Thursday, November 02, 2006

More on Kulongoski/Goldschmidt

The mainstream media double standard has never been more starkly exposed.

Will the Oregonian cover this story? Will it print Fred Leonhardt's claim that he told Ted Kulongoski about Goldschmidt's secret? It doesn't appear likely.

I spoke with Jeff Mapes to confirm that he actually did have the lunch with Fred Leonhardt where Leonhardt told the whole story about Goldschmidt and Kulongoski. Mapes would not confirm or deny the meeting, and said that he was not going to be talking about the issue with anyone. He said that the Oregonian had already done a "detailed" story on the question of when and if Kulongoski knew about Goldschmidt, and that was that.

Well, that's fine, but all it does is let pajama bloggers like me speculate.

Mapes had the whole story five months before Nigel Jaquiss broke it, and for some reason the Oregonian did nothing. It would be very interesting to know what actually happened. Mapes is a tough reporter - he would have taken the issue to an editor, and at some point up the chain someone had to call him off the story. A guy like Mapes would not just decide not to chase what would have been the biggest story of his life when he had a credible source laying the whole thing out for him.

So the higher ups at the Oregonian probably squelched it. When Nigel Jaquiss broke the story and won the Pullitzer for it, the Oregonian had well-deserved scorn heaped upon them for the kid's glove way they reported Goldschmidt's "affair" with a 14 year old.

But their behavior now is even worse than that. The newspaper's apologist - er - public editor tried to explain away the Oregonian's lack of pursuit of the story because all they had was an "anonymous" source.

That, my friends, is a bald faced lie. There is no definition by which Leonhardt's meeting with Mapes could be described as an anonymous source. He was on record, not anonymous.

As the mainstream media studiously ignores this story, why don't we anticipate some of the reasons they might give for not covering and do a little analysis?

1) This is a "he-said/she-said" controversy, so there is no way of knowing if it is true.

Sorry, that doesn't wash. The media goes with "he-said/she-said" stories all the time. How about the Hastert/Foley issue? There were accusations that Hastert knew about the Foley e-mails and did nothing. Just the word of accusers was enough to guarantee front page coverage for days. The accusers had an obvious political motivation to damage Hastert. Newspaper after newspaper demanded that Hastert resign if the accusations were true.

But in the Leonhardt case, "he-said/she-said" is an automatic trump card. No story here folks, please keep moving.

2) Leonhardt's accusation that he told Kulongoski is not credible

It is hard to imagine a more credible accusation, actually. Leonhardt is a liberal Democrat whose livelihood depends on the goodwill of Democrat candidates. He has nothing to gain professionally - and a lot to lose - by making this claim.

His recount of how he came to know about the rape, the lawsuit and when and why he told Kulongoski has the ring of truth. Ted Kulongoski was his good friend. They both socialized together and dealt with each other professionally. He knew this awful thing about Kulongoski's #1 political patron and when Ted was planning to run for AG, Leonhardt figured he would warn his friend, because if it came out there would be lots of collateral damage.

In fact, here is what would not be credible: it would not be credible if Leonhardt claimed he DIDN'T tell Kulongoski about Goldschmidt's secret. Imagine - your best friend is going to run for statewide office, and you know a dark secret about his biggest patron which, if it came out, would destroy your friend's candidacy, and you DON'T tell him?

3) This is old news, because in 2004, both the Willamette Week and the Oregonian ran stories that included Leonhardt's claim that he told Kulongoski.

This is news now for a couple reasons: First, how Leonhardt learned the secret, and the questionof why, when and where he told Kulongoski is far more detailed now than ever known before.

Second, Kulongoski broght the issue up by taking bows for Jessica's Law. He is casting himself as a protector of our young. If there is a credible accusation that he knowingly involved a child molestor in his administration, that is news.

Third, in the aftermath of the Foley/Hastert issue, the question of elected officials sheltering pedophiles is newly relevant.

None of this will matter to the mainstream media, however. It is almost as if they no longer really care when their bias is on full and obvious display for all to see.

Meanwhile, mysteriously, circulation plummets.


Anonymous said...

Mapes is a Pussy

no manhood

Anonymous said...

They might've posted it, Rob. if it weren't such a thinly disguised political hit.

Scott said...

Rob did you hear Gusto on lars Thursday? He has gotten my last vote. By denying every thing he makes himself look like a Goldsmith crowney

sam steady said...

I heard Guisto. Did you know that "Guisto" is italian for "lying snake?"

Anonymous said...

Giusto was Goldschmidts pimp.

Anonymous said...

Giusto is a pimp.

And Giusto was pimping his boss'es wife (a whore?) who was also boinking her husband's driver (who was also the pimp), while the boss was boinking the babysitter.

So now the pimp (who was the driver but graduated to become the sheriff) is busy boinking other men's wives (but not pimping them out as whores to other Johns) while his other buddy, who also didn't know anything, is going for re-election as governor.

Do I have this straight? All these folks have the Democratic Party as their common connection (or is that the Common Good?).

Please, somebody publish a guidebook to this rancid novel, as it is so confusing.

Anonymous said...

This is so desperate and pathetic. Mapes is right, the Oregonian already wrote in detail about this. The public would laugh if they printed such an obvious political attempt by the Rs days before the election.
Meanwhile, over and nw republican there are murmurs that Saxton knew about the Neil thing. Both elitist Portland lawyers.
I'd be careful where you dig, you might find something you don't want to find...
How about you guys pick a candidate with a vision next time, maybe then you won't have to go looking dirty secrets.

Anonymous said...

"How about you guys pick a candidate with a vision next time..."


What a loser... he tells the Republicans to pick a candidate with a what, the Democrats did??


What are you? A Republican troll pretending to be a Democrat ripping on Republicans??

Don't you know why Teddy K has the worst approval ratings in the nation? Because he lacks a vision and is about as exciting as watching paint dry.

Teddy as a great visionairy leader!!

That was a great joke, regardless of if you are a clueless Democrat or a satirical Republican.

Anonymous said...

Most reporters recount their interviews when the subject releases them. Matter of fact, they like to, but not here with Mapes. Sounds like the order came from upstairs,"Do not talk about Goldscmidt and Kulongoski, period."

The Oregonian, where the freedom of inquiry and reporting is in name only.