CWA Region 1 Response to Earlier Story

They took nine whole hours to respond! Outrageous!! (0.00 / 0)

The problem is the rush to put the anonymous staffer's (Mr. Reiner's?) allegations into cyberspace.  If we want blogs to be treated as real journalism, then we need to act like it.  There was no rush to this story.  It wasn't "breaking" news.

The guy (Mr. Reiner or someone else) is still getting paid.  A real vicious response to someone who allegedly is being paid with union members' dues to do Carla's personal politics.  I would think that while allowing Mr. Reiner to spew his "allegations" that questions might have been asked about what he actually does while being paid with union members' dues.  After all, if the statement from the national office is correct, it is OBVIOUS why he is an ardent supporter of Ms. Katz.

If Mr. Reiner's statements aren't true, then what are they but "Internet bile?"  What difference is there between Gerald Reiner and Curveball???

Perhaps you could be a step up from Judith Miller and say why you felt Gerald Reiner to be trustworthy in the first place.

Only a complete moron (and there are some) prints something without knowing who the source actually is (even if it is themselves).  You aren't proving yourself to be any superior to the National Inquirer by saying at least YOU knew that it was Gerald Reiner.

You are better than this.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 22:28:12 PM UTC

You must have a dog in this hunt (0.00 / 0)

---

by: huntsu @ Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 23:51:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Gee, I was thinking the same about you! ;-) (0.00 / 0)

No, I don't have a side.  I do think that Carla Katz has been a net negative to the Democratic Party and she has created situations where her personal needs have become paramount.  So, I am not surprised by any of this.  

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 05:41:21 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Gee ... (0.00 / 0)

I presented both sides as they presented their sides.  Yeah, I must have a dog in this hunt.

And, as I said before, regardless of your feelings about Katz -- and it's entirely possible that I agree -- that doesn't mean that the CWA is acting properly.

I didn't pick a side, but you obviously have.

---

by: huntsu @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 11:35:17 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Look at your choices: headlines, deadlines, etc. (0.00 / 0)

Of course, you have picked a side.  Just look at your choices of headlines.

There was nothing "breaking" about Reiner's spin.  If it had waited until this morning, would it have made one iota of difference?  NO, it would not.  YOU chose to put it out there and to put it on the front page AND to not wait for the other side.  You could have even given Reiner the opportunity for the last word if you wanted.

If Reiner wanted to write his own diary, more power to him.  YOU chose to elevate his platform.

This type of thinking is how Judith Miller became a transcriber for Scooter Libby and Curveball.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 14:07:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not worth my time (0.00 / 0)

---

by: huntsu @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 14:29:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It wasn't from the beginning, (0.00 / 0)

which is why I don't know why you became Reiner's mouthpiece in the first place.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 15:20:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actually, This is All "Breaking News".... (0.00 / 0)

....and the timing counts.

The longer the CWA allegations remain unrebutted; the more firmly they will be anchored into the minds of the press and the public.

This is pretty close to a black and white case.  One of these two parties is lying through their teeth.

My gut tells me one thing, and yours tells you another.   And, no doubt, we could argue at length about why we tend to find one side or the other more, or less, credible.

If people with direct knowledge of these events are willing to come to BJ and share that information; then it should all "go public" asap.

If the individual in question was Mr Reiner; then, it's very telling that the "union" was willing to out his name in this particularly pointed and condemnatory fashion.  (If it wasn't he should have a nice lawsuit in the works.)

I realize that 99% of the time, the "establishment" wins these kinds of wars...even when it's dead wrong.  

Unless Katz is some kind of complete psychopath (which I doubt) the National CWA "leadership" is behaving in a classless and desperate manner......and violating it's own rules/procedures in the process.

That's not how innocent people act.  These folks are either guilty as sin, or extremely incompetent.  (maybe both!?!?!)

Let's hope that this becomes one of the rare cases in which the whole truth comes out in time to bite the bad guys on the ass.

(And, if my instincts are wrong and the "bad guy" is a gal; then let the bite be just as cutting!)

---

by: Nick Lento @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 14:31:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Reiner did NOTHING to counter the "allegations" (0.00 / 0)

He just spewed out bile to distract attention from them.

Why did Reiner want anonymity in the first place other than to try to hide his obvious conflicts of interest?  I would have been fine with Reiner writing his own diary even with a psuedonym.

We may have our particular prisms that we view things through, but truth is truth and the facts are the facts.  

Everything that Huntsu did in this shows (whether she intended or not) an evident bias:
***She decided to allow Reiner the shield of anonymity.
***She decided to give Shelton and company less than two hours to respond to a story that wasn't "breaking news" to begin with.  The "story" wasn't a response to any of the charges.
***The headline for Reiner's charges was a typical tabloid type.  The headline for the response was much more subdued even though the response made Swiss cheese of Reiner's charges.

We attack "Terry Malloy" (just to use one example) for his constant defense of Chris Christie no matter what the circumstances.  Part of the attack is the fact that being anonymous, no one knows whether he is a staffer for Christie or the GOP or not.  Huntsu wants to remain anonymous.  That is her choice.  I do not believe that front-page bloggers should, but while I am a contributing member I don't own or run the blog.

However, telling us that SHE knows who Reiner is, doesn't do much.  Especially when it turns out that Reiner's job was to run Katz' campaign for national leadership while being paid with union members' dues.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 15:34:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I like Terry. (0.00 / 0)

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 17:53:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I might like "Terry" more if we knew who he was. (4.00 / 2)

It is hard to figure out who would have such slavish devotion to Chris Christie without being a staffer or GOP flunky.  In this game, you basically have three plays:  facts, logic, or spin.  

Anonymity does not help "Terry" make his case.  It didn't help Reiner.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 18:50:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And (4.00 / 2)

posting with your real name doesn't help you make your case either, regardless the topic.

But, I'll cave to Lento:

Thanks Mr Pogue for all your contributions here (even the ones that pissed me off ;-).

I say nothing - for the moment.

---

by: SmartyJones @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 19:20:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I May Disagree With The "Side" That Creed Picks... (4.00 / 1)

.....but I will defend, to the death, his right to do so!  And, I dare say, we all likely feel that way, eh?

I think it's great that we all have differing perspectives; this would be a boring and dead place if everyone agreed (or, worse, pretended to).

Thanks Mr Pogue for all your contributions here (even the ones that pissed me off ;-).

---

by: Nick Lento @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 14:13:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

different title (0.00 / 0)

Bile-Spewing "Whistleblower" Is Outed As Katz Campaign Aide With No Previous Labor Union Experience

That is, if you are sincerely saying that you believe that Carla is not completely in the right here and the big bad national people are not the embodiment of evil.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 22:38:06 PM UTC

Standard Arrogant Response (0.00 / 0)

The staffer told the truth. He was locked out of the meeting because he was deemed a Katz supporter. There was a problem with the raffle in Vegas. Shelton cleared up nothing .

CWA's Shelton speaks to everyone like this.

His condesending tone towards anyone who dares oppose his point of view has been noticed by CWA members, Legislators, and now the Blue Jersey family.

His method is to " put down " first and then speak down second.

Now you know why it never worked with Katz!

His ironic comment of , "   We've learned all too well in 2008 that desperate rumors and shadowy political smears are the bile that courses through the internet's bowels " is exactly what he has done to Katz.

Shelton did not answer for nine hours because he did not know what to say. He had to contact the CWA lawyer and find out whether to respond and how to respond.

CWA and Shelton absolutely fear this type of scrunity.

Arrogant people fear being questioned. He and his people  will be reading every post on this site but you will get no further comment from him.

The only thing irresponsible is the coup that occured.

Katz should have been charged if charges were warranted ,but not removed. There was no impending emergency to justify her removal. That was a publicity stunt that is now beginning to backfire on CWA , Shelton, and Masters.

Is it any wonder why CWA has fallen so far under this type of arrogant leadership?    

---

by: firstamend07 @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 00:01:11 AM UTC

And the "problem" with the raffle was...? (0.00 / 0)

Reiner isn't exactly a reliable source.  You are anonymous.  So, you really need to bring more to the discussion than repeating the same unsupported bile.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 05:43:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I like how BJ handled the situation (4.00 / 2)

They clearly said the email was from someone who wanted to remain nameless and they gave the national leadership a chance to reply.. Huntsu posted the national reply in full.

This is a story because of the influence the CWA has over many local and state elected officials.

Thanks for presenting both sides.

---

by: AreYouWithMe? @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 12:54:06 PM UTC

Kudos To Huntsu & BJ (4.00 / 1)

Had y'all held the story awaiting a "response" you would still be waiting.

The ONLY reason you/we got any "response" at all in the time frame was just because of the pressure of the story being told.

As I've said before, all of these issues will be, eventually, before the courts.   I bet there must be at least a dozen legal actions that will emerge from this mess.

The only "bile" I'm detecting here is coming from Mr Shelton.

I find it interesting and troubling if it turns out that the governing legal authority of the means a federally chartered union can use to raise funds is the "Nevada Gaming Commission"!    (btw Does that mean that no CWA raffles of this type have ever occurred anywhere else in the USA.)

I wonder if Mr Shelton has the guts to spend a quick half hour with Jay and Jason on next weeks BJBTR progam???

He will have had a full week to consult with and be coached by all his attorneys and PR people...if the national CWA is being truthful they should have nothing to fear by putting themselves in an arena where anyone can just call in and question them.

---

by: Nick Lento @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 14:07:06 PM UTC

But, we'll never know now will we??? (0.00 / 0)

If Shelton and company didn't respond yesterday, then I would have been 1000% fine with running Reiner's diatribe.  I still don't see what the point was of granting anonymity especially considering Reiner's obvious conflicts of interest, but that would have been a separate discussion.

The "governing legal authority" to hold a raffle in New Jersey is the Legalized Games of Chance Commission.  Of course, there are plenty of youth leagues (for example) which don't get a license.  Reiner was really stretching everything on this one.

After the "even-handed" way this story has been handled so far, why would Shelton or anyone else come to us???  This is what you lose by favoring a side without getting the facts.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 14:17:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Again (4.00 / 1)

er, it's me - Jeff - and Jason doing the radio show now.
:)

---

by: Jeff Gardner @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 17:49:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

LOL Sorry 'Bout That Jeff!!! (0.00 / 0)

By the way; perhaps y'all may want to consider expanding the format to a full hour!

I was away from my computer yesterday afternoon and  last night (believe it or not!  lol)  and unaware that Ms Katz would be on or I would surely have called in.

I suggest you invite Katz's opponents in this controversy on the "air" to rebut her.   (If you haven't already.)

Ideally, as I said up top, these parties should engage in a series of public debates/exchanges in which they subject themselves to questions from the public and from each other.    What can I tell ya, I'm an idealist.  lol

If one party accepted such a challenge/opportunity and the other refused it; that would be telling.

Why not set up a place/time where such a debate (at least round one) could take place?   The parties could bring whatever evidence/sworn affidavits/tapes/emails etc they wished.

My hope is that (various versions of) the whole truth about this could be expeditiously  presented to the public (who after all, is taxed to pay the salaries of CWA members) and CWA members.

I suspect that an open, free and fair discussion/debate between the parties themselves (i.e. no lawers or PR flaks) making their respective cases will be of great value to the public interest.....and, possibly, to law enforcement.

Again, it would be a shame if this is allowed to drag out for years with no real resolution.

---

by: Nick Lento @ Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 20:31:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rainier is a 1st-class Loser (1.00 / 1)

As someone who knew this guy before I became a NJ expatriate, I can assure you all that this guy is a first class loser and creep. At one recent job, he would repeatedly make inappropriate comments to a female colleague, and decided to cyber-stalk another female. This isn't just recent either. Several years ago, I had the misfortune of serving on the NJ College Democrats board with him, and he was equally creepy then too. Unless CWA plans on unionizing stalkers and guys likely to get restraining orders taken out on them, they should cut this guy loose.  

---

by: NJExpatriate @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 12:10:50 PM UTC

So, huntsu, why don't you tell us what you know about Mr. Reiner? (0.00 / 0)

I am not a fan of anonymous attacks, but instead of simply downgrading the comment perhaps you could provide a little light?

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 14:33:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What I've learned through this ... (0.00 / 0)

Is that you don't mind when I go after Chris Christie with questions and suppositions without having facts on hand, but when I put info that goes against someone you support you get defensive.

What I've learned is that you don't like the fact that Reiner was allowed to be anonymous (though everyone involved knew who he was and I knew he would be identified as soon as the CWA responded), but you are willing to accept NJExpatriate's anonymous allegations without complaint.

It looks like you don't have a problem with the way this was brought about, but with the target of the first piece.

What I know about Reiner is he is active in Dems2000, supported by a large number of progressive Dems I respect, and has been given responsibility by many other people I respect.  I've met him a number of times and while we are not friends I have nothing against him.

It's not enough to believe everything he sends in an e-mail, but enough to give him a public airing of his position.

---

by: huntsu @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 23:36:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oi! (0.00 / 0)

Don't go making Terry's case for him.  :-)

Your stuff on Christie has been based on facts in evidence that others can also find (whether they want to accept it or not).  That is a journalistic version of the scientific method.  This time, Reiner put out bovine excrement and you tried to tell us that it smelled like roses.

I have already said that if Reiner wanted to write his own diary (even anonymously) that was fine.  If after getting further information and giving the other side a chance to reply, you decided to put it on the front page that would have been one thing.  There would have been a reason to do it besides just taking Carla's side.

With Christie, you put out your own stuff.  You haven't been a conduit for someone else.

I haven't and don't accept NJExpatriate's statements.  You were the one who downgraded them.  It was foolish for this to have been done anonymously from the beginning when it was going to be obvious who the source was.

Instead of taking this as an opportunity to learn and improve, you now want to hunker down in the bunker and play the victim.  That is beneath you.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 02:10:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Zero Credibility (0.00 / 0)

I see that my comment has been marked as "unproductive." I was simply trying to add a little bit more context about this guy. Beyond being a creep, this guy is power-hungry and exactly the kind of guy who will keep NJ politics in the gutter and will tear someone else down to try to promote his own personal advancement.

The fact that you ran a story that was based solely on this one source, regardless of how long you had to wait for a response from CWA, is ridiculous, considering the source. Your eagerness to run a story compromised its integrity and enabled one of the more incompetent and unlikeable characters in NJ politics to use you to attack his enemies.

---

by: NJExpatriate @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 02:14:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It was marked unproductive (0.00 / 0)

because there were accusations and assertions with no evidence or attribution.  Provide links or witnesses and it will be more productive.

Accusing someone of stalking with nothing more than ... well, nothing and you get an uproductive rating.

---

by: huntsu @ Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 22:42:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No, Creed (4.00 / 1)

I did not try to tell you it smelled like Roses.  I tried to tell you he said it.

Then I told you what the other side said.

You've had the impression I was supporting Reiner, but I was reporting what was said.  

That's no different than what I did with Christie.  I report what was given to us publicly.

As I have said from the very beginning, it is the fact that Reiner said these thing that was news, true or not.  I was very careful to say that they were not verified, and that we were awaiting the other side's position.

---

by: huntsu @ Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 22:40:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]