High: 11° / Low: 9° — Dude Weather Subscribe to Secrets Minneapolis / St. Paul
My old compadre, the grizzled and venerable, Nick Coleman, asks the question I thought somebody in town should have asked at least a month ago. Namely, was U.S. Attorney Tom Heffelfinger's abrupt departure 15 months ago in any way connected to the ever-burgeoning Rove-Bush-Gonzalez USA firings scandal?
Heffelfinger, a self-described moderate Republican, (remember those people?), says if he was targeted by Team Rove he has no awareness of it. Ok, fine. (If I was a moderate Republican attorney in good community standing and I had any basis for plausible denial, I'd say the same thing. There is no upside to getting dragged into this mess.) But as basic journalism goes with a story as big and nationwide as this US Attorneys thing shouldn't someone at the Star Tribune have asked Heffelfinger the question before now ... and published whatever he wanted to say? I'm not asking for much. Maybe 8". Certainly nothing as long as the latest update on Sanjaya.
Coleman's story plays nicely with Bob McNaney's report on Heffelfinger's successor's rather over-the-top investiture a month ago. McNaney pushed the "misuse of taxpayer's dollars" angle pretty hard. Maybe too hard. But there was an unmistakable air of pretension and grandiosity to the affair. Call it personal taste on the part of new USA Rachel Paulose, or call it no big deal, I am still left with questions -- as Coleman asks -- why Heffelfinger was not invited, what this "problem journalist" list that existed at some point in the investiture planning process was really all about, (I mean, come on, a "problem journalist" list? Who is running Paulose's show, Erhlichman and Haldeman?), and finally, whether Paulose in any way owes her present position to the hyper-partisan connivery that has now managed to taint every USA in the country ... who DIDN'T get fired.
But to get back to the top ... does the Star Tribune mean to suggest that no one in the building thought to look seriously at the Heffelfinger departure until now?
Actually, some of us have been looking at this since early March. We just don't have Strib columns. Read my pieces on it here:
http://mncampaignreport.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=326
http://mncampaignreport.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=298
And Coleman got the facts wrong in his piece today:
http://mncampaignreport.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=373
There's still a story here, and I would encourage other journalists to tease it out.
I have the same thoughts as you re: Heffelfinger's repeated denials--what incentive is there to own up to it, if he knew he was targeted?
The only reason this is a scandal at all is that the fired attorneys didn't like that they were being labeled as "poor performers" and wanted to salvage their careers and personal dignity. Heffelfinger still has both--why would he want to wade into this mess?
They were too busy with their third story on Al Fanken's potty mouth. Must be a Doug Tice decision.
"Most of Heffelfinger's prosecutions against politicians involved Democratic office holders."
Except for Dean Zimmermann.
Zimmermann was a Green with connections to Republican donors.
http://lloydletta.blogspot.com/2007/03/when-will-us-attorneys-office-rel...
no, the Strib was too busy having CJ write a column kissing the new attorney's fanny and criticizing McNaney for his piece
The Strib should hang its head in shame at having a "gossip" column about the same five people. She has so little to write about, she is now the self-appointed grammar police.
When is the Strib getting rid of CJ, that most awful and smarmy of so-called journalists? Send her back to the Anoka County beat!!!!
In today's Fox 411 column on Foxnews.com, Roger Friedman opens with the story of Louis J. Pearlman. In it, he made a derogatory remark about the size of Pearlman: "... only Lou Pearlman could party again like it was 1999. The fat, frenzied manager of insipid boy bands was on top of the world then..."
I am mentioning this for three reasons:
1) Don Imus has been vilified for making an extremely stupid and racist remark. Why not demand the Roger loose his job for being equally insulting? I think he should loose his job over the remark!
2) When Mel Gibson made his ridiculous and insulting remarks about Jewish people, Roger didn't shut up about it for quite a while. I quit reading the column for a few weeks because I didn't want to be exposed to any more of his overreaction. I didn't like what Mel Gibson said, but in my opinion Roger spilt far too much ink while working through his anger, and boring me in the process.
3) I am really tired of people mentioning a person's size when reporting on an incident. Why didn't he say the blonde Pearlman? I'll tell you why, it's because he wanted to put as much punch into his insulting rhetoric as possible.
Thank you.
Caroline Zook
Books:
Cracking Spines by Max Ross
Music:
Hear, Hear by Staff
Art:
The Vicious Circle by 6 Critics
Secrets:
Secrets of the Day by Kate Iverson
Theater:
Seen in the City by Staff
Film:
Talk About Talkies by Staff
Weather:
Dude Weather by Jimmy Gaines
Humor:
Spazz Dad by Todd Smith
Cars:
Road Rake by Chris Birt
Commentary:
Read Menace by Tom Bartel
Society:
The Adventures of Melinda by Melinda Jacobs
Politics:
Defenestrator by Rich Goldsmith
Food:
Breaking Bread by Jeremy Iggers & Ann Bauer
Sports:
On the Ball by Britt Robson
Hockey:
Spazz Dad by Todd Smith
Style:
Hook & Eye
Misc:
Is This News?
Fiction:
Yo, Ivanhoe by Brad Zellar
Food:
Consider the Egg by Stephanie March
Baseball:
Warning Track Power by Brad Zellar
Wine:
Beyond the Cask
Food:
Food Fight!
Media:
To the Slaughter
Misc:
Outrage by Staff
Food:
Chef's Table
Guest Commentary:
Just Passing Through