Update: False Retaliation
UPDATE 2: Sen. Sokola states that Rep. Kowalko’s VCCB bill WILL be on the Senate agenda, per Matthews. Two ways to read this little boomlet: 1) Rumors were true, and publication of them forced Governor’s office and the Senate leadership to backtrack, or 2) Rumors were not true to begin with.
UPDATE: The Governor’s office is denying this story to both Matthews and myself. Tommywonk probably accurately describes this rumor as the work of Kowalko detractors in the GA.
From Matthews:
From multiple sources: Because of Rep. Kowalko’s support of certain tax and fee bills, his Violent Crimes Compensation bill will not be run. I’m told the governor’s office is doing this in retaliation.
This is petty if true. Kowalko is offering alternatives that should be debated. It does not embarrass the Governor or the Democratic Leadership to have his bills considered. Nor does it delay the proceedings any more than meaningless and endless tributes and proclamations and endless dinner breaks. This kind of retaliation is usually used to put a wayward Representative in line. But if that is the Governor’s motive, he has missed his mark, since Kowalko hasn’t backed down over the last six months and shows no sign of backing down now. Thus all the Governor is doing is delaying a much need reform of the Victim Compensation board.
Shame on the purveyors of false rumors for sport.
Mike reports that Joe Rogalsky has informed him that it is not true.
Consider the hothouse environment of Leg Hall on June 30 (and I’ve been there): Folks will circulate rumors of this sort to try and screw this person or that or both — or just for the sport of it.
I’m just as happy to not be down there tonight, having gotten most what I care about this session.
Wish I could vote for John, but I live downstate
OK, I’m going to comment here just because. Hey, I’m done blogging tomorrow, so why not start commenting again?
My sources on this tip are impeccable. The fact that Rogalsky’s terse, one-sentence response to me was pretty clearly a kiss-off leads me to believe there is some truth to this. They can deny this because the bill is still in the hands of Senate leaders and they can defer to them. But don’t for one second think the Governor doesn’t have a lot of influence on agenda-making.
Mike, i’m with you retract the retraction!
Are your sources in the General Assembly? Are they Democratic or Republican lawmakers?
With one side denying it, your tip can’t be confirmed without more.
Of course, all the Governor’s office and the Democratic leadership has to do now to substantively deny this story is to make sure the Victims Compensation Board bill does come up for a vote.
Oh, no, I would never ask them to do that. The gov’s office responded and it is what it is.
Two sources are in the GA. One is not.
That’s fine. Well, we have had our first big breaking news/rumor/denial/retraction event of the night. Won’t be the last.
Looks like interesting stuff in the Grant-In-Aid Bill also
Just got word from Sen. Sokola: The VCCB is NOW on the agenda. Hmmm…
Seeing as how Dave Sokola tried so hard to get this bill thru the Senate the old-fashioned way, ‘bulo highly doubts that there was any attempt by the Governor to deep-six this. At this point, they’re working ‘must-lists’ as opposed to agendas, so it probably was put on a must list.
The Beast Who Slumbers doesn’t see any skulduggery here.
The Somnabulent One prefers his own skulduggery.
Good point, ‘bulo.
One word Sokola used with me is that it was “added” to the list. He was in a rush and I wasn’t able to ask or clarify WHEN it was added, but the inflection in his voice made me feel like it had recently been added. Not a reliable indicator, but that’s what I got from it.
MM, it’s also possible that the Senate was deliberately delaying the creation of House must-lists b/c the House was moving so slowly to consider Senate bills there. That kind of Alphonse/Gaston routine is not uncommon on June 30.
That doesn’t negate it being on a must-list. Like I said above: 2 ways to look at these developments. If you prefer behind the scenes intrigue, go for option 1.
One of the first lessons I learned when I first went down to Leg Hall was that people will say things that aren’t true.
But one should never say that so-and-so lied. Instead, one should simply acknowledge that one was misinformed.
I also learned that Senate Must Lists move in mysterious ways.
I knew that rumor was bullshit the second I heard it, but could not comment at the time (damn family!)
JK is great, but a little drama-y.
Don’t assume that Kowalko was Matthews’ source.
Oh no. I didn’t mean o suggest that. I just knew it was BS and even JK supporters can’t deny that drama lays lightly around him.
That tends to happen when he bucks the whole of the establishment.
Clearly the “purveyors of false rumors for sport” know who their “go to” guy is.
Not that I’m interested in engaging, you, A1, but please don’t discount what I’ve reported. I’ve heard many other things this evening regarding this bill that lead me to believe that, to say the least, there has been some funny business.
Not that I’m interested in engaging, you, A1…
That’s OK, Mike. I am already married, and besides, it would be illegal in Delaware.
Oh my…
By the way, Mike, sources who lie to you don’t deserve to have their confidentiality protected.
A1, frankly, you aren’t here. You don’t know what I’ve heard. The governor’s office is fully capable of obfuscation and spin, something I feel they’re a little guilty of here.
Hey Mike,
I understand that ALL gov’t officials and politicians are capable of obfuscation and spin. That’s not what I am referring to. I am referring to people who deliberately and knowingly lie to the media while expecting to have their confidentiality maintained.
When a “source” asks for confidentiality to provide you with information to use in a story, then that information better be true. Otherwise, the “source” is simply using you to spread lies with impunity and such an individual should be exposed for doing that.
If people know that you’re not going to tolerate being fed lies and that there is actually a penalty for doing so, maybe you won’t be their “go to” guy anymore. But you’ll be able to trust the information you do get from confidential sources much more.
Are you sure that I am not there? 🙂
My sources didn’t lie. I’m not saying the Markell Administration *lied*, but let’s just say I’m not “buying their line.”
So you were “told the governor’s office is doing this in retaliation” but have no evidence to support this other than your unnamed sources which you’re sticking to even though the Governor’s office has denied it on-the-record and the Bill is, in fact, in the agenda.
OK, Mike. Everything points to your sources as liars but you’re sticking with them. No wonder you’re the “go to” guy.
Note to self: Don’t believe anything that comes from Mike Matthew’s “anonymous sources”. After all, one of them is known to throw his weight around in a purely arbitrary fashion, like to avoid being arrested, for example. Manipulating young bloggers is exactly the sort of tactic that Grassfire (the Republican astroturf operation behind SCCOR) thrives on.
I’ve never understood this. It happens constantly at the national level – obvious lies are always referred to as “distortions”.
X,
What are you talking about? Your flailing gesticulations in an effort to discredit me are so transparent. I have not been manipulated by anyone. I don’t even know what you’re talking about. Say what you mean and mean what you say and stop being such a fucking pussy. Who are you talking about? Who are you claiming is manipulating me?
Let’s face it: You have personal beef with me because of some bullshit that went down a few months ago. Now you’re just throwing shit out there in the hopes that it’ll stick. Fact is, you’re just full of shit.
I don’t even know why I’m doing this, but I feel I was much too harsh in the response above. My apologies if it comes off like that. I just wish people would be more direct with what they’re saying. Have some cojones, for chrissakes and stop tip-toeing around a point and just say what you mean!
Apology accepted Mike – I thought I was being obvious enough. I was suggesting that since one of the people who fed you information in the past was Rep. Atkins, then maybe we shouldn’t trust your sources in general. Atkins is a member of SCCOR, which is a front for Grassfire, a national GOP astroturf operation with ties to the infamous Craig Shirley.
I was specifically talking about Atkins trying to get out of his DUI ticket by flashing his legislative credentials. Atkins (or whoever else your “anonymous sources” are) later manipulated you into printing some mean-spirited crap about one of our bloggers in an attempt to discredit his reporting (a person that I think you are jealous of).
Go back and reread my comment. I attacked your sources, not you. Although I do understand that when I suggest that you’ve been manipulated, you would take that as a personal attack. It wasn’t intended that way, but I can’t blame you for taking it as such.
So, how ya like my cojones now? Direct enough? What I am saying is this: I don’t trust any information that comes from your anonymous sources, because I think they are just manipulating you (whether or not one of them is Atkins).
To Mikes credit, the timestamp is 1:35. I know I was wiped out after listening to BS for 4 hours…
As I think back, one of the sources of the rumors for me (definitely not originators) were some people that had been working for years to reform the VCCB. They were confronting John Kowalko’s wife demanding to know why John was ruining their work for the past 3 years for a $0.02/can tax on beer.
I want to know who told them that.
Did the VCCB bill finally pass?
xstryker wrote:
I don’t trust any information that comes from your anonymous sources, because I think they are just manipulating you
Of course they are. And until Matthews starts to put truth above sensationalism and publish the names of his sources when they lie to him, any of his anonymously-sourced information shouldn’t be believed.
After all, how is anybody to know that he isn’t just making that stuff up?
Dunno. Like you, I just woke up.
A1 – I’m aware of your disdain for Matthews (who from here isn’t aware), but I can tell you that your allegation of Matthews’ fabricating his own rumor mill is very far off the mark. Homey don’t do that stuff. I agree that I think he gives more instant credit to his sources than he should sometimes, but I would never question him in regard to your charge.
RSmitty,
I don’t “disdain” Mike at all. I think he needs to grow up if he wants to be taken seriously. And he is (slowly), although old bad habits die hard. I certainly admit to writing strong opinions about his blogging, but I also think that he might benefit from truly understanding the message I am sending him.
Don’t tell me that he hasn’t fabricated his own rumor mill when, in the past, he clearly has tried.
And if anonymous sources are going to spread lies and rumors through Mike and he is going to allow them to do it without revealing the sources when they are shown to be lies, then he is an accomplice to that fact. The REAL story would be who was spreading the lies and why.
Mike, you, or anybody else here who wants to think that readers shouldn’t be highly skeptical and critical of what bloggers write are welcome to hold that opinion. I disagree. It isn’t personal for me; it is about trying to hold bloggers to the same standard of openness and honesty that they demand of the traditional media and political figures.
A1 – Mikes “rumor” came from reliable sources. I believe it stemmed from a comment that was made by Deluca, who said, “no House bills sponsored by people that voted against the revenue bills will get voted on.”
I wonder how many people that applied to?