Looks like political gadfly John Kromko has more to worry about than our mocking of him.
The Star’s Erica Meltzer breaks the news this afternoon that Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall has hit Kromko with charges of identity theft, forgery and fraudulent schemes.
The charges stem from Kromko’s nominating petitions for an ill-fated campaign for the House of Representatives last year. Two dead people ended up on the list of people who signed the petitions, which is a pretty good red flag that something’s amiss.
We’re waiting to learn more, but from the initial sound of it, we wonder if the identity-theft charges are just piling on Kromko, a Democrat who has had a rough political streak since he gave up serving in the Arizona Legislature in the early 1990s.
This article appears in Apr 23-29, 2009.
John Kromko is no crook. This looks like payback, not justice.
While signature irregularities on petitions do matter, in the great scheme of things, this is a civil violation, not criminal.
What’s the reason for the inane headline of this story? What does it have to do with the allegation against Kromko? Where was the editor here? You know, since The Weekly was sold some years ago, its writing, its reporting, its analysis and its overall quality have markedly deteriorated. And it’s not just that fool, Danehy, who, since the 1980s, has been phoning in the same three or four ideas. Rather, it’s the amalgamation of many other things – trite story ideas, the cliche ridden weekly editor’s note and the poorly argued reasoning of the columnists come immediately to mind. This paper used to have people who could write with vibrato and excitement – Jeff Smith and Bea Lame are just two examples. Yet now, week after week, readers are subjected to mostly hack writing banalities. The Kromko story referenced here is just one example of the lack of journalistic pride and professionalism that used to be hallmarks of your paper. Can’t you at least try to improve? Tucson, now more than ever, needs a viable alternative paper. Live up to your glory years. Think before you publish junk. Brush up on your writing skills. Take more pride in your work.
“Think before you publish junk. Brush up on your writing skills. Take more pride in your work.”
Could this be the penance Kromko referred to in his letter?
It is clear who has the courage, and who are the cowards in this exchange. Kromko stands up to the establishment, these clowns just kiss establishment ass. Sure, standard driveling puff pieces means the establishment will return your phone calls, but what value is it, really, other than a mutual wank?
I suppose Liss is right, if your idea of standing up to the establishment is making outlandish claims that have no basis in reality.
And just what about the term “shit taco” has a basis in reality or represents competent journalism?
“Nintz”:
What’s more feasible, Kromko making outlandish claims that have no basis in reality or the cowardly nature of someone using his position to kick a man when he’s down because he disagrees with him?
Since you elected not to provide a short example of these “outlandish claims”, I can only assume you are resting on your laurels. You fail.
Liss: First of all, I’m not sure if you didn’t read the blog item, or if your reading comprehension skills need some work. But I suggest you take another look at it–my only observation about the charges is that they seem like overkill. So I’m not sure how that amounts to kicking Kromko while he’s down, unless we’re supposed to just pretend the charges don’t exist.
Secondly, I didn’t realize I had to provide examples of Kromko’s flights of fancy. You didn’t provide any examples of how he has “stood up the establishment.”
But here’s one example: Kromko has maintained, for more than a year now, that the RTA election was rigged. Not maybe rigged, not could-have-been rigged. He told me, in no uncertain terms, that it was rigged, and he knew how it was done. The members of this dastardly conspiracy grew or shrank depending on the questions I asked, but he has said–in public–that there was no doubt the election was fixed.
That’s making up an outlandish claim.
And Kromko himself has told me in the past that he knows full well, having engaged in the practice himself, that if you don’t have the facts on your side in a political fight, you should sow doubt in the minds of the public. That pretty much says it all, regarding his credibility, as far as I’m concerned. YMMV.
“Nintz”:
Asking someone how a ‘shit taco’ tastes, unless you are serving it up for dinner, qualifies as kicking a person when he’s down and is both mean and puerile.
So you didn’t realize you had to provide examples of Kromko’s alleged “flights of fancy” yet you criticize me for not providing examples of how he had stood up to the establishment?
There is prevailing, common knowledge that Kromko typically fights for causes usually opposed by Arizona’s moneyed interests. That is a matter of public record. More specifically, Kromko has fought the RTA, the garbage tax, and has helped to restrict the toxic chemicals in our drinking water.
By way of stating that Kromko makes “outlandish claims that have no basis in reality” you say that Kromko insists that the election was rigged.
That’s the outlandish claim with no basis in reality?
Even if Goddard does decide to examine ballot forensics and to evaluate the ballots as evidence,
that hardly qualifies Kromko’s statement as an outlandish claim. A quick look at court testimony alone removes this statement from the “outlandish claim” category.
I not aware of Kromko’s philosophy of “sowing doubt” (which I disagree with), so I will have to weigh your credibility against his. My experience with Kromko is that he is a straight shooter. I think he is worth my taking the time to respond to you. YAFI.
Liss: Context. I asked how that shit taco tasted in relation to the RTA investigation results, not in relation to his indictment, news of which came days later.
This will probably surprise you, but I’m not worried about what the RTA-was-fixed crowd think of MY credibility. Yours is a little thin right now–and it grows thinner the more you go all CSI on message boards with talk of forensic this and yadda yadda yadda that.
Whatever his charms, Kromko is anything but a straight shooter. You can ask any number of people who have had dealings with him on that score.
Nintz: Please answer K.C.’s
question.
G-Man: Since you said the magic words “please,” I turn it over to the liberal curmudgeon and Mr. Jon Stewart:
http://www.theliberalcurmudgeon.com/2009/0…
I see. So, what your doing, Mr. Nintzel, isn’t journalism, it’s partisan political comedy? Guess I came here for the wrong reason. I was looking for news and thoughtful, though sometimes overly disparaging, commentary. Silly me.
“Nintz”:
Did I confuse “shit taco” with “shit taco combo platter”? Pardon me.
Feel free to lump me in with the “RTA-was-fixed” crowd until the shenanigans stop.
Credibility is earned. Good, credible news reporters would acknowledge that Goddard’s investigatory efforts are better served by verifying the authenticity of the ballots. This is elementary from a legal/investigation standpoint.
What if enough press got behind this idea and Goddard was compelled to verify the ballots for authenticity? Wouldn’t that support the credibility of his findings? Wouldn’t that quiet the “conspiracy theorists”? I would like nothing more than to be certain that an election as irreversible as the RTA won acceptance with a majority of votes.
I would hope that those who consider themselves credible would be interested in finding out the truth even if it does not support the suspected outcome. “yadda yadda yadda” just won’t cut it.
“Think before you publish junk. Brush up on your writing skills. Take more pride in your work.”
Your credibility is evident in your actions, especially if your represent yourself as a journalist. Instead of responding with feeble attempts to discredit your critics, why not take on a more credible role as a journalist? This exchange has come full circle, so it’s time to leave you to your sandbox.
Nintz: I respectfully ask again: Please answer K.C.’s question. Thank you very much.
Given that the county and Terry Goddard have done everything in their power to block a public examination of the RTA vote, one would do well to be suspicious of those in and out of government who stand to gain from a rigged election.
Those hundreds of millions will be going into someone’s pockets. My advice is for Bill Risner to follow the money and continue trying to pierce the wall of denial and obfuscation thrown up by our “representatives.”
I. F. Stone said it best: “Governments lie.”