In her column today, she talks about her experience at a Tea Party event in Avon, here in Lorain County. Reports are that she spent most of her time interviewing attendees for her column. That's what they pay her to do, right? In her column, she pays a lot of attention to who didn't show up. However, she fails to mention one of the speakers who WAS there. That speaker would be Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel.
I wonder why she didn't mention this. Why didn't she mention that when Josh's name was announced, that she rushed to the seats to sit in a row up front, and pulled out her video camera? Well, maybe SHE didn't mention it, but SOMEBODY noticed it. See the photo and video.
Our reports also say that Connie didn't record the other speakers at the event. But she certainly made sure she recorded Mandel. Why was Connie Schultz so interested in Josh Mandel? Oh, please forgive me. I forget to mention something else. Connie's husband is up for re-election next year, and Josh Mandel is almost certain to be the Republican nominee.
So, it appears that while being paid by the Plain Dealer to write a column about the Tea Party event, she was also stalking her husbands opponent and doing work for his re-election campaign.
Wow, Connie is quite the multi-tasker, isn't sh...wait. What!? That would represent a huge, serious conflict of interest for the Plain Dealer. We have some serious questions for them to answer.
Was Connie Schultz at the Tea Party event to provide video and do opposition research for Sherrod Brown's reelection campaign?
Did Sherrod Brown break the law by accepting this opposition research as an illegal corporate contribution from The Plain Dealer?
Will The Plain Dealer publicly acknowledge this giant conflict of interest, punish her and publicly denounce her abuse of their money and journalistic integrity?
Who did Connie give the video to, the Plain Dealer or her husband, Sherrod Brown?
Was Connie there as a reporter for the Plain Dealer, or as a Democrat videographer?
I expect we will hear nothing but silence from the pro-Sherrod Brown Plain Dealer. And their silence will confirm their bias.
You can ask the Plain Dealer yourself here. Let us know if they answer you.
UPDATE: Schultz acknowledges "mistakes" in print.
UPDATE 9/19: Schultz resigns
Follow @Bytor3BP
Wow, Josh Mandel looks like the most qualified 16 year old I've ever seen to run for Senate.
ReplyDeleteAh yes, an ageist joke. How original. Great points brought up here. Conflict of interest is a serious matter.
ReplyDeleteMy apologies for giving your dusty blog a read and stating the obvious.
ReplyDeletemy dear anonymous I sincerly doubt you could even lift his rucksack, much less carry it on patrol in Iraq.
ReplyDeleteIf all you've got is his youthful appearance you're just about par for the liberal commenter course.
Basically, you got nothing. Shocking, I know
Skip
Thank you for bringing light to this serious conflict of interest. A quick search of the PD website shows that Schultz consistently champions causes of the Dem party. The fact that her bio doesn't disclose that she is married to a sitting senator makes a mockery of the profession of journalism.
ReplyDeleteI find the fact that the Plain Dealers "Fact checks" comments made about things said about her husband. Have they ever heard of the appearance of a conflit of intereste?
ReplyDeleteDuh...Had Connie mentioned "her husband's opponent" in her article, you surely would have blasted her for doing so. In that case, you would be screaming about the "negative press" she was giving "her husband's opponent". THAT'S why she chose (correctly) to avoid the conflict-of-interest by LEAVING HIM OUT OF THE ARTICLE ALTOGETHER.
ReplyDeleteThe only "conflict of interest" occurred in you fetid imagination.
Recording video footage of a candidate who is appearing at a public event does not constitute "opposition research". Unless this meeting was a closed session discussing campaign strategy, or some deep, dark secret that Josh Mandel may be hiding, there was nothing Connie Schultz could have uncovered that was not also witnessed (or recorded) by anyone else at that PUBLIC event.
Clearly, you don't understand journalistic ethics, nor the meaning of "conflict of interest" or "opposition research", for that matter.
And by the way, it has not exactly been a secret that Connie Schultz is married to Sherrod Brown. At least, not to literate citizens of Northeast Ohio who read newspapers, particularly the Plain Dealer.
Yeah, anonymous. She didnt breach any ethics at all.
ReplyDeleteThats why she APOLOGIZED today.
Connie is a waste of skin.
ReplyDeleteLooks like about 50 people at that rally. Many less than that We Are Ohio rally that you don't know the attendance for.
ReplyDeleteGood Lord, what a total joke the media in this country is.
ReplyDelete