Frank Guinta vs. The Union Leader

Someone is fibbing (4.00 / 2)

I agree - it is not the Union Leader.

I am trying to figure out who the source of the Union Leader story is. We know it is one of the people at the Kimball meeting attended by Kimball, O'Brien, Jennifer Horn and Jeff Chidester. We also know that the source was "familiar with" the conference call in which Guinta allegedly said what he allegedly said. To me, it is more likely that it is either O'Brien, or Horn.  Unless there was some fifth person at the meeting, but there have been no reports refering to a fifth person. Kimball gave his versionopenly to the press, and Chidester is friends with Kimball, so he would not have been "familiar" with the conference call.  

Either way, O'Brien is boxed in, because he is the person quoted as telling Kimball that Guinta said he couldn't get the $100,000 from the RGA. He either has to throw Horn under the bus, if she is the source, or, throw Guinta under the bus. Hard to throw Horn under the bus, as Kimball and Chidester were there when the conversation took place, and Kimball's account already says that $100,000 was mentioned by O'Brien.    



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Tue Sep 27, 2011 at 17:54:09 PM CDT

Maybe the wrong fib? (0.00 / 0)

What are the chances that the RGA is telling the truth - that Guinta fabricated the donation?

---

by: The Money Magician @ Tue Sep 27, 2011 at 18:07:11 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Guinta's M.O. (4.00 / 3)

Frank Guinta is so capable at passing off multiple layers of deception at any one moment.

But people who do that eventually get tripped up. Sooner or later they loose track of their own tall tales.

It would be so fitting if the U.L. pressures Frank into a mistake.

Just getting a response out of him is a start.

I respect any number of U.L reporters. The trick is to sneak inconvenient truths past Joe McQuaid.

Dean--keep on this guy!

---

by: Chaz Proulx @ Tue Sep 27, 2011 at 23:06:02 PM CDT

Honesty And Idealism (4.00 / 1)

What ever happened to the American ideals of honesty and idealism that Granny D. talked about?

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Wed Sep 28, 2011 at 07:22:29 AM CDT

They don't (4.00 / 1)

make enough profit.  Lies and cynicism pay off in campaign contributions and jobs for people like Frank Guinta when they leave office.  Follow the money.  

---

by: Lucy Edwards @ Wed Sep 28, 2011 at 11:02:23 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Some people confabulate. We associate it with senile dementia, (0.00 / 0)

but it's quite possible that's just when we notice it--when people get old and incompetent to the extent of no longer making rational demands for themselves.

---

by: hannah @ Wed Sep 28, 2011 at 14:09:00 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Generous people can afford to be honest. Cramped, impotent people (0.00 / 0)

can't. Just to get out of bed in the morning, they have to pretend to be something they ain't.

How would you like to look in the mirror and see a nebbish?

"Conservative" is a deceptive designation. These people sit between the creative and destructive impulse and, having no creative talents, opt to destroy.  But, since it wouldn't do to admit that, they've appropriated "conservative," as if fixated on the status quo.  Nevertheless, the theory of "creative destruction" tells them that to be part of the process, it's enough to simply destroy and let someone else do the creative part. That's how come they can argue that destroying public jobs will create private ones and, alternatively, that by destroying public jobs, they are creating private ones. It's not just a matter to taking the intent for the act, as I argued previously.  Wrecking destruction is an active component, just not emphatically admitted.

Just look at Rand Paul objection to preventing gas pipelines from blowing up.  Destruction, whether as a consequence of random nature or human negligence, is an "opportunity" in his book for creating jobs and making something new. That what man has determined to be good does not merit being sustained and the bad is not to be avoided, because destruction is an "opportunity."

---

by: hannah @ Fri Sep 30, 2011 at 05:47:22 AM CDT

[ Parent ]