“Let’s . . .to Rumble!” Charlie Baker in the white trunks vs Rachael Rollins in the black trunks

It was clear the color of the trunks reflects the background and experience of the fighters. They come into the ring having had different training and experiences. Baker who reminds me of the guy Orrin Markhus who used to skate in the Ice Capades who was part of the Old Smoothies duo is an old hardened pro of the Republican style; Rollins recalls an up-and-comer not confined by any previous style but new to the slippery gang-up tactics used by old timers within the ropes.

The fight started with a hard left hook by Markhus Baker. Baker was taught that hook by Thomas A. Truco, III who is the Secretary of Public Safety having been appointed in December 2018. Truco, a life-long public servant from Auburn with a background in probation work and a short stint in the corrections area, with no background in police work – which is very different from probation work – and no street sense having hardly settled down in his office after four months began feeling his oats so he decided to become an officious intermeddler by publicly chastising Suffolk County District Attorney Rachael Rollins about her plans for running her district attorney’s office.

Rollins was backed into the corner with the barrage of criticisms thrown at her, especially by a guy who wasn’t involved in police work or prosecutions. She kept her gloves high against the onslaught of lefts and rights but threw out a soft jab saying she represented “the interests of people who voted overwhelmingly for the bold changes I’ve made.” That did little to change her position.

With another soft jab, as if having been taken back badly by Baker’s relentless attack she seemed to be ready to throw in the towel saying: “I’d be happy to address his hypothetical concerns with some of our real world experience anytime he wants to pick up the phone.” Again little changed. Reeling from punch after punch the Marquess of Queensberry rules like a mouthpiece came flying out of her head. Unlike Orrin  Charlie or his buddy Truco she learned to fight on the streets of hard knocks. Mentally, she was now back on these streets rather than in the polite ring of politics.

As Charlie closed for the kill Rollins seeing her chance for the title evaporating – she instinctively struck back. The move using Charlie’s son’s favored status in the criminal justice system – where he got a “do you know who I am” pass others would not have received through the good  auspices of the federal prosecutors who will want something for having offered this benefit – was fast. It is unclear whether Rollins’s knee came up or her head butted down on Charlie because it was over in a flash. Charlie was floored. He would see that there was no way he could win this match which Truco the Third had engineered.

It never should have been scheduled. Rachael Rollins is an elected official who has the right to run her office the way she sees fit. The governor or his assistants had a right to be displeased with her doings. The incorrect thing to do in that circumstance is to write a letter. Truco was way off base doing what he did.  If he had problems with Rollins he should have arranged for a meeting with her to discuss them.

Which brings me to the real question. Why did Truco decide he should interfere with Rollins as she attempts to change a system that is in dire need of changing? What audience is he playing to? Doesn’t he have enough to do with the problems in the state police? Rollins like every other district attorney is not under his jurisdiction. What she does is none of his business. I know of no other case where the Secretary of Public Safety intruded his judgment on a district attorney who has been elected to office by her constituents.

Is there something different about Rachael Rollins that prompted this attack?

 

19 thoughts on ““Let’s . . .to Rumble!” Charlie Baker in the white trunks vs Rachael Rollins in the black trunks

  1. 2,200 signatures at BAYLOR to stop CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN MATT WALSH from speaking at BAYLOR . . .students say he’ll hurt them emotionally and physically if he utters Pro LIfe, Pro Traditional Marriage Views

  2. Rollins lunatic liberal plan is like OC Ocasio’s lunatic GREEN TREE environmental plan . . . .you know if we build a tunnel from L.A. to Hawaii, think of all the flight fuel we’ll save

    No More Meat . . . .No More Arrests for Drugs . . .Ban cow’s milk …..LET KIDS TRY FENTANYL, LSD AND CRACK, lower the drinking age to 16, let middle school students vote

  3. The malicious assault on Justice Kavanaugh’s character reminds me of Raymond Donovan who said when the Jury acquitted him of the false charges in 30 seconds, “Where do I go to get my reputation back?”
    I read a letter to the editor from a friend, a retired State Cop, who called State Speaker Bob DeLeo (sp?) “an unindicted co-conspirator”. My friend forgot the Probation Officer’s cases had been thrown out . . .who compensates all those falsely fingered persons for their lawyers’ fees and stress inflicted by corrupt Power Abusing Prosecutors.

    Finally, the Ten Commandments forbid killing and bearing false witness against thy neighbor. DEMs favor abortion which kills a human being, and specialize in bearing false witness as with Kavanaugh, and with False Prosecutions . . .worse form of character assassination is an unjust indictment.

    ROLLINS program will result in more persons being KILLED by dangerous drugs.

  4. It’s not just the 70,000 O.D. deaths (mostly narcotic related) it’s the destruction of family, friends, neighborhood, social relations the active addict/drug abuser causes. IT TAKES A TERRIBLE TOLL ON SOCIETY, and leniency and the old soft shoe is not the answer . . .more effective law enforcement, interaction with police, courts, social workers, medical, public health personnel, educators, in the area of drug abuse/addiction is warranted . . .not a lunatic hands-off KIDD GLOVE approach like ROLLINS

  5. My lifelong friend Tom Tucker struggled with heroin addiction since serving in Vietnam. He got 3 years clean and sober towards the end of his life. He had a slip. Picked up one small dose of heroin (likely laced with fentanyl), shot it in his vein, OD and died. If a police officer had stopped Tom and taken that small dose from him, and arrested him, and processed him, and social/medical/friend intervention ensued, Tom may still be alive today.
    Please Understand that a person, of any age, especially a youth, carrying a single dose of heroin, is carrying a DEADLY DANGEROUS WEAPON . . .if he uses, he may die; if he gives to another, the other person may die. SOCIETY CANNOT TURN a blind eye. ROLLINS PLAN IS AS IRRATIONAL AS I’VE EVER HEARD, AND AS DANGEROUS, WHEN IT COMES TO HARD DRUGS, NARCOTICS, HALLUCINOGENS, ESPECIALLY FOR YOUTHAND YOUNG ADULTS,

    TOM TUCKER WAS NEAR 60 WHEN HE DIED JUNE 1, 2004. Tom used to shoot up to 40 bags ofheroin a day. He struggled but did maintain sobriety for the last three years of his life. He was a quarterback on English High School’s football team, a good baseball and hockey player, too, a good lifelong friend, with a great sense of humor, and served honorably in combat in Vietnam as a radio man with the Army.

  6. If Charlie Baker ever decides to run for President , how do you think the non arrest of his son will play out on national media? As far as the woman goes, if it was happening in another state , how would that look to residents of Massachusetts? 3rd world to me!

    1. Norwood:

      Charlie can’t run for president. He thinks he is a Republican but the party he thinks is the Republican Party no longer exists nor will it exist ever again. Would the fixing of his son’s case have an effect on him if he could run, I’d suggest it would be very little. I don’t think most people feel too chagrined about a father trying to get his son a decent break.

      I’m not sure how it would look to residents of other states they way Rachael Rollins is operating. I think she is on to something good. It would not look like 3rd world but something sort of first world European where the laws are less harsh than our laws. Keep in mind our criminal justice system’s only change in a hundred of years is adding by the thousands acts that were once not criminal and making them criminal. As you know anyone who makes a fuss is looked down upon by others who like things never to change.

      1. The Herald has on its website a man in Norwood who just got busted with so much pot, weapons they had to bring in a wagon to take it all away. The suspect is going to have a quote unquote dangerous hearing. Could you explain that as to how in the year 2019 that is quoted as happening? Howie Carr has not written about it yet but I bet he does.Do you think Massachusetts is to liberal in its laws or do you think it is enlightened?

        1. Norwood:

          Not sue what you are asking. Whether the guy should have a dangerousness hearing. What that means is the DA is trying to keep him locked up prior to trial otherwise he would probably be released. I’d think that was an appropriate move. The guy had an assault weapon, tons of ammo, other guns and seemed to be in the business of distributing marijuana on a large scale. I’d want to make sure he came back to face trial.

          I don’t know if Howie will write about it unless the guy is an illegal immigrant or related to the Bulgers of some politician. I think legalizing marijuana was a big mistake something we will come to regret. Overall I’d say MA was not that enlightened in its criminal justice system because it is so 19th century. It is enlightened in its bail situation since the purpose of bail is really to ensure a person comes back to court. It is far from liberal in the costs and fines it imposes on poor people who are the ones mostly caught up in the criminal justice system. Overall its a mix of good, bad, and ugly.

  7. Matt, also, in your book on Whitey, ask the question NC asked long ago. Since the FEDs told Martorano he did not have to say anything about his brother’s or their associates’ killings/crimes, how could he get on the witness stand and Swear To Tell the Whole Truth

    The first question a defense counsel should have asked is How many people did your brother kill.brutalize.extort.drugspushed?

    If he didn’t answer, the JUdge should not have allowed him to testify . . .iin the first place, before any questions . . .

    Wyshak, the Sterns Gang, et al put STONE COLD SERIAL KILLER PERJURERS ON THE WITNESS STAND and the Judges let those Fed prosecutors get away with it

    1. Bill:

      That was pointed out in my first book. Salemme was allowed to testify on the condition he did not have to testify about any Mafia dealings.

  8. Oh, Matt, like a good liberal, Identity Politics must end the comment

    Rachels Rollins plans to decriminalize de facto the possession of small quantities of heroin, opiods, etc, will lead to more narcotics deaths, more drug trafficking, more crime . . . .arrest and interfere/intercede in everyone’s life using heroin, opiods, crack cocaine, iv drugs, heavy hallucinogens. . .lay off the grass guys, it’s legal anyway

    I’ve been on the streets, first hand experience, and in this business of drug abuse, drug addiction and its consequences personally, familially, socially and criminally for way longer than Rachel Rollins .

    Someone should stop the implementation of her foolish plans, which will only add to the 70,000 plus O.D. deaths were experiencing annually in the US and the heavy toll taken on families, neighbors, friends, society and criminal justice system

    INTERVENE EARLY AND OFTEN, and the best place to intervene is when the POlice catch a kid, young adult or fully grown adult with a small quantity of a Heavy Drug like a Narcotic, Speed, Coke, Hallucinogen etc

    W

    1. Bill:

      There are more than one way to skin a cat. Your approach has been tried and has failed as you can see by your own statements. Perhaps it is wise to change course.

      1. The traditional dispositions of petty crime – trespass, disturbing the peace, shoplifting, larceny, B&E, straight possession and small-time distribution of drugs – have been developed over the decades. One or two dismissal on costs, then one or two CWOF’s, then a couple of Guilties with probation and then jail, with probation surrender. The theory is that people will be less inclined to move on to serious crime. Happily, the bulk of those charged move on from the system at one of the earlier points. The policy hasn’t “failed” unless you think there’s another policy that would have eliminated crime altogether.

        We can have a discussion about whether not prosecuting minor crimes at all be will reduce crime by avoiding an early stigma or, on the other hand, lead to more serious crime and deteriorating quality of life for all.

        Instead of engaging in this discussion when these issues are raised, the DA just claims those disagreeing with her are misogynist racists.

        1. Brian:

          You point out what has been happening. How much time does each individual have to spend to go to court for these offenses that result in most cases in dismissals. How would making them into civil actions that did not require court appearances change anything. Wouldn’t you think a court system in the 21st century would have in place a set up on the internet where these matters could be handled?

          One way to reduce crimes is to change what we consider crimes into civil matters. It will also reduce the time the judges are required to sit at arraignments and repeat over and over again the warning about the right to an attorney. It will allow the judges to concentrate on more important matters other than shoveling people in and out of the courtroom. What about the multitude times counsel is appointed to handle minor cases that everyone knows will not result in any time in jail. As I recall counsel is only to be appointed in cases where a defendant if facing jail or prison time. Imagine the savings if trespass, assault and battery, shop lifting, and those many automobile offenses are made civil and they can be handled over a computer.

          There are ways to change the system to make it better. You are aware that unlike in every other profession the legal one is the same now as it was in the 19th century. There is no need for that. But there seems to be great resistance to any change. Why do you think that is” Is that the difference between the private sector where one has competition and the public sector where none exists?

          I think you wrongly place the blame on DA Rollins. It was the governor’s office that refused to have the discussion and made public it criticism of Rollins first. That should never have been done. You do know that the Commissioner of Public safety has no jurisdiction over a DA which makes the letter of criticism something quite unusual. I can’t blame Rollins for saying it is misogynist and racist. It had never been done before in the history of the Commonwealth. Why was it happening to her?

          1. “One way to reduce crimes is to change what we consider crimes into civil matters.” Calling crime something else doesn’t reduce it. It’s petty crime, sure but still crime affecting the quality of people’s lives.
            It’s boring for the judge, lawyers and audience to listen to repetitions of the litany at arraignments. At one time I used to call everyone in at the beginning of a session and give a more dramatic and carefully explained version of the litany. Then at individual arraignments I would inquire if they had heard and understood my earlier comments. Someone told me I couldn’t do it because latecomers would lie about it.
            Anyway the script isn’t written by the people who deliver it but by Appellate judges who are varied enough even for diversity fetishists.
            There are, we may be grateful, still some young people for whom an arrest and court appearance will serve as a wake up call. Others are deterred from more serious crime by an credible warning of future incarceration. Those who are not should be jailed.
            Courts already convert a huge number of criminal offenses into civil infractions.
            You are right that Turco could have handled his communication better. The Executive branch has a role in the discussion though. I don’t recall this kind of pushback on a DA but I don’t recall anything on the scale of this radical policy change either. Can you?
            It’s BS to say that disagreement must be misogyny or racism.
            Turco made specific points in his letter. She hasn’t made any reply on the merits – just identity politics.

      2. My approAch has never been tried . . . .Society since Vietnam has turned a blind eye to Drug Abuse/Addiction . . . .lax enforcement, minimalistic intervention and treatment . . .READ SKIP SVIOKLA’S BOOK, FROM HARVARD TO HELL AND BACK, A DOCTOR’S STRUGGLE WITH OPIATE ADDICTION . .Skip as you know was on my high school football team . .a co captain

        2. wHAT rollins is proposing has already been tried and failed . .it is leniency, turning a blind eye , , ,it is the equivalent of lowering the drinking age to 18 . . . .it is the LIBERAL’S green light to youngsers that its OK to possess small quantities of heroin, fentanyl, opiates, crack coke, speed, hallucinogens . . .typical LIBERAL LUNACY LENIENCY

        3. HERE’S the evil of what the LIBERALS did to JUSTICE Kavanaugh. Without due process (innocent in America until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law) he is labelled a SEX ABUSER by your fellow DEMOCRATS.
        Kavanaugh will teach at George Mason’s overseas university, England, this summer. George Mason students, faculty, Democratic Party has began an outrageous, lunatic, defamatory protest:
        One student said: “It has affected my mental health knowing that an abuser will be part of our faculty.”
        In a petition, a group that calls itself “Mason for Survivors” is asking university administrators to remove Kavanaugh and issue a formal apology to victims of sexual assault. It also calls for the public release of documents related to the judge’s hire, including “emails, donor agreements, and contracts.” And it requests a town hall by April 25 to discuss the “implications for students” of bringing the Supreme Court justice on board.
        The petition, created about two weeks ago, has garnered nearly 3,500 signatures. And it has yielded separate forms for parents and alumni” The Demcratic Party at the University has joined in the protest

        How do you remain in that party?

        Happy Patriots Day Monday

Comments are closed.