U.S. Attorney Ortiz should have heard the message loud and clear. “You want any more benefits from the Democratic Party then stop playing footsie with the Boston Globe.”
Putting Mayor Martin Walsh in the starting lineup at the Democratic National Convention after the Huffington Post made national news of the ongoing plan to try to force him out of office or to prevent his reelection between the Globe and Ortiz’s office had one real purpose. It was to send a message that as a Democratic appointee she was not supposed to be manufacturing cases against labor union supporters or popularly elected mayors. She was put on alert that the nation was watching her.
The problem a lot of people seeking power in Boston have is that they forget we are part of a larger nation and only a tiny part at that. The local newspaper also forgets that its power is quite limited to the local area and when it comes to the national scene things are viewed quite differently than in Massachusetts.
You would have thought that Boston’s delusion about the power of its local media on the national scene led by the Boston Globe (with all the other media following behind like a group of dutiful elementary school children being led in a school yard by their teacher) would have evaporated after it created the presidential candidacies of Iron Mike Dukakis and soon to be Long Gone John Kerry. But like all small towns or insular communities the people forget that sometimes they are part of a larger nation.
For years the Ortiz gang operated like Mafia members under the local godfather the Boston Globe. They kept it happy doing its wishes and went about beating up on people who were out of favor with it or themselves since it had its protection and cover. No one cared what was happening in Boston until the Huffington Post lifted the lid.
The local media’s response was to immediately jumped to the Globe’s and Ortiz’s defense. It went after the mayor as being behind the story. The Huffington Post fired back. It showed this reaction. This gave credence to its original story of this tawdry cabal.
There was another immediate response among the high circles of the Democratic Party and national labor leaders who had no idea of what was happening in Boston. “Who appointed Ortiz?” they asked. “Is she a Democrat?” they wondered. “Why is she conjuring up indictments based on far-fetched and flimsy evidence in order to change the will of the people who elected the mayor?” they queried. “Is the Huffington Post story correct that she is harassing him?”
They sought to find out more about Mayor Walsh. Everything they discovered showed the man was doing a great job and his administration was clean and transparent and helping out all people of all races, colors, creeds, and sexual orientation. It was unanimously decided that the efforts of Ortiz’s officer were outrageous.
She needed to get a message. What better way than to put the party’s hand squarely on Walsh’s shoulder and tell her that he is one of them. What better way than to have him as one of the kickoff speakers from the podium on the altar of the Democratic National Convention.
Walsh after saying he is an alcoholic reinforced the message to Ortiz to layoff the unions. He said: ” I followed my father into the Building Trades when I was 18 years old. Labor gave my immigrant family a chance. And the labor community got me the help I needed, and gave me a second chance.” He mentioned workers, working families, jobs almost a dozen times in his short speech of a little over three minutes.
Ortiz surely got the message. Her future is not with the Globe but is through the way she got the job, the Democratic Party.
John K who comments here astutely put all I wrote in a nut shell: “Marty’s speaking at the DNC . He appears to have made the cut . I do not see worry clouding his brow. He is In With The In Crowd, nationally .”
Marty Walsh is just what Hillary desperately needs — a slice of the white, working-class vote. Not a majority, of course, but enough white voters to defeat you-know-who. It’s the same reason Clinton chose a boring, white, male moderate, Tim Kaine, as her running mate instead of well, I don’t know, Elizabeth Warren. The Sanders people have reason to be pissed. Hillary is basically blowing them off. To my way of thinking, this is going to make her a stronger presidential candidate.
Marty Walsh just went ” National. ” Yep …. That was him ! DNC … America loves an underdog and damn, if Marty had been wearing an Underdog cape his honest tale of Union tough love and loyalty as he ” hit bottom ” only to surface and live to tell it … is … Political Gold !
Dismiss the scrappy Marty with the cherub bulldog’s face and you ignore that his Working Class CV and plain spoken ways are the reason he is Mayor of Boston. He is an ambitious lad. He is apparently on a track now. Smile, Marty 🙂
Who brought home the bacon for HRC in the Democratic primary in Massacusetts and how did he do it is the question….?
Whoever was carrying the bacon dropped most if it. Clinton and Sanders split the vote, with Clinton getting 46 delegates to Sanders’ 45. As you may recall, at the time people mostly talked about Trump’s huge victory in the GOP primary.
This article seems to have lots of chest thumping by HP with apparently very little actual substance.
You wrote “when it comes to the national scene things are viewed quite differently than in Massachusetts.”
We have seen that in how the Supreme Court differs in their interpretation of U.S. Constitution by many in Massachusetts, most recently Jaime Caetano v. Massachusetts.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/14-10078_aplc.pdf
It starts with the following:
“The Court has held that “the Second Amendment extends,
prima facie, to all instruments that constitute
bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at
the time of the founding,” District of Columbia v. Heller,
554 U. S. 570, 582 (2008), and that this “Second Amendment
right is fully applicable to the States,” McDonald v.
Chicago, 561 U. S. 742, 750 (2010).”
Read it slowly. Move your lips if necessary.
Note that this was unanimously decided on March 21, 2016, after the death of Antonin Scalia. Further, the recent actions of the Commonwealth’s Attorney General come to mind:
“The lower court’s ill treatment of Heller cannot stand.
The reasoning of the Massachusetts court poses a grave
threat to the fundamental right of self-defense. The Supreme
Judicial Court suggested that Caetano could have
simply gotten a firearm to defend herself. 470 Mass., at
783, 26 N. E. 3d, at 695. But the right to bear other weapons
is “no answer” to a ban on the possession of protected
arms. Heller, 554 U. S., at 629.”
…
“Countless people may have reservations about using
deadly force, whether for moral, religious, or emotional
reasons—or simply out of fear of killing the wrong person.
See Brief for Arming Women Against Rape & Endangerment
as Amicus Curiae 4–5. “Self-defense,” however, “is a
basic right.” McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767. I am not prepared
to say that a State may force an individual to choose
between exercising that right and following her conscience,
at least where both can be accommodated by a
weapon already in widespread use across the Nation.
A State’s most basic responsibility is to keep its people
safe. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts was either
unable or unwilling to do what was necessary to protect
Jaime Caetano, so she was forced to protect herself. To
make matters worse, the Commonwealth chose to deploy
its prosecutorial resources to prosecute and convict her of
a criminal offense for arming herself with a nonlethal
weapon that may well have saved her life. The Supreme
Judicial Court then affirmed her conviction on the flimsiest
of grounds. This Court’s grudging per curiam now
sends the case back to that same court. And the consequences
for Caetano may prove more tragic still, as her
conviction likely bars her from ever bearing arms for self-defense.
See Pet. for Cert. 14.
If the fundamental right of self-defense does not protect
Caetano, then the safety of all Americans is left to the
mercy of state authorities who may be more concerned
about disarming the people than about keeping them safe.”
You could almost apply this decision directly to the current scheme in Massachusetts concerning detachable magazine fed semi-automatic rifles with pistol style grips.
Ed:
Thanks for that. Aside from putting a check on the Supreme Judicial Court it calls into question part of my argument that the writers of the Second Amendment did not anticipate the type of weapons we have today. I’ll have to go back to the drawing board on that one.
I am also going to have to rad the Caetano decision that was clearly out of line with Supreme Court precedent. It should make you wonder that our justices can be so wrong in pushing an agenda. We saw it when the gays wanted to march in a parade when the SJC approval was overturned 9 – 0 and now with the gun case.
I expect as you suggest that AG Healey’s new ban on guns will be met with challenges which may be successful since it seems with her loose language she is trying an end run to ban weapons considered lawful.
Given that AG Healey is fully aware of the remanding of Caetano v. Massachusetts almost four months ago, we can safely state that it is she who is now “pushing an agenda” in the face of decided law. Can we now safely question her competence or is it merely abuse of authority? Is she competing with U.S. Attorney Ortiz in this field of endeavor?
Ed:
Abuse of power/authority. As evidence that her office is above the law, see maurabrokecfaa.com.
[email protected]
How can one square Marty Walsh being honest and being “In with The In Crowd nationally”? In with the Clinton mob does not mean honest. The mayor is not Ivy League, is not Goldman Sachs and is presumably a Catholic – all major NoNos for the Clintonista In Crowd.
There is no signaling. Marty is a northern ethnic mayor and fit the opening day narrative of the Philadelphia coronation pageant.
Boston Democrat mayors hoping to go national, which Walsh is at this time probably is not, have a mixed record. Flynn got sidelined by Clinton with the Vatican because he took his faith seriously, Tobin got rewarded by Truman with Labor because of yeoman campaign services rendered and Curley got screwed by FDR because he was one Catholic too many.
Matt, your thoughts are intriguing except you never explain why Ortiz is after Walsh or who is directing her actions. Is she a loose canon, out on her own trying to take down Marty Walsh? If not, the real question is who is in charge of Ortiz? She is a political appointment and owes her job to a democrat. Is she a hack? Or is she like some past ADA’s like yourself? Was she hired because she was very capable, smart, new the law and could run the Office? If Walsh is tight with our president and the democrats, it seems very odd that Ortiz would be targeting him and his staff unless she was truly on to political corruption and could justify her actions to her democratic bosses. If Ortiz is acting on her own because she has uncovered corruption, you as a former prosecutor should hold her in high regard for her courage and determination for doing the job she is paid to perform. Sometimes prosecutors have to do unpopular investigations and prosecutions, as you too have done. Thanks and be well, Bobby Curtis
Bobby: I can only speak for myself, but this looks like garden-variety patronage politics dressed up as high-level political corruption. A couple of months ago, the former speaker of the New York State Assembly, a very powerful man, was sentenced to 12 years in prison for political corruption. The jury convicted this guy of taking nearly $4 million in illegal payments. Now, this is my idea of serious corruption. The Boston situation looks like a few punk-ass jobs. And there’s no indication, as least as yet, that the main suspect personally benefited for any of this this. I also think the recent Supreme Court decision makes it less likely that Ortiz will carry on, even with the help of the Globe and its little friend, the Herald.
Hi DanC, I don’t know where the line is drawn between high level political corruption and a few punk-ass jobs. If the quest to get jobs is combined with the violence, threats and damage to personal property as it was in the Milton incident it can’t be tolerated. The union reps are in place to gain jobs and opportunities for the members, when city officials are demanding union jobs as a prerequisite to issuing city permits that’s wrong and criminal. The mayor keeps all his business within his small circle of trust. Two of his top level city officials, under indictment, were only acting in behalf of the mayor and I imagine that he was well aware of their activities. Whether or not their actions were criminal is a matter for a jury. Whether or not the mayor knew of their actions is up for public opinion and his re-election attempt. I’m still looking for the answer of who is calling Ortiz’s actions, she does not operate in a vacuum, she has people who she answers to and most likely they are loyal, high ranking democrats. Thanks, have a nice day!
Bobby: She answers to Obama’s Justice Department (Loretta Lynch), but he’s on the way out. If, going forward, she wants to keep her job for any reason, she’s going to want to keep Hillary happy. But if Ortiz is leaving anyway, which often happens, it’s anybody’s guess. I wouldn’t expect anything before the election, would you?
I agree that the HuffPost story will make it much harder for a political animal like Ortiz to drop the hammer on the mayor. If there’s a misstep, the Globe and the Herald (When did this newspaper underdog become a newspaper lapdog?) will have a much harder time sparing her embarrassment. (I don’t believe there has to be a secret meeting at Starbucks for this to happen.)
This may be a tradition. As I recall it, Obama pissed off Mayor Menino in 2012 by failing to show up for an event in Boston, as promised, or some such political transgression. Menino’s price for forgiveness was a spot as a speaker at the national convention, and the mayor got it.
Matt, what evidence is there at the moment that “Ortiz surely got the message.” ? Are you simply assuming that she did so because she is not brain-dead?
Or was there a chance meeting on a runway somewhere that may soon come to light?
Walshs elevate d profile will only whet their appetite. The prize is now grander. Imagine when they can say “We brought down the Mayor, who, only months ago, had a role as a rising star at the DNC” . I suggest he should be more wary than ever.