« “AGENT FOR CHANGE” SHOULD CHANGE TO DIFFERENT CAMPAIGN VEHICLE | Home | DFL-ENDORSED CANDIDATE MARK RITCHIE PROMOTED ON COMMUNIST PARTY USA WEBSITE »
NEW ULM JOURNAL: HATCH COMPLAINT “AN EFFORT TO MUZZLE THE NEWSPAPER”
By Michael B. Brodkorb | July 28, 2006
"Attorney General Mike Hatch took an unusual step this week, filing a Minnesota News Council complaint against the Star Tribune of Minneapolis over a story that hadn't been written. His complaint was that he didn’t like the kind of questions they were asking.
The Minnesota News Council is a non-regulatory organization made up of media members and members of the general public that reviews complaints about unfair news coverage. Usually, there has to be a report published or broadcast in order for there to be something to complain about.
Hatch, who is running for governor, didn't like the questions Star Tribune reporters were asking him about a parking ticket he got, a ticket that was part of an opposition investigation on Hatch that originated with Rep. Matt Entenza. He didn't like the idea that they were asking about his adult daughters and their lives.
Hatch has every right not to like the questions, and to refuse to answer them. But filing a complaint with the Minnesota News Council before any story was published can only be considered a pre-emptive strike, an effort to muzzle the newspaper." Source: New Ulm Journal, July 28, 2006
Click here for complete editorial.
Tags: Uncategorized
Topics: Uncategorized | 5 Comments »
5 Responses to “NEW ULM JOURNAL: HATCH COMPLAINT “AN EFFORT TO MUZZLE THE NEWSPAPER””
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
July 28th, 2006 at 10:41 AM
The NEW ULM JOURNAL has it absolutely right !
Isn’t it a tragedy that such basic logic can be
employed in a medium sized and growing town, while the METRO area is subjected to the fundamental stupidity and mean spirited Left Wing
ranting of the Star tribune ?
July 28th, 2006 at 12:07 PM
It is a nice theory you have, but have you found one democrat yet who has defended Mike Hatch for this action?
We will defend his right to privacy. We will defend his right to answer whatever questions he sees fit to answer.
I don’t think anyone believes he should have the right to stop newspapers from asking questions.
July 28th, 2006 at 6:58 PM
It’s amazing just how many times MB can post the same echo of the same old same old.
When it gets old, he could always try red-baiting another candidate!
:’)
July 28th, 2006 at 9:29 PM
Congratulations NEW ULM JOURNAL for having the courage to print what many Minnesota voters may be thinking – HATCH, AS ATTORNEY GENERAL, IS UNLAWFULLY SUPPRESSING THE FEDERALLY-PROTECTED FIRST AMENDMENT CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.
What does Hatch have to hide to go to such reprehensible extremes to silence the Press? Rather obviously, Hatch doesn’t want any “press†before the elections that might cause voters to recall the arrests of Hatch’s two adult daughters in Chicago for drunk and disorderly conduct, assaulting a police officer, and destroying public property by kicking out the window of a police car. Clearly, it strains credibility to believe a Chicago judge, in a city historically known for judicial corruption and bribery, simply found the Hatch daughters not guilty. The “Press†has yet to raise the hard question which voters may very well be asking – HOW MUCH DID HATCH PAY THE CHICAGO JUDGE TO FIND THE HATCH DAUGHTERS NOT GUILTY?
Historically, in just one federal “sting†operation alone in Chicago, eleven (11) judges were convicted and sent to federal prison for bribery and public corruption, not to mention the thirty-eight (38) attorneys who were also convicted, along with a number of deputy court clerks. Now when the intoxicated Hatch daughters assaulted a Chicago police officer and kicked out a police car window – yet the “nice†Chicago judge decided the Hatch daughters are “not guilty†– just what does Hatch think the average voter in Minnesota is likely to think? BRIBERY BY THE MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL?!?!
In the opinion of certain voters, this is not about privacy for the Hatch family and his seriously out-of-control daughters, this is about covering up possible criminal violations of the Federal Bribery Statute perpetrated by Attorney General Hatch.
July 30th, 2006 at 4:52 PM
If you have proof, bring it.
If you have enough for a investigation, I encourage you to file a complaint.