Timing Of CT Post Election Story Attack Suspicious, Two Weeks Before Mayoral Primary – Why Now?

If a news organization doesn’t like a politician or the establishment in control, so be it, at least show some common fairness. The uppity reporting of the Connecticut Post is lancing itself so deep into the ground you’d need a backhoe to dig up all the desperados controlling the shots, from the desk to the lowly reporters who frown marching orders, but obey for paychecks.

Sound familiar? Isn’t that like the politics they castigate?

Don’t assume the hierarchy of a news organization is anything different than government. Just a matter of perspective.

For four years now Post stories over and over and over preened uncovering dubious absentee ballot information to benefit the candidate the Post’s editorial board endorsed for mayor in 2019 Marilyn Moore. She lost. Her people have violated absentee ballot laws.

(Gee, we kinda forgot about that)

In June, this year, the State Elections Enforcement Commission voted to “authorize staff lawyers to refer “evidence of possible criminal violations undertaken” from the 2019 race.

No charges have been filed.

Fascinating the Post did not pop this story in June, July or August, but decided oh, gee, let’s drop (what we think) a sensational headline bomb less than two weeks from a Democratic primary for mayor. Why not relax a little to probe perspective?

The motive is obvious.

There’s no reason to sit on this story for months, unless a news organization wants to decide – or control – the occupant of City Hall.

Moore’s conflicted political arm Bridgeport Generation Now Votes which clearly coordinated illegal expenditures with Moore during her latest announcement for mayor (the Post ducked this story) financed a challenged of Ganim’s 2019 primary win.

Fact: Judge Barry Stevens tossed it.

Fact: The Connecticut Supreme Court unanimously backed up Stevens on appeal.

Fact: Gen Now Votes leaders Callie Heilmann and Gemeem Davis talk off the ears of Post reporter Brian Lockhart, and others, to sway their way.

Don’t ever assume outsiders who urge control of City Hall are any different than the establishment they want to replace.

Lockhart always postures dude, this is not my call, I had to write it. They told me.


Horse droppings.

If an editor told me to write something I was uncomfortable doing I said when you uncover information I don’t have, I’ll write it. I’m not writing It!!!

Or, maybe, the Post’s super-hero columnist Dan Haar, comes along and says, hey, I uncovered this stuff from the state in June. Let’s run with it (we hate all those people anyway).

Do any of them take into consideration “those” when writing such a BS story without any appreciable balance?

Fact: the only mayoral candidate who was fined in 2019 for violation of state law was the Connecticut Post-endorsed candidate Marilyn Moore.

Fact: guess who Moore and Gen Now phonies hired to run her absentee ballot campaign in 2019? Betty Chappell who one year prior entered multiple guilty pleas in state court for violation of absentee ballot fraud.

Fact: here

Fact here

Fact: Moore and Gen Now are so inept they cratered to signature her onto the ballot. Of course, we heard nothing from Lockhart why that happened.

See, that’s the thing with selective CT Post reporting: We like government when it points fingers at officials we don’t like, not so when pointing at people we like.

No different than the pols they attack.





      1. “Fact: the only mayoral candidate who was fined in 2019 for violation of state law was the Connecticut Post-endorsed candidate Marilyn Moore.”

        Fact: When I filed the complaint leading to the above mentioned violation, I also filed a Complaint against Senator Moore with the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection. I think it was file 78-19 or something like that. Did the post miss a ruling on this complaint. Moore had/has close ties with the boos there. Lennie, get off your ass and give us answers. Don’t wait for the post to do it.

  1. And what about the Working Families Party. Why has the WFP eased away from involvement in Bridgeport’s mayoral election this year? Is it simply that, after the Moore Campaign, repeat debacles, they are gun-shy about backing any other candidate that faces a steep, uphill fight because they cannot bear — or afford — to possibly be on any other than the victorious side after their embarrassments with the Moore candidacy?! Isn’t the WFP supposed to be all about taking the part of the (earnest, competent, untainted) underdog?!

    It would seem that the WFP should at least undertake to raise the political profile of the untainted, competent, outsider undergo Lamond Daniels in this election cycle.

    What the WFP should be afraid of isn’t backing a long-odds Bridgeport candidate; what it should be afraid of is losing its reputation as the advocate of the voiceless masses. The WFP becomes quite irrelevant once they lose the faith of poor urban voters as their advocate and voice.

    Truly; Lamond Daniels is the only candidate for mayor this cycle that both fits their (unspoken) underdog-candidacy preference, as well their need for an earnest, untainted, competent candidate.

    It will truly be a shame if this well-qualified, Bridgeport political outsider isn’t offered a hand by the WFP for the upcoming November election. It can only help the WFP to support this potential winner even as they cultivate political alternatives in the state’s largest city…

  2. Regarding the Connecticut Post; their mi$$ion has been unclear for quite some (Hearst) time now. They don’t do “controversial” unless it suits their circulation and ad-sales needs… During municipal campaign season, “Bridgeport’ sells — especially if it concerns any sort of (potential) Ganim City Hall scandal. No surprises here…

    Of course, despite their pretense at taking on Connecticut’s rogue public utilities, they won’t dig up the real dirt that explains why the “regulated” utilities remain essentially non-regulated — the fact that the “regulators” (GA, Governor, PURA officials, newspaper owners/publishers, et al.) are very, very invested in them… (E.g., how much Avangrid and Eversource stock does the Governor and his family own?) Indeed, the Post editorial board should be talking political and journalistic ethics even as they do their pretend rant against the greed of the utilities. (And they should also — in the context of JG’s official, mayoral praise of the latest UI rate-hike granted by PURA — be looking into his investment relationship with UI/Avangrid…)

    In any event, it is difficult for the public to believe that anyone in politics or journalism is advocating for them in these difficult times (especially the BRIDGEPORT public)…

  3. Lennie,
    I am a newspaper junkie and a current subscriber to Greenwich Times, CT Post, Boston Herald, Wall St Journal and an ex-subscriber to the NY Times and New London Day.

    While I will continue to subscribe, I find editor Hugh Bailey sanctimonious and the opinion columnists way over the top regarding race, climate, anything Republican, conservative or Trump..

    I have no problem reading their columns, just wish they would have opposing views. (Strongly urge them to publish Christopher Powell now that he’s retired from Meriden Journal Record..) Maybe if they published strong liberal and conservative opinion columnists, they’d generate more reader involvement and hopefully more subscribers?

    In short, bring back the Bridgeport Light!


Leave a Reply