Democrat Gottheimer needs to spend less time condemning and more time explaining

By Sussex County Watchdog

He’s at it again.   Yesterday, in the midst of an actual shooting war between the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran, Congressman Josh Gottheimer called a press conference to tell us that the real threat came from… other Americans.  Especially “white” Americans. 

Why is Gottheimer ignoring the existential threat posed to Israel and Jews around the world by the Islamic Republic of Iran?  Why is he trying so hard to change the subject?  Founded in the wake of the 1979 revolution, the Islamic Republic of Iran rests on a “foundation of three pillars.”  They are:  (1) The mandatory veil (hijab) for women; (2) Opposition to the United States of America; and (3) Opposition to Israel.  Look it up! 
 
Instead of trying to blame Americans for all the world’s troubles, perhaps Congressman Gottheimer should adopt a little humility, search his own past, and atone for some of his own actions.   Before he was elected to Congress in 2016, Josh Gottheimer followed his buddy Mark Penn, the Clintons' polling guy, to take over an international public relations/lobbying corporation called Burson-Marsteller.  These folks are a real piece of work. 
 
Hey, don't take out word for it.  Here's what MSNBC's Rachel Maddow had to say about the firm where Josh Gottheimer held the number two position as International Vice President (his buddy Mark Penn was International President):

Yep, Josh Gottheimer and his pal Mark Penn ran the "PR Firm from Hell"!
 
Maybe Josh Gottheimer should explain what he got up to at the "PR Firm from Hell"?  Maybe offer a little apology?

Pro-Sanctuary State NBC “hit job” triggers calls for FCC investigation

We’ve received word that Republican leaders are planning to contact the chief counsel of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) with evidence that NBC aired what amounted to a negative political ad against Republican Sheriff Mike Strada.  A Sussex County Republican, Strada is leading the fight against Democrat Governor Phil Murphy’s Sanctuary State scheme to block federal law enforcement and to allow illegal aliens to reside in New Jersey and access welfare, health, education, and legal benefits (many of which are not available to legal resident  taxpayers).

Sarah Wallace is a Bergen County Democrat.  She is what’s called a “hard” Democrat – totally loyal to her party, never missing an election, always supporting whatever Clinton or Murphy that appears on the ballot.  And she is proud of it.

Given the public information available about her, we were surprised when we learned that NBC – the parent company of Rachel Maddow’s MSNBC – chose her to do a segment on the primary campaign between Sheriff Mike Strada and Jail Guard Andy Boden.  Especially as Boden had previously bragged to a member of the local, Sussex County media, that the interview was going to be a “hit job” on Sheriff Strada.

Further complicating matters is Sheriff Strada’s central role in opposing Democrat Governor Phil Murphy’s Sanctuary State scheme.  In the past, Sarah Wallace has done interviews that were very favorable to illegals and against members of law enforcement.  In fact, Sarah Wallace is currently being sued by a police officer for her conduct and behavior.

Last November, a New York judge accused someone championed by Sarah Wallace – named Manny Gomez – of “coercing a witness to a gang slaying not to testify.”  According to the New York Daily News (November 3, 2018), police have suggested that Sarah Wallace and Manny Gomez have “an apparent relationship” and that Wallace does stories that favor Gomez. 

Why did Boden go to Wallace, a Democrat, and why was he so sure she would do a “hit job” for him on Sheriff Strada?

And why are the NBC attacks being promoted by the Democrat Party – if this is supposedly a Republican primary?  In a departure from normal journalistic protocols, NBC has promoted their “hit job” on Sheriff Strada to left-wing blogs.  Was Bergen Democrat Sarah Wallace herself the source of promoting the “hit job” on those leftist blogs? 

Candidate Boden continues to claim that County Clerk Jeff Parrott triggered the psychological examination that resulted in a police psychiatrist finding him “unfit” for duty.   Boden claimed that it was the result of him picking up petitions to run for office.  The County Clerk disputes Boden’s contention that he came to his office to obtain the nominating petitions.

After months of being asked to produce evidence to support his claim, Boden finally “discovered” an email that he claims is from the County Clerk’s office, in which they instructed him to obtain the petitions on-line.  This is itself a departure from Boden’s original story, which was that he visited the County Clerk’s office.  But that embellishment aside, how are we to believe that this email isn’t doctored in the same way that the FAKE video was doctored that his campaign said was coming days before it was released?

In fact, Boden’s psychological evaluation came after a series of incidents including some that left female employees intimidated and fearful of having him over them.  After a police psychologist found him “unfit for duty” and he was placed on leave, Boden went to Sheriff Strada and asked him to restore him to duty – which meant giving him back his power over people, a firearm, handcuffs, and badge.  The Sheriff’s office told Boden that he needed to get well first and re-evaluated by a mental health professional, before he could be re-instated.

Boden’s claim that he was ruled “unfit for duty” because he was running for office, repeated again in the Wallace interview, is clearly a lie.The public testimony of the police psychologist who ruled Boden “unfit for duty” makes it very clear that Boden is not being honest:

A.     The whole point of the

fitness-for-duty evaluation in many cases is to

avoid things getting to that point.  We are --

you know, as the IACP, we're looking for

conditions that are going to impact someone's

ability to safely and effectively do their work.

We want to keep that environment safe.  We also

want to treat people compassionately.  And if we

see that someone is under duress, to try to

intervene and help them.

             Fitness-for-duty evaluations are

often seen as punitive in nature, but they don't

necessarily have to be or need to be.  The idea

is to intervene much in the same way as an EAP

and get someone help before there's an incident,

before someone does get injured or before

something becomes career ending.

      Q.     Based upon the information that

you had received and gathered during the course

of this assessment, could you rule out that

Lt. Bannon (sic) wouldn't hurt somebody

prospectively if allowed to work while getting

therapy?

      A.     I could not rule that out.

      Q.     At any point did you tell

Lt. Bannon (sic) that he had passed the

assessment?  Boden.  I'm sorry. 

      A.     No.  We don't give anyone results,

pass or fail, at the end of the evaluation.

      Q.     Does somebody pass?

      A.     They are found fit to return to

their duty.

      Q.     Right.  Or unfit.

      A.     Or unfit.  And then when unfit,

they are given conditions with the goal of

restoring fitness.

      Q.     And your case -- and in this case,

what were those conditions to restore fitness?

      A.     Lt. Boden was to engage in

individual treatment outside of the treatment

that he had already been receiving with his wife

with the sole purpose on managing his stress

level, identifying coping mechanisms that work

for him so that he could return to his position.

      Q.     And in the meantime, as an

individual who was unfit for duty, he should not

be working while receiving that initial

treatment, correct?

      A.     You cannot return to duty if you

are found unfit.

Boden’s case mirrors the current national debate concerning mental health and gun laws.  Should employers act when they observe traumatic stress in employees (in this case, confirmed by a mental health professional) or should they wait until after something actually happens?  It is a complex issue.

In the Wallace interview, Boden also claimed to have had no knowledge of the doctored video that was sent around in an attempt to damage Sheriff Mike Strada’s family.  The video also attempted to destroy the reputation of an innocent young firefighter.  NBC and Sarah Wallace made no attempt to protect the innocent woman whose image was used in the FAKE video doctored by Andy Boden’s campaign.  They did not receive her permission to use the video of her which was made against her will and then doctored to make her look bad.  Night after night NBC and Sarah Wallace ran the doctored image of this innocent woman, simply for salacious clickbait.  She is a private citizen and Andy Boden, his campaign, Sarah Wallace, and NBC have much to answer for. 

Andy Boden, his campaign, Sarah Wallace, and NBC used the video knowing that it was found to be a FAKE and totally false by the media and law enforcement.  Despite Boden’s lies in the Wallace interview, a statement from Sussex County Republican Chairman Jerry Scanlan makes it very clear that it was the Boden campaign behind the release of the doctored FAKE video:

The above is the direct testimony of the Republican Party Chairman regarding the attempted shakedown that occurred before the FAKE doctored video was released.  Clearly Boden’s campaign knew all about the video that later nobody wanted to take credit for.  Why did NBC not require Sarah Wallace to contact this source before airing its “hit job”? 

Why did Andy Boden tell Sarah Wallace that he knew nothing?  Why did Sarah Wallace and NBC allow Boden to lie?

NBC lies in "hit job" by Bergen Democrat

Sarah Wallace is a Bergen County Democrat.  She is what’s called a “hard” Democrat – totally loyal to her party, never missing an election, always supporting whatever Clinton or Murphy that appears on the ballot.  And she is proud of it.

Given the public information available about her, we were surprised when we learned that NBC – the parent company of Rachel Maddow’s MSNBC – chose her to do a segment on the primary campaign between Sheriff Mike Strada and Jail Guard Andy Boden.  Especially as Boden had previously bragged to a member of the local, Sussex County media, that the interview was going to be a “hit job” on Sheriff Strada.

Further complicating matters is Sheriff Strada’s central role in opposing Democrat Governor Phil Murphy’s Sanctuary State scheme.  In the past, Sarah Wallace has done interviews that were very favorable to illegals and against members of law enforcement.  In fact, Sarah Wallace is currently being sued by a police officer for her conduct and behavior.  

Last November, a New York judge accused someone championed by Sarah Wallace – named Manny Gomez – of “coercing a witness to a gang slaying not to testify.” According to the New York Daily News (November 3, 2018), police have suggested that Sarah Wallace and Manny Gomez have “an apparent relationship” and that Wallace does stories that favor Gomez.  

Why did Boden go to Wallace, a Democrat, and why was he so sure she would do a “hit job” for him on Sheriff Strada?

In any case, the resulting story did more to harm Andy Boden than it did to help him.  On camera, Boden was induced by Wallace to lie about two important aspects of his story.

The first is that his psychological examination was the result of him picking up petitions to run for office.  The County Clerk, Jeff Parrott, disputes Boden’s contention that he came to his office to obtain the nominating petitions.  It appears that Andy Boden is lying about this and that he lied in testimony given at his fitness hearing.  As this statement by his attorney shows:

According to the County Clerk and his office, Boden did not come into the office to pick up the nominating petitions – he accessed them on line, so that nobody could have known that he was running.

In fact, Boden’s psychological evaluation came after a series of incidents including some that left female employees intimidated and fearful of having him over them.  After a police psychologist found him “unfit for duty” and he was placed on leave, Boden went to Sheriff Strada and asked him to restore him to duty – which meant giving him back his power over people, a firearm, handcuffs, and badge.  The Sheriff’s office told Boden that he needed to get well first and re-evaluated by a mental health professional, before he could be re-instated. 

Boden’s claim that he was ruled “unfit for duty” because he was running for office, repeated again in the Wallace interview, is clearly a lie.  The public testimony of the police psychologist who ruled Boden “unfit for duty” makes it very clear that Boden is not being honest:

 A.     The whole point of the

fitness-for-duty evaluation in many cases is to

avoid things getting to that point.  We are --

you know, as the IACP, we're looking for

conditions that are going to impact someone's

ability to safely and effectively do their work.

We want to keep that environment safe.  We also

want to treat people compassionately.  And if we

see that someone is under duress, to try to

intervene and help them.

            Fitness-for-duty evaluations are

often seen as punitive in nature, but they don't

necessarily have to be or need to be.  The idea

is to intervene much in the same way as an EAP

and get someone help before there's an incident,

before someone does get injured or before

something becomes career ending.

      Q.     Based upon the information that

you had received and gathered during the course

of this assessment, could you rule out that

Lt. Bannon (sic) wouldn't hurt somebody

prospectively if allowed to work while getting

therapy?

      A.     I could not rule that out.

      Q.     At any point did you tell

Lt. Bannon (sic) that he had passed the

assessment?  Boden.  I'm sorry.

      A.     No. We don't give anyone results,

pass or fail, at the end of the evaluation.

      Q.     Does somebody pass?

      A.     They are found fit to return to

their duty.

      Q.     Right. Or unfit.

      A.     Or unfit. And then when unfit,

they are given conditions with the goal of

restoring fitness.

      Q.     And your case -- and in this case,

what were those conditions to restore fitness?

      A.     Lt. Boden was to engage in

individual treatment outside of the treatment

that he had already been receiving with his wife

with the sole purpose on managing his stress

level, identifying coping mechanisms that work

for him so that he could return to his position.

      Q.     And in the meantime, as an

individual who was unfit for duty, he should not

be working while receiving that initial

treatment, correct?

      A.     You cannot return to duty if you

are found unfit.

Boden’s case mirrors the current national debate concerning mental health and gun laws.  Should employers act when they observe traumatic stress in employees (in this case, confirmed by a mental health professional) or should they wait until after something actually happens?  It is a complex issue.

In the Wallace interview, Boden also claimed to have had no knowledge of the doctored video that was sent around in an attempt to damage Sheriff Mike Strada’s family.  The video also attempted to destroy the reputation of an innocent young firefighter. It was found to be a FAKE and totally false by the media and law enforcement.  Despite Boden’s lies in the Wallace interview, a statement from Sussex County Republican Chairman Jerry Scanlan makes it very clear that it was the Boden campaign behind the release of the doctored FAKE video:

The above is the direct testimony of the Republican Party Chairman regarding the attempted shakedown that occurred before the FAKE doctored video was released.  Clearly Boden’s campaign knew all about the video that later nobody wanted to take credit for.

So why did Boden tell Sarah Wallace that he knew nothing?  Why did he lie?

DiGaetano: Is CD05 a choice between two bigots and the PR Firm from Hell?

The battle to represent the 5th congressional district has turned into a real shit show since candidate John McCann lost the favored ballot position in Bergen County and then followed up that bad news with the announcement that his campaign was in deep in debt.  For his latest attack on opponent Steve Lonegan, McCann dug up a twelve years old allegation by a Democrat candidate for Mayor in Lonegan's hometown of Bogota.  The Democrat is an avowed supporter of President Barack Obama and, like McCann, has campaigned against the Trump tax cuts.

The Democrat claims Lonegan called him a bad word in a heated exchange more than a decade ago.  This has led the McCann campaign to label Lonegan as the "Roy Moore of New Jersey" -- a reference to Alabama Senate candidate Judge Roy Moore.   But apparently someone on the McCann campaign didn't think this through because McCann's big fundraiser was built around a guest speaker who was one of Moore's main allies, a guy named Sebastian Gorka.  Take a look at the video below and note the fellow with the beard standing directly behind Moore:

McCann's attacks are taking place while his former boss and department -- the Democrat Sheriff of Bergen County -- are being sued for laying-off and allegedly harassing police officers.  McCann was named by the Bergen Record as the Sheriff's "right hand man" and McCann openly takes credit for getting rid of the police.  We will let NJTV tell the rest of the story:

https://www.njtvonline.org/news/video/lawsuit-bergen-county-officials-ignored-gay-cops-harassment-allegations/

Andrew Kara was one of the dozens of Bergen County cops who lost their jobs followed the merger of the sheriff’s and county police forces that congressional candidate John McCann takes credit for making happen.

“Andrew was called a fag, a queer, a freak and a homo,” said Kara’s attorney, Matthew Peluso.

The abuse went on for years and, according to a suit, the County Executive Jim Tedesco, County Sheriff Michael Saudino and the county prosecutor, now state attorney general, Gurbir Grewal, ignored his complaints.

“Andrew reported this conduct up the chain of command and nothing ever happened,” Peluso said.

During this period, candidate John McCann was the lawyer for the Sheriff's office and the "right hand man" to Sheriff Saudino, according to the Bergen Record.

Peluso says the lawsuit is "about standing up for a gay officer who has been treated cruelly by his supposed colleagues and the county’s leadership structure."

The suit has 21 plaintiffs who allege a variety of harassment.  It calls for reinstatement of the officers, including Kara, back pay, as well as punitive damages for pain and suffering.

Bergen County Republican Organization (BCRO) Chairman Paulie "the hand" DiGaetano has written to all the other GOP county chairs of the 5th congressional district, threatening them and telling them to demand that any GOP candidate connected with bigotry be required to stand down.  Does this mean that DiGaetano intends to deliver the 5th District meekly into the hands of Democrat Josh Gottheimer? 

We certainly hope not.

Is DiGaetano -- the doyen of the brylcreem set -- forgetting the kind of pissbag Josh Gottheimer is?  Doesn't he know the record of Josh "the breath monster" Gottheimer?  Well thank goodness someone does and she has his number.  Her name is Rachel Maddow, perhaps you've heard of her?

Before getting elected to Congress in 2016, Josh Gottheimer followed his buddy Mark Penn, the Clintons' polling guy, to take over an international public relations/lobbying corporation called Burson-Marsteller.  These people are real turds. 

Hey, don't take our word for it.  Here's what MSNBC's Rachel Maddow had to say about the firm where Josh Gottheimer held the number two position as International Vice President (his buddy Mark Penn was International President):

Yep, Josh Gottheimer and his pal Mark Penn ran the "PR Firm from Hell"!  So now we know what kind of shithouse Paulie is shilling for.

What kind of "enterprise" is Gottheimer really about?

"The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them."

Lenin, aka Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (1870 - 1924), Founder of the Soviet Union

The corporate lobby has always been transactional.  They will place short term profits ahead of long term goals every time. 

It is important to remember that the corporate community isn't "conservative" in any recognizable way.  Corporations exist to make a profit and to expand market share to make more profit.  They naturally seek a monopoly and, to that end, employ thousands of lobbyists and expend billions of dollars to subvert the free market and hobble competition.  Their monument is the crony-capitalist state.

American corporations have done more than New Left Marxism to undermine traditional values and deference paid to the religious and cultural institutions of the West.  These corporations were far more effective because they put massive resources behind this transformation.  Money does change everything.  So it was out with the church and in with the mall as the center of human life.  Instead of a community with a common culture, we had atomized consumers -- the easier to (endlessly) market to.

The corporate community isn't even American in outlook, but rather it is globalist and acts accordingly.  The international trade deals favored by the corporate community have brought Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders supporters together, have united main street business with organized labor. 

Organizations like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have promoted outsourcing of jobs to countries overseas and the illegal immigration policies that suppress wages and drive-up unemployment here at home.  And they've backed bailouts for Wall Street while recommending foreclosures for the rest of us.  They get the property tax breaks in places like Jersey City -- and everybody else just keeps on paying more.

On the U.S. Chamber's website there is an entire globalist agenda with sections on "international affairs", "international agenda", "international policy", "global initiatives", "global regulatory cooperation", "Africa", the "Americas", "Asia", "Eurasia", "Europe", the "Middle East and Turkey", and "India".  But there is no section on the American worker.  Nowhere is he or she listed.  Nowhere.

All this came to mind the other day, when Democrat Congressman Josh Gottheimer scored the U.S. Chamber's "Spirit of Enterprise Award" -- something bestowed each year on whatever lackey in Congress happens to be advancing the globalist agenda in a way that attracts attention.  As an expert in public relations, Josh Gottheimer has the inside track on such things.  He knows the ropes.

How?  Well, before getting elected to Congress in 2016, Josh Gottheimer followed his buddy Mark Penn, the Clintons' polling guy, to take over an international public relations/lobbying corporation called Burson-Marsteller.  These folks are a real piece of work. 

Hey, don't take our word for it.  Here's what MSNBC's Rachel Maddow had to say about the firm where Josh Gottheimer held the number two position as International Vice President (his buddy Mark Penn was International President):

Yep, Josh Gottheimer and his pal Mark Penn ran the "PR Firm from Hell"!  And now you know what kind of "enterprise" the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is talking about.

Al Doblin is speaking from "The Bubble"

Alfred P. Doblin is the Editorial Editor of the Record of Bergen and the surrounding counties.  His writing is strong, with few of the over-the-top emotions that are often on display over at the Star-Ledger.  He appears to try for balance, for persuasion instead of name-calling.      

But we fear he is trapped, as so many others are trapped, in a perception that is based more on geography and on class than on ideology or party identity. 

In his recent column -- "GOP at the crossroads" -- Mr. Doblin falls back on the tired values of an old religion.  Using terms like "mainstream right... extreme right... hard-line conservatives... social issues," we feel that he misses the lessons of the 2016 presidential election.

And who are the people Mr. Doblin turns to in his column to illuminate his argument?  All members of the ruling class:  former Governor Christie Whitman, global lobbyist Mike DuHaime, and Senator Kevin O'Toole Esq.

From them we get the same, tired prescriptions we get after every presidential election -- win or lose:  “(Republicans) can no longer be defined both statewide and nationally as the older white man’s party and expect to succeed (even though they just did)... (Republicans) have to do a lot more to attract females, to attract African-Americans, Asians, Hispanics. We have to be far more diverse than we have in the past.” 

The perspective of these people is one of class.  They are far, far more richer and more prosperous than the average American or the average Republican. When they speak of diversity it is the false diversity of gender, color, ethnicity, or sexual identity.  What is studiously ignored is class. 

In his book, White-Collar Government: The Hidden Role of Class in Economic Policy Making, Duke University's Nick Carnes points out that while upwards of 65 percent of citizens are "working class" and 54 percent are employed in a blue-collar occupation, just 2 percent of the members of Congress and 3 percent of state legislators held blue-collar jobs at the time of their election.  How about some diversity?

Donald Trump's campaign saw through the false political divide of Democrat and Republican to the vast economic and social divide that is the truer measure of America today.  Authors as diverse as George Packer of the New Yorker (The  Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America) to Charles Murray (Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010) to Chris Hedges (Days of Destruction Days of Revolt) to David Brooks (BoBos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There) have written about this, with Brooks actually employing Donald Trump as an example of what the "new upper class" finds unfashionable.  In a prescient piece of writing, Ralph Nader gave an outline of what was coming when his book (Unstoppable: The Emerging Left-Right Alliance to Dismantle the Corporate State) was released in the summer of 2014.

On election night, MSNBC's Chris Matthews came closest to the mark, with this surprising exchange:

Of course, the ruling class will try to fit what happened back into the perception that they are most comfortable with -- and so we get the familiar postscripts about "old white men" and "diversity" of the surface variety.  It is an exercise in virtue signaling, whereby one member of the ruling class assures his "goodness" to another.

White collar America spends its time concerned about issues like the availability of condoms to Ivy Leaguers.  Such concerns are the marks of privilege. Blue collar America, working class America, worries about foreclosure, about housing, about having a job, about getting out of debt, about having enough to give their children the life that they've enjoyed.  With the greatest respect to Christie Whitman and Mike DuHaime and Kevin O'Toole, they don't have those problems.  So relieved of such pressing concerns, they can float above the mass and think sweet thoughts, reaffirming their "goodness" to one another.

The lack of shared experience places much of our ruling class, and those who aspire to it, into a kind of "bubble" -- secure and apart from the mass. Senator O'Toole's statement to Editor Doblin that what he regretted most was not voting for same-sex marriage is a symptom of that "bubble."  The Senator is a wise and judicious man and surely, if he thought about it a bit, he would have said that his greatest regret was not being able to cut property taxes down to a sane level.  For it is property taxes, a major driver of foreclosure and of homelessness, that is the greatest concern to the greatest many.

The idea that some Americans exist in "bubble" communities that vastly outstrip neighboring zip codes in status, wealth, cultural influence, and corporate/political power is not new.  Although now it seems to be going mainstream, filtering into "pop" culture.  Consider this recent skit from Saturday Night Live:

Wealthy professionals, like Al Doblin, should be aware of their class bias.  As a journalist, great care should be taken to seek out and include the opinions of genuine members of the working class for balance -- and not just members of the ruling class who happen to be labeled "diverse" for whatever reason