Greenhut's Sunday Column Is Disingenuous: Part 1

As readers of the OC Register know, Steve Greenhut wants Sheriff Carona to resign...yesterday. So when the OC GOP Central Committee didn't figuratively deliver Carona's head on a platter, Steve penned a Sunday column accusing them of being cowards.

But his commentary is an example of how columnists can stretch and twist the truth, even when the untwisted truth should serve them just fine.

Let's take Steve's treatment of OC GOP Chairman Scott Baugh's comments to the committee. In a blog post the day after the Central Committee meeting, here's how Steve characterized Baugh's speech:

Party Chairman Scott Baugh, although offering some mild rebuke of the sheriff, gave a rousing talk designed shore up support for the sheriff.

Here's how Steve characterized it in his column:

Baugh, who was once the target of an overzealous local prosecutor, insists that I was wrong in the Orange Punch blog for viewing his speech as a ringing endorsement of Carona. (I wasn't the only one, by the way, as OCBlog's Jonathan Constantine referred to it this way: "Chairman Scott Baugh kicked off the night at the O.C. GOP Central Committee meeting with staunch support of Sheriff Mike Carona.") "My intent last evening was not designed to promote and defend Mr. Carona," Baugh explained. "In fact, as expressed above, I have called into question his innocence, his character, his integrity and his private life, which is appropriate to do whether or not he is guilty of the crimes alleged against him. Rather my speech was designed to promote and defend liberty [italics added]."

Don't fall out of your chair laughing. The liberty issue Baugh refers to involves Carona's supporters' allegations of prosecutorial abuse by federal prosecutors.

Now watch Scott Baugh's speech for yourself -- here and here -- and I think you'll agree that Steve's (and my colleague Jonathan's) characterizations are off the mark. Jonathan's I can understand given his youth and newness to local politics, but it's hard to be so generous as to why Steve mis-characterized Baugh's speech.

Steve continues:

Now, I've known Baugh for years and know that he's serious about that issue, given his personal experience, but it is a bit hard to take for the sheriff, his top aides (including Schroeder, who advises the sheriff and D.A. Tony Rackauckas) to all of a sudden start sounding like card-carrying members of the ACLU (or this editorial page!). Carona and Rackauckas have long argued that the public should trust law enforcement and prosecutors, as they both opposed various efforts to ensure additional oversight.

"All of a sudden"? As a matter of fact, Schroeder was very outspoken regarding examples of prosecutorial abuse under the Capizzi regime. Tony Rackackaus campaigned against it.

Steve needs to remember few people support his "police are out to get us" mentality. We ought to be trust law enforcement  and prosecutors. But trusting them isn't incompatible with keeping a watchful eye on them (and all public servants).

Steve then gives Republicans a good going over with this broad brush in this call-and-response routine with himself:

The GOP is not exactly a bastion of concern for civil liberties. How often do you hear top GOP officials, especially those in law enforcement, express concern about poor folks being railroaded to jail by overzealous D.A.s? Not often, right?

How often to do hear Steve Greenhut express concern about missile defense? Not often, right?  Steve's obviously not a bastion of concern for missile defense.

How often do you hear Steve Greenhut express concern about single-sex education, classical music, breast cancer or the degeneration of popular media? Not often, right? Steve's obviously not a bastion of concern for any of those things.

Somebody ought to take that straw man argument off to see the Wizard, because maybe he can give it a brain.

Steve goes on to conscript blogger Allan Bartlett's straw man to reinforce his own:

"It was also ironic to see so many new civil libertarians in the room when their guy is under indictment," added Bartlett. "If I got a dollar for everyone that came up to me tonight and told me, 'Allan, the sheriff deserves to be presumed innocent under our system,' I'd be a rich man tonight. Of course these are a lot of the same people that believe cops and prosecutors can do no wrong."

And who would those lots of people be? I'd be curious to meet lots of people who actually believe cops and prosecutors "can do no wrong."

To be continued...

Comments

[Allan Bartlett]

I really didn't wanna get dragged into this, but since Jubal asked me which public officials I think, think cops & prosecutors do no wrong, you have to start with the obvious one...Todd Spitzer, T Rack, and Wanye Quint for starters.

The big problem I have with letting this Carona cancer fester for another two months is that it's clear to me and the vast majority of other regular citizens that Mike Carona has at the very least, at the very the least, completely violated the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics section as follows...

"I will keep my private life unsullied as an example to all"

Please tell me how the Sheriff has upheld this part of his oath. I'm all ears.

[Art Pedroza]

Hmmmm...who should we trust? The OC GOP spin machine or a renowned newspaper columnist? I'll take Greenhut any day!

[Make him go awwway]

Ugh. Art Pedroza, the Gollum of the blogosphere, rears his empty head.

You gotta a new buddy, Greenhut! Lucky you!

[Jubal]

Allan:

Thank you for responding to my request, rather than tossing out insults. We disagree from time to time, but you're a class act.

I disagree with you on Tony. He actually started an initiative within the DA's office to re-examine questionable cases, and it has led to the release of wrongfully imprisoned individuals. I would call that thinking cops can do no wrong.

[Jubal]

On the other hand, we have Art, who can't seem to differentiate between argument and invective.

I have an idea for you. Take these words:

Trannie
Machine
Space Commander
cabal
quite
pajarito
corrupt
quite
Pulido
Santa Ana
Janet Nguyen
Joe Dunn
Photoshop Trung
Benapuppet

Shake them up and spill them out in a post. Regardless of the order they fall into, it will resemble 90% of what you post.

[d'Anconia]

LOL

[Gustavo Arellano]

Meanwhile, Jubal didn't respond to Allan's request for a justification on Carona...

[Jubal]

Allan and Steve made certain claims, I asked them for justification. I, on the other hand, haven't been mounting either a defense of or an attack on the Sheriff, so it's a bit out of place to ask me to "justify" him.

[Gustavo Arellano]

I don't think so, but it's up to Allan. Hey, fellow Bruin: what do you think?

[redperegrine]

Allan didn't ask for a "justification" of Carona. He asked for Jubal's opinion as to whether or not Our Sheriff has upheld the cop Code of Ethics oath.

If the answer is no, then Mike must go.

[Flowerszzz]

LOL Jubal you hit the nail on the head with Art and his posts!!!

[Jubal]

No, I don't think Carona has upheld that Code of Ethics. And I find that a much stronger argument for his resignation than the indictment.