New Hampshire Attorney General Releasing Preliminary Results Of Probe Of Romney Mormon Calls
That's what the New Hampshire attorney general's office has just confirmed to us.
The AG is about to start a press conference, we're told, at which the AG is going to announce preliminary results of their probe into the source of those now-notorious calls raising negatives about Mitt Romney's Mormonism.
The calls became a big issue in the New Hampshire GOP primary, with some politicos charging that John McCain was behind them, while others suggested that someone connected with Romney himself was doing the calls, perhaps to test negatives about his Mormonism or diffuse it as an issue.
The results of the probe could have a major impact on the NH primary, but it's unclear as yet what the AG has found. More as we learn it.
Comments (29)
M wrote on January 3, 2008 3:40 PM:Interesting timing.
Mike wrote on January 3, 2008 3:42 PM:It's obvious Edwards was behind this,
he is a devious trial lawyer,
he is trying to rig his opponent,
he does not play nice!
bet its Romney's own campaign
jay wrote on January 3, 2008 3:44 PM:Mike- what????? Are you that clueless or just that much of a jerk?
Julie Waters wrote on January 3, 2008 3:44 PM:I think it's good that we learn about this, but I hope it's not being timed to coincide with the primary.
Mike wrote on January 3, 2008 3:49 PM:jay
ok - and he did'nt invest in offshore hedge funds tied to subprime loans either.
And he only defended poor orphans who paid him a pittance and low and behold he became a populist millionaire.
Jay go back to your video of Mary Poppins -
and let the grownups play politics
I don't have a problem with the timing as long as the AG is DAMN sure of what he is saying. Otherwise, its like that scandal pushed by Bush admin. on vote fraud right before the last election.
Michael A wrote on January 3, 2008 3:56 PM:I'll bet anybody a lunch it was at mitt the flip's direction. Any takers?
jay wrote on January 3, 2008 3:57 PM:Mike-
Nice try -- but its you who sounds absurd: Edwards built his career fighting corporate malpractice against working poor and others, like children injured by defective products.
But this is besides the point: why would he go after Romney on Mormonism? In case you haven't noticed, he's in a poltiical dogfight right now called the Democratic primary that is taking up all his campaign resources and effort. What possible motive would he have for diverting these resources by going after Romney, who may not even be his GOP opponenent, IF he wins the Dem. nomination?
This whols exchange is ridiculous and a waste of time already. I'm not posting any response, so go ahead -- flame away if you like with no risk of an actual rebuttal.
Lisa wrote on January 3, 2008 3:57 PM:Come on guys -
we all know Edwards is an angel, and floats on clouds of kindness and charity.
He's a politician for goodness sake -
of course he is capable of "stooping" so low - they all are.
Mike makes it seems as if he's the only one who does,
And Jay makes it seem as if he is the only one who does'nt
Get real guys
Michael A wrote on January 3, 2008 3:59 PM:Here's more detail. It doesn't sound like anything will come of it before tuesday.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22491180/
POed Lib wrote on January 3, 2008 4:02 PM:As far as Edwards' trial lawyer background, corporations actually do injure people, and the injuries can be very serious indeed. When this happens a good trial lawyer is very important. I thank god for lawyers; they keep the corporations honest.
Next time YOU get badly injured by some negligent corporation warned over and over to correct some situation and then failing to, would you prefer to have John Edwards sitting by your side or Dennis Hastert?
MR wrote on January 3, 2008 4:04 PM:Oh my god, Moore Information is behind this! That is, some unknown party hired Moore Information (of Portland, OR) to write the script. And then they hired Western Wats in Utah to actually conduct this survey.
Obviously, someone wanted to cover their tracks as much as possible. Too bad NH voters won't know who until after their primary.
I worked for Moore Information as a poor college student about a million years ago. My 2nd worst job ever. Called up people to do a 40 minute market research survey on motor oil preference. I really wanted to hang myself...
Mike wrote on January 3, 2008 4:05 PM:your peeking
"Nice try -- but its you who sounds absurd: Edwards built his career fighting corporate malpractice against working poor and others, like children injured by defective products".
Did you just fall off the turnip truck,
not wonder the Democrats lose
Jay, take a deep, deep breathe. Though his second post threw me a bit, it was pretty clear there were only two interpretations of Mike's first post. One, it was sarcastic and not intended to be taken seriously. That is how I took it. His second post was a little garbled in its intent and does open the door to the questioning the first post. So the second interpretation could be he was serious. But since the article regards a subject that has absolutely nothing to do with Edwards or any of the other Democrats, then there would be no reason to pay any attention to him as his "serious" comment would not be considered seriously by anyone thinking about it and, therefore, should have been ignored.
I think people would enjoy reading this site more if they used those options more---chuckle (and maybe roll eyes) and ignore. If you can do that, it is pretty easy to separate out the wheat from the chaff and have good discussions.
Just some kids on planet Kolob making prank phone calls.
frank wrote on January 3, 2008 4:08 PM:Bob Moore is a pretty well-known GOP pollster in the Pacific Northwest.
Michael A wrote on January 3, 2008 4:12 PM:POedLib. I've tried quite a few cases and been involved in alot more. Incidentally, most of my cases have been commercial/contract disputes and not pi, but I have defended and prosecuted many over time.
The fact that he got some big wins, kudos to him, but its primarily based on the facts of the case, not necessarily his skills. Does he have skills as a pi lawyer? Absolutely, he totally sounds like one. I am not familiar with the facts of his medmal cases, but my guess is that they were catastrophic injuries. That being said, line up your experts and go at it. It really isn't rocket science and it sure doesn't qualify you to be president. Also, it has absolutely zippo to do with his "corporate greed" bs. He was a freaking pi lawyer, not a commercial litigator.
Gaines wrote on January 3, 2008 4:19 PM:Let's deal in facts. Not ad hominem attacks.
I have lived in North Carolina a long time. Here is the short version of how Edwards came to wealth and prominence. A two year old girl was playing in a wading pool without a diaper on. She sat down on the drain in the center. The suction held her there and began pulling her intestines out. This could have been prevented by a couple dollar piece of plastic, but the pool company had shaved its costs and omitted it. By the time she was pulled off (not long) the drain had pulled all but a few feet of her intestines out. It was not repairable. I believe she has to poop in a bag the rest of her life. Some life. The insurance company was too stupid to settle. The jury awarded $25 million. Big time headlines and nice share for Edwards. Naturally, this begat more big time cases and nice paydays.
I like Edwards, but there are certainly things that reasonable people can criticize him for. The kinds of cases he took and won are simply not any of those things. Save the legitimate things for posts on relevant articles, not articles that are solely about Republican shenanigans against each other.
no rules in politics boys
just a little practice for the general
election
you gotta fight fire with fire
There are laws - but don't confuse em with rules.
Take the damn gloves off
HEY MIKE ...
go back to LGF
http://www.unc.edu/news/archives/feb05/edwards020405.html
pc wrote on January 3, 2008 4:47 PM:It will turn out to be mike Huckabee who has fingered Mitt Romney.
Lisa wrote on January 3, 2008 4:52 PM:I can't say I like Edwards -
but I will say I'd like to -
maybe my fault.
I just have this nagging feeling that he is a little too - I hate to say - slick.
I really can't say why I feel this way -
and it bugs me that I do without being able to put my finger on it,
but I'm not a Robot,
Intuition comes into play,
right or wrong,
I hope I'm wrong
Lisa it isn't Edwards,its Hickabee that guy is as slick as an oil slick.
TQTGA wrote on January 3, 2008 5:05 PM:Since both McCain and Romney asked the NH AG to investigate, I'm betting neither of them were directly behind the calls. It may be that a group who likes McCain but isn't under his control did it. In that case, it will be no big deal. However, if it is a pro-Romney group outside of Romney's control, it will stink to Celestial Heaven and he will be damaged. It will stink because two of the few people who reported getting the calls were not just citizens--they were on the Romney payroll (i.e. it was an attempt to generate sympathy for Romney and outrage against an allegedly devious McCain). The most interesting outcome would be if Giuliani were behind the calls, hurting Romney and throwing positive vibes toward McCain who, at that time, appeared too weak and broke to ever be a threat.
sparrow wrote on January 3, 2008 5:09 PM:Lisa, if you have the time and the inclination, you might want to see Edward's extended 1 hr. interview on Charlie Rose. I didn't see a man who was "a little too slick" at all.
http://www.charlierose.com/guests/john-edwards
Lisa wrote on January 3, 2008 5:40 PM:sparrow
thanks
I'll look at it
Thanks for the link,sparrow.Even though it`s ploy to get us off topic, to accuse Edwards of "the Mormonizing deed;"the Edwards interview was very interesting and it helps me in my quest for a viable candidate other than Kucinich who I worked my butt off for in 2004,and still favor,but now back to the topic.
I wouldn`t put it past any of them,but my money`s on Huckabee.
My guess is that it is the Romney campaign themselves.
(No, it was NOT Edwards, nor Hillary, nor Obama. The company involved works Exclusively for Republican campaigns.)
Why would the Romney campaign request an investigation that could only result in their own culpability?
They had no choice.
Once it became clear that McCain would request an investigation, what else could the Romney campaign do? Almost from the start, the Romney campaign has been implicated in this. Had they not joined in with McCain's request for an investigation, the blame and investigation would have immediately focused on them. His staffers could even have been called in for questioning.
If the Romney campaign is in fact responsible, they should have followed scandal 101. Meaning, the minute the media finds out, fire everyone involved, paint them as lone wolves, and release all the info to the press. Had they done this when the scandal broke, it would mostly be forgotten by now.
But by stalling the investigation, this could be a dribs and drabs scandal during the final 30 days of the nomination race. If the investigation further implicates Romney, it could easily doom his nomination hopes.
