You probably haven’t heard much about the race for State’s Attorney General to replace Spitzer, except maybe for a few ads by Jeanine Piro wherein she claims to have “the same experience as Elliot Spitzer,” which one has to admit is both sad and depressing.  Then there’s Andrew Cuomo, whose claim to fame is being (at minimum, we presume) tolerated by the Clinton Administration as director of HUD.  But no endorsement from Clinton 1 nor Clinton 2, . . . not even Chelsea.  Yawn, press the lever for your favourite Party, and then leave the booth. . . .

Well, the only interesting thing to happen in this campaign just did: seems Jeanine’s under investigation for potential crimes while in the midst of a marital dispute a year ago, involving the discussion of investigating and wiretapping her husband whom she suspected of cheating and who already damaged her campaign by being in the pokey for other matters entirely.  Whew!  Got all that?  Thing is, she claims it’s politically motivated.  Daily Politics has an astute observation of the fall out:

Jeanine’s Presser | The Daily Politics

There’s some “this is actually good for Jeanine” spin circulating at the moment, along the lines of her being the victim, of women sympathizing with her wanting to track down her husband’s infidelity, with her having been very sympathetic at the press conference for which video should be popping up below shortly. But really, come on. The problem is that this is the only thing most New Yorkers know about her.

I’m going to assume for now that those “positive spinners” are men.  The kind of men who secretly think that women are wiretapping them, anyway.  Women I’ve known in my lifetime would not “sympathize” with a woman who’s having her jail-bird husband wiretapped, but then stays with him because “he’s a good father.”

She admits to having her husband followed, and talking about having him tapped, but not actually doing it.  OK, you’re free to insert your own “I did not inhale” joke here as you deem fit.  But seriously, she’s claiming that the political motivation of an attorney obsessed with their family (he investigated her husband, got that straight?) has prompted this investigation, and nothing illegal happened.  OK, . . . Fair enough.  We don’t have a clue what the actual facts are, yet.

But can you really claim the moral high ground when you, yourself conducted an investigation for which there was no evidence?  Does it not go to your temperament that you hired a private investigator to investigate such a husband as you have?

Whatever, I was going to vote the the Dem (whatever his name is, I’m not even interested enough to scroll to the top of this post).  Just an observation.

Technorati Tags: Pirro, Cuomo, Attorney General, Investigation

powered by performancing firefox