Dear Governor Ted
You're up against the wall now. Bernie's going down, but you know he won't go quietly. Margie's been talking. Leonhardt passed the lie detector, and his story is checking out.
You're not going to lie to the state bar, are you? Don't do it, man. It's not worth it.
Comments (37)
In Phil Stanford's column this morning, he mentions some of the Mayor's staff that apparently were enabling/facilitating the rapes. Who and where might these people be??
Posted by pdxjim | October 30, 2007 10:25 AM
I don't see a way out for Ted, especially if the MSM would start using the word rape in their coverage.
The Progressives in our community won't like the comparison, but this is the same sort of "protect the old boy network" fixation that brought down Nixon.
Posted by David E Gilmore | October 30, 2007 11:06 AM
Ted is not an active member of the bar. He's never going to practice law again. He's not going to run for re election - he's term limited, AIUI. Ted may be able to cut off a bar investigation by resigning from the bar.
Though that option may be foreclosed by the filing of the complaint by Liars Larson. I haven't read the Form B rules in at least 15 years.
By the way, everybody know where Mary Oberst, who is the current Mrs. Ted, used to work?
Can you say OSB?
Posted by Nonny Mouse | October 30, 2007 11:37 AM
Jack's right, it is not worth it. Loose any (even meaningless) investigation with the State Bar. Or the continued bad publicity.
If TedK knew more back then, and lied later, well too bad. But it is not too late to change your story to one which more matches the truth. Pres. Clinton got very bad advice from Carville, when he advised Slick Willy to 'stay the course' and keep with the lies. Clinton could have avoided impeachment, and gained much simpathy from the public if he had just said "yeah, I lied, it wasn't anyones' business, so I lied. I'm sorry."
With all the info that is out there, including former Goldschmidt speechwriter Fred Leonhard, and the many more people who are only now just starting to talk more freely about who knew what and when, the Governor is gonna have to come clean with the Oregon public. Either that, or pull a Clinton.
The only question that we will soon find the answer to is: "How many people did TeddyK spew his dna on back then?" We don't need a stupid GAP dress, just a few more people to say "Yeah, we did discuss it back then" just like the ex Mrs. Goldschmidt did recently with Bernie.
Posted by Harry | October 30, 2007 11:55 AM
This is why the OSB needs more staff and a bigger building? I don't care about 20-year-old skeletons.
OT, it looks like I owe $1.02 more than yesterday.
Posted by J | October 30, 2007 11:57 AM
Why didn't Bernie report Goldschmidt to prosecutors?
Posted by Kari Chisholm | October 30, 2007 12:06 PM
How can he not lie? It's what sociopaths do.
Posted by Bob | October 30, 2007 12:17 PM
I don't see a way out for Ted, especially if the MSM would start using the word rape in their coverage.
One of the news anchors on channel 12...Pete Ferryman I think...used it this morning.
Posted by Jon | October 30, 2007 12:24 PM
*****Why didn't Bernie report Goldschmidt to prosecutors?*****
Come on Kari I suspect even you know the answer to that one. The statutory rape occurred in the 1970's. By the 1990's when Bernie found out about it the Statute of Limitations had long since run.
Greg C
Posted by Greg C | October 30, 2007 12:32 PM
Greg, get your facts straight:
"According to investigators, Margie Goldschmidt said she learned about the sexual abuse from her husband after he became governor in 1987. She also said Giusto, who was Neil Goldschmidt's police driver, found out about the girl during the governor's administration." from the O.
And, yes, Greg, you are correct. Kari does know the answer to his own question. But Kari's role in all of this is only as a tool for TeddyK and other D's.
The difference between former Goldschmidt speechwriter Fred Leonhard, and former TeddyK mouthpiece Kari Chisolm, is one of integrity and ethics. Mr Leonhard (also a true blue Democrat) could no longer stomach the disgusting behavior of exGov Neil, AND ALSO THE PEOPLE WHO LOOKED THE OTHER WAY and ignored it, allowing it to continue with no accountability. So Fred Leonard grew a pair, and proclaimed the truth out loud, when establishment Demos like Kari tried to shout him down.
Leonard has paid a high price for his courage, and gained nothing but scorn and ridicule from his former friends in the Democrat party. My question is: Does Chisolm hope to REAP a high price for his 'courage'?
Posted by Harry | October 30, 2007 12:59 PM
you have to love classroom teacher Margie Goldschmidt defending her ex husband as "not a pedophile"...because it only happened once.
the fact that "once" lasted for three years and involved a girl who may have been (stanford) 13 years old ...and this woman is still in a classroom with kids.
would you trust her with your kids with that kind of attitude...
Posted by Lars | October 30, 2007 2:02 PM
Anybody ever find out what was actually in Pandora’s' box?
Ask Bernie.
Oh, oops...
...after skwat's little apologia, I felt momentarily empowered.
Posted by rr | October 30, 2007 2:17 PM
Where is Neil now, anyway? Still in France or back home in Puddletown.
Posted by nancy | October 30, 2007 2:20 PM
*****Greg, get your facts straight:*****
Harry,
Sorry you are right. My answer should have been that by the time Bernie found out about it in 1989, the Statute of Limitations had long since run.
Thank you for correcting me.
Greg C
Posted by Greg C | October 30, 2007 2:37 PM
And Jack I just noticed you have hit the jackpot today. You have a posting here from Lars Larson quoting Phil Stanford as to the facts of the Goldschmidt case. We can now all go home the gods of Portland's media have spoken.
By the way to be fair I must confess that I worked for the City of Portland in the 1980's and once saw Neil Goldschmidt walking down the street in downtown Portland. And I "don't remember" if anyone ever told me anything about Neil and his infamous Lolita.
Greg C
Posted by Greg C | October 30, 2007 2:45 PM
First the "statutory" modifier, then the "Lolita" tag - anyone else here see a pattern?
...Bueller?
Posted by rr | October 30, 2007 2:56 PM
*****First the "statutory" modifier, then the "Lolita" tag - anyone else here see a pattern?
...Bueller?******
There was a rape in Ferris Bueller's Day Off?
Greg C
Posted by Greg C | October 30, 2007 3:19 PM
Ted's problem, as Jack Bog has pointed out repeatedly, is that he refuses to say "I don't remember Fred Leonhardt telling me about this" and instead keeps insisting "Fred Leonhardt didn't tell me about this (and, by the way, neither did anyone else)."
The fact that he responded to the Giusto investigation with an unsigned statement instead of the sworn affidavit they requested seems to indicate that he wants to stick to his original story without committing perjury.
It is increasingly evident that he can do one or the other but not both.
Posted by Jack Roberts | October 30, 2007 3:21 PM
We know Greg C, does not have a 13 year old at home. I dont call my Daughter a Lolita. I call her my Little Seventh Grader. And if she was raped by a 40 year old Mayor, it would not be statutory. But my reaction would not be murder. Maybe manslaughter.
Posted by meg | October 30, 2007 3:24 PM
Meg,
Sorry if I riled you up but I guess I forgot that there are some peolpe out there who don't realize that all this now has nothing to do with justice for a once 13 year old girl.
Rather it has everthing to do with media "gotcha's" and partisan politics. If it really was about justice all these poeple would do what the now 40 something woman said when Willamette Week came to call. "Go away. I don't want to talk about it."
Greg C
And no I don't have a 13 year old girl. But I once did and I would have killed the son of bitch too. But unfortunately he got off and trying to crucify by inuendo everyone who ever worked with Neil isn't going to change that.
Posted by Greg C | October 30, 2007 3:41 PM
Horrible events, disgusting people, yet not much relevance to our time. We knew the sheriff was not the most upstanding person; we knew our governor was deeply flawed. Meanwhile, much more interesting things are going on: Donald Rumsfeld is a fugitive in (from?) France; Bush and Cheney continue to make wildly belligerent statements to and about Iran, while arming our B-52's with "bunker buster" bombs; nobody worth a spit is running here for mayor, and the city's debt load is out of control. Some of these things are more interesting than the modest moral peculations of our sorry governor.
Posted by Allan L. | October 30, 2007 3:45 PM
No relevance; nothing to see here...
Bush/Cheney, Bush Cheney!!!!
This is all about ...media "gotcha's" and partisan politics. and crucifixion by ...inuendo(sic), you rabble.
Bush/Cheney, Bush/Cheney!!!!
Pathetic.
Posted by rr | October 30, 2007 4:08 PM
I was wondering when this would get back turned around to Bush Lied,Impeach Bush, Bush is the father of the Wyden twins, Bush was driving Ted's car across the bridge, Bush hid the billing records.
Posted by pdxjim | October 30, 2007 4:19 PM
crucify by inuendo
The governor and the sheriff are both on the carpet for alleged bald-faced lying to the public. That's no innuendo.
Posted by Jack Bog | October 30, 2007 4:36 PM
in one uendo and out the other.
Posted by Bark Munster | October 30, 2007 5:24 PM
*****The governor and the sheriff are both on the carpet for alleged bald-faced lying to the public. That's no innuendo******
Politicians lying to the public!!! Heaven forbid. (Though there has to be a political joke in there somewhere. Oh you say the jokes on us?)
Actually Jack I was thinking about Phil Stanfords column today when I wrote that. It's the one Lars referred to above. It's one where according to a usually reliable Los Angeles movie screenplay almost everyone who worked in City Hall during Neils reign knew about, helped facilitate, and helped cover up his abuse of the girl who is now reportedly 13 years old when it started. An age picked up and repeated by Lars on his show today and then again on your blog and by several posters since as if it was now gospel.
I am sorry I have injected myself into this. But this is starting to look more and more like the kind of sex fueled witch hunt that I have seen before. And the funny thing is it always seems to work. If I didn't know better I would think there was an election coming up that someone was trying to distract us from.
Greg C
Posted by Greg C | October 30, 2007 6:45 PM
Greg, if I were a Republican (a hard thing, in fact, to imagine), I'm sure I would want to be changing the subject.
Posted by Allan L. | October 30, 2007 7:48 PM
Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. -- Address to Military 1798
Posted by John Adams | October 30, 2007 9:23 PM
...by the time Bernie found out about it in 1989, the Statute of Limitations had long since run."
Nah. Cops don't decide statute of limitations issues. Cops take evidence of crimes to the DA. If there's a S/L issue, it's the DA's job analyze that. S/L issues can get complex fast, depending on the facts. A sex crime on a minor invokes one way of tolling the statute right from jump. This was way out of a cop's bailiwick to take it upon himself to determine and essentially adjudicate that matter all by his lonesome. He should have forwarded whatever information he had about the crime to the DA, regardless of when he learned of it.
Posted by Zeb Quinn | October 30, 2007 9:54 PM
this is starting to look more and more like the kind of sex fueled witch hunt that I have seen before.
No it isn't. This is a coverup of a rape.
Posted by Jack Bog | October 30, 2007 11:00 PM
Bernie had an obligation to take the information he had to either his supervisor, or the D.A office and let them investigate and then make the call.
Bernie failed and so did just about everyone else involved in this mess.
BGTI
Posted by Better Government thru Intimidation | October 31, 2007 3:46 AM
Nice to see Greg C trying to marginalize the rape of a minor and the proceeding cover up by people in the highest levels of our state government.
You should be proud.
Posted by Chris McMullen | October 31, 2007 9:40 AM
----Nice to see Greg C trying to marginalize the rape of a minor and the proceeding cover up by people in the highest levels of our state government.
You should be proud.-------
Thank you Chris and your point is? Ok you are all right. I give up. Lars Larson made his bar complaint solely out of a righteous need to see justice done for a 43 year old woman who can't fight this fight herself. Phil Stanford has taken newpaper writing to new heights of investigative journalism by searching diligently to find this screenplay exposing new depths to this rape coverup. Everyone who ever knew Neil or worked with him is scum who actively abbeted his rape. And more importantly are lying when they say they didn't. And finally the plethora of Republican posters including some Oregon's best known names are repeating all the charges on this blog without any thought of the political ramifications involved.
And lastly anyone who denies any of the above is himself scum whose arguments are to be met with derision and not so subltle suggestions that he is scum himself. Got it.
Greg C
Posted by Greg C | October 31, 2007 11:04 AM
Uhhhhhhhhhhh, how come The Oregonian didn't aggressively pursue the Goldschmidt rape story till it found out WW was going to run it? Oh, I forgot. They cover up news, they don't cover the news. Sorry, my bad.
Posted by paul | October 31, 2007 11:41 AM
Note to Greg C: Damn, I can't say that!
Note to Jack Bog: You damn right it was rape...don't back off of this Jack, we need to "clean the pipe" on this issue.
Question: Who took, or put this kid in front of the "OH HE ONLY DID IT ONCE" rapist?
Posted by Jack Peek | October 31, 2007 1:01 PM
Kari does know the answer to his own question. But Kari's role in all of this is only as a tool for TeddyK and other D's
Hey Harry!!! Dead-on about "Kari" (strange way to spell a guys name)
Hey Kari..you got kids?
Posted by Jack Peek | October 31, 2007 1:04 PM
And lastly anyone who denies any of the above is himself scum whose arguments are to be met with derision and not so subltle suggestions that he is scum himself. Got it.
"Scum" is such a harsh word - whether used before or after "himself".
Phony self-flagellation is not much of a distraction when what you've written is just a few up-arrows away.
However, you can take solace in the apparent (I'm never quite sure) fact that Tenskwatawa is in your corner - dark though it may be.
Posted by rr | October 31, 2007 1:34 PM