Friday, October 29, 2021

And Now This

Just when you think there's a candidate for Columbia County Sheriff you can support, Sam Pratt reveals some things you would rather not know: "Did the Columbia County Dems nominate a Trumper for County Sheriff?" 



23 comments:

  1. I have often wondered about that Auto Body shop near Hannaford's -- is it his? What a disgraceful eyesore it is!

    ReplyDelete
  2. The County Dems seem as useless as the City Dems. It's time for NYS to move to open primaries and put the 2 party system down.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed. You see the same thing in all over in local politics now that the electorate seems to be mostly democrat. Candidates just lay low and offer nothing but the general boilerplate liberal/woke pleasantries and hope to slide by. Especially since there is not much depth in local journalism. Parties don’t even make much sense at the local level. So many policy discussions about keeping a city running don’t have a left/right side.

      Delete
  3. Some people think we need a third political party. I'd settle for a second.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Bartlett's mailer plus now Sam Pratt refer to the "multiple domestic disturbances" rap on Krapf. What is that all about?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Krapf offered this explanation in a statement released yesterday:

      I’m tired of politicians playing fast with the facts and fabricating lies. My opponent has put out misleading mailers alleging that I was involved in “domestic disturbances.” This is mud. It’s slanderous. I believe in transparency, especially when it means looking inwardly. Over two decades ago, as a young probationary deputy, I had a verbal argument with my girlfriend at the time. My opponent took this incident and applied provocative terms to it knowing that voters would assume the worst. I have never laid my hands on a woman and I never would. I take responsibility for what happened, and I will always aim to answer for my actions, as should every Sheriff.

      Delete
  5. The auto body place with all the junk cars near Bell’s Pond I believe is owned by a Krapf family member, not the candidate himself. It was the first place I saw a sign for him.

    ReplyDelete
  6. FYI Krapf Autobody does great work- on cars.
    We would all like more factual information on the candidates in the impending elections!
    Lets not link the two.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm pushing back on this one. In full disclosure, I've known Don for decades. I am one of the many who encouraged him to run for Sheriff because I know he will perform his duties with honor, integrity, a lack of hubris the likes of which we see in the incumbent, and because he wants to move the Sheriff's Office away from back door deals and patronage and in the direction of transparency and more community-centric policing. Whom did he vote for in prior elections? Why is it any of our business to ask that question (and this comes from me, someone who despises Trump)? A basic tenet of democracy is the ability to vote for whomever you want, without the need to disclose (or justify) that decision. It's because I know Don as well as I do and I respect everything about him that I wouldn't ask him this question; it's none of my business. And orange on his signs being equated to Trump? Spoiler alert: it was at my suggestion that Don's signs were designed in orange just as mine were when I ran for office because it's a color that stands out in a sea of red, white, and blue signs.

    Then we come to the vaccination question. Why is it OK to push someone to disclose federally protected (HIPAA) personal information? There were early concerns about the vaccines and how they might affect certain health conditions, and perhaps those had to be carefully weighed by Don in consultation with his healthcare providers. That's all I'm going to say about that.

    Since I'm on a roll, I'll address a few other things.

    An incumbent is always going to have the upper hand when it comes to institutional knowledge (I actually felt badly about having that advantage when I participated in a panel discussion at TSL when I ran for my second term on the school board). In this case, Sheriff Bartlett has been in the role for eight years and has intimate knowledge of running the CCSO daily. But did he come in with that knowledge, or did he learn it on the job, just as almost all elected officials do? And in his time in office, has he acted in good faith, with no improprieties or cover ups? We all know the answer to that question.

    As for the multiple domestic disturbances blasted on Bartlett's flyer, has anyone asked Don about that? Is anyone curious how someone knew to FOIL specific personnel records "uncovering" reported incidents from more than two decades ago or, for that matter, who it was that even submitted the FOIL request? I sure am! Were anyone else's personnel records FOILed and, if so, by whom? Was anyone curious about, say, what might lurk in the files of Sheriff Bartlett's current and prior Undersheriffs?

    And lastly, I know because I was in the room multiple times with Sam Donnelly when Sam Pratt's questions were coming in rapid fire. It seemed that no answer was sufficient, the questions were never ending and were being framed to elicit a specific response, and Mr. Pratt's questions were by no means the only ones being fielded by Sam Donnelly and others on the team.

    Sam Pratt, I've *always* completely respected your integrity when it comes to research and reporting. I'm sorry to say that, on this one, I feel like there's an agenda being pushed rather than a desire to understand who Don Krapf genuinely is as a person, the wealth of experience he has and the respect he's earned from colleagues and from members of the community with whom he's interacted calmly and with compassion, and what he brings to the table overall as a candidate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gossips of Rivertown desperately needs to include an option to “like” or “love” posts, just like Facebook. Can you look into that, Carole? I’m a Facebook addict and I think it would be great here.

      Delete
    2. Sorry, Holst, it's not up to me. Take it up with Google Blogger. Also, I should remind you, "The Gossips of Rivertown" is not Facebook.

      Delete
    3. Meta. Facebook is now everything.

      Delete
    4. All that’s very nice, Tiffany. But it looks like, once again, the choices for sheriff are not great on either side. Bartlett still seems the weaker choice, for sure: the man seems to lack a respect for the very rule of law he is sworn to uphold and the pay to play is glaring. But it would be better if Mr. Krapf would exercise some of the transparency he espouses. And it would be nice if the county and local Dem committees could pull their collective heads out of their respective asses.

      Delete
    5. In response to Tiffany (1/2) —

      1) The Dem committee asked the Trump question months before I did. Bartlett said straightforwardly that he didn’t; Krapf refused to answer. If it’s not a valid or relevant question, why’d the Dems ask?

      Anyway, it’s likewise notable despite all that verbiage, that you didn’t deny that Krapf voted for Trump twice. It’s hard to believe you aren’t in a position to know.

      2) Since reporting my story, very strong confirmations of the central question (Krapf voting twice for Trump—possibly three times, actually, since I now have confirmed from BOE public records that he voted in the 2016 Republican Primary as well).

      3) When I posed questions to the Krapf campaign, his campaign manager asked to “take them to email,” then never responded to the emails. The questions were quite simple, and not terribly numerous.

      4) When I asked Krapf to interview him directly by phone, Don said he was too busy and insisted any questions be posed in writing via Facebook Messenger, which I did. He ignored all questions about Trump, and others regarding ICE raids, etc. The only reason I even got a chance to get his evasive refusal to respond was because I finally tracked him down at a campaign event. Whatever one thinks of him otherwise, this is the opposite of the “transparency” he has trumpeted, and does not create “trust.”

      5) I have also heard from additional, very credible sources who say from experience with Krapf that they do not believe he supports much of the party platform which has been circulated by the Democrats on his behalf.

      Delete
    6. 2/2 to Tiffany —

      6) I don’t know where the friends of Bartlett group got their claim about domestic incidents; I reported that it was claimed because it is news—just as I likewise mentioned the fallout for Bartlett from the brutal Handy beating. These competing allegations are part of the campaign, and thus merit mention. Note: I noticed many Dems repeating the cornfield bribe claim of Handy’s father, but not the fast and firm denial of his own father’s son by Handy (the victim) himself. This is an illustration of the sad prevalence of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” mentality among local partisans.

      Similarly, while the Democratic backers of Krapf are now alleging “corruption” in the Bartlett Sheriff’s office, it raises an eyebrow that to my knowledge Krapf never spoke out public about such alleged corruption before, in more than two decades in that office. Is public corruption just a problem when it is useful to a campaign? Or do public officers have a duty to report corruption as soon as they see it?

      7) Vaccination is a monumentally important public health issue, with a significant number of County residents (on both the far right and far left) still refusing to get vaccinated. More pertinently here, it’s an issue which the Sheriff’s office does play a role — both in terms of its own workforce, and enforcement of public regulations.

      Ex: In Thanksgiving 2020, when mass gatherings were prohibited, Bartlett’s CCSO announced that it would not enforce State rules. That was not proper, or beneficial to the public. If Krapf is vaccine-hesitant, or a denier, that is likewise info the public deserves. Of course Krapf is not obliged to disclose such medical info—just as candidates are not necessarily obliged to disclose their taxes — but he could voluntarily if he wants the confidence of voters who care about the most pressing public health issue of today.

      The vaccine issue came up because Krapf was circulating in indoor public spaces when he spoke to voters, one of whom claimed that he was disinvited from a fundraiser because of his vaccination status, another of whom claimed he was unvaccinated when they spoke. Journalistically speaking, Krapf deserved the chance to respond. If I had just reported such claims without giving him a chance to rebut, Krapf’s partisans would be demanding to know why he *wasn’t* asked.

      8) I am more than willing to say, if it matters, that I will not vote for Bartlett, either, due to many problems over the years in his department. If I had to bet on the outcome, I would bet on Krapf winning. And the result will be that we will be stuck with a Trumper for the foreseeable future, because the CCDC will never admit a mistake. This raises the possibility of a bruising Democratic primary in the future (unless Krapf takes retirement before he is challenged).

      9) Lastly, in some new news, I am told that the Democrats have already organized a “victory party” for Krapf, but that he has declined to attend — preferring to host his own private party at the Hudson Power Boat Association. The Krapf campaign is welcome to reply.

      Delete
  8. Thank you Tiffany for speaking the truth! Now it seems the current Sheriff has accepted money on multiple occasions from companies the county does business with. The is strictly counter to our County Code of Ethics!

    ReplyDelete
  9. I see the "Orangeman" is still living rent free in the heads of liberal democrats.

    Not Peter Meyer

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ironically Hillsdale Dems are attacking a qualified Republican candidate for Town Board for admitting to voting for Trump and who is still unvaccinated. Though I abhor both characteristics of the candidate, I still think he’s he’s the best candidate for the job. And, frankly, I abhor more how local Dems are attacking the candidate’s wife for her heinous Facebook hygiene (she has reposted some offensive memes). The hypocrisy among County and Town Dems is confounding, and shameful.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I really hope that people don’t use this information as a reason to somehow NOT vote for Don Krapf instead of David Bartlett, or to waste their vote on Ralph Nader, so to speak. (Don’t judge me, I voted for Nader in 2000). C’mon, let’s be realistic. No one is perfect, but some candidates are clearly MUCH better than others. Vote for Don Krapf.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you pronounce Krapf "Crap" or "Kraf", either way I would not vote for a republican Trumper pretending to be a democrat. If you don't like the other guy, don't vote for anyone, or write someone in. Maybe next time the Dems will get their act together and put up an actual Democrat for Sheriff.

      Delete
    2. P. Winslow, God but you are profoundly Stupid Right now. Seriously. Do you have any idea whatsoever about the history of the complete corruption of the David Bartlett administration ?!?!?!?!?! Of course you don’t, you pathetic ass.

      Delete