Connor to Try Again
Diamondstone contends that Connor is attempting to further tie up his campaign resources with the challenge, which could run through August 23, and believes that Connor doesn't want to talk about the issues facing the district, calling him "mostly absent." And he said that the whole effort to elimiate him from the race was actually about...
Clarence Norman.
Read on for more comments from Diamondstone after the jump. And let us know what you think.
Diamondstone charges that Connor has "focus[ed] on the minutia, legal techicalities to get me off the ballot because when we're discussing issues it's very uncomfortable for him when we talk about his working with Clarence Norman during many, many years to help rig the judicial system in Brooklyn. He presided over eight of Clarence Norman's basically sham judicial conventions that led to the Brennan Center decision to throw out the way we select our judges. He was working hand in glove with Clarence Norman in all of this. He doesn't want to hear about that. He doesn't want us to talk about his key role in ending the commuter tax and costing the city three billion dollars and I'm going to talk about that and he will say 'Oh, that was one of only 50,000.' Well, but it was the most devastating vote and it was the one that he led on."
As for the additional appearances in court:
"I see our campaign going forward no matter what he does, we are convinced that we will prevail again, and that there's virtually no chance of our success being derailed. We will go forward whether he tries to drain our resources continually. We will go forward, we will find new sources, we will proceed as we expected. We will inform the public in the next month of all the things that we haven't been able to talk about and we will make sure that they know what the differences are between us: that he has been basically not the leader that we need in this most incredible and diverse and complex district and that we need someone in Albany who we can trust not to betray us as he's done on so many fiscal and important issues to the citizens of New York."
—Nicole Brydson
Connor, by appealing the court decision, obviously believes he can prevail without the coveted New York Times endorsement, because he has zero chance of receiving it now.
why does this remind me of those stickers that say "the Supreme Court will decide who is Mayor -- Adames or Bloomberg"
what a louse! I'm not familiar with Connor's relationship with Norman, but seems like a good strategy to be linking them if his charges are true given the anti-incumbent, anti-corruption sentiment among voters
nicole, i am glad you have been paying attention to this race.
Any incumbent who has no appeal to his constituents would have to appeal to the courts. By the way, who is paying Marty's legal bills? His filing seemed pretty spare to run a campaign and a law suit at the same time.
Marty seems to think he can convince a judge to install him into office instead of the voters. But it looks like he can't even do that. Pathetic.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Marty is representing himself. I don't know if that would constitute an in-kind donation.
As to the first comment, I agree. If Ken is on the ballot the Times will have a few paragraph non-endorsement of Marty, with a brief "we endorse Ken" at the end.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Marty is representing himself. I don't know if that would constitute an in-kind donation.
As to the first comment, I agree. If Ken is on the ballot the Times will have a few paragraph non-endorsement of Marty, with a brief "we endorse Ken" at the end.
A previous post said Connor is represented by Henry Berger.
Sunday's Times' endorsement of John Sabini & Velmanette Montgomery gave me the impression that those were the only Senate races where they would endorse. I might be wrong but if I am, why wouldn't they endorse others at the same time? I also want to reiterate my view that challenging opponent's petitions does not preclude a candidate from receiving the Times endorsement. Remember Bloomberg knocked Ognibene off the ballot.
Connor's team of lawyers include fake Manhattan reformer Henry Berger, Mr. Cemetery Arnold Ludwick and non lawyer, the man in black, Jeff Feldman. Feldman job is to sit in the courtroom to remind the judge who got him on the bench.
Wonder what reformers Millman, Flashman, JoAnn the future Councilman member and the old gate gang at IND think of Feldman and Connor
The Times probably wouldn't have made an endorsement in this race already considering the challenge is still in court.
So, Diamondstone can appeal a decision of the Board of Election, and he is a good guy? When Connor appeals, he gets attacked.
If all you Diamondstone supporters - or is it Marty haters? - would get off this blog and start campaigning, maybe Ken will get a chance to break the 15% ceiling.
Do you think the Times will endorse a slumlord who gets thrown off the community board and is into yet another of his quixotic narcissistic campaigns?
And does anyone really think voters pay much attention to the Times' endorsement? They generally endorse candidates that are likely to win. At best, they give a 5-10% boost.
Diamondstone will need a lot more than that to win.
Clarence Norman gave Marty Connor the screwing of his life, pulling the plug on his support from the Brooklyn delegation when he sought to be renominated as party leader; the proof was that Clarence's pet rock, Carl Andrews, supported Paterson.
And to imply that Marty Connor's presiding over the conventions means he played some evil role in the judicial nominating process is just silly. In order to believe that, one would have to believe that the conventions played some role in the judicial nominating process.
There may be a case to be made against Connor, but since losing his leadership, he appears to have adopted useful curmodgeon's role, unafraid to say the emperor has no clothes. He was the only vote in the Senate against the bill creating the second Brooklyn Surrogate's seat, while supposed reform heroes voted with the machine. Diamondstone would probalby be off on cloud nine introducing resolutions calling for multiple impeachments and constitutional amendments; chances are, he'd never have even noticed the judicial bill.
Campaign Contributions Fund Senator Connor
I thought the new york supreme court was the highest court in the state, and that their decisions could not be appealed on the state level. Is Connor now appealing on the federal level?
The New York Supreme Court is NOT the highest court in NY. The next step is the Appellate Divison and then the State Court of Appeals. Connor cannot appeal to the Federal Courts.