Would you call Carl Paladino's [statement] to a reporter a death threat?

[Boyo Jim]

In an argument with a reporter, recorded on videotape, the candidate for governor said, "You send another goon to my daughter’s house and I’ll take you out, buddy."

You can watch the video here (http://capitaltonight.com/2010/09/fight/).

There's a NY Times story about it here (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/30/nyregion/30cuomo.html).

Personally I can't interpret it any other way than as a threat of serious violence.

And I swear Luca Brasi was there. :p

I meant for the thread title to say "Paladino's statement..."

[Tazmanian Devil]

And then he makes it worse when, after the reporter asks 'How are you going to take me out', Paladino says 'Watch'. While I don't believe he meant it as a death threat, it was not a very wise thing to say. Cuomo's campaign committee could very well start running spots along the line of 'Just what did he mean when he said this to a reporter?' And then the spot would end 'Do we REALLY want a person who threatened a reporter to represent us?' Paladino needs to do damage control quickly before Cuomo has a chance to make hay out of this incident.

[Mr. Moto]

That ad would only work if the public held reporters in universal esteem.

Since they don't, that ad wouldn't work at all. More than half the public would agree with Paladino, even if they disliked everything else he said.

[jonesj2205]

The last thing Cuomo wants to do is put it in an ad right now. As it is it will be on the news and pundits will be talking about it ad nauseam. He should just let them give him free advertising for now.

[Tazmanian Devil]

Point well taken...just a thought that I had when I saw the report.

[Boyo Jim]

Does anyone know if they're going to debate?

I would think it would be pretty easy to poke a bit at Paladino and get some kind of outrage response. He doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who can hold his temper.

[Marley23]

I meant for the thread title to say "Paladino's statement..."
Fixed it.

Cuomo's campaign committee could very well start running spots along the line of 'Just what did he mean when he said this to a reporter?' And then the spot would end 'Do we REALLY want a person who threatened a reporter to represent us?' Paladino needs to do damage control quickly before Cuomo has a chance to make hay out of this incident.

That ad would only work if the public held reporters in universal esteem.
I'll cut the guy a break and say he was just idly threatening to hurt the reporter, not kill him. But people usually don't like to see their public servants making threats. It doesn't matter that reporters aren't that popular. The problem here is not that Cuomo is going to run an ad about this (he won't), it's that people are already starting to see Paladino as a psycho. That's what happens when it comes out that you've been emailing racist jokes and horse porn to your friends. So adding this on top of that is only going to make it harder for him to be taken seriously, and he's already well behind in the polls.

[Zebra]

I am still just blown away that Paladino got the nomination. WTF?

[Boyo Jim]

I am still just blown away that Paladino got the nomination. WTF?

Good point. How big a loser must the other Republican have been? Or is this another Christine O'Donnell case?

[BrainGlutton]

Cuomo is leading Paladino consistently and by comfortable margins in the polls, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_gubernatorial_election,_2010#General_election) if that's any consolation.

[Marley23]

I am still just blown away that Paladino got the nomination. WTF?

Good point. How big a loser must the other Republican have been? Or is this another Christine O'Donnell case?
Lazio is kind of a loser, yes. But Paladino is a Tea Party guy and had stronger support from the more conservative parts of the state- although I see he failed to get the nomination from the Conservative Party. That's usually a lock for major Republican candidates.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

That ad would only work if the public held reporters in universal esteem.

Since they don't, that ad wouldn't work at all. More than half the public would agree with Paladino, even if they disliked everything else he said.
No, the public would not approve of death threats to a reporter. I know a lot of right wingers have been brainwashed by the right wing media into thinking they're supposed to fear and hate the legit news media, but that does not translate to a majority of voters approving of murder.

[Boyo Jim]

Cuomo is leading Paladino consistently and by comfortable margins in the polls, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_gubernatorial_election,_2010#General_election) if that's any consolation.


Thank you. It is.

[BrainGlutton]

I read once that Harry Truman, when president, sent a scathing letter to a reporter who had published something about his daughter, but I don't recall the details. I don't think it included a death threat.

[Marley23]

the legit news media
I'm a little surprised to hear you say that about the New York Post. ;)

It sounds like Paladino was angry about press coverage of his youngest daughter, age 10, who was born after an affair with an employee. I never heard about that at all, but it looks like the Daily News broke the story in April. At the time at least, Paladino said the girl would be with him and his other children on the campaign trail. I don't know if that actually happened but it would be a bit ridiculous to say the press is intruding on their private lives when he's appearing with her in public. On the other hand if the Post has been sending photographers to her house, that's too much. We're talking about a 10-year-old and she is not running for office.

[Mr. Moto]

I read once that Harry Truman, when president, sent a scathing letter to a reporter who had published something about his daughter, but I don't recall the details. I don't think it included a death threat.

"Some day I hope to meet you. When that happens you'll need a new nose, a lot of beefsteak for black eyes, and perhaps a supporter below!"

Cite. (http://www.trumanlibrary.org/trivia/letter.htm)

Not a death threat, certainly, but not very nice. And let's face it, Truman's threat was as empty as Paladino's.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

I wouldn't be so sure that Truman's threat was empty.

[gonzomax]

I assume if you describe it as "an empty threat', it is irrelevant? Does it not reveal character? Does it not tell you a lot about how he responds to pressure?
I think the voters should take Paladino out.

[Mr Smashy]

It's pretty clear if you hear the tape that the future Governor meant that he was going to take him out to dinner.

[BrainGlutton]

It sounds like Paladino was angry about press coverage of his youngest daughter, age 10, who was born after an affair with an employee.

:eek: Now that's precocious!

[Mr. Moto]

I assume if you describe it as "an empty threat', it is irrelevant? Does it not reveal character? Does it not tell you a lot about how he responds to pressure?

Uh, no. Just that this wasn't a credible death threat, any more than Truman was actually threatening to kick a music critic in the nutsack. Questions of character I will leave to the voters - who may decide to elect a jerk that they happen to agree with. This has been known to happen.

I don't think it will happen in this case, though, which means that formal dinners in Albany will be semi-homemade. Bleah!

[newcomer]

I'll cut the guy a break and say he was just idly threatening to hurt the reporter, not kill him. But people usually don't like to see their public servants making threats. It doesn't matter that reporters aren't that popular. The problem here is not that Cuomo is going to run an ad about this (he won't), it's that people are already starting to see Paladino as a psycho. That's what happens when it comes out that you've been emailing racist jokes and horse porn to your friends. So adding this on top of that is only going to make it harder for him to be taken seriously, and he's already well behind in the polls. Then it must be that public is okay with picking on the candidate's daughter as in it’s all fair and square?

I made a similar comment elsewhere that politics nowadays is all about everything but the ideas and principles that candidate espouses and serious thinking of impact of certain policies that a candidate would like to establish or push for. You don’t like his policies or ideas? Fine, fight them on their own merits.

Could it be that there is something of “Hey, he wants to be a politician now we’ll skin him until he bleeds”. And, when his reaction is indeed to bleed, then the public goes like “Oh, can’t do that!”

Completely disregarding the fact that the attack on him at a basic human level was inappropriate and offensive and that his reaction was probably how 99% of people would react. And the net result, some smooth talking thief moves in the office while the public enjoys self-righteous moment of deliverance. And then, in couple of years same thing starts rolling.

[Marley23]

Then it must be that public is okay with picking on the candidate's daughter as in it’s all fair and square?

Uh...

I don't know if that actually happened but it would be a bit ridiculous to say the press is intruding on their private lives when he's appearing with her in public. On the other hand if the Post has been sending photographers to her house, that's too much. We're talking about a 10-year-old and she is not running for office.

Completely disregarding the fact that the attack on him at a basic human level was inappropriate and offensive
What attack?

[elmwood]

Good point. How big a loser must the other Republican have been? Or is this another Christine O'Donnell case?
Lazio is kind of a loser, yes. But Paladino is a Tea Party guy and had stronger support from the more conservative parts of the state- although I see he failed to get the nomination from the Conservative Party.

Upstate New York isn't "conservative' in the same sense as what one might see in the South, Texas or Arizona, though. Buffalo and its surrounding suburbs are fairly liberal-leaning, as is Rochester. The rural counties tend to be more conservative, but again, it can't be compared to a place like South Carolina or Oklahoma. Rockefeller Republicans are still quite common around these parts.

Also, in the Buffalo area, Carl Paladino has a bad reputation as a developer. Historic properties succumbing to "demolition by neglect", and tearing down urban-scale commercial buildings to build suburban context Rite Aid stores, are his trademarks.

Upstaters are frustrated, though. Most governors and lieutenant governors have been from Downstate as far back as anyone can remember. Taxes are astronomical. Rural Upstate NY is nothing like West Virginia, but it's seen much better days in the recent past, and it seems like nobody in state government cares. Paladino's rage resonates with the public, even in a blue state with a strong progressive political tradition.

[BrainGlutton]

At least he didn't threaten to use the man like a horse. :eek:

[Duke]

At least he didn't threaten to use the man like a horse. :eek:

Somehow I don't think the horse minded...

I can't believe Paladino managed to last this long before blowing up at someone. The guy is legendary around here for his temper.

[Marley23]

Upstate New York isn't "conservative' in the same sense as what one might see in the South, Texas or Arizona, though. Buffalo and its surrounding suburbs are fairly liberal-leaning, as is Rochester. The rural counties tend to be more conservative, but again, it can't be compared to a place like South Carolina or Oklahoma. Rockefeller Republicans are still quite common around these parts.
That's more precise. He's a conservative by New York standards but maybe not by national standards, which isn't a surprise. New York City's recent Republican mayors have been the same way.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

I assume if you describe it as "an empty threat', it is irrelevant? Does it not reveal character? Does it not tell you a lot about how he responds to pressure?

Uh, no. Just that this wasn't a credible death threat.
That's for a jury to decide, and whether the victim felt it was credible. Even if it was empty posturing, it showed a very unsavory and unstable character.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

I'll cut the guy a break and say he was just idly threatening to hurt the reporter, not kill him. But people usually don't like to see their public servants making threats. It doesn't matter that reporters aren't that popular. The problem here is not that Cuomo is going to run an ad about this (he won't), it's that people are already starting to see Paladino as a psycho. That's what happens when it comes out that you've been emailing racist jokes and horse porn to your friends. So adding this on top of that is only going to make it harder for him to be taken seriously, and he's already well behind in the polls. Then it must be that public is okay with picking on the candidate's daughter as in it’s all fair and square?
Who's picking on his daughter?
Completely disregarding the fact that the attack on him at a basic human level was inappropriate and offensive...
What attack?

[Marley23]

Uh, no. Just that this wasn't a credible death threat.
That's for a jury to decide, and whether the victim felt it was credible. Even if it was empty posturing, it showed a very unsavory and unstable character.
It may say something about his character but there's zero chance this is going to court. The guy lost his temper and yelled some stupid things. I can't imagine charges being filed and no one was harmed.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Death threats are illegal.

[Mr. Moto]

Uh huh. Find a prosecutor to take it up. Good luck with that.

[Marley23]

I'll assume you're right even thought I don't know exactly how the state of New York defines a death threat. (I'll see if I can look that up.) There still aren't going to be charges.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

There probably won't be charges, but that doesn't mean he didn't commit a crime.

[Marley23]

Maybe this would apply to what Paladino said.

§ 240.26 Harassment in the second degree.
A person is guilty of harassment in the second degree when, with intent to harass, annoy or alarm another person:
1. He or she strikes, shoves, kicks or otherwise subjects such other person to physical contact, or attempts or threatens to do the same; or 2. He or she follows a person in or about a public place or places; or 3. He or she engages in a course of conduct or repeatedly commits acts which alarm or seriously annoy such other person and which serve no legitimate purpose.
Subdivisions two and three of this section shall not apply to activities regulated by the national labor relations act, as amended, the railway labor act, as amended, or the federal employment labor management act, as amended.
Harassment in the second degree is a violation.
I believe that means it's not a felony or a misdemeanor.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

What's the statute on terroristic threats?

[gonzomax]

"I will take you out", is a death threat. We all know what it means. Does he mean it? I don't know but with that temper and attitude, he may.

[Marley23]

What's the statute on terroristic threats?
Putting on my internet lawyer hat again, I'm pretty sure this wouldn't apply to him for several reasons. Link here. (http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/LAWSSEAF.cgi?QUERYTYPE=LAWS+&QUERYDATA=$$PEN490.20$$@TXPEN0490.20+&LIST=SEA150+&BROWSER=BROWSER+&TOKEN=52229681+&TARGET=VIEW) (The second degree harassment law is over here. (http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/LAWSSEAF.cgi?QUERYTYPE=LAWS+&QUERYDATA=$$PEN240.26$$@TXPEN0240.26+&LIST=SEA27+&BROWSER=BROWSER+&TOKEN=52229681+&TARGET=VIEW))

§ 490.20 Making a terroristic threat.
1. A person is guilty of making a terroristic threat when with intent to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a unit of government by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of a unit of government by murder, assassination or kidnapping, he or she threatens to commit or cause to be committed a specified offense and thereby causes a reasonable expectation or fear of the imminent commission of such offense.
2. It shall be no defense to a prosecution pursuant to this section that the defendant did not have the intent or capability of committing the specified offense or that the threat was not made to a person who was a subject thereof.
Making a terroristic threat is a class D felony.
Paladino was talking to an individual, not trying to coerce a civilian population. I don't think you can say there was a reasonable expectation he was going to do it either.

Taken literally, Paladino threatened to kill the guy. I'll grant that. He didn't mean it but that's the clear reading of what he said. His defense today, which I only heard part of, seems to be "I was saying I was going to take him out just like I'm going to take out all the trash in Albany." Which is just plain stupid, but you knew they were going to come up with one stupid lie or another.

[boytyperanma]

I don't think it's enough to justify a criminal charge. He said 'I'll take you out' but hasn't done anything to follow up on said threat.

If you want to bring him up on charges for attempting to kill his own campaign, I can get behind that. I mean come on threatening the press before and election, that's a great way to endear them to you, I'm sure they'll have nothing but favorable things to say about him now.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

I read once that Harry Truman, when president, sent a scathing letter to a reporter who had published something about his daughter, but I don't recall the details. I don't think it included a death threat.

"Some day I hope to meet you. When that happens you'll need a new nose, a lot of beefsteak for black eyes, and perhaps a supporter below!"

Cite. (http://www.trumanlibrary.org/trivia/letter.htm)

Not a death threat, certainly, but not very nice. And let's face it, Truman's threat was as empty as Paladino's.I thought your argument was that Paladino's statement was okay because lots of right wingers like death threats against reporters.

Now it is okay because Truman did it too?

[Boyo Jim]

Paladino has now had admitted he has no evidence (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/01/nyregion/01paladino.html) that Andrew Cuomo was engaged in any affairs while married. According to the NY Times, ...he merely wanted reporters to scrutinize his rival’s personal life as closely as they had his own...

The confrontation started with the reporter demanding that Paladino produce evidence of his accusations about Andrew Cuomo's personal life. Earlier the same evening Paladino had suggested that Cuomo had as messy a personal life as Paladino, and had engaged in affairs while married. Paladino grew more and more angry that the reporter wouldn't accept his word that the evidence would be made available "at the appropriate time".

[Mr. Moto]

"Some day I hope to meet you. When that happens you'll need a new nose, a lot of beefsteak for black eyes, and perhaps a supporter below!"

Cite. (http://www.trumanlibrary.org/trivia/letter.htm)

Not a death threat, certainly, but not very nice. And let's face it, Truman's threat was as empty as Paladino's.I thought your argument was that Paladino's statement was okay because lots of right wingers like death threats against reporters.

Now it is okay because Truman did it too?


Where did I say it was okay? In the first post I was just saying that an ad highlighting his statement might not have the impact desired, in the second I was just answering what Truman actually wrote in his letter.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

nm

[lieu]

I would venture that most anytime a reporter become the news, he's doing something wrong. Paladino's culpability aside, the reporter gives the appearance of baiting someone, of egging him on in hopes of getting a sensational response. That's not reporting, it's creating. What story wouldn't become a trainwreck if that practice was commonplace.

[Boyo Jim]

I would venture that most anytime a reporter become the news, he's doing something wrong. Paladino's culpability aside, the reporter gives the appearance of baiting someone, of egging him on in hopes of getting a sensational response. That's not reporting, it's creating. What story wouldn't become a trainwreck if that practice was commonplace.

There was a more complete (and better quality) video of the incident on Lawrence O'Donell's show last night. It started out more civilly than the link in the OP suggests. IMO Paladino escalated it.

Also, I for one am getting tired of politicians making baseless accusations, and reporters sitting back and noting it down like gospel. I want reporters to challenge bullshit when they see it.

[Marley23]

I can't make out the conversation well enough to say that Dicker baited Paladino into anything. And the confrontation has already started by the time the phone is turned on, which makes it that much harder to tell. Regardless, sending photographers to the kid's home is over the line and stupid (even if it's what you'd expect from a tabloid), and while I can understand Paladino being upset by that, he completely blew it. And suggesting to reporters that Cuomo has had affairs was also a stupid tactic.

[Really Not All That Bright]

On the bright side, at least he's stopped forwarding horse porn and nigger jokes.

[Boyo Jim]

Here (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/tea-party-candidate-carl-paladino-scuffles-with-reporter-fred-dicker-11764184) is a considerably longer and better quality version of the incident.

[Marley23]

Dicker does ask a couple of loaded questions for sure, but that doesn't do Paladino any favors. Essentially the argument escalates because Paladino made up something about Cuomo and got called on it.

[gonzomax]

I would venture that most anytime a reporter become the news, he's doing something wrong. Paladino's culpability aside, the reporter gives the appearance of baiting someone, of egging him on in hopes of getting a sensational response. That's not reporting, it's creating. What story wouldn't become a trainwreck if that practice was commonplace.

Like Katy Curic asking Palin what she reads?
Paladino is crude, rude and aggressive. He will do more to show that . he gave an interview on CNN, Ricks List, and was very snotty.

[Spiff]

I would venture that most anytime a reporter become the news, he's doing something wrong. Paladino's culpability aside, the reporter gives the appearance of baiting someone, of egging him on in hopes of getting a sensational response. That's not reporting, it's creating. What story wouldn't become a trainwreck if that practice was commonplace.As Boyo Jim replied, I think it's right and proper (and unfortunately very rare) for reporters to challenge the BS that politicians spout.

Kudos for this reporter for doing so, IMHO.

[Steve MB]

It's pretty clear if you hear the tape that the future Governor meant that he was going to take him out to dinner.

I didn't ask, and Paladino didn't tell.

[gonzomax]

Dicker does ask a couple of loaded questions for sure, but that doesn't do Paladino any favors. Essentially the argument escalates because Paladino made up something about Cuomo and got called on it.

Define loaded. He asked about Paladinos charge that Cuomo was having affairs. That was a news story. He asked if he had proof so he could print it. Paladino had none, so Paladino got pissed off for getting caught making shit up.
The reporter denies sending people to take pictures of Paladino's daughter. Why are we to accept that he actually did?

[Boyo Jim]

[QUOTE=Marley23;12976979]... Why are we to accept that he actually did?

Which "he"? Reporters don't send out photographers.