From Merriam –Webster’s Online Dictionary:
weasel word -- a word used in order to evade or retreat from a direct or forthright statement or position.
By now everyone’s heard that our Governor, Mike Easley, told the city folks at NYU Law School a tale about how a good ol’ boy like himself turned country lawyer turned Brunswick County DA turned NC State Attorney General turned twice elected NC Governor came one day to appointing as Durham DA that slick Mike Nifong, his fellow Democrat.
The Raleigh News & Observer reported some of Easley's weasely comments. (“Easley: Nifong broke his word.”)
But the N&O’s story left out some important items.
Ol’ JinC recommends anyone “traveling down Tobacco Road” listen to what Easley actually said.
To do that, go here at N&O online where you’ll see a photo of Governor Easley. Beneath it are some menus. The second menu’s titled: Related Content.
The first link below Related Content is to the audio of Easley’s remarks. They’re part of a Q&A and last about three minutes.
Don’t miss listening to the audio of Easley’s tale.
You’ll hear, for instance, Easley say: “I do know the obvious conduct and we’ve seen with the racial slurs and that sort of thing certainly does not – does not speak well for the conduct …. However, you can’t comment … [comment trails off].
Was that weasling or just Easley stumbling?
Will anyone at the N&O or elsewhere among MSM follow-up on that? Why did they ignore it in the first place?
Then there’s Easley allowing as how “I” appointed judges but “we” appointed Nifong.
Who’s the “we?” How did we get from "I" to "we?"
On the audio Easley says when he learned Nifong was going to run for a full term “I almost unappointed him”.
Could Easley really have done that?
Was Nifong only serving at the pleasure of the Governor?
Or was Easley just “talkin’ through his britches?”
I’ll post more on this story tomorrow.
Meanwhile, two items.
1) Some people are saying the N&O was the first to report on Easley’s remarks.
I have it in my head that about Jan. 22 or 23 Liestoppers mentioned Easley’s remarks at NYU.
I feel very sure it was a Liestoppers’ report that prompted my call to Easley’s office around the 23rd seeking clarification concerning his NYU remarks.
I hit a brick wall on that.
2) Don’t miss John Hood’s insightful column on Easley’s weasly NYU words.
I’ll be back on this story tomorrow.
That’s a promise.
And I won’t Easley out on it.
If I do, you can Nifong me.
2 comments:
The fish rots from the head down.
John, I listened to Easley's answer twice (with my eyes closed to really LISTEN), and I was struck by a few things.
As you noted, he used "we" and "us" when talking about Nifong's appointment- I inferred that he meant Hardin and Stephens (of course, Stephens was the first judge on the case and signed the NTO). "Nifong told US..."
Easley states, without any equivocation, that "racial slurs" were used. He does not call it an allegation, etc. and he mentions "conduct," all of which seem to me to be perpetuating the myth that drove this story in the first place.
His only REAL criticism of Nifong seems to be that Nifong spoke to the media. His tone of voice and offhandedness about purposely not disclosing exculpatory evidence has morphed into a focus on the passage of the law in N.C. about evidence that happened during his tenure as A.G.- his tenure as A.G. seems to be the most salient point for him.
Texas Mom
Post a Comment