Did a recent interview with "Reverend" Stevie Fielder vindicate Charles Johnson? MPB reported online:
For nearly six weeks, Reverend Stevie Fielder of First Union Missionary Baptist Church in Meridian has been at the center of one of the most closely watched political dramas in the nation. Fielder's role in that drama came about after he participated in an interview with conservative, political blogger Chuck Johnson, where he made allegations of vote buying against members of Senator Thad Cochran's reelection campaign.....
Further questions about the validity of Fielder's claims were made after it was found that he was paid for his story. Chuck Johnson, the conservative blogger who conducted the interview and later posted it to his website, says he paid Fielder $2,000 for text messages and emails that show Baird asked Fielder to buy votes.
"I have repeatedly said and will continue to say, because it's true, that I was the one who paid Rev. Fielder," Johnson says. "I paid him an amount of money to have his text messages and publish the material on my site as well as the audio as well."
Yet, Fielder recounts the sequence of events differently. He says he wasn't paid by Johnson, but instead by Noel Fritsch, the spokesman for state Senator Chris McDaniel's campaign. Fielder also says Fritsch was present when the interview was conducted by Johnson. He says he was asked to explain as a hypothetical situation how the vote buying scheme would have worked.
"That's what Noel Fritsch was paying me for to give Charles Johnson a run-through of how it would be," says Fielder. "A hypothetical situation so that the people would understand how the full process was working. That's all it was. I had to put myself in the situation as if I would have actually taken the bribe to do this; what they was wanting me to do.
Fritsch refused to be recorded during an interview yesterday, but in a previous conversation with MPB when asked about paying Fielder or being part of the interview process he responded like this.
"That is false, I did not do that." Fritsch says. "What I understand, Charles Johnson did not do that either. My understanding is that Charles paid for the text and emails, and those emails are from a Thad Cochran campaign staffer and those emails and texts strongly suggest that the Cochran campaign was paying $15 dollars for Democrats to vote in the primary."
Fielder's initial allegations of vote buying also sparked an immediate investigation conducted by Attorney General Jim Hood's office. While repeated attempts to reach Hood for a comment went unanswered, he previously stated that he believes Fielder was paid to lie. Fielder says he stands by his claims.
"At no point did I admit to him that McDaniel and them paid me to lie to bring all of this stuff up like it didn't happen." says Fielder. "It happened. I told the truth. Just the interview was paid, but not to lie to anyone. I was not paid to lie." Rest of article.
Mr. Johnson and his allies were quick to tweet this article:
Charles C. Johnson @ChuckCJohnson 52m WOW. Fielder says he was never paid to lie
Dostoevsky's Shade @DostoevskyShade 1h Bottom line: Fielder's MPB interview torpedos any bs case govt might be pursuing agst @chuckcjohnson or any McDaniel people. They are done
Richard J. Addante @RickAddante 1h @ChuckCJohnson Offer donation$ to a liberal charity for each retraction offered by a member of the #press (i.e.@samrhall). #CricketsChirping
Charles C. Johnson @ChuckCJohnson 1h VINDICATED: Reverend Fielder: "I was not paid to lie." #mssen http://yallpolitics.com/index.php/yp/post/39028/#.U-odH_odBH4.twitter …
Stay tuned. I don't think this one is quite yet done.
30 comments:
So, people would believe a liar when he's lying about not lying previously? If you do I have some beachfront property in Phoenix I'd like to sell you.
and, of course, 12:16, if Fielder were to say what you want him to say, he would be a towering paragon of truth.
So, people would believe a liar when he's lying about not lying previously?
Same folk who believe Henry Barbour.
The veil of the temple will be rent and all will be revealed when Li'l Ginge is sworn under oath in Lauderdale County. Does anybody here with real legal experience think Chuckles will be fined or jailed for clearly violating the terms of the supoena?
Wait, has Fielder ever retracted his previous claim that he never told Charles Johnson what Johnson reported him as saying about voter fraud? Oops, no, as a matter of fact, he hasn't yet repudiated that rather salient assertion.
And yet Mr. Johnson & McD's phalanx of online supporters are now insisting that we all selectively trust Fielder about this particular statement while conveniently discarding his unretracted claim that Johnson concocted the bulk of the charges against the Cochran campaign and misattributed those fraudulent accusations to him.
For their own preservation, you'd think they'd not claim - preposterously - that Fielder has vindicated anybody ever, and suggest instead that nothing that comes out of the man's mouth can be trusted and it was a regrettable ethical & professional mistake for a partisan media propagandist acting on behalf of a political campaign to solicit paid testimony about anything in the first place.
But that would require that the people now speaking in furtherance of the effort undertaken by McDaniels' camp to subvert the results of an election demonstrate some smart strategic foresight for a change.
They seem to be completely clueless when they unwittingly undermine their own and their preferred candidate's reputation by naively jumping at any opportunity at all to 'defend' their side, even if the extended logical implications of the latest defense they've desperately latched onto might instead redound against their own credibility & their candidate's efforts to win an election he seems to have lost.
It appears to me the good Reverend should just be ignored from here on out, by BOTH sides. The man cannot be trusted to tell the truth about anything.
The amount of stupid from the players in this tale is amazing.
1) If Cochran's people did what Fielder alleges they did, then they are both corrupt and incredibly stupid to leave such easily confirmed tracks.
2) If Cochran's people did what Fielder alleges they did, then McDaniel's people are incredibly stupid for involving themselves in the story by paying the man, because it damages his credibility AND theirs.
3) If Cochran's people DID NOT do what Fielder alleges they did, then McDaniel's people are incredibly stupid for making themselves an obvious part of the story and it makes THEM look corrupt AND stupid.
I don't want to be represented by any of these people.
Won't Fielder's story be put to rest by the AG one way or the other?
Where did the story of Fielder 'lying about paying for votes' come from if not the AG?
@2:16 PM...Ron White was right, you can't fix stupid! Everyone but you knows that isn't any beach front property in Phoenix! geez... oh, wait....saaaaayyyyy! where you just trying to be funny?
1:42, you make three good observations. So how do you get to your conclusion that you don't want to be represented by "any of these people"? Assume for a moment that it is #3 - which is what the evidence brought forward by the AG (certainly not an A$$hold buddy of the Cochran operatives) - why would you not want to be represented by Cochran? Your #3 says, put simply, that Cochran had nothing to do with this. McDaniel and his people are incredibly stupid and corrupt. Understand not wanting to be represented by McD, but how does the Fielder story - the true one - do damage to Cochran?
OT, but Geoff Pender has an article up that says the McDaniel campaign is challenging Mitch Tyner and q
wife's vote in Madison. Bwahahahaha.
Things not vindicated: the term "reverend" and common sense.
So first Fielder said he bought votes for Cochran. Then someone told him that he just admitted his complicity in a felony. So Fielder says " wait no, I was just speaking hypothetically, I never said I bought votes." Now Chuck comes to town(with another $2K perhaps?) and now Fielder says he didn't buy votes but was saying he was told votes were being purchased but declined to participate. Yeah this whole story is ripe with credibility.
Someone just needs to get Fielder in front of a grand jury or have him put his story in a sworn affidavit and see what he says then.
It would seem that the story here is that Fielder admits to having no personal knowledge of any vote buying. So, regardless of what "hypothetical" he was paid to talk about, he has no evidence to offer in any challenge. Am I missing something?
@1:42. Game, set, match. You said it all, no more really needs to be said.
Except maybe one thing: it's being reported this afternoon (Aug 12 in Talking Points Memo) that McDaniels' crackerjack legal team sent out to all parties yesterday a slew of affidavits purporting to 'prove' voter fraud and two of those 'damning' affidavits 'prove' that McDaniels' own lawyer & his wife cast two of the irregular votes which should be disqualified. Team McD accused themselves of an election crime!
LOL! I swear, you can't make this stuff up! The whole fiasco has officially turned into an Onion satire now.
"and, of course, 12:16, if Fielder were to say what you want him to say, he would be a towering paragon of truth. "
Wrong again, loser. I wouldn't take his word that the sky was blue without looking for myself. He has no credibility about anything.
Please tell me Kingfish is going to video one of Chuck's speaking events. That has got to be enjoyable watching for both McDaniel and Cochran people.
Johnson got a subpoena asking about Fritch. Fritch says he didn't get a subpoena. Does that mean he is the target?
Now Tyner is listed as a crossover.
http://m.msnewsnow.com/msnewsnow/db/330626/content/D1FwJ9vv
@5:51
It probably just means he's following the law as stated very plainly in the subpoena.
At Johnson's speaking event, he said that Noel acted as the go-between to get the text messages delivered from Fielder to Johnson.
This new statement does not (further) impeach Fielder's credibility, but it makes it certain that either Johnson or Fritsch is lying.
"but how does the Fielder story - the true one - do damage to Cochran?"
Excuse me - which of Fielder's stories (if any) is "the true one", and how can you prove it? =============
"It probably just means he's following the law as stated very plainly in the subpoena."
Uh, the previous comment referred to two males. Which "he" do you suppose is "following the law" - I think Johnson and Fritch are both liars, so where is your proof that either is following the law.
At Johnson's speaking event, he said that Noel acted as the go-between to get the text messages delivered from Fielder to Johnson.
Did you attend Johnson's event?
From Jackson Free Press:
In the Fielder interview, Fritsch is mentioned. When asked why, Johnson said, "We mentioned Noel to send the text messages, to send them through Noel, so that they could be published, so we could ascertain that those were there."
#When asked why the messages would have to go through Noel, Johnson said, "We wanted to have the images sent to somebody in Mississippi who could then send them on to us."
How anyone could have seen the " interview" and buy that Fielder was speaking " hypothetically" is hard to understand!
How anyone would imagine that Fielder in his first explanation would forget to add as an " excuse" for his paid lies that " Oh and by the way, I WAS asked to buy votes but I refused", is beyond me!
And, so now, this sorry excuse for a man, much less a preacher, compounds his mortal sin of " bearing false witness", not to mention his criminal behavior, by smearing yet another person.
If all this weren't horrible enough, the McDaniel zealots seize on this " new" version as if it had any credibility whatsoever!
I sincerely hope that the remaining McDaniel supporters are either clinically insane or else severely learning disabled, or else we have far too many despicable people among us!
"compounds his mortal sin of " bearing false witness","
Some clown responded to a bit of profanity I posted recently by admonishing me to "go to church".
Let me point out my memory of an ancient catechism class by pointing out that lying is a venial sin, not a mortal sin.
3:31 pm You are mistaken.
Telling a " white lie" would fall under venial sin, but to knowingly, willfully and deliberately break one of the Ten Commandments makes in mortal especially when you are a preacher or priest is " turning away from the face of God".
The Daily Meaningless Pontification is brought to you courtesy of August 13, 2014 @ 1:27 PM
4:02 pm If McDanielites are going to use God and morality to justify what they are doing and get a preacher to do their bidding, you're damn right I'm going to " pontificate"!
And, perhaps, those who were fooled by McDaniel and that actually give a rat's behind about ethics, morality or their professed Christianity will give pause to thought! It's pretty clear that facts and logic don't work with the remaining McDaniel apologists!
Thad Cochran is an adulterer. Morality ... ethics ... Christianity. LMAO
I'm not sure if people are actually missing the one piece of semi-hard evidence which Fielder presented, or just hoping it will go away. Johnson paid Fielder for photos of the text-messages, sent to Fielder by a member of team Cochran, talking about cash in envelopes. Those pictures have never been disputed by team Cochran, who admitted that they hired Fielder (so did Gregg Harper in a previous campaign... he endorsed Cochran in 2012 and was on the trail with Cochran as well). They also admit that they typically pay campaign-walkers in cash-filled-envelopes. The only dispute is over whether this was bribery-for-votes, or just an extremely odd-but-innocent system.
Hard evidence of all the text-messages are the key here, straight from Ma Bell rather than filtered via the internet; either the Cochran staffer really sent those messages (and others to other people involved in the campaign), or the pictures of the text-messages were fakes / photoshop'd / misunderstood / somesuch. Although there seems little chance that Jim Hood will subpoena the telephony evidence, since he has not done so yet, now that McDaniel has filed an election-challenge-lawsuit, I would expect that McDaniel's lawyers can seek out the telephony evidence as part of the discovery phase. Is that wrongheaded?
Post a Comment