Skip to main content

Raw Sewerage Escapes From Blumenthal’s Office


George Gombossy got curious after stories began to appear in Connecticut’s media -- 90% of which genuflects and crosses itself before the Dick Blumenthal icon every morning -- concerning Richard Hine’s personnel file.

Hine is the Marine in Blumenthal’s office who released to the media a letter disclosing that Blumenthal had told him in personal conversations that he had served in Vietnam. Not a big deal there, since it had already been established that Blumenthal had lied SEVERAL TIMES concerning his attempts to steal valor from Vietnam soldiers who, unlike Blumenthal, did not spend the war getting deferments.

Those of us who know how the eye-gougers and ear-biters in Blumenthal office operate were waiting patiently for the hob-nailed boot to come down on Hine’s face.

Gombossy filed an FOIA request to secure Hine’s personnel records, portions of which had already been released by Blumenthal’s office to other news outlets after reporters had filed other FOIA requests. The packet, Gombossy discovered, contained what some in the business call “raw information,” documents that had not been certified as true by Blumenthal’s office. Such data should more properly be called raw sewerage.

While other journalists had only requested disciplinary information from Major Hine's personnel file, Gombossy requested ALL the file information, about 500 pages. Hine claims the allegations against him, not anonymous, were redacted when he was told about it. Gombossy was given access to the redacted and unredacted documents, copies having been made for him the attorney general’s office after he had paid for them.

Gombossy was permitted to view the unredacted raw sewerage. Hine had requested that the sewerage should not be given out, since it contained unverified and libelous charges; Hine, unlike Gombossy, was not permitted to learn the name of his accuser.

Gombossy’s story on the sewerage gusher, “Blumenthal’s Office Improperly Releases Sensitive Personnel Document About Staffer Who Claimed Blumenthal Lied About Vietnam,” is well worth a peek.

Gombossy apparently attempted to contact the icon himself but reached a subaltern, who was shocked, SHOCKED, that the sewerage had been inadvertently included in the file.

“Blumenthal,” Gombossy writes, “according to his press aides, would not comment on this issue and that he turned the matter over to his deputy Attorney General because of the obvious conflict of interest.

“’This document was provided completely in error in response to a disclosure request,’ Deputy Attorney General Carolyn Querijero said. ‘We immediately urged in writing and by phone that the document be returned and not disclosed. We continue to strongly urge that the document be returned and not disclosed.’”

So saith the eye-gougers and ear-biters in the attorney general’s office. Even the icon himself might have had a bit of a problem swallowing that big fish in one gulp, had he been available to handle Gombossy’s questions.

Good thing for Blumenthal there was a conflict of interest.

Others in the media beside Gombossy might well wonder at the “mistake” had they been more familiar with the methods used by the eye-gougers and ear-biters.

Then again, what they don’t know won’t bite them.

Comments

watchdoggpg said…
To be more precise, other journalists had only requested disciplinary information from Major Hine's personnel file. I requested ALL the information in his file, all 500 pages. The allegations against Atty. Hine were not anonymous. He claims it was redacted when he was told about it. I was given access to the redacted and unredacted documents. I didn't make the copies the AG office made them at my request and I paid for them.
George
Don Pesci said…
George,

Thanks. Your comment has been incorporated in the text.

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Powell, the JI, And Economic literacy

Powell, Pesci Substack The Journal Inquirer (JI), one of the last independent newspapers in Connecticut, is now a part of the Hearst Media chain. Hearst has been growing by leaps and bounds in the state during the last decade. At the same time, many newspapers in Connecticut have shrunk in size, the result, some people seem to think, of ad revenue smaller newspapers have lost to internet sites and a declining newspaper reading public. Surviving papers are now seeking to recover the lost revenue by erecting “pay walls.” Like most besieged businesses, newspapers also are attempting to recoup lost revenue through staff reductions, reductions in the size of the product – both candy bars and newspapers are much smaller than they had been in the past – and sell-offs to larger chains that operate according to the social Darwinian principles of monopolistic “red in tooth and claw” giant corporations. The first principle of the successful mega-firm is: Buy out your predator before he swallows

Down The Rabbit Hole, A Book Review

Down the Rabbit Hole How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime by Brent McCall & Michael Liebowitz Available at Amazon Price: $12.95/softcover, 337 pages   “ Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime ,” a penological eye-opener, is written by two Connecticut prisoners, Brent McCall and Michael Liebowitz. Their book is an analytical work, not merely a page-turner prison drama, and it provides serious answers to the question: Why is reoffending a more likely outcome than rehabilitation in the wake of a prison sentence? The multiple answers to this central question are not at all obvious. Before picking up the book, the reader would be well advised to shed his preconceptions and also slough off the highly misleading claims of prison officials concerning the efficacy of programs developed by dusty old experts who have never had an honest discussion with a real convict. Some of the experts are more convincing cons than the cons, p