The report on the propriety of a governement employee’s scrutiny of “Joe the Plumber” is in - and is not surprising:
TOLEDO, Ohio – An agency director improperly used state computers to find personal information on “Joe the Plumber,” a government watchdog said in a report released Thursday. There was no legitimate business purpose for the head of Ohio’s Department of Job and Family Services to order staff to look up the records, Inspector General Tom Charles said.
But what caught my eye was this:
Investigators weren’t able to determine whether the searches were politically motivated, the report said.
Really? Hasn’t the Inspector General ever heard of deductive reasoning? Or, in the more popular vernacular of our time, connecting the dots? Or, plain old common sense?
Let’s look at what the Inspector General had to work with.
- Hellen Jones-Kelley, the state official who did the snooping on Joe, was placed on leave this month over separate allegations that a state computer or state e-mail account was used to assist in political fundraising for Democrat Barack Obama’s campaign.
- Jones-Kelley said the checks are routinely done by her office when someone “suddenly emerges in the limelight.” Yet the Inspector General said he found no policies or procedures to support Jones-Kelley’s obviously specious claim.
- The Inspector General concluded that Jones-Kelley’s reasoning “was at times contradictory, inconsistent and ambiguous. Go figure.
Hmm. No legitimate business purpose for her actions. She improperly used state property to raise funds for Obama. She justified her actions by relying on policies that didn’t exist (i.e., she made them up, or, phrased less charitably, she lied). Yet Inspector General Charles could not conclude that her pursuit of Plumber Joe was politically motivated?
Maybe there’s some arcane Ohio rule prohibiting an Inspector General from stating the obvious. Otherwise, I must say about this IG (borrowing the immortal words of JFK assassination author Harold Weisberg regarding New Orleans D. A. Jim Garrison): “As an investigator, he couldn’t find a pubic hair in a whorehouse at rush hour.”
The Inspector General has turned his insightful findings over to the Franklin County prosecutor’s office. I can’t wait to see how clever those folks are.
Filed Under Front Page · · · · 
Print This Post
··
Comments
24 Responses to “When the nose on your face ain’t so plain - to some, at least”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...
Why wasn’t JoneshypenKelley fired when she was caught taking donations for Obamaer which was illegal? Then the IG wouldn’t be put in the embarrassing position of making a legal decision against a woman who obviously will do anything illegal to attain her corrupt agenda.
#1 and all, There is just no desire to follow through on any of this. You see, the people inquiring were democrats. They were not mean old, hateful Republicans, whom everyone wants to stone. Republicans are the only ones who are expected to follow all rules, and laws. This is sickening, and it’s happening in all areas of our lives.
If not politically motivated, then what? Yeah, he was in the limelight, he put the “Chosen One” in a bad spotlight. Does anyone smell cover up for the sake of the “Chosen One”?? Win at any cost, legal or not!!!!
Looks suspicious to me.
I suspect the one month suspension puts any potential criminal punishment as double jeopardy.
Now if he had been driving a car, the checks would have been acceptable …….
It’s funny isn’t it? The Dems love to use the Judiciary to get most of their gains.
Now they don’t want to take their guilty people to court. Go figure.
Great quote, Rick.
Well;
Apparently the Democrat governor couldn’t find any cause to fire the lady:
And apparenlty, he doesn;t see any need to ake an example of anybody. After all it’s only:
Nah—there’s no need to scare the bejabbers out of anybody with acesas to government records in Ohio by firing the most prominent person exposed so far.
And nope, fundraising no big deal either:
Move along, now—nothing to see here.
And you would be wrong. The suspension is the result of violating policy. She has not been convicted of anything.
JtP should sue her a$$ off, along with that of the State of Ohio.
/sigh
If the Franklin County prosecutor’s office in Columbus finds evidence of criminal behavior, her defense will be that it was administratively handled and any further punishment outside the suspension would be double jeopardy. Protection from prosecution is one of the sweeteners associated with acceptance of adminitrative punishment.
I suspect JtP will file lawsuit against the State, he will have to provide evidence of damages though and that could be tricky.
I’m a betting type of gal, and if your offer up the “bet”, you’ll get a fresh batch of jam in the spring, if I lose. What do you have to own up? I have more faith in JtP. If you win, the wedding is off with JtP as well.
Pick your poison:
Bread and butter pickles
Strawberry, blueberry, dewberry/blackberry, apricot, peach, or orange marmalade. Pending the future growing season success, of ‘course.
#10 Ms. st
Shoot, one of the few transactions that I have with a LST member that does not contain the words moron, idiot, quisling (or worse) and I come a cropper. I fear I have nothing to offer in a wager similar in value to your stake, save a dog named Gypsy. And she only comes to me when called if I wave a piece of ham, perhaps you can imitate a squirrel bark?
But I couldn’t part with Gypsy anyway. Mrs. Shamaal would be of no use to you either, at least judging by the absence of any posting with your name on it in the gay threads.
Also given the glacial speed with which the judicial system moves it would be next presidential election cycle before the case is settled and the wager completed. My stake would be along in years and to set in her ways to match the value of the B&B pickles. And Gypsy will have probably run away by then and not much use either.
So, I’m afraid I’ll have to pass on this particular opportunity.
“She lied. she lied to us.”
/sigh
Double jeopardy only applies to Judicial proceedings.
I’m shocked! An untruth/half-truth from a government agency? How can that happen? Well, I don’t think anyone on this blog is so naive as to act like this is anything but the norm. Why all the chortling? Just hold onto your posterior. Things are about to get much worse. BHO will keep his promises. We will join Cuba and Venezuela insomuch as they started out with an elected president and ended up with a dictator. There will be no pretense by a government agencies then. “Joe The Plumber” types will openly be investigated and dispensed with post haste.
#9 shamaal
Oh, good grief.
How in the world does an administrative suspension qualify as a Get Out of Jail Free Card for this bureacrat ? There is no way administrative sanctions can be defined as statutory charges or punishment.
#13/15
Double jeopardy does not necessarily apply to back to two criminal proceedings. The court examines whether a “civil action” qualifies as a “criminal punishment.” The test is whether the disciplinary sanction was so punitive in deterrent or retributive purpose or effect that it negates having a civil, remedial character. [1] In this particular instance does loss of pay for a month and public embarassment constitute a deterrant or criminal punishment. FWIW, I’ve seen this used in ethics violations and civil servant administrative hearings. The court examines the civil proceedings and punishment and compares it with the criminal cahrge and potential punishment. Does it get you off a murder charge - no. Does it get you off a criminal ethics charge - maybe.
Now that I think of it Governor Palin’s team was looking at this with her problems in Alaska, There was the civil service review board action that could have negated a criminal trial.
After this a Minnesota lawyer would have to lay out previous case history and how often this works.
[1] Minnesota State Constitution A Reference Guide by Mary Jane Morrison p.69
[I'm to cheap to buy full rights so I can't cut and paste]
Work with civil servants long enough and one learns these things
Ummm…lets see…a buddy asks me to check the criminal history of a possible new hire of his…I do, word leaks, I’m definitely fired, maybe indicted ( you see, at the PD we sign a document telling us that’s a no-no to do)…Govt official does worse ( political motivation)…walks away without a mark…welcome to American! Land of the peons ( us) and home of the connected ( them)…
Yeah, it’s amazing . . . but not surprising. This is exactly why this kind of abuse keeps on happening: no retribution. Until the peons get fed up and start demanding scalps, maybe even taking a couple, nothing is gonna change. Business as usual.
And it’s gonna get worse. In case you just woke from a three year coma, anyone that supported The One seems to have received a psychic pardon from any wrong-doing for their part in getting him elected. I’m afraid unless we form and use a ’shotgun squad’, we’d better get a little used to swallowing cr@p like this. This is gonna happen every time one of the Obamanots does something “necessary” to get their agenda in motion.
Keep your powder dry . . .
I think Joe the Plumber is going to be ok, except for the exorbitant tax BO is going to impose on him for asking a simple question for which ‘His Majesty’ had no answer. With his (supposedly outcoming) book, personal appearances and possible pending law suits against the state of Ohio, I think he’ll be alright. Good for him! Maybe he will consider running for office…..no…he’s got more class than that. Why lower yourself to that level? I just hope he continues to “speak up”.
There was a time when dodging taxes, misrepresentation, voter fraud, and participation in government wealth distribution schemes was frowned upon.
I guess he’ll run as a Democrat.
#21:
Nope….too much class for that! You need to read up on his history. He is a Regualr Guy that just asked an unacceptable question of the ‘Onointed One’. But, he will be OK!. Definately, NOT a DEMOCRAT (Hold your tonge!). Hope he sues their soxs off….they are all demos.
I’m familiar with the man’s history, and I too hope he sues their sox off.
#23
Guess I misread you previous post. I think we have more in common
than in opposition. Sometimes it’s hard to tell. As I see it, he’s pretty much a regular guy finding himself in an irregular circumstance. I hope he makes the best of it.