Search Results for: Dave Reichert

US Representative Dave Reichert (R-WA8) is widely rumored to be considering a run for governor in 2016. And what better way to prepare for a campaign than to suck up to Seattle Times publisher Frank Blethen by repeating his editorial board’s shameless anti-estate tax lies?

In my home state there are numerous examples of the harmful impact of the death tax. In Seattle, permanent relief from the death tax is critical for family-owned businesses like the Seattle Times Company, which is a fourth and fifth-generation family business. And, in my own District, in Issaquah, Washington, last year, a family had to make the difficult choice to sell their farm which had been family run for over 120 years. That is a devastating decision to have to make, and they are not alone in making it.

That was from Reichert’s opening remarks at a March 18 congressional hearing on “The Burden of the Estate Tax on Family Businesses and Farms,” and it is of course a total fucking lie. As I painstakingly documented last August, there is absolutely no way the McBride family was forced to sell the family farm in order to pay either the state or federal estate tax, because 1) Ralph McBride’s property was too small to be subject to either the state or federal estate tax, 2) working farms are entirely exempt from Washington’s estate tax, and 3) the McBride property was not a working farm!

The story is simply not true. In fact, there is zero evidence of a family ever being forced to sell the farm in order to pay off the estate tax, anywhere ever. And yet there goes Reichert, faithfully reading this bullshit into the congressional record.

And this is what makes the Seattle Times’ shameful anti-estate tax lies so pernicious: they have knowingly provided the anecdotal foundation upon which future anti-estate tax lies will be built, all in the service of exacerbating our crisis of grotesque wealth inequality by a repealing a tax that 99.85 percent of estates will never pay.

Rep. Dave Reichert is, perhaps, best known for compulsively talking about his bravery. He has, after all, stared down the business end of a loaded gun…or some such thing.

When it comes to politics…not so much.

Yesterday The Atlantic took up the apparent decline in town hall style meetings on the heels of the 2009 teabagger-infused raucous town hall season.

During this year’s recess many congresscritters are replacing town hall meetings with other forms of constituent contact like individual meetings, themed meetings, and small venues. These alternatives tend to make constituent contact more difficult, but…

Congressional aides insisted that their events are well publicized through e-mail, website announcements, or alerts in local newspapers. They cited scheduling issues as the top reason for announcing an event on short notice.

There are notable exceptions (emphasis added):

But not all members make their schedules public. The office of Rep. Dave Reichert, (R-Wash.) declined to release his schedule of events.

“Aside from various other tours and visits in the community, we are currently planning his tele-town hall schedule,” spokesman Charles McCray wrote in an e-mail. More than 200 protesters gathered outside Reichert’s office on Thursday, the third such incident this month.

Oh, great. Reichert is afraid of his constituents and the national press has picked up on it.

Thanks for embarrassing us…fucking coward.

So, only a week after the Seattle Times lauds Democratic challenger Suzan DelBene for her nuanced and knowledgeable stance on reviving the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act — a subject that came up at their joint editorial board interview — you’d think Republican incumbent Rep. Dave Reichert would at least be able to bullshit an answer on the issue.

Um… nope. In fact, at a candidate forum in Newcastle this weekend, Reichert said he doesn’t even know what Glass-Steagall is.

I don’t know what’s more insulting, the suggestion that Reichert is brain-damaged, or the insistance that he’s not.

More snark at Slog.

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again, and I just said it over on Slog: Dave Reichert did not catch the Green River Killer.

He simply didn’t. In fact, if anything, it was Reichert’s investigative bungling that allowed Gary Ridgway, one of the earliest suspects in the case, to go on killing for 18 more years.

Of course, the inspiration for both these posts is Michael Hoods excellent series on BlatherWatch, the re-posting of which has become a much looked forward to biennial media event.

Read the whole thing.

From: David Goldstein

Subject: Rep. Reichert’s medical records

Date: September 30, 2010 9:27:31 PM PDT

To: Darren LIttell, Dave Reichert for Congress

Darren,

While my recent Slog post, “What’s Wrong With Reichert’s Brain?” was generally well received, some readers wondered if it was fair to Rep. Reichert to speculate about his health, based on such limited information. And so in an effort to maintain the highest level of journalistic integrity, I am writing to formally request that Rep. Reichert release the medical records regarding his recent brain trauma.

Please rest assured that I fully understand the confidential nature of these documents, and as an advocate for the disabled, will treat their content with the utmost respect.

Sincerely,

David Goldstein

http://www.horsesass.org/
“Politics as unusual.”

Looks like Rep. Dave Reichert has drawn himself a teabagger challenger, and he appears to be a doozy.

Ernest Huber, with 21 years of service to his name in the United States Army, Air Force and Navy (what… he couldn’t hack the Marines?) has now officially filed with both the SOS and the FEC, and has some pretty harsh words for the incumbent:

Reichert has sold us out and has disqualified himself for office.

In 1997, King County Executive Ron Sims, a Progressive, appointed his friend Dave Reichert as King County sheriff.  Sims and Reichert endorsed each other in 1997 and 2001.  In 2004, Reichert was elected as a Republican to Congress from the Eastside’s 8th Congressional District.  He has voted against our party in Congress hundreds of times, and has had no bills enacted.  He’s a follower, not a leader.  Reichert has been called a RINO, but he is much worse.  His ideology is “moderate” Progressivism.  Our district is not Progressive.  He does not represent us. Reichert has to go.

Reichert’s sole job is on the corrupt Progressive Charlie Rangel’s House Ways and Means Committee.  It oversees borrowing by the Treasury Department’s Bureau of the Public Debt from the private Federal Reserve bank.  It allocates money, then writes the nation’s tax bills and raises revenue to pay for the debt.  This Committee is a cesspool of pork, earmarks, lobbyists, and bankers.  Reichert is also on its Oversight Subcommittee, which theoretically investigates wrongdoing by Obama’s administration. Remember that as you read the following samples of his voting record, because Reichert is an insider who knows exactly what he’s doing to us, our district, and our nation.  This is cold-blooded betrayal.

And Huber only gets more strident from there, as he launches into a 9,000 word “Conservative Manifesto” that includes such teabagger staples as repealing health care reform, eliminating both the IRS and the Federal Reserve, closing off the Mexican border and deporting all “invaders,” and immediately deposing the “radical communist” Obama:

After his election, Obama and his followers began incrementally overthrowing our government and installing a dictatorship. They must be immediately arrested and jailed by whatever means necessary. Impeachment can come later.

Now that’s the kinda plain spoken patriotism that makes one proud to be an American, and if our local Tea Partiers have any integrity or balls, you’d think they’d rally to Huber’s support, rather than sheepishly collude with a RINO who appeases environmentalists (or “Leninists,” as Huber calls them) and votes Yes on “Soviet-style” cap and trade.

But of course, our Tea Partiers don’t have integrity or balls — they’re just pawns of the usual corporatist suspects — so don’t expect Reichert to spend much time looking over his shoulder to the right this cycle, as he instead tries to patch up his moderate image after the embarrassing leaked audio fiasco.

At a town hall meeting last week, after being asked about the possibility of going to jail for failing to buy health insurance, U.S. Tom Coburn (R-OK) warned the audience not to believe everything they hear, explaining “That makes for good TV news on FOX but that isn’t the intention.”

This of course got Fox host Bill O’Reilly’s undies in a knot, who castigated Coburn the other day, insisting that he “find one person on Fox News who told this audience that they would go to jail if they don’t buy health insurance.”

Well, Kate Pickert at Time Magazine’s Swampland blog took up the challenge, and who was the first person she found to spread this lie on Fox News? None other than our own Rep. Dave Reichert.

Ironically, Reichert himself recently went out of his way to warn supporters not to question the lies they hear on TV or read online:

“Don’t believe everything you hear. Find out the truth. And I’ll tell you why it’s so important to find out the truth. Because it has to do with keeping this country free. It has to do with keeping our country, our freedom. It has to do with us having that responsibility and gaining that knowledge. It will keep us free, because there are people who want to divide us. And we all know that a house divided will fall. And if we let ourselves become divided this country will fail, and for that and for the future of our children and our grandchildren we cannot allow it to happen.”

Which I guess is about the most useful advice we’ve heard from Reichert in while.

(From Crooks and Liars, via BlatherWatch)

Jesus… could Chris Matthews let Darcy Burner finish a single sentence? Um, no, but I think Darcy stood up to it pretty well. She never lost her patience, and kept a smile on her face, making Matthews come off as a bit of an asshole.

All that aside, isn’t it interesting that when the cable news folks are looking for someone credible to talk to about health care reform, they come to Darcy Burner, and not Do Nuthin’ Dave Reichert?  Hmm.

So the GOP’s brilliant new plan to derail health insurance reform is to “ACORN” the AARP. (Pausing while that sinks in a moment)

You know, the AARP, the really, really powerful lobby that is really really powerful and represents the group of Americans who vote the most–seniors.

The slime is already pouring from the right-wing noise machine, a sure indicator of impending wingnut baying and howling.

But wait, it gets even better. One of the GOPoodles leading the charge is none other than Rep. Dave Reichert, R-WA 08. From TPMDC:

The GOP has gone further than rhetoric as well. Rep. Dave Reichert (R-WA) claims to have launched an investigation into AARP in his home state. Reichert says his “ongoing” investigation focuses on whether AARP should be classified as an insurance company because of its revenue from royalties the group gets from licensing its brand for insurance products. AARP says it’s not aware of the investigation, and Reichert suggested to reporters Monday that it was essentially stalled. But the question of whether AARP is an insurance company or not is at the center of the GOP messaging on the group.

I didn’t know a Congressman could make such determinations at the state level. My guess is he can’t, which is probably why his “investigation” is stalled.

Meaning, of course, Reichert is just being a grandstanding fool. People who have followed recent elections in WA-08 won’t be surprised by this, unless they’re political reporters from The Seattle Times. In that case this is a shrewd move by a sensible moderate who has grave concerns blah blah blah blah blah diploma.

For everyone else it’s a sign that Reichert has now performed a triple-shark jump, replete in leather jacket with Pinky dressed as Santa Claus. The crowd goes wild, folks.

Hey, here’s an idea, Dave. If you want to “ACORN” the AARP, why don’t you dress up in a mini-skirt and go filming yourself at some AARP offices? I bet you’ll get on Fox!

A couple days after the primary, Dave Reichert pissed off more than a few members of the press by issuing a media advisory promising a “major announcement,” only to produce delusional fringe “Democratic” challenger Jim Vaughn at the podium, offering his enthusiastic endorsement.

Well, since then, Vaughn and his bride Sally Daugherty have been regulars in the comment threads here on HA, leaving increasingly insulting and bizarre commentary, such as this doozy from earlier today:

7. Jim Vaughn spews:

Go Darcy. Go home. Go away. Better yet Go buy a smoke detector and be a responsible parent.

Jim

Classy.

Then, of course, there’s this piece of cogent analysis from a couple days ago:

Goldy your actions do not help the Democratic Party. The difference between you and pigs and hockey moms is not lip stick. Reason being you have your head so far up your ass that the only thing on your lips and coming out of your mouth is a bunch of SHIT.

Vaughn claims to be a Democrat, but what he really is, is a sore loser and an asshole, and I’m guessing, more than a touch crazy.  But since Reichert called a press conference to announce Vaughn’s endorsement, I can only assume that Vaughn speaks for the Reichert campaign.

I suppose that’s bipartisanship, Dave Reichert style.

[EDITOR’S NOTE:  As long as the Reichert campaign is bringing up the issue of resume padding, isn’t it time the media address the real elephant in the room… the simple fact that Reichert’s entire political career is based on the out and out lie that he caught the Green River Killer?  Of course, he didn’t, and most everybody in the media understands that, but nobody is willing to say it publicly because it was the media after all, that willfully gave life to this self-aggrandizing myth.

So in the spirit of full disclosure, I am reprinting this October 2006 special post by Michael Hood, originally titled “It’s the Green River, Stupid.”  And you can read Part II of Michael’s report over on his blog, BlatherWatch. In the meanwhile, please help Darcy refute the lies, by generously giving to her one last time. — GOLDY]

I am not afraid, I’ve had people point guns at me.
— Rep. Dave Reichert

“He desecrated the victims. The public ought to know that.” Tomas Guillen is describing Republican 8th District Congressman Dave Reichert and his manipulation of the Green River murder investigation and the arrest of Gary Ridgway to climb up into party politics.

Guillen’s no political firebrand, he’s a respected Seattle University journalism and criminal justice professor. But as a Seattle Times reporter, he covered the Green River story from its beginnings and has written two books on the subject.

His academic text, Serial Killers: Issues Explored Through the Green River Murders, and Ridgway attorney Mark Prothero’s Defending Gary, both written after Reichert’s 2004 election, tell a starkly different story than does Reichert’s ghost-written autohagiography, Chasing the Devil, My Twenty-Year Quest to Capture the Green River Killer.

Reichert’s record as sheriff was exposed in last week’s devastating reporting by the P-I’s Lewis Kamb who found plenty of former colleagues who’d reveal him to be “an ambitious self-promoter, an inexperienced manager prone to poor decisions, even a close-minded detective more obstacle than asset to a serial murder investigation.”

Reichert refused to be interviewed in person for the P-I’s piece, preferring to answer the reporter’s questions in writing. He did not return our attempts at contact.

(The written material, and people we’ve talked to use some strong adjectives to describe the former Sheriff’s professional behavior: manipulative, self-serving, amateurish, ambitious, creepy, bungling, inappropriate, opportunistic, egotistical, voyeuristic, and stubborn. These are quite different from the descriptives we’ve been hearing for years: heroic, gracious, sensitive, muscular, chivalrous, well-mannered, brave, clean and reverent. You decide).

Sheriff Reichert became the public face of the sensational arrest of the serial killer by elbowing his way in front of the cameras on November 30, 2000 when the sensational collar was announced.

Everyone knows Reichert is the guy who caught the Green River killer- Why? Because he reminds us in every introduction; every speech, interview, and on his website.

It helped get him elected in 2004 in his race against KIRO radio host, Dave Ross; and he still flogs it every time he opens his mouth in his race against Darcy Burner.

Recently, on KUOW’s Weekday with Steve Scher, (in a rare appearance in a venue where he might be seriously questioned) he referenced serial killers no fewer than three times in one hour on the local NPR talk show despite being asked no questions on the subject by Scher, who’s unused to politicians who drop blood instead of names.

Here’s an example: Why is Reichert against abortion? He told a interviewer recently, “I have a great respect for life. I’ve seen a lot of death in my career, worked Green River, seen lots of dead bodies.”

Back in Washington, the Honorable Mr. Reichert is known as the Man from Green River- his longest speech on the House floor during his lackluster first term was about “capturing” Gary Ridgway.

The release of Chasing the Devil, in late July, 2004 was exquisitely synched-up with his primary campaign which was a difficult one with a crowded Republican field anxious to replace the retiring Jennifer Dunn.

Bolstered by both his publisher’s marketing and his own political campaign, it was a perfect PR storm. Reichert’s face was thrust onto the front pages of local papers. He was interviewed on CNN and Court TV in full dress uniform (and every hair present and accounted for) talking about “capturing” the killer.

“Reichert used the serial murder case to move forward,” Guillen told BlatherWatch. “It was a travesty.” Photos released when Ridgway was arrested show Reichert in a suit posing in the bottom of a ravine near the Des Moines Highway.

“He used the grave site of a murder victim for personal ambition,” he says.

Meanwhile, his opponents, Bellevue Councilman Conrad Lee, State Sen. Luke Esser and (now GOP State Chairman) Diane Tebelius were lucky if they made page B-1 with their little coffee klatches, blah-blah press releases, and cheesy meet & greets.

(Chasing the Devil was neither a literary nor a popular success. P-I books critic, John Marshall wrote that Reichert painted himself as “muscular, charismatic, devoutly Christian, a dogged mix of Dudley Do-Right and the Lone Ranger.” Not exactly a bestseller: you can now buy a like new copy on Amazon for $1.74.)

Although otherwise a failure, his book as a political instrument was inspired. Media was flooded with pictures of the sheriff in a hunky muscle shirt sifting for bones at a body dump site, or in full Sheriffian regalia sternly leaning into and staring down the cowering serial killer from across a table. Reichert won the primary easily and got a tremendous knee-up in the November election.

(There’s his hair. It’s magnificent. Dave Ross told us: “He’s got great hair, he’s acknowledged he’s got great hair.” He’s known in legal circles as “Sheriff Hairspray.” [Reichert’s hair]… is always ready for the next photo opportunity,” says Prothero).

“My standing orders were that we were going to campaign on issues,” says Dave Ross. “Rumors I got about Dave or the Green River killer or the release of the book- we weren’t going to touch them.”

But there’s more than a little resume inflation going on in Chasing the Devil. There’s some obfuscatin’. Reichert had been “lead detective” in 1982 as the first bodies surfaced in and around the Green River. His book, however, would let you believe he held the title until 1990, never mentioning that several other detectives led in later murders.

The book is more than three quarters done before he makes passing reference to the fact that the task force had commanders over the “lead detectives.” Former Detective Bob Keppel told the P-I, Reichert was “one detective among many,” and never led discussions about the direction of the task force as a true leader would have.

Actually, he had little to do with the investigation having left the task force in 1990 to climb the bureaucratic ladder in the Sheriff’s Department. What’s more, these new accounts show how Reichert’s tremendous ego was responsible for early police blunders that stalled the investigation and let Gary Ridgway continue killing for decades.

But great hair or not, “He got elected based on Green River, when in fact, he didn’t solve it and he didn’t win against Gary Ridgway,” says Guillen.”

The fact is: technology caught the killer, not Detective Reichert’s dogged shoe-leather sleuthing as his press so dramatically implies. Even then, on Sheriff Reichert’s watch, the saliva sample that could have busted Ridgway as early as 1996 when the DNA technology became available, was not tested until 2001.

Women died in that interim.

[Click through to read It’s the Green River, Stupid: Part 2, including the really creepy parts.  And please don’t forget to give to Darcy.  Thanks.]

Via Open Left, Democratic consultant Blair Butterworth explains Dave Reichert’s half million dollars in free (ie, illegal) TV advertising, and how this scam works.

If you’ve noticed an absence of substantive posting from me over the past couple days, it’s not from a lack of writing.  In fact, I’ve written a couple of rants, several thousand words total, responding to the editorial endorsements of Dave Reichert by the both the Seattle Times, and even more disappointingly, the Seattle P-I.

It was cathartic.  It felt good.  But, well, sometimes one can be too honest, and at this point, really, what’s the point?  So I’ll just keep my least constructive comments to myself.

But I’m sitting here watching the debate between Darcy Burner and Reichert on KCTS-9, a debate in which Darcy is clearly kicking the incumbent’s ass, and so I just can’t let this all pass by without at least one blunt critique, and that is that both paper’s editorial boards appear to have knowingly endorsed the least intelligent, least knowledgeable, and least capable candidate.  As my 11-year-old daughter just aptly observed, Reichert “sounds like a little kid giving a report that he didn’t practice on, and knows nothing about.”

Or perhaps I give the editorial boards too much credit?

You see, I have always started from the basic assumption that the vast majority of voters would prefer elected leaders who are at least as smart and capable as they are.  These are our leaders after all, and we entrust in them huge responsibilities.  I accept that there are multiple intelligences, and that being book-smart is not a qualification on its own, but generally, it seems like a good idea to populate Congress with our best and our brightest.

And the fact is, Dave Reichert is, well, average.  There’s no getting around that.  He’s not well educated, he’s not well informed, and he has few if any accomplishments to show for his four years in the House.  Indeed, neither the Times nor the P-I argue that Reichert is exceptional in any way, instead, they argue, he is, well, good enough.

So if Reichert is good enough for our two dailies, what does that say about the editorial writers themselves?

Unlike me, do these editorialists simply not mind being represented by somebody who is less capable than they are?  Or does my assumption hold true, and are these editorialists simply as mediocre as Reichert?  Do they accept Reichert as good enough because they really do find him to be an intellectual equal?

I know I may come off as sounding a little elitist, but Congress is a very elite organization, and it just seems that our region would be best served by selecting the very best representatives we can find.  And Reichert simply is not that.

He is, however, the incumbent, and what we have seen from both papers is little more than a defense of incumbency, a circular logic that argues that Reichert’s experience in Congress, however unremarkable, is the singular qualification that makes him a better choice than Darcy.  And if that is the curious logic by which our region’s opinion leaders determine their endorsements, then my original assumption is left unchallenged.