Former Newark, New Jersey Mayor Sharpe James has been brought up on charges of corruption and the AP, The New York Times and several other outlets have all been reporting that jury selection for the event is underway this week. These news outlets dutifully reported the charges against James, reported his long political career, some even reported how popular he was in office. Yet, not one of them remembered to mention he was a Democrat. So, today's episode of "Democrat or Not?" leaves us right back where we usually are... with a story of corruption of a public official where his Democratic party affiliation is somehow not "relevant" to the story.
In two versions of the story the Associated press seems not to notice that Sharpe James is a Democrat (here and here).
NEWARK, N.J. (AP) -- Former Newark Mayor Sharpe James is scheduled to appear in federal court today for the first of two federal corruption trials.
After being indicted in July, both James and his co-defendant, Tamika Riley, pleaded not guilty to all charges and are free on bail.
And what are the charges?
The first trial focuses on whether James, 72, arranged for the sale of nine city-owned properties at discounted rates to Riley, a woman nearly half his age with whom he traveled. Prosecutors said they will present evidence to show the two had an intimate personal relationship.
Prosecutors said James improperly steered properties to Riley, 38, and that she, with James' help, quickly resold them at much higher prices. Riley was able to buy the properties although she lacked real estate, construction and financial experience to rehabilitate them, according to the indictment.
And where is his party affiliation mentioned....
You guessed it. Nowhere to be seen.
It isn't just the AP conveniently forgetting that James is a Democrat of long standing, to be sure. The New York Times omits a party mention and so did the Star-Ledger. And UPI couldn't seem to find any reason to mention that James was a Democrat, either.
And there you have it: another in our long, long list of corrupt government officials (or those charged as such) without that Democratic party label affixed to their name. Isn't it a blessing that the Democrats are so chameleon-like as their party fades into invisibility once charges of their criminal activity fills the air?
h/t Don Dunn
Photo via ABCNews.com.
















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Warner, this is old news for Joisey
February 27, 2008 - 12:36 ET by FastEdif there is corruption in NJ, it is ALWAYS a given that it has to be a demolib. It is BIG news, if it turns out to be a (R). These types of stories are just normal. We are sooo Blue, it rubs off on others - NY Giants only play here, and they're know as . . . Big Blue!
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
WTH, I think you have the
February 27, 2008 - 12:44 ET by Chris NormanWTH,
I think you have the basis for a new game show: "Democrat or Not?". I can picture it now, "Wink, I'll take New Jersey corruption cases..."
And for the bonus round . .
February 27, 2008 - 13:26 ET by FastEd"Toxic waste sites for $500"
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
The Big picture
February 27, 2008 - 13:12 ET by RackieDemocrat or Republican is not the story here. It's that there is political corruption in New Jersey. This surely has to be a first. So sad.
FIRST?
February 27, 2008 - 13:29 ET by FastEdOur charter, from 1773, necessitates corruption as a way of doing buiness - otherwise we might become, what's the word, honest?
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Democratic "amnesia" is
February 27, 2008 - 13:46 ET by rbosqueDemocratic "amnesia" is becoming routine now for the MSM. Must be something contagious at journalism schools.
always assume Demoncrat
February 27, 2008 - 13:51 ET by SouthJersey1953Any elected official in Blue Jersey is automatically assumed to be a Democrat. Like FastEd said, it is only newsworthy if there 'happens' to be an "R" by their name (which is extremely rare).....
Besides, NJ assumes the Dems are corrupt, but overall they have no prolem with it. Why else would they keep electing/reelecting these clowns???
this is why I visit NB
February 27, 2008 - 14:08 ET by wizardjrI don't have the time to do all the reading and research that goes into this site so I really love coming here and getting this information. Up here in The Peoples' Republic of Minnesota you're not likely to hear this sort of thing.
I have come to following conclusions
February 27, 2008 - 17:48 ET by YahooWatcherIn an article like this where no mention is made of the crook's party affiliation, you can assume he/she is a Democrat.
Also, if you a read a story where some judge rules for gay marriage, against terrorist wire tapping, or proclaims that some Habib in Guantanamo Bay has the same rights as you and me, you can assume the jurist was appointed by Bill Clinton.
There are several
February 28, 2008 - 00:28 ET by JerryThere are several indicators of political affiliation in this report.
We have concensus, the debate is over!
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).