Politicians have a fickle relationship with the truth, and during an election year, it’s their own records and biographies that get edited. Attorney General Richard Blumenthal at least allowed for some confusion about his military service, Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz tried to fudge her history of “active practice” and Sen. Joe Lieberman spent 2006 vowing to fight for everything he is usually trying to derail. Recently, a trio of Connecticut Republicans has delivered some gems that make “I never said I was a maverick” seem like a mild embellishment on a Match.com profile.
Guess which Republican candidate's history of lying to the public received the most attention?
Finally, Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton, who wants to be your lieutenant governor, seems to melt into truthiness whenever the fragile issue of the city’s surge in immigrants from Latin America comes up. He said the city was not involved in the arrest of the day-laborers who’d come to be known as the “Danbury 11” in 2006. We later found out a Danbury police officer drove the van of ICE agents that tricked them into thinking they were going to a job. Last month, Boughton said he was too busy campaigning to testify in the lawsuit of the 11, but when The New York Times tried to contact him about it, he was at a golf tournament.
The Danbury News-Times recently asked Boughton if the street celebrations following World Cup games fall under the city’s parade ordinance. He said no, “These are spontaneous celebrations and there is nobody really organizing them.” HatCityBLOG has kept up with the mayor for the last five years and noted that, in 2007, he said of the World Cup fiestas, “[T]hose are not impromptu parades.”
It may seem like a small detail about proper paperwork, but a) it shows a marked difference between the local official under pressure to do something about those immigrants and their unfamiliar ways and the state-level campaigner probably trying to soften his image, and b) those statements are as contradicting as “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” and “I did have a relationship with Ms. Lewinsky that was not appropriate.”
The Weekly's conclusion about Danbury's last honest man basically sums things up.
A person running for higher office should be comfortable with his or her past. It shows maturity and perspective. Plus, the realization you’ve done some stupid stuff is an indication you’ll recognize and avoid that kind of thing in the future. But for politicians, ego gets in the way of maturity and ideology in the way of perspective. And anyone seeking elected office is clearly not done doing stupid stuff, so we are left with a sea of distortions, omissions and inconsistencies every two years.
Calling the last honest man in Danbury a serial liar is an understatement...hopefully more media outlets will take the time to document Boughton's trail of misleading statements and dishonesty.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
Finally, Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton, who wants to be your lieutenant governor, seems to melt into truthiness whenever the fragile issue of the city’s surge in immigrants from Latin America comes up. He said the city was not involved in the arrest of the day-laborers who’d come to be known as the “Danbury 11” in 2006. We later found out a Danbury police officer drove the van of ICE agents that tricked them into thinking they were going to a job. Last month, Boughton said he was too busy campaigning to testify in the lawsuit of the 11, but when The New York Times tried to contact him about it, he was at a golf tournament.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
