Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Morning Shorts
Next Post: “Truthers” think Blagojevich is innocent - Blagojevich agrees
Posted in:
* Mark Kirk is yet again appearing too defensive about his military record.
The Pentagon released a statement yesterday confirming that Kirk engaged in partisan political activities while on duty. From the Pentagon’s statement…
In December 2008, Commander Kirk, while on active duty, participated in video discussions in the media about the unfolding situation involving then-Governor Blagojevich of Illinois. Members of the Armed Forces on active duty may not participate in television discussions as an advocate for or against a partisan political party, candidate, or cause.
In July 2009, while on active duty in the Washington area, either Commander Kirk or a staff member posted a “twitter” to his Senate campaign web site that indicated he was on duty at the National Military Command Center. At the time, Commander Kirk was a candidate for the Senate. Candidates for political office may not participate in any campaign activities while on active duty. They may not update or revise their websites, and they must inform their campaign staff of the applicable restrictions.
These aren’t gigantic violations, of course, but the Kirk campaign’s reaction is nonsensical and way too defensive…
These questions have been addressed by the campaign in the past and had there been any issues documented in Congressman Kirk’s military record, the Department of Defense would not have issued a second waiver for his deployment to Afghanistan. The campaign has made all of the Congressman’s military fitness reports available for review and no concerns were documented.
That’s just bunk, as the Pentagon’s statement confirms…
Commander Kirk was counseled about each of his violations after they occurred and signed a statement acknowledging the limitations on his ability to participate in campaign activities while on active duty. He was required to complete this acknowledgement before being allowed to begin active duty in December 2009.
In other words, Kirk was only able to obtain that waiver after he was “counseled” about his violations and signed a statement promising never to do it ever again.
Last week, the Kirk campaign described the original Department of Defense memo warning him about his partisan political activities as a “baseless political ploy by partisans bent on defending a U.S. Senate seat at any cost.” That didn’t do him much good. And, then today he again refuses to just own up to his mistakes and move along.
More ominous for Kirk, though, is that unlike last week, when it was just some bloggers and the Sun-Times which picked up on the DoD memo story, this time both the AP and the Tribune have taken notice. From the AP…
The Pentagon said Republican Senate candidate Mark Kirk has been cautioned twice for improperly mingling politics with his military service, but Kirk’s campaign denied any improper conduct Tuesday.
The Defense Department said Monday night that Kirk, a commander in the Navy Reserve, was warned after two incidents of political activity while he was on active duty. Before being allowed to go on active duty again in Afghanistan, Kirk was required to sign a statement acknowledging he knew to avoid all political work.
The Pentagon [yesterday] offered details to support its assertion that Republican Senate candidate Mark Kirk twice violated military policy by participating in political activities while on active duty — once in 2008 and once in 2009.
* Kirk’s campaign tried to change the subject today with a press release demanding that Alexi Giannoulias release his tax returns…
After two months of waiting for Alexi Giannoulias to file his 2009 individual tax return, the Kirk for Senate campaign today renewed its call for Giannoulias to end his “Blagojevich-style” stonewall tactics and disclose his financial information for the last calendar year.
* And the Giannoulias campaign held a presser this morning to unveil Giannoulias’ energy policy…
In advance of President Barack Obama’s address to the nation after his latest visit to the Gulf Coast, U.S. Senate nominee Alexi Giannoulias and Director of the Illinois Chapter of the Sierra Club Jack Darin will participate in a conference call with reporters TODAY, June 15, at 9:30 AM CST. Giannoulias will discuss the importance of implementing safeguards to prevent spills like this from happening again, holding BP accountable, reducing our dependence on foreign oil and jumpstarting the clean energy economy of tomorrow.
* Related…
* Senate Race Rankings: Not So Fast, Democrats: 6. Illinois (D): Rep. Mark Kirk (R) has certainly been bruised from having embellished his military record. But will that sort of controversy have the same gravity and staying power in voters’ minds as Alexi Giannoulias’ problems with his family’s controversial bank? Dems need to find a catchy moniker for Kirk on par with Republicans’ “mob banker” for Giannoulias.
* Why in the World is Giannoulias Announcing Gay Benefits Now?: If Giannoulias has already established himself as the Straight Avenger in this race, why the need for a big show? Because he’s not just competing for the gay vote. He’s also competing for the anti-anti-gay vote: heterosexual, middle-of-the-road voters who have gay friends, gay neighbors or gay relatives. They may not share Giannoulias’s liberal economic views, but they appreciate politicians who treat gays as human beings.
* GOP Candidate: Politics In Treasurer’s Same Sex Benefit Order: The GOP state senator and candidate for Illinois treasurer says he supports the order, but wonders about the motivation behind it. Rutherford said he also wonders whether there are other initiatives from the Giannoulias office that are being launched or publicized to maximize their political benefit
* Sweet: Giannoulias getting boost from Biden
* Biden to raise money for Giannoulias
* Desiree Rogers Dodges Reporters at Giannoulias Event: But when Rogers’ car pulled up to the event and she saw the NBC 5 camera, the driver kept rolling. Rogers apparently came and left thru the back door in the alley. One attendee told us Rogers didn’t know how to pronounce the name of Congressman Jan Schakowsky, one of the hosts for the event.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:12 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Morning Shorts
Next Post: “Truthers” think Blagojevich is innocent - Blagojevich agrees
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Denial is unnecessary.
Just stick to the facts.
Kirk overexaggerated his military record and accomplishments, while Giannoulais hasn’t any.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:17 am
Hey, VMan, I thought this issue jumped the shark for the third time yesterday? lol
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:18 am
Here’s why this is important. I think the key here is that Kirk spent a month saying his previous falsehoods were misstatements, misrememberings and clerical errors. Yet just last week he claimed he had “never violated Defense Department policies.” Now we know he was lying when he released that statement, which shines a new light on his previous statements.
Comment by nitpicker Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:27 am
The issue hasn’t jumped the shark, although Ms. Chapa LaVia did. LOL
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:27 am
Why does anyone care about Desiree Rogers? Talk about jumping the shark — she’s yesterday’s news.
Comment by Whatever Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:30 am
You ask yourself how Illinois continues to get such awful leadership and then you read 3 weeks of wall to wall coverage over the symantics of a navy career. Kirk served, Alexi did not. Kirk has worked on energy issues for 30 years, Alexi has a four point plan handed to him by some 23 year old.
To paraphrase the late great david hoffman “Kirk is the grownup in the race”.
Comment by shore Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:35 am
Luckily for Kirk these revelations came in June and not October. I just don’t see this issue having legs come election time. Jobs/Economy/Deficit/Debt/Taxes is where the action will be.
Comment by Cincinnatus Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:37 am
Seems like we are digging for very little here. If his military records make no mention of the situation, then apparently it really wasn’t a big deal.
Basically he made a mistake that the military pointed out to him after the second time. He was “counseled” aka “told he did something wrong” and then said, in writing, it won’t happen again.
Seems like this is akin to spending work hours on a call with your family about a sick relative. After a couple of times you employer might say, “hey you really aren’t supposed to be doing that.” HR documents it, but doesn’t feel it is important enough to mark as a blemish on your official records. If you have half a brain you don’t do it again.
Really what are we going to look for next. Information about an argument he had with a colleague while on active duty? Or maybe, *gasp* he took extra desert from the mess line!
Comment by A.B. Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:37 am
…ok, I am a moron, it is DESSERT not desert….
Comment by A.B. Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:39 am
Interesting that the Pentagon made this statement. Pressure from the Oval Office? Kirk has every right tobe proud of his military service. Complications likely to arise with Congressman active in military.
Comment by Anon Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:39 am
So we have to Senate candidates who overstated records.
Kirk did with his Navy records.
Ali G (courtesy of Proft) overstated his bank records when he ran for Treasurer) now he is understating them when his family bank failed.
Comment by Wumpus Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:39 am
This Kirk is not the sharpest knife in the drawer. He wrongly accused an Army lifer of partisanship. Now, they’ve revealed he was counseled on actions he previously denied making. More lies.
He could have let it go, but he was too dumb to do so.
He’s lucky he has Alexi, a bad economy and Dems in charge. Because he’s a lightweight.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:45 am
i’d take it a step or two further than nitpicker. kirk has a pattern, not just of obfuscation, but of profoundly poor judgment. consider the contrast: as part of a unit, kirk shares an award. as an individual, he promoted and defended the greatest intelligence failure in our lifetime (by believing a con man and thinking that there were wmds in iraq). this is only one example of kirk’s poor judgment. the worst that kirk can say of alexi is that illinois suffered from the worst recession since the great depression, and (of course) alexi’s responsible for it. (i’d note that if alexi had the power to control the markets that mark kirk infers, we wouldn’t want him to be our senator, we’d want him to be our broker.) while one *might* argue that giannoulias’ judgment is in its formative stages (i wouldn’t make that argument, but i can see people trying to do so), at least we can hope for good judgment from alexi giannoulias. we can never expect mark kirk to have good judgment. he’s already proven that he lacks it (over and over)…
Comment by bored now Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:45 am
–Interesting that the Pentagon made this statement. Pressure from the Oval Office?–
Kirk accused McGinn of partisanship in her report. Now, in her defense, they’re revealing more, including that Kirk had been counseled on his actions and accepted the counseling. Previously, he had denied there was a problem.
This guy is not smart. He’s kept a two-day story alive now on its second week through his own lies.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:50 am
Additionally, in this campaign full of gaffes and mistatements, excellent that Joe Biden is coming to town!
Comment by Wumpus Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 10:50 am
Something’s hinky here - and it’s not Kirk’s denials.
Why is a pentagon Air Force Major issuing any statement about the individual personnel issue of a navy reservist?
Why is the first appearance of this “counseling” in any written form a reference in a required waiver written 1 year after the first alleged problem and 6 months after the second alleged occurrence?
Why are there no references to this supposed counseling or violation of Navy rules in Kirk’s Officer Fit Reports for his 2008-2009 tour of duty?
Why does this new statement imply that Kirk’s signed acknowledgement was some type of punishment when it was part of the Waiver requirement for his 2009-2010 duty and the waiver document clearly states it is a requirement given his status as “a senate candidate”?
A google search for Kirk shows no quotes attributed to him from Dec 12 - Jan 6 and his last attributed quote was saying that George Ryan should not be pardoned; a day earlier he called on Blago to resign, when asked if he would run in a special election he said he wouldn’t rule it out. Do any of those statements qualify as advocating for or against a partisan political party, candidate, or cause?
Comment by 10th Indy Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 11:02 am
Hey Vman, Kirk “overexaggerated?” Interesting word. Kind of like “symantics,” Shore.
With you guys on his team, he’ll be fine.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 11:04 am
Kirk worked on energy issues for 30 years…. would that be the same experience which caused him to support putting BP and other oil rigs into the gulf without much oversight?
The problms with Kirk’s serviceisKirk himslef elt it was inadequate so Kirk made up and exagerated his service. But Kirk has a major character problem where he wont just own up to his conduct, appologize and move on.
Kirk could draw from animal house: sure we took a few liberties with [our service record](winks at audience) who hasnt…..
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 11:06 am
I think the most interesting piece of info here is Biden campaigning for Alexi already. We knew this is a very, very important election for the WH but wow, the VP already. Apparently, Axelrod et al have decided to get behind Alexi big time and early.
Maybe it wasn’t necessary. Kirk seems to be busy self-destructing, with his, er, resume-fluffing and whiny conspiracy theory pronouncements about
suspicious leaks. And little positive anything.
It’s probably too late for the hapless Repubs to replace him without looking pretty incompetent.
I wonder how important the WH finds our Pat’s re-election. Will Biden be helping out our Pat?
Comment by cassandra Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 11:10 am
Hey, VMan, I thought this issue jumped the shark for the third time yesterday? lol
When the Fonz jumped the shark on “Happy Days”, it didn’t mean the end of the series, sadly. Instead the show limped on. It wasn’t until the ratings came out that Marshall realized that the show jumped the shark.
Same with this one. It is still playing, but there really isn’t any more “news” here. When Linda tilted against the windmills of her mind the other day, the whole thing became laughable. When the polls come out showing that not enough voters are listening to this shopped political spin any longer, then perhaps we can return to real issues here.
I don’t want to hear anymore about Broadway Bank or Kirk’s military record. I can’t imagine anyone outside this blog or political campaign caring about these stupid things either.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 11:15 am
I am now going to encourage Burris to reconsider leaving the Senate…hard to believe, but he is the lesser of three jamokes at this juncture…
Comment by Loop Lady Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 11:25 am
VM 22% is a ig chunk of voters, and not being aware isnot the same as not listening.
And Kirk helps to keep this alive by isuing denials, creating new falsehoods to report.
heneeds to take a page from the Obama play book and do a the buck stops here speach, take responsibility and appologize. His resitance, or topping to feed the shark bloody chum, is keeping this alive.
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 11:26 am
===When the Fonz jumped the shark on “Happy Days”, it didn’t mean the end of the series, sadly.===
Yeah, but what would’ve happened if Fonzie’s bike landed in the shark tank? Just sayin…
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 11:28 am
VanillaMan,
I think you are on the mark when you say you don’t want to hear about Kirk’s military record any more. As I stated above, this election will be about economic issues, and perhaps corruption (thanks to Rod, there).
If one can tie Kirk’s military record into the overarching theme of the economy, the issue can be used to Alexi’s advantage. I’m sure if I spent a few minutes really thinking about it, I could figure something out.
On the other hand, Alexi’s bank stuff is much easier to tie to the economy. There is another argument I’d use were I advising Kirk, Alexi’s responsibilities as the states chief investment official. I know that the economy tanked, but a case can be made that ties his judgement on the types of investments the state uses, to the current deficits in the state, and oh, by the way, he did the same with his bank costing taxpayers millions to bail it out.
I still feel that straight out use of either the bank or military records is over. That damage is done, since I doubt there will be many more revelations about either topic after say, July. The campaign that can use these issues as supporting an economic attack on the opponent will have done yoeman’s work for their candidate.
Comment by Cincinnatus Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 11:32 am
Kirk finds himself in quite a Catch-22.
He can’t wrap himself in the shroud of military service and attack the Defense Department at the same time.
He can’t claim his military “service” is beyond political scrutiny when he was busted politicking on the Navy’s dime and using his enlistment as a campaign prop.
To VM, this is about one guy who lied about his military record and another who never served in the military.
I agree.
But Kirk won’t be able to run a single ad in this campaign mentioning his military service without reminding voters he lied about it. And 90% say they don’t trust him.
There’s still alot of time until November, but Kirk is in deep, deep do-do.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 12:10 pm
Did anyone see our Congresswoman Melissa Bean skitter away from the TV cameras? There’s the person we want ‘fighting’ for us in Washington D.C. How hard would it for her to say, Yes, I am supporting Alexi for the following reasons, x, y, z and thank you and good bye… Instead she bolts away.
She has no serious Republican opponent (Joe ‘No James Gang’ Walsh) and the Rs in her district are almost completely a disaster and have been and will be for the forseeable future. Make note of that lack of courage next time a tough vote comes up in Congress.
Comment by P. Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 12:12 pm
Boy am I confused. So Kirk was on active duty but not deployed? It was active duty overseas someplace that was not Paris France or the Caribbean but which was not a “deployment” in DOD jargon? The “waiver” and “counseling” for the deployment was signed after he was deployed? So Kirk is being criticized for being on active duty and playing politics. The DOD is issuing explanations about memos that are at times difficult to understand, and make reference to other memos and documents that have not been released. Accusations are also flying that he is getting special treatment by DOD for being a congressman and getting special scrutiny for being a congressman?
But the DOD has not initiated court martial proceedings for the horrifying crimes of tweeting and giving an interview?
Do I have this all somewhat straight right about now? More or less?
Is this M*A*S*H stuff or Beetle Bailey military stuff?
So if Kirk issues as denial, this makes him a liar. If Kirk does not issue a denial, this means he was a liar. And he should apologize to Vietnam veterans because a Democrat falsely claimed he served in Vietnam (at the age of 13).
Maybe we’ve reached that jumping the shark tank scenario after all since the questions on this subject have degenerated to the classic “are you still beating your wife?”
I am mindful that Kirk has to own up to his misremembering and misstating and embellishments and grudgingly has, but now the demand is that he own up to not being on active duty when the DOD said he was, tweeting on active duty (horrors!), and being overseas “on assignment” which may or may not be a “deployment” depending on which DOD definition you read.
What’s the next headline? Kirk tweeted some guy named “Jaws?”
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 12:15 pm
Taxpayers didn’t lose a dime when Kirk lied.
Comment by Leroy Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 12:33 pm
Hmmm…rhythm is off…how about
The taxpayers didn’t lose a dime when Mark Kirk lied.
Yeah, that is more true to the original.
Comment by Leroy Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 12:37 pm
Why hasn’t Kirk done the press conference surrounded by supportive vets praising his service? The quotes from other veterans from last week are still echoing, and I can imagine it’s the same in many VFW halls around the state.
There was one quote from a veteran raised here previously that sums up this entire sad episode:
“If a man lies about his service record, there is nothing he won’t lie about,” or words to that effect. That’s why this story has legs, and Kirk’s repeated mishandling of a proper response raises more questions as we go. He’s put the legs on this story, and has only himself to blame.
Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 1:19 pm
Can someone tell Kirk … please … just admit fault and move on?
Want to get some GOPers real upset? If things go south, and Kirk loses and Brady/Plummer lose, and the Post-Mortem indicates that self-inflicted wounds that these “stellar” campaigns refused to address or talk themselves in such knots that no one believed them was the number 1 mitigating factor … the lack of being truthful … then you will see he true/actual/possible end of two parties in Illinois …
I mean, why is Kirk keeping Alexi in this race …
Retreat, Regroup, and Recommit … to the truth this time!
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 1:48 pm
For clairification:
No, I do not beielve that there will be more parties, my point was that the ILGOP will not be a viable option against the ILDEMs and the state will turn darker Blue instead of just Royal Blue it is now. The GOP will be relagated to back-benchers.
Thanks.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 2:09 pm
Kirk’s deflection of demanding Alexi tax returns has the side effect of re-igniting plummers absolute refusal. Alexi has not said no, just wait until I file. So when Alexi files Quinn can run adds with all the GOP people, like Kirk, calling for release of tax returns, with a tag line about how Plummers own party oppose concealing his hidden benefactors. Plummer, who is really pulling the strings… kind of thing.
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 2:18 pm
But Kirk won’t be able to run a single ad in this campaign mentioning his military service without reminding voters he lied about it. And 90% say they don’t trust him.
I think he can get away with it if it is only a part of his bio presentation. It is a fact no one is disputing. If he keeps it simple, then this will look like a kerfuffle of political spinsmanship.
But I am still at a loss with Giannoulais. Banking was his calling card. Can he please find something he did well as Treasurer he can stand on? There has to be something, right?
Kirk is guilty of hyping a fact into an illusion and having that hype blow back on him, leaving him with the basic fact. Giannoulais is guilty of hyping an illusion without facts and having that hype blow back on him, leaving him with nothing at all.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 2:28 pm
- Why hasn’t Kirk done the press conference surrounded by supportive vets praising his service? The quotes from other veterans from last week are still echoing, and I can imagine it’s the same in many VFW halls around the state. -
Because anyone who knows anything about crisis communications will tell you that the best thing for him to do at this point is stop talking about it. That includes stupid, useless press conferences.
Kirk screwed up when he tried to explain this situation rather than owning up to it and apologizing profusely. At least he is starting to figure out that shutting up and changing the subject is in his best interest.
Comment by A.B. Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 3:10 pm
It worked for Blumenthal A.B., and believe it or not, I know a thing or two about crisis communications.
The first rule of crisis communications is to tell the whole truth from the get-go, and tell it yourself. Get it all out as soon as possible and apologize. The last thing you want to do is let it drip-drip-drip out, or blame staffers, or blame the Pentagon. That is death by a thousand cuts, all of them self-inflicted.
I’m assuming Kirk can’t find enough veterans to stand by him while he apologizes. Blumenthal handled it exactly right and now it is in his rear-view mirror.
Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 3:23 pm
Kirk is much smarter than this. However, I now have to question his handlers and his outlook.
Rich, I remember reading your take on Kirk last summer before he jumped in to the race. You noted Kirk had a rep for being a prima donna. Well well. He is certainly showing some of his prima donna ‘tude now. He won’t drop it and won’t stop talking to the press. One of his campaign chairpersons or perhaps even Mr. Elk, his campaign manager, needs to tell Congressman Kirk to knock it off. If the Pentagon comes out with another release, Kirk should merely note the existence of a new press release and finding and say he has no further comments. It’s that simple.
I also think the Pentagon needs to drop it. I’m not sticking up for Kirk in this regard and I’m not telling Admiral Mullen how to run the Joint Chiefs of Staff. But both sides need to put this issue to rest before the Pentagon is accused of playing politics and/or Kirk decides to file a lawsuit. After all, in Illinois politics, nothing would surprise me - and it’s only June.
Comment by Team Sleep Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 3:37 pm
As usual, we in Illinois are faced with two unpalatable candidates. I think Alexi Giannoulais isn’t a lightweight. He is a flyweight. I think Mark Kirk has done a fine thing with his military service and I applaud him for it, but he has proven himself a liar and a rather inept one. He also sought the endorsement of Sarah Palin, who represents so much of what is wrong with American politics.
As usual, we voters must hold our noses when we enter the booth. I’ll be throwing my vote to Alexi, simply because I find Republican Party policies repugnant and I am loathe to give them another vote in the Senate. Mark Kirk’s behavior has made it much easier for me to justify that decision.
Comment by Bordo Tuesday, Jun 15, 10 @ 5:34 pm