Remember John Solomon? He's The Associated Press Find-Dirt-Any-Dirt-On-Harry-Reid-And-Make-It-Sound-As-Evil-As-Possible bureau chief. First, he gave us the trenchant (but since forgotten) really long story on how Harry Reid didn't do anything for Jack Abramoff. Then Solomon followed up with the at least fun (but mostly forgotten) really long story about Harry Reid's boxing match freebies. Now Solomon is at it again, this time breathlessly revealing in a really long story that Harry Reid -- gasp! -- sold land for more than he paid for it.
And people say Democrats don't know anything about bidness.
It's a complicated story, involving ownership transfers, county zoning changes that fly in the face of master development plans, and land made available for development in the first place as the result of a federal land swap. In other words, it's a typical Southern Nevada commercial real estate deal. The Harry Reid Democratic War Room and Media Message Development Center, Responds to Solomon Division, whipped up a point-by-point fact sheet disputing the story, but it looked really boring so we did our own.
Solomon's biggest gotcha, as near as we can tell, is that on Reid's Senate financial disclosure forms, Reid failed to report the transfer of his interest in the property from private ownership to a company formed with his good buddy Jay Brown. Instead, Reid continued to report it as his personal property, up until it was sold in 2004 -- a transaction which, by the way, Reid reported. And that, boys and girls, is the hook on which Solomon hangs more than 2,000 words.
How did Solomon (with an assist from local AP writer Kathleen Hennessey, who we are going to charitably assume did some reporting but had little to do with the spin-packed, chock full o' bias tone of the final product) manage to puff that up into 2,000 words? Oh, most impressively.
For instance, the story notes that "Reid paid about 74 percent of the property taxes, slightly less than his actual 75.1 ownership stake, according to canceled checks kept at the local assessor's office." What? He was paying his taxes? Gawd, Democrats can't even do a scandal right. Anyway, even the ethics expert-texpert that Solomon managed to unearth who would be willing to say something usable for the story pooh-poohed Solomon's hard-boiled investigation into the assessor's records. The expert, writes Solomon, "said the IRS might view the handling of the land taxes as undisclosed income to Reid but it was unlikely to prompt an investigation. 'If someone is paying a liability you owe, there may be some income imputed. But at that level, it's pretty small dollars, he said."
Oh. Stop the presses, etc.
Solomon also draws an incredibly flimsy connection between the land Reid and Brown owned and one of our infamous land swaps with Interior designed to accommodate breakneck development 'round here. Reid's enthusiastic role in promoting runaway growth through federal land swaps is fodder for plenty of criticism, and his overall coziness with the growth lobby generally is really more befitting of Republican behavior. But the land in question was made available, and acquired by another owner, four years before Reid bought it. Solomon as much as admits in his story that there are no connections between the land swap and the Reid deal. But he brings it up anyway, throwing everything into the story in the hope, s'pose, that something will stick...
Like the suggestion that there's something fishy about property on Patrick Lane and Fort Apache getting rezoned from residential to commercial. Yes, it's shocking to imagine that county officials would deviate from their master zoning plan, inasmuch as they only do it, well, when asked.
Finally, Reid's buddy Jay Brown is shady, Solomon says. Well, he's totally juiced up, so we don't doubt it. But you'd think Solomon, being a crack investigative reporter and all, could have dug up something better than "federal prosecutors introduced testimony at the bribery trial of former Clark County Commission chairman Dario Herrara (or Herrera, as us dumb yokels spell it) that Brown had taken money from a Las Vegas strip club owner to influence the commission." That's one way to put it. Another way to put it is when strip club king Mike Galardi took the stand in the G-sting thing, he tried to implicate just about everybody who is anybody in Southern Nevada. Galardi might have forgotten to mention Wayne Newton, but that's about it.
Hey, we like to hammer on Harry too, but for stuff that matters, like his cynical 2002 vote to give Bush a blank check on Iraq or, of course, harboring a known Republican senator in his own state.
We have no idea what Reid did to Solomon, but the AP writer is clearly never going to give up until either he finds something genuinely dirty on Reid, or his editors come to their senses, realize one of their reporters is unhealthily obsessed, and reassign him to, oh Pocatello, Idaho, so he can chill and clear his head.
Meantime, Hannity, Limbaugh and the rest of the wingnut echo chamber can have a ball trying to whip up outrage over Reid and see if they can't bump Foley out of the news for a day or two by screaming about this outlandish Democratic "scandal." Somebody be sure to tell us how that works out for them.
It would be nice to know whether Solomon has sent a resume to the R-J. His kind of journalism is just the sort that makes moustaches there twirl.
Posted by: TruthToPower | 10/11/2006 at 05:30 PM
"Hammering Harry", I think, has very little real effect - better, to try to work with the "Reid Machine" than hopelessly fight it!
Too many people are far too afraid take on "The Godfather of Nevada"...
Harry is doing a great job fully backing Tessa Hafen - I wish he would do the same for the ENTIRE Democratic ticket (to include Jack Carter)!
And it would be nice to get something, that is to say almost anything, other than "lip service" in support of our veterans...God, how I wish we could just return to the days of blatant political pandering!
When is Harry Reid going to show the courage of Jack Carter and take a strong stance on fully funding the VA?
Posted by: Johnathan L. Abbinett | 10/11/2006 at 05:38 PM
DailyKos has a nice blast at Solomon, too.
Posted by: TruthToPower | 10/11/2006 at 08:13 PM
I'm not sure any of you have really looked into this. Reid has a major problem. OF course, this looks to be a diversion tactic to bring it up now, but the facts don't look good for Harry. He's going to have a hard time winning reelection when all the facts are presented.
Posted by: Fallon | 10/12/2006 at 08:51 AM
Let's see, based on the R-J's history of we love him/we love him not, next election they are likely not to endorse Harry. So Sherm will use this story in part to justify that decision.
(Note to Hary: Stop stepping in it, will you please? Keep this up and people will think you're a Republican.)
Posted by: The Penguin | 10/12/2006 at 09:00 AM
The facts on this Reid thing show that this is a witch hunt. Declaring the land as his only may be a misunderstanding of the statute, but it is not actionable. Solomon's hope is that people see Reid, $1.1 million dollars, land deal, and Ethics and stop reading- just like a Porter commercial, no truth, no context, just insinuations and implications. And Reid's already asked the Ethics Commission to look at it... which I'm sure they are willing to do since they have no other pressing issues to deal with......
Posted by: lisa | 10/12/2006 at 09:14 AM
Reid, the elder, is undoubtably not going to seek re-election to the U.S.S.; there could be a seat on the Clark County Commission coming up, though.
Posted by: joe | 10/12/2006 at 09:53 AM
Joe-- you think? I think Rory is happy where he is. I don't think he has the desire to take dear old dad's seat.
My question though, who is Reid grooming to take his seat? Or will he, like Perkins, leave his seat for the wolves to fight over instead of mentoring someone to take his place.
Posted by: lisa | 10/12/2006 at 10:02 AM
Depending on how bad this gets for the Senator, the younger will likely wait it out on the commission, and then spring for either a us senate seat, or a run for gov when gibbons/titus step down. He has big political aspirations--he's a Reid!
Posted by: Fallon | 10/12/2006 at 10:33 AM
Why not Tessa? Even if she loses to Porter, she has developed name recognition, will be a little bit older (and politically wiser), and may be able to even raise some more money. And maybe Harry can convince Ensign to grandfather in their mutual non-aggression treaty for her.
Posted by: The Penguin | 10/12/2006 at 11:03 AM
I think tessa will move on if she doesn't win.
Posted by: Fallon | 10/12/2006 at 11:12 AM
I'm just sitting back and taking notes on how little Harry Reid and his "machine" is doing to actually (that is to say, sincerely and geniunely) help the entire Democratic ticket!
We've got only 9 Days to Early GOTV, and only 25 Days to E-Day!
Then, we have a lot of "house keeping" work to do in 2007 and a lot of work to get through the 2008 Presidential race!
Harry Reid is a matter of 2009 and 2010 - let's move on shall we?
Posted by: Johnathan L. Abbinett | 10/12/2006 at 01:48 PM
NOTICE: The National Security Rally with President Jimmy Carter and the 2006 "Challengers for Change": Jack Carter for Senate; Dina Titus for Governor; and Tessa Hafen for Congress (CD #3) IS A GO!
Next Saturday, October 21st (the first day of Early GOTV) at 12:00 NOON outside the UNLV Student Union in the Alumni Amphitheater - FREE and everyone is invited!
Please spread the word through your personal e-mail lists of family and friends - this may well be the ONLY opportunity (prior to the election) for EVERYONE to come out publicly and show their support for students, the troops, our veterans and our opposition to the illegal, immoral, unjust war in Iraq!
Posted by: Johnathan L. Abbinett | 10/12/2006 at 01:53 PM
Johnathan-
Just as a matter of interest, would you please tell me when, in your opinion, America fought in its last legal, moral, and just war? Thanks.
Posted by: Fallon | 10/12/2006 at 03:13 PM
Havent't seen Texex around in a while. Did he give up already? I kind of figured he would by the way he was talking about Derby all the time. Oh well, better off without detractors.
Posted by: Fallon | 10/12/2006 at 04:03 PM
Dear "Fallon", in answer to your question, the current Global War On Terrorism (GWOT)in Afghanistan (and elsewhere, EXCEPT Iraq, that is being quietly fought through the international intelligence and police agencies) is a "Just War" - Iraq is an UNJUST WAR (though we must still support our troops - by bringing them home ASAP)!
"Persian Gulf I", also, met the criteria of the "Just War" tradition.
Vietnam was NOT a "Just War" - and the proud patriotism of our military was prostituted in that debacle!
One could argue that Korea was a "Just War", though it was touted as a "police action" under the United Nations - and remains "unfinalized".
Clearly, WWII was a "Just War" - though, one could argue it was often conducted too brutally beyond the criteria of Geneva (by both sides).
I'm slammed right now with deadlines, so I won't go into the insanity we participated in South America and elsewhere...
I'd recommend you read President Jimmy Carter's last book "Our Endangered Values" (if you haven't yet done so) - it outlines the history of our Constitution regarding the "Just War" criteria and American tradition - which, very sadly, too few know and understand...
Posted by: Johnathan L. Abbinett | 10/13/2006 at 03:04 PM
Thanks. Appreciate your insight.
Posted by: Fallon | 10/14/2006 at 03:24 PM