To Top

Cleaning up another sloppy Ralston report

Nevada’s #2 liberal blogger-without-a-TV-show “reported” this morning that a political operative named Tony Dane was funding mailers into the districts of Assemblyman John Hambrick and Assemblyman Chris Edwards, attacking the pair for betraying their constituents and supporting, at least tacitly, Gov. Brian Sandoval’s billion dollar tax hike.

Ralston suggests that Dane may have broken campaign finance laws related to “pass through contributions,” and then added this…

“A PAC to recall Hambrick already has been filed by activist Chuck Muth, who also has been pounding Edwards. Muth declined to answer when I asked whether he is involved in Dane’s effort.”

That’s just not true.

When Ralston emailed me last night, the subject line read…

“Post cards against Hambrick and Edwards.”

The body of the text in the message read simply…

 “Are you helping to fund that effort?”

Considering what a jerk Ralston has been to me in particular and, conservatives in general over the past few years, I replied with a healthy dose of snark…

“Who is this?”

Ralston responded…

“OK. I’ll say No Comment.”

To which I replied…

“I’m always willing to comment to any responsible journalist who reports fairly and objectively.”

And that last response is exactly why I didn’t answer Ralston’s questions.  Because as you’ll notice, he twisted and mislead his readers when he wrote that I “declined to answer when I asked whether he is involved in Dane’s effort.”  The fact is…


Ralston never asked if I was involved with “Dane’s effort.”  He asked if I was helping to fund “that effort.”  I didn’t even know what effort he was talking about.

The truth is Dane and I had a major falling over 15 years ago.  I didn’t know about his mailers.  I never saw the mailers.  And I sure as heck had nothing to do with funding them.  Dane and I don’t even talk to each other, let alone work together.

So when Ralston claimed I declined to answer whether or not I was involved in “Dane’s effort,” that was a flat-out lie…because Ralston never asked me if I was involved in “Dane’s effort.”

Dane’s name never came up in his emails to me last night.

And it’s because of this kind of intentional misrepresentation of the facts that I refused to answer his actual question – which, again, never mentioned Dane – and wrote that Ralston is not a responsible journalist who reports fairly and objectively.

Because he isn’t.

He’s a liberal political activist.

And a dishonest one at that.