Since Carmelo Garcia leaked his "500 emails" to the The Hoboken Reporter, Al Sullivan has been the Johnny Appleseed of innuendo. Sully has been busy sowing his column with 'stuff' like this:
Ironically, many of Grossbard’s loudest defenders are the same people who over the last few years painted Lane Bajardi and his wife as “political operatives.”... But the emails show that he appears to have provided advice to more than his wife, and may have given information to and advised some of the pro-Zimmer bloggers who relentlessly attacked the Bajardis.Really?
GA's 50,000+ emails prove: (1) the Bajardis "relentlessly attacked" Reformers, then sued us for calling them what they were: political operatives, and (2) Al Sullivan knew the Bajardis were political operatives.
According to this email, Beth Mason was able to coordinate an 8:30 AM breakfast meeting at the Malibu Diner with Al Sullivan and the Bajardis:
The emails show Sullivan meeting with Mason with her political operatives, (the Bajardis), and PROVE Sullivan had insider knowledge of Barracato and Bajardi's "brilliant campaign" a.k.a. a "relentless attack" on a blogger (me.)
GA's emails are a peek at the dishonesty of Al Sullivan's recent rhetoric.
Did bloggers really "paint" an innocent couple? Weren't the "relentless attacks" a two-way street, such as the "brilliant campaign" he praised Barracato for? What about bloggers being victims of a 3-year SLAPP suit?
What is more disturbing: Al Sullivan's unsupported allegations that bloggers are 'following orders' from City Hall.
Al's been sewing Facebook with such allegations to new-found friends: John Keim, Chairman of "Real Democrats for Hoboken," politico Sara Stojkovic, and aspiring 5th Ward candidate, Melissa Blanco.
NO, we HAVEN'T seen the emails. Let's see the emails.
Match your alleged 'smoking gun' emails with the corresponding blog posts you allege a blogger was being directed to write.
You can't because THEY DON'T EXIST.
"As the emails show..." PROVE IT.
Let's see what you've got.
Meanwhile, GA won't get into utter betrayal of 5 years of confidence based on (alleged) mutual respect.
UPDATED- Nov. 8, 2015
Here's a recap of what we learned on GA yesterday:
(1) Al Sullivan consorted with the Bajardis in their capacity as political operatives for Beth Mason as early as 2007. [BAJARDI_00025359.htm, BAJARDI_00001327.htm]It is reasonable to believe that Sullivan's "boy" confided to Sullivan about other political operations he'd masterminded with the Bajardis.
(2) James Barracato confided in Al Sullivan about at least one political operation, which Sullivan praised as a "brilliant campaign." The Bajardi-Barracato "brilliant campaign" was an attack on a reform blogger that so impressed Sullivan, he called Barracato, "my boy." [BAJARDI-00041510.htm]
Like the SLAPP.
The SLAPP was built on the Bajardi's denial they were "political operatives," and "defamed" by being called "political operatives."
But Sullivan knew the Bajardis were political operatives.
And yet, The Hoboken Reporter called them mere "activists" and portrayed the pair as a besieged, victimized "Hoboken couple"... 2 years after James Barracato confided to Sullivan about his "brilliant campaign" against me (Defendant) which was publicly executed at the City Council by Lane Bajardi (Plaintiff), and 5 years after Sullivan met the Bajardis with Beth Mason for a political breakfast at the Malibu diner.
Thus, The Hoboken Reporter knew the lawsuit was drenched in Hoboken politics, the Bajardis were political operatives, and his "boy" James Barracato had been talking about suing bloggers for years. Did any of that appear in their coverage of the Bajardi SLAPP suit?
The Hoboken Reporter COVERED UP the truth about the SLAPPers, and laundered their political operation to sell it as a REAL defamation case. The emails expose the Reporter canoodling with players in the fake-defamation case to demonize Reform bloggers.
What other "brilliant campaigns" did Sullivan's "boy" Barracato share with The Hoboken Reporter?
Here's an explosive exchange between Al Sullivan's "boy" James Barracato and political operative Lane Bajardi from April 26, 2009. They are discussing the disclosure of Peter Cammarno's alleged "love child" on Hoboken411. In it, Bajardi tells Sullivan's "boy" "I wanted to get documents out there as soon as possible so we can do this right" and advises Sullivan's "boy" against "anonymous smears' in "tidbits on internet message boards" and that Hoboken4111 will post the "love child" smear because he "Perry dislikes Cammarano"
In the letter, you will discover the origin of the "love child" smear campaign...
In case you were worried, the smear-merchant Hoboken411 finally got his ghostwritten smear for publication on May 7, 2009 at 8:30 AM.