Mason: "Release the emails!"

This design and others available at GA's Recall Beth Mason Gift Shop

Thank goodness for Da Horsey.  MSV's coverage of last night's Waltz of the Obstructionists contained this gem:

A pro-Sunshine resolution presented by Councilwoman Mason in New Business caused an uproar with questions why such an item would be presented after midnight with no public notice and when the public could not offer any of the sunshine.  An amendment changing the political charge of transparency required by the Administration to the words Beth Mason created a tumult and didn't pass and out of nowhere Councilwoman Mason said "release the emails,"  - a reference to the emails under FBI investigation in the massive Data Theft Conspiracy looting from the mayor's office.  

WOW!

Now, we've all seen that unscripted Beth Mason is a jumble of mangled syntax, gibberish and (sometimes) a slip-of-the-tongue. 

Like this outburst at Roman Brice at the City Council on November 14, 2011:

"Council President, first of all I'm raising concerns because these are issues of libel. And I'm gonna make it very clear. That there are significant issues here and unless there's proof I'm going to say I've NOT seen those emails and maybe Mr. Brice should release the emails between YOU and the mayor's political aides that I asked so we can see what has REALLY been a coordinated effort as a smear campaign between THOSE of us who don't agree with this administration and continue to speak out and you're NOT gonna shut me UP! I'm tired of this constant (garbled), false representation, accusations between members of this council.

If you have proof come with it! Stop talking. Show your effort."

Not-Stempler, GA's legal department, had called this an "admission-against interest":

 In criminal law, it is a statement by the defendant which acknowledges the existence or truth of some fact necessary to be proven to establish the guilt of the defendant or which tends to show guilt of the defendant or is evidence of some material fact, but not amounting to a confession.

As for her admission against interest, she is saying that unless someone can prove her guilt, that she will deny seeing the emails. Such a statement in public forum in her capacity as an elected official is beyond self-destructive.

GA would have added: a couple of cookies are missing from her cookie jar.

What does this tell us?

When not reading something 'the help' has written, anything is liable to fly out of Beth Mason's mouth.

Last night, it was back to THOSE emails- the ones she won't admit seeing unless you've got proof that she did.

Tim, her personal videographer, was there for the Midnight Surprise, filming a future campaign commercial.  (For Mayor?  State Assembly?)    But the absurdity of the late-night, sneak-resolution to honor transparency in government ignited an angry response in the room, turning her photo-op into a public brawl.

And in the midst, she cried out, "Release the emails!"

Thank you!

Now GA can remind everyone that the F.B.I. agreed to release emails to Mason as long as their release did not interfere with the ongoing investigation.  From June 16, 2011:

During Wednesday night's meeting, however, Tabakin and Mason reached a compromise. The FBI will take a look at the emails the council president has requested. If they don't interfere with the investigation, they will be released to her. The FBI will give the emails to Tabakin. Tabakin, in turn, will give the emails–watermarked—to Mason.

Get that, people?

Mason CAN get the emails ANYTIME, watermarked, from the F.B.I.   

She merely has to request them.

So did she?

Has Mason ever requested these emails from the F.B.I. after they agreed to release them 'watermarked'?

Of course not.

Now, do you get that Catch-22?

Requesting specific emails from the F.B.I. from the hundreds of thousands in their custody is tantamount to an admission that she has already seen them. Otherwise, how the hell would she even know of their existence? Which implicates herself directly in the chain of email theft and distribution.  Should Mason request an email or emails, a whole avenue of interrogation is opened; the Feds will pounce.

And don't you love that they'd agreed to release copies watermarked.  Another way of saying 'we trust you as far as we can throw you'.

Face it, the Mason jihad against the mayor's staff was like Don Quixote fencing with windmills. 

So why remind us of that and her (suspected) role in Patrick Ricciardi's email theft?

Ask Gumby.