COMMENTARY:
Columnists shouldn’t participate in “dirty tricks” by gubernatorial candidates. Echoing Sam Bregman ads, Albuquerque Journal columnist Jeff Tucker writes that Deb Haaland “needs to answer questions about her associations with unscrupulous sex offenders.” Nonsense!
Both candidates spoke here, at Progressive Voters Alliance. I’d never met either. I had a mild preference for Haaland, but no strong feelings. Haaland gave a rabble-rousing speech on the issues, and our current situation, without particularly focusing on Bregman. Bregman shouted too loudly into a working microphone, and, when asked if convicted felons should be able to vote after serving their sentences, he understandably bragged about putting away a specific sex offender, then launched into a discussion of Jeffrey Epstein, to remind us slyly of fresh news that his opponent had once flown on an airplane connected to Epstein. I found that unappealing. Apparently he’s used this in ads, too.
What are the facts? [Opinion columnists should at least learn those.] In September 2014, then gubernatorial candidate and New Mexico AG Gary King, for a single campaign trip from Santa Fe to Washington, D.C., chartered an airplane owned by Virgin Islands-registered JEGE, LLC. Lieutenant Governor Candidate Haaland was listed as a passenger. “JEGE” was connected to Epstein, who was not on the flight. Tucker misleadingly calls this “Haaland’s September 2014 flight from Santa Fe to Washington aboard a private jet chartered by Epstein.”
Epstein had been convicted only of 2008 Florida state charges of solicitation of prostitution involving a minor and was given an extremely light sentence approved by U.S. Alexander Acosta, who let Epstein avoid federal charges and get a short sentence with work-release. Trump later appointed Acosta U.S. Labor Secretary, but he resigned in 2019 after the Epstein case became a big public deal.
In 2014, Epstein wasn’t famous. His conviction got only very local news coverage until 2018. How would Haaland, who didn’t arrange the flight or meet Epstein, and likely didn’t read local Florida newspapers, have known stuff we know now?
In Tucker’s defense, he focuses more on a pretty lame Haaland campaign publication that the campaign took down within 24 hours. Tucker reasonably asks what Haaland knew when about that.
Tucker also stresses that Haaland served on the House Judiciary Committee with Eric Swalwell, and once called him a “friend.” Actually, Haaland served Oversight, but never Judiciary. Again, it’s not clear how she’d have known then about his alleged sexual misconduct, which she has strongly condemned. Tucker also writes that a House subcommittee “investigated” Haaland, but he omits that the apparently partisan proceeding reached no findings.
I gather that Tucker, oddly, has been generally positive about Donald Trump. Trump unquestionably knew of Epstein’s misconduct, yet called Epstein his great pal, and joked about Epstein’s appreciation of young girls. A civil jury found Trump guilty of a sex crime. But Tucker would hang Haaland over . . . ?
If Tucker truly thinks we should decide who governs us for four years based on this 2014 flight, he’s a moron. But if we really had to decide that way, I’d eliminate Bregman, who has consistently misused the flight to malign Haaland.
If Bregman told a jury that a defendant had “associated with a sex offender” because the defendant had supported Donald Trump or worked for a company in which Epstein invested, the Judge would reprimand Bregman sharply. Bregman knows that, even if Tucker doesn’t.
Whomever you vote for, vote on issues and character.
Peter Goodman's opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of KRWG Public Media or NMSU.