Oct
18
Judge will hear motions in “lose your house, lose your vote” case
October 18, 2008 |
By Clarence William Cromwell
We may never know exactly what transpired when a reporter from the Michigan Messenger interviewed James Carabelli, chairperson of the Macomb County Republican Party, but on Monday a federal judge will have to consider which version of the truth is more believable.
Read on to find out what we learned when we dug into this case.
The dispute results from a Sept. 10 story in the Michigan Messenger, headlined: “Lose your house, lose your vote.”
The disagreement over what was said by Carabelli, to reporter Eartha Jane Melzer, is now the subject of more than one lawsuit, because after the Democrats sued to block use of foreclosure lists, Carabelli sued for defamation, saying he never made the remarks in question.
The hearing set for Oct. 20 pertains to two motions in the case of the Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committe versus the Macomb County Republican Party, Michigan Republicans and the Republican National Committee. The Democrats have asked for an injunction that would forbid the Macomb Republicans from using foreclosure lists to challenge voters; the Republicans, meanwhile, have filed a motion to dismiss the case.
Reporters, working for Blogging for Michigan and FreeTheNews.net, attempted to find out more about the Michigan Messenger’s interview with Carabelli, and about plans to use foreclosure lists in Macomb County. Melzer and Carabelli declined interviews, but we spoke with Jefferson Morley, editorial director of the Center for Independent Media. CIM is the parent organization of the Michigan Messenger; Morley edited the original “Lose you house, lose your vote” story, and he is named as a defendant in the defamation case.
Reporter sticks to story
Melzer gave a deposition in the Obama vs. Macomb County Republicans suit, according to Morley, because she wanted to take the opportunity to publicly declare that her reporting was accurate.
BFM obtained a copy of Melzer’s affidavit through the court. It states, in part:
The following facts relate to my investigation and preparation of that story:
1.On Monday, September 8, 2009, I called the Macomb County Republican Party as part of my coverage of preparations for Election Day in Michigan.
2. I was put in touch with James Carabelli, and I spoke with him around 4 p.m.
3. During my conversation with Mr. Carabelli, I asked him about plans to have election challengers at the polls on Election Day. I then asked: “How will they know if the addresses match? How will you know which addresses to check?”
4. Mr. Carabelli responded, “We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren’t voting from those addresses.”
5. I asked a follow-up question: “How will you know people are who they say they are?” Mr. Carabelli responded, “I would rather not tell you all the things we are doing.”
6. I subsequently published Mr. Carabelli’s comments in the attached article, “Lose Your House, Lose Your Vote.”
7. All quotes attributed to Mr. Carabelli in my attached article, “Lose Your House, Lose Your Vote,” accurately report what he said to me.
A reporter contacted Melzer at her home in Traverse City, but she declined to be interviewed for this story.
According to filings pby Eric Doster and Richard Kraus, on behalf of the Michigan Republican Party, foreclosure lists will not be put to use on election day.
Affidavits in the case have been entered by Saulius Anuzis, Republican state chairperson, and Kelly Harrigan, election day operations director, and both declare that neither the Republican party “nor anyone acting with its knowledge or approval” has obtained foreclosure lists, that the party will not use foreclosure lists on election day, and that it doesn’t intend to obtain foreclosure lists.
Macomb County Clerk Camella Sabaugh issued a press release Sept. 12, stating that foreclosure would not stop county residents from voting. State elections director Chris Thomas issued a similar statement.
Defamation suit
When the federal case is settled, there will still be the defamation suit, filed by Carabelli in Michigan’s 16th Circuit Court.
In that complaint, filed Oct. 1 in Mt. Clemens, Carabelli states that he never made the comment attributed to him in the Sept. 10 article of the Michigan Messenger.
Here (again) is the passage from the Messenger article that caused all the fuss:
“‘We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren’t voting from those addresses,’ party chairman James Carabelli told Michigan Messenger in a telephone interview earlier this week.”
But the suit further alleges that Carabelli, the sole plaintiff, was wronged by a subheading over the article, which reads “Michigan Republicans plan to foreclose African-American voters.” Carabelli was not quoted with regard to African-American voters, but the subhead is substantiated by a paragraph which explains that
“. . .African-Americans are overwhelmingly Democratic voters. More than 60 percent of all sub-prime loans–the most likely kind of loan to go into default–were made to African-Americans in Michigan, according to a report issued last year by the state’s Department of Labor and Economic Growth.”
In the 17-page complaint, Carabelli denies that he made the statement about foreclosure lists, or said anything about blocking voters, or said anything about targeting African-American voters. The complaint describes the Messenger’s allegations as “complete fabrications created by Defendants themselves.”
The complaint goes on to say that the story did great harm to Carabelli’s reputation because it was repeated widely in the media. The case specifically mentions USA Today, but a story was also transmitted by the Associated Press, and umpteen TV stations reported it.
Carabelli did not respond to email and phone inquiries; his attorney also did not respond to requests for an interview.
How the story came into being
According to Morley, Carabelli’s comments were gathered for a story that was ostensibly about voter caging statewide. He said Melzer began the story after he pushed his reporters and editors to investigate election-related issues, including voter disqualification, the accuracy of voting machines, and other regulations
When officials in Lansing were slow to return calls, Melzer began to make calls at the county level, because she wanted to find out what kinds of procedures were in place regarding challenged ballots. And she wanted to know what plans the political parties might have with respect to challenging voters.
Morley said the messenger was trying to find out about the process and also “just looking at all the things that can go wrong on election day.”
He said Carabelli was asked about plans to challenge voters and made the statements about foreclosures voluntarily.
Morley said the conversation was not recorded; nor were there any emails, voice messages or other correspondence between Melzer and Carabelli to further substantiate the claims of the story. However, if the case did come to trial, the Messenger would have phone records to prove that the call took place, as well as Melzer’s notes, the emails in which she discussed the article with Morley before writing it, and rough drafts of the article.
Morley said he thinks the Messenger article did what it was supposed to do, since Republicans in Michigan and other states are now saying that they will not use foreclosure lists to challenge voters. He also points to the suit filed by the Obama campaign.
“I think the story has had a positive effect,” he said.
Morley insists that the defamation suit is payback for the impact that the story has had.
“The case is clearly an attempt to punish political speech,” he said.
Chet Zarko contributed to this article, by attempting to arrange an interview with Carabelli
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.