Attorney General Martha Coakley made a lot of noise prior to her last election about public entities not being allowed to force nondisclosure agreements onto whistleblowers and other employees. Turns out it was just that, noise. In a very important report this week, the Globe revealed that it had to fight Martha Coakley in court for 4 long years to get public records that by law were always public, especially as they concerned the taxpayers’ money. Then again, when has Martha Coakley ever respected the taxpayer?
In my previous columns here in The Valley Patriot, I have given instance after instance where Martha Coakley sided with the corrupt and the criminal against the little people whom state government supposedly exists to protect.
Martha Coakley ignored a written criminal complaint filed by me against then Director of MassHealth, Dr. Julian Harris, in an egregious case of public corruption and abuse of office. Martha Coakley did not care. The poor parents of young Justina Pelletier begged Martha Coakley to help rescue their child from Children’s Hospital’s locked psych-ward, a situation that allowed Children’s to ding the taxpayer $2000 a day for 11 months with ZERO improvement in the child’s health. Martha Coakley met their pleas with deaf ears.
In the hidden cases revealed by the Globe after fighting Martha Coakley tooth and nail, it is no surprise at all that the maximum amount of secret settlements [$1.6 MILLION] involves the institutionally corrupt Executive Office of Health and Human Services, the same cesspool that knowingly let Annie Dookhan send hundreds to prison on fake data, that then let murderers out on the street, that allowed 64 people to be killed by fungal meningitis, that knew openly and did not care that Jeremiah Oliver’s social worker had not visited him since April 2013, that illegally sided with Children’s Hospital against the parents of Justina Pelletier and consciously violated their human rights by hiding reports from the Judge, that officially aided Cambridge Hospital in attempting to intimidate a witness to criminal fraud. Yes, that same EOHHS, the definition of a state predator.
It is further no surprise at all that Martha Coakley was hand in glove with Governor Deval Patrick in trying to hide all this from the taxpayer. Readers of the VP may remember my reporting what I was told by Deval Patrick’s aide Matt, in Deval Patrick’s office at the State House on the 25th of February, 2013 – “Ensuring Good Governance is not the obligation of the Governor’s Office.”
The Globe quoted a lawyer who said “We expect [government employers] to follow the rules. And when the rules haven’t been followed they should correct them. It seems to me that should be part of good government.” Deval Patrick and Martha Coakley strenuously disagree.
It is heartening to read that Martha Coakley lost this court case here to the Globe.
It is however equally likely that Martha Coakley has also lost the case at the Supreme Court involving the 35-foot buffer zone outside women’s health clinics. The judges of the present Roberts court made it plain her arguments were weak and likely to fail.
Knowing Martha Coakley nothing better may be expected.
Given that Martha Coakley’s basic grammar itself is shaky, it was too much to depend on her to win an argument at the Supreme Court – ““With no due respect, I haven’t heard a good response,” Coakley said.” [State House News Service – Matt Murphy – Jan 23rd, 2014]
“No due respect”? Really? Really?
It is the utter misfortune of women nationwide that they were represented in this case by Martha Coakley.
Women nationwide would be well served to also loudly question the wisdom of Emily’s List already throwing it’s full support behind Martha Coakley when there is another woman by the name of Juliette Kayyem running for the same office, a woman who surely is no less competent than Martha Coakley herself plus carries nary a whiff of being corruption’s active handmaiden.
Then again the fact that Martha Coakley is partial to big wigs may have had a lot to do with Emily’s List deciding to support her all the way, one full year before the election.
All kingmakers prefer a controllable, compromised candidate who will be dependent on them to be deemed one of what Ben Hecht memorably termed “The Respectables.” To be considered one of “The Respectables” is enough for some to go along with anything, including fighting a newspaper for 4 long years over the release of public data involving public money paid to public employees who themselves overwhelmingly supported the release of said public data. And why fight it? To hide the corrupt and their malfeasance from sunshine! That is what Martha Coakley has been doing as Attorney General!
Which likely explains Emily’s List’s description of Martha Coakley’s performance as Attorney General, a perfect example of an unsupportable assertion – “Martha, a second-term Attorney General, is leading the field in the race for governor by double digits because, quite simply, she is really good at her job.”
Massachusetts taxpayers! Behold what Emily’s List considers being ‘really good at her job’! Women would be better served by voting for any woman candidate who has been actively ignored by Emily’s List.
And if as expected the Supreme Court rules against Martha Coakley in the buffer zone case due to her own oft-demonstrated incompetence, she may well be fêted by the anti-abortion camp for handing women’s health clinics back to them just as she handed Ted Kennedy’s old Senate seat to the Republicans.
At that point Martha Coakley can always pull a Reagan and join the Republican Party.