Did Filner and Peters Break Up?

Owen Kellogg Undesignated 15 Comments

Share

Late last night Red State reported on the interesting dynamic between Scott Peters and the Filner scandals. The point is after weeks of silence, Peters responded to criticism by removing almost every reference to Bob Filner from his website.  Yikes! I don’t know if that’s more embarrassing for Peters or Filner but the entire incident certainly reflects poorly on the freshman congressman.

The Red State article is a must read: Democrat scandal brewing in CA52 race

So is the NRCC’s series of press releases yesterday where they point out:

Wow. That didn’t take long.

I wanted to make sure you saw the latest update in the Scott Peters/Bob Filner corruption mess.

It seems that Peters realized that continuing to align himself with Mayor Filner would bring nothing but bad news and bad politics to his office. He’s since deleted the press release that was originally sent out last year once Filner endorsed him for the House.

But perhaps Peters has forgotten a key component of the World Wide Web – press releases may come and go, but things on the internet live forever. Check out the original copy of the release here.

More to come.

Share

Comments 15

  1. I HOPE the Dems and labor unions continue to doggedly back Filner all the way through a recall. That way they won’t get behind a more electable Democrat (Todd Gloria? Nathan Fletcher?), and will waste a TON of money in a hopeless cause.

    There not enough money in all the union treasuries to keep Bob Filner in office in a non-Presidential election.

  2. There are now reports that the Filner endorsements of Peters are BACK up on Peters’ website. Odd.

    Frankly I hope Peters continues to tout his backing by Filner. If he does, DeMaio’s margin of victory in 2014 will only grow.

  3. “Scott Peters/Bob Filner corruption mess”

    Really? I think it would be a dangerous game for anyone to claim that an elected official has ownership of everything their supporters do.

  4. The RedState author is talking about Filner’s endorsement of Peters in 2012, when Filner was a congressman. The author only has a screenshot of when that endorsement was up on the website, not when it was supposedly down, if it even was. Because it’s up now.

    Hysterical writing from the RedState writer as well:

    “But Peters has a problem that certainly isn’t going to help Peters gain…” — Peters, twice in the same sentence, as well as two sentences above that, twice? And, again, twice in the same sentence in paragraph five. Writing 101.

    Oh, and what’s his name? Peters, with an s at the end, not Peter. So, where does the apostrophe go in paragraph five? Where he has it, as Peter’s? Come now.

    No credibility and no basic writing skills.

    Oh, the NRCC got it’s info from the RedState article. No questions asked.

    Even Rostra does better than this. LOL!

    We should do better than this.

  5. I wonder how much money Filner’s endorsement cost Scott Peters? Would anybody be surprised if it turned out to be $100 k ?

  6. Dan,

    Are you accusing Congressman Peters of a felony? If so, can you please provide proof.

  7. Barry Jantz – “Hysterical” . . . “no credibility” – must have been written by Tony Krvaric.

  8. HQ, I know you’re a little sensitive because your leftist buddies are tripping all over themselves and Peters campaign is looking shaky. Does Bob Filner ever do anything for free?! Just wondering.

  9. Dan,
    Is Thor’s Assistant equally sensitive or could it just be that this blog is usually above allowing unsupported accusations, especially when the accusation concerns the commission of a felony?

  10. From his response, it’s now clear Dan was trying to make a joke about Filner’s alleged play to play philosophy, not accusing Peters of anything. Although the humor was lost on us, initially.

  11. HQ: No, don’t get worried, I’m not indicting Scott Peters. He should have been indicted a long time ago over his role in the pension underfunding scheme, but that’s water over the bridge. Besides, this was aimed at Filner, not Peters. I was merely enjoying the comedy of Peters and Filner stumbling all over themselves. Frankly, I admire the way you leftists aggressively attack anyone who questions your tarnished heroes, and circle the wagons to defend people like Filner to the max. It’s an effective strategy that we conservatives need to use more often.

  12. I even missed it the second time. Thanks for doing a “Bob Siegel” for me.

    My apologies to Dan.

  13. HQ, thanks, but no need to apologize. Yes, it was the “pay to play” philosophy I was commenting on. I’ll have to work with Leno on my jokes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *