Local Campaign Rhetoric Moves from Nasty to Libelous

Maybe I’ve missed it up to now.  Perhaps I just wanted to ignore this foolishness until after the election.  Sadly, when you come across a LIE that is so blatant you just have to respond.
What am I talking about?  This headline from local blogger Jonathan Taylor:

McDermott To Stand Trial December 7th

Taylor claims that District 38-B candidate Mike McDermott “will have to answer for the "handgun" incident he is hoping everyone has forgotten.”
Unlike Taylor, I did a little checking.  McDermott has been neither charged with a crime nor indicted.  He won’t be standing trial for anything on December 7th.  Hopefully, if the voters of 38-B see fit, both he and Marty Pusey will be preparing for the trial of serving in the Maryland House of Delegates.
Taylor falls flat in the credibility game, so I’m not particularly concerned with his libelous ways tarnishing a good man like Mike McDermott.  Unfortunately, in addition to pimping for poor candidates like Worcester County State’s Attorney Joel Todd, he has also been hawking the candidacies of a few first rate folk, like Pusey and Wicomico State’s Attorney candidate Matt Maciarello.  I wouldn’t want Taylor’s lying ways to diminish the reputations of two such sterling individuals.
In anticipation of a venomous (and typically illiterate) reply, the onus is not on me (or anyone else) to prove a negative.  Any remarks regarding “attacks” on a certain former Maryland House candidate will be answered with a repeat of the candidate’s own writings.  I can’t help it if certain candidates insist on making foolish statements – in writing.
UPDATE -
It didn’t take long.  Taylor has now “re-worded” his post to state that McDermott is scheduled for a “Disciplinary Hearing” on December 7th.  Is this true?  I couldn’t say.  The only thing I do know is that McDermott had not been notified of any such hearing as of 9PM Wednesday night (when I spoke with him).
Should we be surprised?  Of course not!  Harken back to early August.  In what was an obviously political act, McDermott was placed on suspension by Sheriff Chuck Martin.  In that post, we noted that rumors emanating from Snow Hill about the action were circulating at least a full day before McDermott was even notified.
It’s not the usual occurrence when I agree with the Daily Times on political matters.  However, on this matter we were in agreement.  This whole affair smelled then of political retribution.  I maintain that this current matter is nothing more than a ham-handed attempt at an October surprise.
As Parker noted in her op-ed:

… the bottom line is this: McDermott’s reputation before the electorate might be damaged by a sheriff whose twin interests — running a smooth police department and helping his political allies get elected — are in conflict.

As we noted Wednesday:

If McDermott is returned to duty (per the review board), the matter dropped or a formal complaint filed, and promptly investigated (if a formal complaint is filed), then the entire affair could simply be chocked up to a misunderstanding.  Each day that this affair continues without an objective conclusion in sight makes the matter appear more and more sordid.  This does not bode well for either Conway’s candidacy or the last few months of Sheriff Martin’s distinguished career.

Given the probable route of this “news”:  Martin to Worcester State’s Attorney Joel Todd to Taylor, and the low credibility of the whole crew, the voters District 38-B shouldn’t be too concerned about the man they are about to elect as one of their Delegates.
Unfortunately, the lack of a swift, independent investigation into charges that appear to be baseless is ending Sheriff Martin’s career on a bitter note.  Is attempting to protect his pal, incumbent delegate Norm Conway, worth it?  Using Taylor as their drum beater only makes Martin, Todd, and Conway look more petty, and pathetic, than they seem to be.
from Delmarva Dealings