- Associated Press - Tuesday, May 1, 2018

The Jefferson City News-Tribune, April 26

Hawley erred in calling for Greitens’ resignation

In his haste to distance himself from Gov. Eric Greitens, Attorney General Josh Hawley erred in calling for Greitens’ resignation.

Hawley made the statement April 11, the same day a House committee released a salacious report about Greitens in the wake of is felony invasion of privacy charge.

Hawley called for Greitens to “immediately resign,” and said the report was grounds for impeachment.

Hawley isn’t the only one to say this, but he was investigating the governor at the time. A week after he made the statement, he released a report citing evidence Greitens committed a felony by stealing an electronic donor database from The Mission Continues, a nonprofit group Greitens previously started.

Hawley’s report has led to a second felony charge against Greitens.

It has also led to questions as to whether it was appropriate for Hawley to call for Greitens’ resignation while investigating him.

Greitens’ attorneys pounced on the statement, seeking a court order banning Hawley to investigate him. Greitens, through his attorneys, said Hawley’s call for his resignation makes Hawley unable to conduct an impartial investigation.

Hawley’s team defended his action in a court filing, and then said he was just doing his job: “It is a critical aspect of the Attorney General’s duty and responsibility to the people of Missouri to provide leadership in calling on Mr. Greitens to resign in the wake of credible, corroborated evidence of sexual coercion, blackmail, and violence by Mr. Greitens.”

We’ll trust a judge to determine any legal fallout from Hawley’s statements. However, in the court of public opinion, we believe he should have kept silent while investigating the governor. At the very least, it gives the perception his investigation could be tainted. At the most, he could have jeopardized a criminal case involving the state’s top elected official.

For Hawley, he may have felt like he had two choices, neither advantageous. Hawley is challenging U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., for her seat. Democrats previously charged Hawley with giving the governor a pass at possibly illegal activities.

So he was faced with either joining a growing group that’s calling for Greitens’ resignation, or risking further criticism by staying silent while finishing his investigation.

Unfortunately, in this instance, Hawley chose his political campaign over his job as attorney general.

____

The Kansas City Star, April 29

Eric Greitens blames Josh Hawley for this mess? Is the governor serious?

Well this is rich: Having personally constructed quite an uncomfortable little box for his fellow Republican, Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens now blames Attorney General Josh Hawley for the no-win spot Hawley’s in.

How unfair, screams Team Greitens, that Hawley is investigating the governor’s use of a charity’s donor list while the attorney general is also running for the U.S. Senate. Hawley can’t do that, Greitens’ lawyers have argued to Cole County Circuit Judge Jon Beetem, because Hawley’s campaign itself constitutes a conflict, as does the fact that Hawley has called for Greitens to step down. On Friday, Beetem ruled that Hawley could continue his investigation.

And if Hawley’s conflicted, it’s because Greitens has left him no other option. The fact that Hawley would much prefer not to be taking Greitens on at all, but especially during an already tough campaign against incumbent Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill, seems not to trouble either the governor or his dead-ender defenders.

Why it’s Hawley, who still has a future to preserve, who is in effect being asked to sacrifice both his integrity and his political life for a tribe member who has neither of those things is unclear.

But here are Hawley’s choices: He could defend Greitens’ outrageous alleged behavior with the woman the bipartisan House committee investigating the governor found credible. She accused him under oath of coercing her sexually and abusing her physically.

But defending Greitens would be wrong, and would cost Hawley with voters who believe her. Or, Hawley could do as he has done and call out the governor. Righteous as that is, taking on one of his own will hurt him, too, with those who see any attack on a Republican as one that must be defended.

McCaskill, who is narrowly leading in the most recent polls, accuses Hawley of only criticizing the governor now that it’s politically expedient. It’s isn’t that yet: Greitens still has a 57 percent approval rating among Republicans.

But those in the GOP who favor a cede-no-grain-of-sand defense of the indefensible will only hurt their party in the end. (Ask the Catholic Church how that strategy worked out for them. Or USA Gymnastics. Or Baylor University.) And since Greitens faces a jury next month for allegedly threatening his hairdresser with distributing a compromising picture she says he took of her without her consent, the end may not be long in coming.

Greitens continues to insist he’s done nothing wrong. But Bill Cosby’s guilty verdict, and the fact that sexual assault victims are more often believed, must have set off a tremor in even the most unshakable of Greitens’ defenders.

Greitens’ personal lawyer says Hawley’s public comments are hurting Greitens’ ability to get a fair trial. Just like Greitens’ alleged actions are hurting Hawley’s ability to run the campaign he’d planned to run, or to get a fair look from voters?

_____

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, April 29

Missouri Legislature should not reverse hard-fought municipal court reforms

The city of St. Louis and surrounding municipalities, both rich and poor, have backed off their longtime practice of using abusive police and court practices to pad their bank accounts. The court reforms that brought about the changes are working and should not be undone, as state Sen. Bob Dixon, R-Springfield, proposes to do.

Ticket-writing is down across the region, along with the amount of fees and fines collected by courts, as reported by the Post-Dispatch’s Jeremy Kohler. The predatory municipal justice system raised $52 million for St. Louis County municipalities in the year ending June 2014, and only $22 million in the year ending June 2017.

Police in municipalities like Bellefontaine Neighbors wrote 27 tickets a day in 2014. They now write five a day. The city’s police chief says they fight dangerous driving with billboards, brochures and public awareness campaigns. Police officers have conversations with drivers and use verbal and written warnings.

Municipal leaders who want their cash cows back moan that lawless driving has erupted since the changes took effect. That’s not supported by data. Driving appears to be the same as it’s always been.

But law enforcement has changed. Police are no longer told that their pay will hinge on the number of tickets they write, nor are they encouraged to write nuisance tickets just to keep the revenue churning. Gone are radar gun-wielding police and modern-day debtors’ prisons, where people got fines heaped on fines and then were jailed for failing to pay those fines or for not appearing for a court hearing. Some municipalities offer community service as alternatives to sentencing.

The reforms also led to the demise of at least one north St. Louis County community, Vinita Terrace, which used traffic court revenue to fund more than half its budget. It merged with neighboring Vinita Park last year. Local governments that can’t make ends meet without sucking revenue from citizens should dissolve.

State Treasurer Eric Schmitt was a Republican state senator from Glendale when he sponsored the bill that he says “put an end to taxation-by-citation schemes.” The law limits the amount of money cities can make from traffic violations, caps the amount of fines that can be imposed on a person for traffic violations and permits community service as an alternative to fee payments.

Missouri’s Supreme Court ruled later that courts had to have bigger courtrooms, more personnel and fewer conflicts of interest among judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys.

Dixon’s bill, which is awaiting Senate debate, would allow cities to keep more court revenue, reinstate charges for failing to appear in court and allow municipalities to jail people for not paying minor traffic or ordinance fines.

This would be a backward step for Missouri. Cities that can’t function without squeezing money out of people don’t deserve another chance.

Copyright © 2024 The Washington Times, LLC.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide