It isn't her.
Update appears at bottom of posting
“That is an unfounded truth.” – Linda D. Thompson to ABC27 News regarding the District of Columbia court docket.
We don’t quite know what "unfounded truth" means, but our Linda D. Thompson claims the woman with the DC criminal record is someone with the same name.
Both the Patriot and abc27 News have checked and found the woman in the criminal case has a different birthday and which makes her a few years older than our Linda D. Thompson.
There is some additional verification underway, but we’re also inclined to believe the two Thompsons are different people. If our Linda D. Thompson was going to falsify her birthday, we think LT’s vanity would preclude choosing a fake birthday making her older than she is.
But really Linda, the threat of a libel suit? "It's libelous and me and my lawyer are taking action."
If the threat of litigation is going to be your response every time you’re asked an impertinent question, you’d better stop using “transparent” as an adjective.
Let us be VERY clear:
We never said you were the heroin-possessing Linda D. Thompson; we asked you if you were. That is the huge difference.
You have invited scrutiny of your public record, but for some inexplicable reason you think that scrutiny should be limited to your service on Council and not to your managerial abilities running LOVESHIP or any other aspect of your life.
Sorry. We don’t know what gave you that idea, but those running for public office do not get to choose the questions they are asked by the public. Sometimes the questions can be impertinent, inappropriate, irrelevant, rude or hostile, but the point is: you don’t get to choose the questions.
Your options are limited to answering the question or refusing to answer. That’s it. There is one other option which you frequently use to great effect -- answering a completely different question than the one asked. You did that brilliantly on your WHP radio interview this morning.
You are surely aware there are rumors of a “hidden” past and there is some question about your whereabouts and activities for a period of time after you graduated with a communications degree and returned to Harrisburg.
We asked a reasonable question based on your apparent reluctance to account for your life experience during that time frame and the public records available from the same period.
It's time rumors were put to rest. This is far too important of a campaign to be sidetracked by whispers and rumors. Yesterday we gave you an opportunity to address them head on.
Rather than an immediate response on the PennLive Harrisburg forum (we know your people can post and post and post) your campaign was silent for hours. This not only served to heighten suspicion you have something to hide, but calls into question your ability to manage a crisis.
Had you or your operatives responded immediately, we would have posted that information. In fact we did update yesterday's posting not once, but twice. And we will update it again as soon as we have verification you are NOT the Linda D. Thompson named in that particular criminal complaint. Count on it. That’s only fair. It may come as a surprise to you, but websites aren't that hard to update.
Meanwhile, In the interest of quelling unsavory speculation about your missing years you might want to whip your resume up on your website complete with dates. Your website hasn't been updated since May so you could take the opportunity to add your platform replacing the empty talking points you’ve been parading as your plan for Harrisburg. We’ll even provide a link for it here.
UPDATE
Thursday, October 29, 2:50 p.m.
Thursday, October 29, 2:50 p.m.
We are now reasonably convinced the Linda D. Thompson guilty of heroin possession in 1982 in D.C. is likely not our Linda D. Thompson, mayoral candidate. No help from Miss Transparency in that regard.
But let us be clear and shout from the rooftops: A heroin possession charge is apparently NOT among Linda Deliah Thompson's skeletons.
Although now we more fully understand why she has good reason to be vague about her birthdate and resume. It's such a simple request really. A copy of her birth certificate would suffice. And how hard is a resume? One with dates?
Posts
5 comments:
Unless Linda's "lawyers" have some hope of future city contracts, I doubt they will be too eager to give her credit for their retainer. In order to extend credit, one needs to have confidence that the debtor has some intention of paying their bills.
This isn't a case like "Coca-Cola truck hits family of four," where there would be deep pockets involved and lawyers are tripping over each other to take the case on a contingency basis.
Ok, I have to ask some questions. I hope a local reporter picks these up and runs with them.
1. If a 501(c)3 organization like Loveship promotes a contest and receives submissions for the contest, are they legally required to fulfill the "prize" of the contest? In what timeframe must that happen?
2. The Loveship Board of Directors. How is it possible for the President and CEO of a non-profit organization to not know the members of the organization's board? That information is required to be filed every year when the organization files its federal 990 tax form. A current board list is part of the filing requirements. Loveship's filings are signed by Linda Thompson, and include an updated board list each year. So, one would assume that Linda Thompson, as the sole employee of Loveship, would have prepared the board list that was included with the 990 filing each year. Now, it's been reported in the Patriot-News that at least two board members have stated they either were never board members or had ended their board service years ago. Seems to me that the updated board list required to be filed with the federal government would have included those updates. If you make a mistake one year, perhaps you can consider that an "oversight." But if you continue to make that "mistake" for five years in a row, wouldn't that be considered either incompetence or sheer negligence? Should a person who does not pay attention to details in a federal tax filing be elected as mayor? (By the way, anyone can see the 990 forms for any nonprofit organization through www.guidestar.org You have to create an account, but it is free.)
3. What is the total amount of the student loan Linda Thompson took out to go to college in the 1980s? It's been reported that she still owes $11,000 on those loans. What percentage does the $11,000 still to be repaid represent? Is this a good representation of a person who has a grasp on personal debt management? How would that personal experience translate into financial management for the city of Harrisburg?
4. One of the pastors who endoresed Linda Thompson for mayor this week mentioned she had overcome great adversity. What exactly is the "adversity" she reportedly overcame?
5. Who has the authority to investigate the legality of her unemployment claim? When did she collect it? It still doesn't make sense that she was eligible for unemployment if she resigned her job, as she's been reported as saying she did.
I am more alarmed at the nuisance lawsuit against the gas station, then I would have been with the drug possession case.
The drugs , while indeed troubling, could have been chocked up to youthful indiscretion. But a shake-down lawsuit by an adult is another story altogether.
Why not provide your resume unless your trying to hide something? Since all we can do is speculate and here's what I think ....This woman spent years after college doing nothing but sponge off the government. Provide your resume Linda and prove me wrong.
It's been almost 25 years and she hasn't even paid off her student loans?? Maybe she should have attended a local school instead. How is someone like that going to clean up Harrisburg's problems? The more I listen to her (and I don't live in the City of Harrisburg, so I don't have a horse in this race), the more I think she's an empty head with a big ego. (like many politicians) But frankly, I don't think ANYBODY who wants to be the leader of this royally messed up city is particularly bright. Reed did good things, but was in office far too long.
Post a Comment