Friday, September 03, 2010

Mike Coogan, Humbled or Hummeled

In politics there is nothing like the home-stretch of a campaign. The last days and weeks leading up to Election Day are really do or die. These are the moments to persuade the undecided, to build on momentum and clinch the election or catch the frontrunner. The home-stretch is also when all candidates fear having a wheel blow off as they cruise to Election Day. There is the fear of something scandalous or unfavorable hitting the press and derailing all the hard fought efforts of months on the campaign trail.

 

State Senate candidate Mike Coogan recently faced just such a moment when a civil court case he was involved in started to get some attention. Did Coogan or his company do something unethical or illegal? Well Coogan dodged a bullet because as quickly as the rumors started the wind was taken out of their sails by a Herald News headline that proclaimed that Coogan was cleared in the civil lawsuit. Whew! Turns out there is more to that story, and a judge still needs to make a final ruling in the case but that campaign friendly headline crushed the negative momentum and the Coogan campaign pushed on ahead. However it looks like once more there's trouble on the tracks up ahead.

 

It turns out that Jim Hummel, an investigative reporter, a familiar fixture on ABC6 for years and now with WPRO and his own website The Hummel Report is featuring a story on his website that details another construction incident involving Mike Coogan and his company. The incident involves Fall River attorney John Angelo and work that he says he hired Coogan's company to do. Now, I'll leave it up to you to visit Hummel's site and watch the video and/or read the transcript, but it's pretty damning stuff and Mike Coogan does little to effectively explain it.

 

It was a blog reader who brought the story on Hummel's website to my attention and wondered if I still felt the same way about Coogan. Well in regards to the civil case, he was cleared from wrong doing by a judge who had a whole bunch of facts that I don't. So I wouldn't hold that against him, except the Herald seems to have jumped the gun on the story and made no mention in their initial coverage that there was yet another decision to be rendered. Now in this latest matter, after viewing the video and reading the transcript, I find it pretty damning.  

 

Now to be fair anytime I see a bombshell get dropped so close to Election Day, I get a little suspicious. In this case I wonder is it possible that Attorney Angelo may be supporting another candidate? I only ask because why would you bring an issue from a year ago to the attention of the press NOW, days before the primary? Why wouldn't you have pursued this when it happened? Why now?

 

Whatever the reasons for this "October Surprise", (Yes, I know it's only September..) this could have a devastating effect on Coogan's campaign. I have to imagine that this is going to get lots of news coverage over the next few days and if Coogan doesn't handle it better than he did with Hummel he's in trouble.

93 comments:

Anonymous said...

The timing of this is too coincidental to believe it came from anyone other than one of Coogan's opponents. If it is revealed which candidate orchestrated these latest dirty tactics, I will not vote for that person no matter what. I will also tell my family and friends the same. I have heard stories about all the candidates so it appears there are skeletons in their closets as well. I do not know whether they are true or not so I will not repeat them. Disgusting dirty politics.

Anonymous said...

Lefty, I give you a lot of credit for objectivity for posting this information. I just read the script and watched the video on the Hummel Report website and it is both compelling and convincing. Charging the homeowner $800 (in writing) for a permit that was never even applied for??? And that's not the worst of it. Frankly, I'm stunned.

Anonymous said...

A lawsuit like this would likely have to have been filed long before Coogan ever even announced his candidacy so it is silly to think this was in furtherance of making coogan look bad.

Anonymous said...

There appears to be a common thread in claddagh constructions business dealings ...the guy in barrington probably saw the press on the other lawsuit and said hey that happened to me too..........

Anonymous said...

Speaking with someone who is familiar with both Coogan and Angelo, this person said they don't believe the story to be true. Also said that there is some history between Angelo and Rodrigues. Time will tell.

Anonymous said...

At the very least, this part of the Hummel Report needs to be addressed by Coogan:

-------------------------------

That's because Coogan's bid included a line item for building permits.


Angelo: ``He did invoice me and showed a breakdown of the quote including all the charges, and itemized in that was an $800 charge for permit fees.''


Hummel: ``$800?''


Angelo: $800.''


Hummel: ``For permits that he did not pull.''


Angelo: ``That's correct.''


Angelo did some more digging and discovered Coogan was not registered with the state Contractor's Registration Board, as required by Rhode Island law.

Anonymous said...

This should be considered public information ( for all candidates) I would like to know what a persons character is before voting for them, if they are going to do this to paying clients in business....what is going to stop them from doing this to voters?

Maybe we need to start having background checks before a candidate is elected, much like employers do before a candidate is hired.

John G. Angelo, Esq. said...

The report was not politically motivated. As a Barrington resident for 20 years, I’ve never donated to any of the opposition campaigns. My motive is purely altruistic.
This is out now because voters have a right to know about whom they are considering. I’m angry his platform mentions transparency and accountability, neither of which I was provided.
His company began work on 02/02/09, with a summer hiatus due to my family’s work schedule, then resumption in 10/09. At that time he brought a new crew to begin work on the bath and it was mostly inaccessible due to floor and plumbing work. After the plumber left on the last day 11/13/09 I checked the room and found the floor tilted with a shim underneath a utility door, while the other door was flush to the floor, prompting an email to Coogan asking him to see it.
He never did, instead asking my architect to check the room and make a report. He did so on 11/17/09 noting issues of sub-par workmanship and emailed a memo to Coogan and myself the next day.
At our only meeting per his request at my office (12/14/09) Coogan began the discussion offering to part ways, attributing it to a series of miscommunications.
On 12/04/09 I had been informed by a bidding contractor that a permit hadn’t been pulled. This contractor was later hired and resumed work on 01/11/10.
My claim is for over $13,000 paid for the sloppy work.
The problems found and corrected:
1.Tilt caused by sub-floor placed on top of other sub-floor running along one edge of the 1/2 bath.
2. A leaky drainpipe.
3. 2 bath fans and a heater improperly connected outside the devices creating a fire hazard. No electrician was used for the installs.
4. Tile installed with 5/8” substrate leading to cracks voiding the warranty. Industry standard is 1 ¼”.
5. Vanity butchered after repositioning and metal caps unable to cover the water line holes as seen in the Hummel Report.
6. Heater installed with a 3/8” pipe but connected to the home's 5/8” pipe causing heat inefficiency. The heater also created noise due to debris left inside it.
7. 1/2 bath had 2 entrances. We chose to close off the adjoining room entrance. They created an uneven surface and the light switch next to where the doorway once existed was left up.
8. Raised tiles creating a tripping hazard and sloppy grout lines. (Current floor shows that there are still skilled craftsmen in the world.)
9. I was concerned about a hallway floor hump, so Coogan quoted $9,360 to fix it. I was told by the spring crew the culprit joists were fixed. The new builder found only 1 joist was ever addressed. It was cut down too much on one end and not enough at the other end requiring correction. Also the sub-floor put down was poorly cut causing excessive squeakiness.
I sent Coogan a demand letter on 02/25/10 listing payments made to his construction company for shoddy work needing correction and accused him of misrepresenting his licensing in RI.
Search www.crb.state.ri.us/index.php to see an expired license and my claim filed this June.
Between the February demand and the June filing, his attorney got involved recommending a claim be made with Coogan's insurer. Early June the insurer told me coverage for negligent supervision didn’t exist. I gave the attorney a week to settle or face a board claim. No resolution was offered so I filed.
Besides corroboration by the new builder and my architect, I have photos, his many emails regarding company work, letters and 4 cancelled checks totaling $28,675. He returned $4,700 for both work never begun and a $300 credit “for issues” which he deducted from the last payment of $10,500. For legal reasons I didn’t cash the check but I can’t now as it has either been stopped or there is no cash in the account.
Cleverly in the Hummel interview he denies doing the work himself as he never hammered a nail or screwed in a bolt. He doesn't answer the question about his corporation doing the work.
The local media hasn’t called, but I will answer any media representative wishing to discuss this.
John G. Angelo, Esq.

Anonymous said...

Attorney Angelo,

It is evident by the detail above that this issue has been going on for quite some time.

My question is why wait until the end of August to go public with this information?

Anonymous said...

Attorney Angelo,

My comment is thank God you went public with this information?

John G. Angelo, Esq. said...

Coogan and I parted ways on 12/14/09. As my prior post indicates, certain aspects took time to develop. Naturally I had to put the project out to bid again and choose another contractor. Then the hired contractor had to determine what other hidden problems existed in my home. By late February all of Coogan's work had been checked, with the previously noted repairs by the new builder.
Please note that I did not request a complete return of all monies from Coogan. Some of the work appeared adequate and I wasn't going to parse every cent to determine if those charges were fair.
My intention and hope had been to reach some resolution. However by June it became evident that it wasn't going to happen. On one hand I wanted resolution, but I also feared that I was being stalled by the other side in light of the upcoming primary date. There was only so much time I would allow this to go on.
For explanatory purposes, after filing a Board claim an investigator is eventually assigned
to meet with both parties. If a resolution cannot be reached a hearing is scheduled. I was unsure about the time frame for all of this.
I also outlined this in my 02/25/09 demand letter to Coogan, so he and his attorney were fully aware of the potential process.
I called the Board in July and was advised that no investigator had yet been assigned. It was then that I decided to elevate the stakes. (I have now been advised this past week that an investigator has been assigned, but I have not been contacted as of yet)
It took time for the reporter to review the facts and prepare the report, which included the interview with Coogan on 08/26/10.
I've noted my anger at his disregard of the sloppy workmanship. It frustrates me to no end that he could not provide the common decency to travel 20 minutes to my home to inspect the poor job done by his crew. He was willing to stop by to collect a check however.
It angers me that by being unregistered he did not have workers' compensation coverage. Some of the work involved roof repair. What if a worker fell of my roof leaving me and my family legally exposed?
Before deciding to hire Coogan I asked him about being licensed in RI and having insurance coverage and he answered in the affirmative.
Plain and simple I could not bear seeing a candidate win a primary with the knowledge that I possessed.
My decision to go public was not at the behest of any opposition candidate. This was my decision and mine alone. Believe me I know the risks I've taken. But this is black and white and I could not remain silent any longer.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Angelo,

Thank you for bringing this to the public's attention. I know first hand how Michael Coogan deals with people and I can say from experience that he is the last person that should be elected to a position like State Senator.

Certainly he must have known he had no license in Rhode Island and therefore must have known he could not have pulled permits, yet he charged you $800! Amazing!

I feel badly for his campaign people as they're the ones who have invested a large portion of their lives and money into getting him elected. Hopefully the public will not allow that to happen.

Anonymous said...

The last post begins to focus on what's important. This information coming out will upset Coogan's supporters and please his opponents. But they aren't the ones who matter now. The ones who need to know this information are the people who are going to vote. They'll read Mr. Angelo's posts and watch the video on the Hummel Report website. Then, they'll make up their minds. That's how it should be.

Anonymous said...

Maybe Atty. Angelo can also answer the question of whether Mr. Coogan uses union help with his private business ventures.

Anonymous said...

Maybe Atty Angelo can verify that Mr Coogans Mass license expired?

Puck said...

This is very sad. I watched the video and was extremely disappointed in Mr. Coogan's evasion of the issue. Unless he holds a press conference or submits to an interview on this topic, and can prove his innoncence in this matter, he will lose the election. Voters seem to be willing to look the other way when a politician already in office goes astray, but they aren't as forgiving before a person is elected.

I had planned to vote for Coogan because I have been very impressed with his work on behalf of the firefighters. However, unless he can clear his name, I can't, in good conscience, support him. My vote will now be going to Lorne Lawless because of his work in opposing the LNG plant and because he seems to be the only viable candidate without a shady record.

Anonymous said...

I originally planned on voting for Coogan. However, after his disappointing appearance during the debate. His command of the English language was Leo-esque. Coupled with his shady business dealings, my vote will now go to the other Fall River candidate - Mitchell.

John G. Angelo, Esq. said...

To answer the recent questions posted, I was not aware of whether or not Coogan's crew were union. I never asked.
After discovering the website database in RI I also curiously looked to see if Mass offers something similar and they do. (Coogan still has an active license in Mass)
What I am going through is a cautionary tale for the consumer. There are resources available online today. This is a lesson in not placing total trust in someone.

Anonymous said...

Your objectivity is always impressive lefty. I couldn't agree with your assessment more.....entirely accurate and perceptive. Are there any issues that cause you to lose your cool? Ryan p.

Anonymous said...

Why would someone who lives in Rhode Island be so concerned about an election in Ma. Also, Mr. Angelo never responded to a comment made earlier about what his relationship is with Mike Rodrigues.

Anonymous said...

Bravo Atty. Angelo.
The voters need to know the character of their candidates. You have exposed him as unethical, among other adjectives.

In response to whether he uses union workers... I used to work for him and he uses lots of day labor from "Steppingstone". Its cheaper and under the table.

Anonymous said...

Anon 8:08,

These following comments that were previously posted by Mr. Angelo more than adequately answer your questions:

Mr. Angelo:
"My decision to go public was not at the behest of any opposition candidate. This was my decision and mine alone."

and, Mr. Angelo:
"Plain and simple I could not bear seeing a candidate win a primary with the knowledge that I possessed."

and finally, Mr. Angelo:
"But this is black and white and I could not remain silent any longer."

Every voter in this election owes Mr. Angelo a debt of gratitude for his willingness to come forward with this information. Information is power, and in this instance the power rests with the people... the voters.

Thank you, Mr. Angelo.

John G. Angelo, Esq. said...

I was born and raised in Fall River. I practice there and my mother still resides in the city. It may be facing many struggles going forward but it doesn't deserve unethical leadership
Living in RI for 20 years doesn't make me any less angry that I was taken advantage of after placing trust in someone.
Anyone who has doubt about my motive should ask themselves these questions.
Why on earth would I do something like this if I didn't have the facts to back this up?
When Coogan's crew began work in my home in 02/09 was there some conspiracy brewing between myself and an opposition candidate?
When Coogan's crew totally screwed up my bathroom, did I think to plan in 11/09 to conspire with another candidate?
None of this would be happening if Coogan had stopped and pondered in 2008 that what he was doing in the first place was wrong. Remember I wasn't the one who committed the act I'm exposing.
I'll say it again, I welcome any member of the media to look at my evidence. If it was good enough for Mr. Hummel then it should be good enough for the rest of them as well.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Angelo, you seem to be very forthcoming with many facts, and claim these accusations are not at the behest of any candidate. Since this is strictly a public service announcement and not political, why avoid responding to what was mentioned earlier, is there a relationship between you and Mike Rodrigues?

John G. Angelo, Esq. said...

no, but my late father went by the same name. He passed away in 2001, and once worked for Barney Frank before he retired. He was friendly with Mr. Rodrigues because of his involvement in the area's politics.
Hope that answers your question.

Anonymous said...

to your question anon 10:04 does mr coogan have any relationship with anyone on the state legislature as former state rep tom nortons ad describes his relationship with coogans uncle former state rep John Long, or city government or school dept
managment?

Let's get the political motivations out in the open.

Anonymous said...

Anon 7:15 what does your statement have to do with the argument. All candidates running for office have some backing of current or past elected officials. And that is not the point. It is whether someone is using dirt in an attempt to discredit a candidate. It is whether their motive is the advancement of a particular candidate rather than informing. I do not take everything that people post as gospel. And if I have some doubts I will ask. Seeing Mr. Angelo was forthcoming in his relationship with one candidate Mr. Coogan, what is your problem in asking about his relationship with the other candidates, if there is any? As of now, all we have is Mr. Angelo's side of the story, which very well may be the truth. Let's see how the this story ends before passing judgment.

Anonymous said...

I'd like to hear the other side of the story about Coogan charging the homeowner $800 for a permit he never pulled.

I'd like to hear the other side of the story about Coogan doing work without a permit.

I'd like to hear the other side of the story about Coogan doing work without a license.

I'd like to hear the other side of the story about Coogan's employees not being covered with worker's comp insurance on this job.

Here's a question to consider: How would a union president feel about a company that employed his union members doing business this way?

Lefty said...

First, I want to thank Attorney Angelo for participating in the discussion.

I can understand being skeptical of his motives. In fact when writing the post it was something I thought had to be mentioned. Mr. Angelo says he is not supporting any other candidate and that was not his motive. I'm sure some will still doubt this, particularly Coogan supporters. However, set aside motivation for a minute and just look at the evidence, it's pretty damning: no license, no permits, sloppy work, and no real response from Mr. Coogan. I agree with Puck that if Mike Coogan doesn't address this, explain this, he can kiss his campaign goodbye. Oh, hold on, Mike denies doing any work there, but how does that explain checks from both parties etc. etc.

Coogan has to address this, plain and simple and considering it's the second complaint against him as a businessmen that we're aware of, it does raise questions to his conduct, judgment, & accountability. That might not seem fair to some but it's how we judge the qualifications of the people we vote for.

If Attorney Angelo was able to learn about this blog post, well I have to imagine Mike Coogan knows about it too and he is more than welcome to respond.

Anonymous said...

Lefty, you say conduct, judgment and accountability are how we judge somebody's qualifications for office. And with that I have no problem. If these charges are true, then Coogan has a problem. The question I have is why are we not holding the other candidates to the same standard. No interviews about a questionable billboard, attempts to avoid alcohol taxes, shady dealings involving the former speaker. How about illegal use of campaign contributions. If you want an informed electorate, then everything should be put out there.

Anonymous said...

To Anon 12:08,

- No interviews about a questionable billboard (Old News and really not a big deal to the average voter),

- attempts to avoid alcohol taxes (Again, old news, and who doesn't stop at the state line liquor store on their way back from NH?, Most voters don't care as they do it themselves),

- shady dealings involving the former speaker (Unfounded and lame at best).

- How about illegal use of campaign contributions (Proven, but again, Old News).

Anonymous said...

9/4 @ 9:12

You may have had somebody clean up your post, however the syntax does not lie. If Rodrigues is looking for support he should stay as far away from you as possible.

Anonymous said...

Where can I find the campaign finance reports? Curious to see how many firemen "contributed" to Coogs campaign. I'm sure he hit up every fireman in the country. I know of a fireman lives in Maryland that was "asked" to donate to Coogan. Politics as usual. Can't wait to hear Coogan get roasted at tomorrows debate.

Puck said...

Anon 9/6 4:32

The issues you list regarding Mike Rodrigues' past transgressions are still very relevant to me. He has used his position to curry favor with special interests in a very unsavory manner, showing that he can be bought. That's why I can't vote for him.

Just because the problems you list are in the past, that doesn't make them irrelevant. They speak to his abuse of power. And, actually, I don't think Roderigues' entanglement with DiMasi has been satisfactorily resolved.

Lefty, you are right about Coogan. He could use this blog to clear up this issue if he doesn't want to do so on TV news or in the paper. The least he could do is explain why he told Hummel, several times, that he didn't do the work at Mr. Angelo's house.

Anonymous said...

9/6 @ 4:50

Stop being such a lemming. Try seeing the forest through the trees for once. You ff's are so gullible.

Anonymous said...

This entire debacle has caused me to take a closer look at Coogan's candidacy. Among things I found is that his recent college degree is from an online school. So, I checked out the online school to see what I could find out about it. What I read was interesting, to say the least. There are a lot of people who have shared their feelings about the school with comments and reviews online.

Also, Coogan will have to address the issues surrounding his contracting business at the debate tonight. If I were running against him, I would use some of my time to ask him these questions:

Mr. Coogan, did you bill a client of your contracting business $800 for a permit you never pulled?

Mr. Coogan, did your contracting business do work in Rhode Island without a license to operate in the state and without a building permit for the work?

Mr. Coogan, were the employees of your contracting business covered with worker's compensation insurance when they were working on Mr. Angelo's property in Rhode Island?

These are all fair questions.

Anonymous said...

Anon 9/6 4:32

Hmmmm, let's see, discussing a candidate selling his vote is lame.
I believe dealings involving the former speaker, Rodrigues partner in questionable activities, are still current. In the courts anyway.

A representative who voted to raise your taxes but does everything he can to avoid paying them himself-old news?
I can tell you it's very current to the liquor stores owners who are losing business to New Hampshire.

Maybe we can get some answers on these issues that not everyone considers, "old news".

Anon 9/6 5:28

Stop the Presses - Headline News -
Firefighters support one of their own for state senate, shocking.

Lefty said...

Anon 9/7 6:36,

I agree it would be absolutely fair to ask Mr. Coogan these questions. However, it's also fair to ask Mitchell if his past is something voters should hold against him, or if Rodrigues issues (listed a few comments ago) should be held against him. Lawless could be asked if his loss in the Somerset selectmen race is an indicator of his support in town, or of the work he did while serving. They can ask Coogan whatever they like but they open themselves up for questions they may not want to answer.

Anonymous said...

7:08 9/6

I support and plan on voting for Rodrigues. This campaign has been a long road, don't trash it up.

Anonymous said...

Anon 7:08 - "Don' trash it up". You sat back and said nothing when another candidate was being hammered, but now that it's hitting close to home it's let's play nice. A little late for that.

The amazing thing Lefty is that we have about 40 comments here and not one mention on were any of these candidates stand on any of the issues.

Anonymous said...

Mitchell had a tremendous insert in today's paper. Very well done. Mitchell seems to get it. The keys jobs and getting people back to work. Mitchell has my vote!

Lazurusisus said...

Don't trash it up?....That's all this entire discussion has been about, trashing of candidate's reputations by anonymous commenter's and an attorney with an axe to grind. To hell with the attorney's complaints made at a very suspicious time. I never hired or worked with a lawyer who wasn't a total liar and manipulator. Wait...isn't one of the candidates for State Senate a lawyer too? LMAO!

Anonymous said...

One-liners about lawyers won't explain away Coogan's billing a client $800 for a permit he never pulled. It also doesn't explain away Coogan's contracting company doing business in RI without a license.

You're pretty good at selectively applying ethical standards to candidates, Laz. I guess such trivial matters don't apply to candidates you support.

Good grief, Laz! Coogan billed a client $800 for a permit he never even pulled! Who does something like that? Eight hundred dollars! That's shameful!

You're kidding me, right? said...

Micthell put a big ad in the paper and he just keeps repeating the word "jobs", so clearly he is going to bring more jobs to the city.

Hi I'm John "Jobs" Mitchell. Do you know what Fall River needs? Jobs. Do you know what I am going to do for this city? Jobs. How will I bring jobs here? Jobs, Jobs, Jobs, that's how.

What a smart man. He did so much for Fall River's economy as Mayor. My frigging hero.

Spare us the B.S.

He is an incompetent, double-dealing, ethically challenged lawyer. People that vote for the Mitchells of this city are the same ones who sit and gaze with wide-eyed wonder when they can't figure out how the city is going further and further down the poophole every year.

Sure, vote for Mitchell, more incompetence!!! Just what we need!

Anonymous said...

Anon 8:03, talk about Laz being selective, Attorney Angelo on this blog claimed he has no relationship with Rodrigues, yet from what I've been told he HAS had contact with the Rodrigues camp. This guy is not the victim he wants all to believe.

Lefty said...

Laz,

Let's set the record straight here. I stated that the timing was suspicious and questioned whether or not Attorney Angelo may have a relationship with any of the other candidates. Attorney Angelo commented here that he doesn't. Your brilliant retort is that he "may, in fact have ties to Rodrigues". You're basing this on what proof, what evidence? Personally I would targeted Mitchell, after all both are lawyers there could be a communal feeling, some brotherhood. YOU say Coogan told you the story is different and that Angelo was aware he wasn't licensed in Rhode Island. Well why didn't he say that to Hummel? Why hasn't he said that anywhere? Instead he just funnels it through you? He could have contacted Hummel and set the record straight. He could have commented on my post. And I emailed him to give him the opportunity to tell his side. Why has he stayed silent until "now". If there was no contract what paperwork is being referred to showing that $800 was charged to Angelo for permits that were never pulled? I know Laz, it must be because the story was assembled by a 'muckraking investigative reporter'. Except this particular muckraking investigative reporter has worked in the news industry for over 25 years. He was the chief reporter for ABC6 for over a decade and has won an Edward R. Murrow Award for Investigative Reporting. We're not really talking about some tabloid reporter for the National Enquirer.

Anonymous said...

I feel sorry for you Coogan supporters. Your candidate put you in a bad spot. He got you to support him, and now you learn about this incident that strikes at the very core of his character (or lack thereof). I'm sure it stings. But, it isn't your fault. This entire debacle rests squarely with Coogan, himself.

Anonymous said...

Is Laz conspiring with Coogan to deflect and deny the allegations of wrongdoing made against Coogan in the Hummel Report?

Lefty raises a revealing question in his latest post. Why isn't Coogan responding to these allegations? Lefty gave Coogan the opportunity to do just that right here on this blog!

I guess Laz is now the Coogan campaign spokesman.

There are lots of questions that Coogan needs to answer on this. The one I'm most interested in hearing him respond to is why Coogan sent a bill for $800 to Attorney Angelo for a permit he never pulled.

Anonymous said...

Supposedly there was an interview with Angelo on WSAR, and Coogan was denied the right to confront him on the radio. Why do people believe it's Rodrigues behind it? He gets finacial support from the Karam's, and they use their radio show to advance his agenda. Angelo says he has no history with Rodrigues yet has been in contact with the campaign on more than one occasion.

Anonymous said...

LOL... another spinmeister at work.

Yes, there was an interview on WSAR. Barry Richards repeatedly stated that he had tried to get Coogan to participate in the interview. Coogan never returned the call. The whole thing is available for you to listen to as a Podcast on WSAR's website.

It's Rodrigues... Not!

It's the Karams... Not!

It's the boogeyman... Maybe.

Why not try "The Devil made me do it!" he he

Nice try at spinning it, though. LOL

Lazurusisus said...

Dear Lefty, I have no earthly clue why Mike Coogan doesn't feel comfortable with talking to you dir4ectly about this issue, but then again, if he an impartial personw ere to peruse this story's comments section it would look like a bag job, with all those Angelo comments and the story itself peppered with indicting information. I'm NOT saying it was a bag job, just that it could easily be interpreted that way.

I have never claimed to be any kind of reporter. My expertise is municipal government and finance, more so, in fact, than anyone holding office currently in Fall River or who is currently working for this woefully run City right now. But, everything else on my blog is pure opinion. I've NEVER stated I was any kind of impartial arbiter of anything other than administration and finance. I do not believe that anyone CAN be totally impartial about anything, and certainly not when politics is concerned. But, if you must cling to that belief, it is your right and choice to do so...I wish not to diswade you otherwise, it would be a waste of time.

You know it's funny that I was listening to SAR a few weeks ago when a person called and made a statement that Coogan was in court that day and in a lot of trouble. Turns out it was a civil matter and he won the decision. But I found it hilarious...because I think it was a dry run for the current crap someone has decided to throw against the wall. I'm hearing it's all over town that Rodrigues DID meet with Angelo to discuss this whole mess....and trust me lefty, I have dealt with the press professionally many, many times, and until you REALLY have to face questions of a pointed nature, you have no idea how downright uncaring and nasty they can come at you, or that their interest is NEVER to merely know the "TRUTH". Any member of the press wants a juicy story, period. Just give an interview sometime and read it and you'll see it was NOT the conversation you actually had, especially if you dare to say "NO COMMENT". I think that might be the case with Mr. Honesty and Integrity in the Press from Channel 6 as well!

There is not a single doubt in my mind that Angelo contacted Rodrigues, if for no other reason than to get even in some way with Coogan for what he considered bad treatment. I do not think that's a hanging offense for a candidate for office.
It still stands as discussed in the Boston Press, and as commented on by a Suffolk Superior Court Judge that Mike Rodrigues had a direct role in trying to hurry a bill through the legislature at Speaker Sal "180 years for extrosion" DiMasi that would have legalized ticket scalping for only the largest ticket distributors like ACE Tickets, DiMasi's unregistered lobbyist buddy was representing the tickets businesses. Great work there you new Hampshire booze hound. Talk about against the public interest! He votes on a sales tax increase one day, and he's over the border buying tax free booze the next for himself! Putz! And let's not mention who was exorting their membership to kick in $500 a pop to Rodrigues for this election...the Mass Bio-Tech Council. Gee, I woinder how he's been able to raise so much money versus the other candidates. The Bio-Tech money has been funneled into MA from all over the country just for this race...no wonder he hates the casino...lol...

Sorry lefty, you do what you need to do...I'm supporting Coogan, and I'm proud of it!

Anonymous said...

No spin, just facts, Karam wouldn't allow Coogan on WSAR. Same type of thing the radio station did in trying to protect Correia. And as Laz has said, Angelo has been working with the Rodrigues camp. From people who heard the conversation.

Anonymous said...

I get such a kick out of you guys trying to give Coogan cover for what he did. I'm beginning to think you really believe it's working. LOL

This thread ain't about the Karams or Mike Rodrigues. It's about Mike Coogan. But you can keep trying to deflect everyone's attention. Just don't expect it to work.

Mike Coogan owns this problem. He'd do well to address it head-on. The fact that he won't address it speaks volumes about the issue, and about him.

Face it, guys. You hitched your wagon to a lame horse. It isn't your fault he came up lame.

Lefty said...

Laz,

It's not that Coogan hasn't responded here, he hasn't responded anywhere. He finishes the Hummel interview saying he'll talk to Hummel but doesn't. Does that make sense? If there is another side to the story why not present it? Instead Attorney Angelo gets to present his side unchallenged. Again does that make sense?

I never claimed you were a journalist, or for that matter that I am either. I did say that Mr. Hummel is an award winning reporter of considerable experience, with a good reputation.

I also never claimed to be impartial or unbiased, although I do think those are goals worth striving for. All I've ever said is that I try to be objective and fair and balanced. I think in the case of this post I've done that.

I have no way of knowing if Mr. Angelo contacted Mike Rodrigues but see no proof of it so I'm not going to allege that it happened.

The bottom line is now that WSAR has picked up this story Coogan needs to address the issue and he needs to do it in a forum other than your blog or mine.

Lazurusisus said...

Lefty, I can whole heartedly agree with you on that last point...he's got to explain himself to some regular media outlet before the election...who that will be is entirely up to him...and will this Rodrigues shill placing the same comments on these blogs and on the pages of the HN please at least admit you work for the Rodrigues campaign...lol...your "Sal DiMasi" is showing!..lmao!

Anonymous said...

Anon 9/8 9:37 you are correct Coogan owns his problems, just as Rodrigues owns his. Such problems as when caught buying booze in NH and being asked if his business was personal or official, Rodrigues response was, "mind your own business". Well Mike when you vote to raise our taxes, while you sleaze your way out of paying yours, it is our business.

In a judge's ruling in the state's influence peddling case against Richard Vitale it was revealed that Vitale told the owner of Ace Tickets that DiMasi spoke with Rodrigues about moving their legislation. Of course Rodrigues gave his usual response when asked something uncomfortable, "I can't recall". Even though consumer groups called the bill "anti-consumer", Rodrigues pushed this bill for DiMasi. Obviously his chairmanship was more important than his constituents

Anonymous said...

I just heard Coogan's latest ad on WSAR. He says this is a smear campaign against him, and he doesn't know who is behind it. Simply incredible! You can't make this stuff up.

Earth to Coogan! The man's name is Attorney Angelo. You might know him, as your contracting business did work for him (sort of). LOL

Attorney Angelo isn't smearing you. He's informing us of what his dealings with you were like. And, it ain't pretty. Attorney Angelo has been entirely forthcoming, and backs up his statements with documents you provided him.

Try as you might to deflect attention away from this, it won't work. All you do by using surrogates like Laz to try and provide cover for you is focus the spotlight on you even more.

What is it going to take to get you to answer the serious questions raised by Attorney Angelo and the Hummel Report?

Answer the questions, Mr. Coogan.

$800 for a permit never pulled?

Working in RI without a license?

Were your employees covered with worker's compensation insurance while working on Attorney Angelo's house?

Shoddy workmanship by a building contractor is one thing. These questions aren't about shoddy workmanship.

If you have answers to these questions, provide them and it will all go away. It really is that simple, Mr. Coogan.

Anonymous said...

I'm not voting for Rodrigues because when Mayor Correia blew through a stop sign and hit a 19 year old girl Rodrigues wouldn't cooperate with the police investigation. Apparently he didn't see nuttin'. LOL, C'mon! Really?

Anonymous said...

I planned on voting for Coogan until today. Then I received a mailing from Coogan that smeared his opponents instead of telling me what he planned on doing.

The guy is a hypocrite and hypocrites don't get no vote for me. I'm now voting for Mitchell or Rodrigues.

Scummy dirty politics by coogan cost him my family vote. Hypocritical from the guy that says no personal attacks.

Anonymous said...

Same here.
Hypocrisy + lies = equals no vote.

Anonymous said...

I was a Coogan supporter, but cannot in good conscience support him now. I heard him accuse his opponents of committing "double speak" - this has to be the worst case of double speak I've witnessed. I respected Mike when he started each debate by stating his personal conviction that there be no smearing of one another, and to stick to the issues. I was actually encouraged by his "end politics as usual" mantra, and believe in it with all of my heart. I was with Mike when he admonished smearing in his radio ad I heard this morning.

You can imagine the surprise and disgust I felt when I received the two negative ads put out by Mike smearing everyone but Lawless. Mike - I'm not a firefighter, I'm not in a Union... I won't support you for those reasons. I thought you stood for change - you're one of the same. Sorry Mike, I'm disgusted.

Anonymous said...

I was a Coogan supporter, but cannot in good conscience support him now. I heard him accuse his opponents of committing "double speak" - this has to be the worst case of double speak I've witnessed. I respected Mike when he started each debate by stating his personal conviction that there be no smearing of one another, and to stick to the issues. I was actually encouraged by his "end politics as usual" mantra, and believe in it with all of my heart. I was for Mike when he admonished smearing in his radio ad I heard this morning.

You can imagine the surprise and disgust I felt when I received the two negative ads put out by Mike smearing everyone but Lawless. Mike - I'm not a firefighter, I'm not in a Union... I won't support you for those reasons. I thought you stood for change - you're one of the same. Sorry Mike, I'm disgusted.

Anonymous said...

I also didn't like the sappy ad run wsar saying coogan didn't always agree with senator menard but blah blah blah....

He didn't agree, he made very negative comments about her and bob c, how is that different then the campaign he is in right now?

Anonymous said...

On behalf of many campaign supporters of the other candidates, we just want to thank Mr. Coogan once again for doing what comes naturally to him - making himself look unethical, unbelievable, insincere, hypocritical and foolish!

Unethical - Sitting on a credit union board, being sued as a contractor for funds recieved from the same credit union sounds unethical to me. Engaging in questionable business practices on a regular basis. Charging for permits never obtained.


Unbelievable and insincere - Claiming several times to not engage in personal attacks, yet acting in manner contrary to those very words he utters.

Hypocritical and Foolish - Promising a change but it is evident, if you are not a union memeber, you can forget about getting any support from him.
Resorting to gorilla tactics such as his recent smear campaign ads that only alienate and embarass his own supporters

However, if you are NOT a union member, you could probably go work for his company. Thanks Mr. Coogan, Great Work!

Anonymous said...

I was considering Coogan until I heard the ad from Norton.

Anonymous said...

Coogan's hypocrisy has costed him my vote.

Anonymous said...

Every campaign we hear the same, I was going to vote for him until he did this or that. Not very clever and nobody buys it, as we all know you were never voting for him in the first place.

Some of you talk of hypocrisy, but what is more hypocritical than Rodrigues voting for us to pay more taxes, while he avoids paying them himself. Or Rodrigues pushing an anti-consumer bill at the behest of an indited speaker, then telling the voters, "he gets it".

Lefty said...

The problem with getting a dozen anonymous comment saying they're not voting for one candidate is it could be 12 comments from the same person.

I haven't seen Coogan's mailer and as a Republican I doubt I'm on his mailing list. If someone wants to scan it and email it to me at aviewfrombattleshipcove@gmail.com that would be appreciated.

I'm not really thrilled with the idea of people just leaving a comment saying they won't vote for Coogan without telling us WHO they will vote for and WHY. Honestly, most of the candidates have some sort of skeleton to deal with so I'm not sure how you justify one over the other.

Anonymous said...

Laz..... Coogan did a pole 6 to 8 weeks ago. He likes to lie and claim he was a close second to rodrigues but anyone with a brain and common sense who saw the article and press release he sent out immediately after getting the results, where he attepmted to blast Mitchell for not bringing casino gaming to mass. 18 years ago (ignoring the fact that Will Flanagan cant swing it 2010) can tell that he was third behind rodrigues and then mitchell. His own campaign team was admitting the results around the city as is common place with campaigns and secrets. Fact is Rodrigues has been first and Mitchell second in every professionally done poll during this campaign. It makes nos sense for rodrigues to go negative or conspire with mr angelo. Reality is you live in a dream world with your exotic political theories. Anuone who knows Mike Rodrigues knows he plain and simple doesnt have the balls to do such a thing. He the most unconfrontational elected official in this area. Coogan has gone negative because he is behond and has been the whole campaign. Behind Rodrigues and Mitchell. Thats why he continues to smear Mitchell as well. And Coogan has no one to blame but himself. He refused to go door to door early and lost his original campaign manager as a result. He has a nasty "you are with me or against me" attitude and it cost him.

Anonymous said...

Anon 1044, since the majority of coogan supporters seem to be the union does anyone know how the ration of how many of them and their families are able to vote in this election?

Anonymous said...

10:44

Your comment is the gayest I have ever read. Nuff said.

Anonymous said...

What? No room for funny?

Anonymous said...

Word on the street is that many of Coogan supporters are greasing the skids for a soft landing on the Rodrigues and Mitchell campaigns. They realize they're on a sinking ship and are looking to jump.

Anonymous said...

Coogan was a registered REPUBLICAN up until 3 years ago!!!!!

Why is this NEVER mentioned!!!!

Another FRAUD by Coogan

Anonymous said...

If this is true why wouldn't he run as a republican? How can this be verified? Aren't most union guys democrat? If this is true I will have to vote Rodrigues.

Anonymous said...

Coogan was 100% a registered Republican. Another hypocritical move by the 2 faced candidate.

Anonymous said...

Ewww..looks like you have been Rodriguesized! Keep in in mind the douche forwarding this crap is not behind anything Rodrigues.
se

Anonymous said...

word on the street is ELMO

Anonymous said...

What's going on here?

Anonymous said...

Rodrigues supporters are trying to smear Coogan on this blog.

Anonymous said...

If Coogan is a distant third behind Rodrigues and Mitchell, why is he the main target of the other camps? Doesn't make sense.

True Rodrigues doesn't have the you know what to attack negatively,that's why he is using Angelo and his pathetic cultist on the blogs to do it for him.

Anonymous said...

Let me see, I have to decide whether to believe a LAWYER (pronounced LIAR many places), from Rhode Island (the most corrupt state in the Union) no less or a hard-working public servant who runs a small business? Humm. Let me think.

Let face it if you put all of Mikey "I Like New Hampishire" Rodriques supporters together in a room together they couldn't get to a double digit I.Q.

The choice is clear, especially for Freetown voters. COOGAN.

Yeah like I care what a LAWYER (pronounced LIAR in many places)
from Rhode Island has to say. Get real.

Anonymous said...

http://www.hummelreport.com/9.1.2010_coogan.html

Anon 10:47,

Thank you for returning this conversation to the intended topic of this thread.

Did Coogan doing business in RI without a license?

Did Coogan charge an $800 fee for a permit he never pulled?

Did Coogan's employees have worker's compensation coverage while working on Attorney Angelo's house in RI?

It's painfully clear that Coogan has overtly and purposely chosen to avoid responding to these serious questions. That is not what one would expect from a candidate for high public office who is running on a platform of transparency!

The talk in the coffee shops about this issue has been non-stop for more than a week now. There's no question Coogan is aware that everyone is talking about it. So, we are now left to decide without benefit of so much as a single word from Coogan.

After going back and watching the video on the Hummel Report one more time, I'm not really that surprised by Coogan's silence. Attorney Angelo is quite compelling in his statements in the report.

I suggest anyone who hasn't already watched the video or read the script of it should do so now. Here's the web address for it:

http://www.hummelreport.com/9.1.2010_coogan.html

Anonymous said...

The problem is it's not that the lawyers story is in question, it't that there are more than one person with claims against coogan and they happpened well before he was running for senate, this shows a lack of character. and by the way coogan is cousins with a lawyer running for senate....mitchell. He is also backed by a lawyer Flanagan and look how that is turning out for Fall River.

Anonymous said...

Some of you consistently speak of character yet you back Rodrigues. He would sell his soul and betray his constituents for a chairmanship. He pushed an anti-consumer bill at the behest of an indited speaker. He voted to take collective bargaining rights away from labor. He voted for you to pay more taxes, yet doesn't feel he should share the same burden. Why he even stabbed a colleague in the back by trying to steal a piece of legislation that this other rep. had been pushing for two years, and had the audacity to claim it as his own. Anon 8:13 This shows lack of character.

Anonymous said...

Ho-hum, gee Mikey "I Love New Hampshire" you and yours spend a lot of timke on this blog attacking and hiding like little girls. Boo-hoo. You lose Mikey. You wanna believe a LAWYER from RHODE ISLAND, have fun. The rest of us non Mikey family members will vote for COOGAN And grow up will ya.

Anonymous said...

6/30/2010 Patrick Long
8 Bill Street Westport, MA 02790 Coogan, Michael J. Food / Clamboil @ Corky Row $812.00

Anonymous said...

9/2/10 - Hummel Report comes out raising serious questions about Senate candidate Mike Coogan's business practices (the details are more than adequately detailed on this blog). Coogan refuses to respond to the inquiry and says he will call Hummel back.

9/3/10 - Lefty posts a link to the report on this blog. Readers begin to ask for a response from Coogan. No response from Coogan.

9/4/10 - No response from Coogan.

9/5/10 - No response from Coogan.

9/6/10 - No response from Coogan.

9/7/10 - No response from Coogan.

9/8/10 - No response from Coogan.

9/9/10 - No response from Coogan.

9/10/10 - No response from Coogan.

9/11/10 - No response from Coogan.

9/12/10 - No response from Coogan.

Here we are on September 13th... still no response from Coogan, and people will begin voting in less than 24 hours!

Anonymous said...

Can we ask Mikey Rodrigues why he voted to raise taxes on booze and then slithered to New Hampshire to buy it?

Can we ask Mikey Rodrigues why he voted to support a convicted house speaker?

Can we ask Mikey Rodrigues why he votes against unions?

Can we ask mmikey Rodrigues why he voted against teachers and education?

I'm waiting.

Hello Mikey what's the matter?

Afriad to answer?

Anonymous said...

No response from Mikey Rodrigues.

Opps, I bet he's out of town buying tax free booze in new Hampshire.

Don't forget to get some booze from your pal Sal DiMazi.

Still waiting.

Anonymous said...

All of this bickering between the Rodrigues and Coogan camps is making me vote for Mitchell.

Mitchell does not take the low road that these 2 are taking. My vote is Ray Mitchell!

Anonymous said...

It's John not Ray......but a good nonetheless. I'm also voting Mitchell. John Mitchell not Ray ;)

Anonymous said...

Coogan has purposely chosen not to respond to the Hummel Report, in spite of having ample time and forums to do so.

That's unfortunate for people who want to cast an informed vote. It's also going to be politically unfortunate for Coogan.