GOP candidate still hasn’t made good on his promise to release tax records
Last week, Republican 2nd Congressional District candidate Ed Tinsley cancelled his final week of scheduled broadcast TV advertising, an unconventional move in a close race that surprised many.
This week, Tinsley unveiled his new media strategy: negative ads on radio and cable television attacking his opponent, Democrat Harry Teague.
The sum of the ads: Teague is an inarticulate man who ignores sexual-harassment claims in his companies and doesn’t mind the government taking away your guns.
The ads about Teague’s speaking ability and stance on guns are spin — like every other political ad out there — but are based primarily on statements Teague has made. But there are three misleading claims in Tinsley’s new TV and radio ads about the sexual harassment lawsuit against two of Teague’s companies.
Here’s the TV ad, which is airing on cable in targeted areas of the district:
You can listen to the similar radio ad by clicking here. Essentially, the ads take the allegations of the woman who sued Teague, his companies and others and presents them as fact.
The problematic statements from the TV ad: It calls Teague a “defendant,” claims that “the case is still pending,” and states that “Harry Teague isn’t talking.”
The facts are these: Teague and other individuals were dropped from the lawsuit early on, leaving only his two businesses as defendants, so the case against Teague himself is long over. Teague hasn’t been a defendant in the case for months, though the ad states that he still is.
And Teague is talking. He said during a televised debate earlier this month when Tinsley brought up the lawsuit that he wanted to be “real clear” about the situation.
“When I heard about that instance in my company, I was concerned,” Teague said. “I was real concerned because we don’t allow that type of behavior in my company. And that has been taken care of, and it was settled out of court…”
Which brings up the claim that the case is still pending. A notice of a settlement hasn’t been filed in court (the settlement itself wouldn’t be made public), so Tinsley has persisted in questioning whether there is a settlement. On Tuesday, Teague’s campaign manager showed me an Oct. 21 letter from Teague’s attorney notifying Teague that the case against Teague’s businesses was settled on Oct. 17 and a request for an order dismissing the lawsuit would be filed in U.S. District Court no later than Friday.
Today, Joleen Youngers of
Technically, the case is still pending against Teague’s businesses because a judge hasn’t yet dismissed it. But the case has been resolved. What’s left is a formality.
As for Tinsley’s other ads: Click here to listen to the radio ad about guns and here for the ad related to Teague’s speaking ability. Click here for the story on Teague’s gun stance, and here for more on his ability to articulate what he believes.
A promise not yet kept
Teague’s campaign manager wouldn’t let me keep a copy of the letter from Teague’s attorney or release it publicly because he’s still waiting for Tinsley to keep a promise he made at a televised debate earlier this month. Democrats have attacked Tinsley over a situation in which he had to pay the IRS $65,000 in penalties and interest several years ago because of the late filing and payment of payroll taxes owed by a restaurant Tinsley owns.
In an Oct. 15 article on this site, Teague’s campaign called on Tinsley to release tax records related to the situation. During the KOAT-TV debate held several days later, Tinsley told Teague, “absolutely, you’re welcome to any and all records.”
That was about 10 days ago. Tinsley still hasn’t provided the IRS records Teague has requested.
“Ed Tinsley fails time and time again to live up to his promises to the voters of southern New Mexico,” Josh Geise, executive director of the Democratic Party of New Mexico, said in a Tuesday news release. “New Mexicans deserve a representative who will treat them with respect and conduct his business in an ethical manner.”
Asked about the situation on Tuesday evening at a candidate forum in
Update, 10:25 p.m.
Teague hit back today in a radio ad titled “Reasons” that you can listen to by clicking here. The ad contains its own factual error.
It states that Tinsley’s failure to pay payroll taxes resulted in “fines and costs of over $122,000.” That’s inaccurate. Though the IRS originally levied that fine against Tinsley, the court case led to the fine being cut to $65,000, which is what Tinsley had to pay.
In a prior version of this posting, Geise’s first name was misspelled.