[UPDATED:]Does Lee Fisher pay the Plain Dealer for the work Mark Naymik is doing for Lee? Someone alert Connie!

But the fact that he's told others that he received the information from a "Fisher supporter" and it's so obvious that he's been handled information from Fisher's opposition research folks, and not some over eager Fisher supporter in the Franklin County Treasurer's office that would think to call a Cleveland paper.

The fact that Naymik has a history of carrying water for Fisher. And the fact that's I'm tracking down information that is similiar but of such a scale that the most logical conclusion is that its the Fisher campaign all strongly suggest that this story to attack Brunner by using her child as  proxy did not come from some loose cannon of a political supporter but is coming from a campaign that has decided to attack a candidate's child and spouse in a bid for higher office.  Given that Fisher is in a dead heat with Brunner for his last campaign for elected office, who is would it be but Fisher.  It's called deductive logic, not a conspiracy theory.

I'm gonna stick with conspiracy theory given that you have one completely anonymous source who says that someone told him that someone heard Mark Naymik say that a Fisher supporter had told him to write the story.

That's some Ida Tarbell quality reporting right there.

But we don't just run whatever the hell we feel like posting.

We don't always have a clear chain of evidence we can lay out publicly, but we still build that chain none the less to ensure people get the truth. Do we screw up? Ya, sometimes. Sometimes sources lie or mislead, sometimes we don't get the whole story, and even then sometimes the situation changes after we report it.

The fact of the matter, however, is that there's a high probability that this story was pushed by a die-hard Fisher supporter, if not the actual campaign staff. I don't know Modern's sources, but I've heard this too.

Finally, I've heard a ton of rumors about Fisher's campaign tactics that are highly plausible. I believe some of them to be true, and a few of them would make this seem relatively benign. You haven't seen them posted here yet because I only have circumstantial evidence that they're true. If we just ran everything we heard, I would have went with something far more sensational.

If itfinal turns out to have come from within Fisher's campaign and if Fisher does not quickly condemn the story regardless of where it came from, then Fisher is no long an acceptable option for me. I'm especially disgusted with Naymik for thinking that this is news. I think back to being a poor and struggling grad student in my 20s and my parents bailing me out, and I think that THIS is an actual, disgraceful example of attacking someone's kids, unlike Sarah Palin's inane examples where people were actually attacking her. I feel for Jennifer's son, and by the way, I know some stuff about Jason Fisher (personal experience) that makes him look bad. Is THAT what I should be talking about? 

I look forward to hearing a condemnation of this tactic from Fisher. 

You say Fisher "thank god is not responding." He could have ended all the speculation by swiftly and unequivocally condemning the story and saying that if he learns it came from anyone in his campaign that person would no longer be with his campaign." Failing to do that, he's no longer an acceptable candidate to me.

And be careful about getting too indignant about this story — the source will most likely come out, and I hope for Lee's sake it's NOT someone within his campaign. But he still needs to condemn Naymik's sleazy reporting. 

To use the cliche and completely inappropriate "McCarthy" line for a private citizen criticizing a government official's smear campaign against a private citizen to score political points.  Guess you couldn't figure out how to fit a Hitler reference, too? 

Ironic that you'd use a McCarthy  given the Fisher camp's "witch hunt" for dirt on Brunner's spouse and child.

Look, when I read this story, I thought that it looked like Naymik was being fed Fisher's oppo research on Brunner and her family because this is such trivial nonsense that it could only come to the attention of an overpaid oppo researcher.

I've since learned from sources I've been able to trust in the past that Naymik has told more than one person that the information he wrote about Brunner's son did, in fact, come from a "Fisher supporter".

Other things I've learned from sources who refuse to go even on background lead me to conclude that this is not some distant supporter, but part of an organized whisper campaign to smear Jennifer Brunner's family that could only be coming from the Fisher campaign.

Don't come to me with your mocking,  phony outrage when the real outrage is the "win at any costs" strategy the Fisher campaign is deploying that goes so far as use an opponent's young adult son as a foil to attack his opponent.  That's what is outrageous.

I slept fine after writing this post.  My conscious doesn't bother me at all by dragging such intraparty dirty tricks into the light where they can finally be seen.

It's not like Lee doesn't have a history of doing this kind of campaign or anything.

The fact that a political campaign is using a surrogate in the media to pass along minor negative information is more of a relevant story than the actual things Naymik is reporting. How ANY blogger, journalist, freelance whatever the hell you call yourself fails to see that is ... well I lack the words.

Does the additional information that this information came way from Brunner's political opponent add context to the story? Yes.  Does it presents accountability and transparency by declaring clearly that the story is being pushed with people with ulterior motives?  Yes.  Does is raise possible questions about the credibility and motives of the reporter in agreeing to pursue a story based on information obtained by her political rival?  Yes.

Perhaps you think this is just some small thing... but you know what they say about small things:

'If you think small things don't matter, try spending the night in a room with a mosquito.' --Tenzin Gyatso, a.k.a. the Dalai Lama.

make a dumb comment, get called on it, call people names, flee.  FUCKING CLASSIC.

john, why don't you tell us how often you pitch your freelance writing services to the checkbook you defend here?

You arrogant cocksucker. You obviously didn't know that I used to be a newspaper reporter who covered politics. So unlike you, I have actual experience in the field. Therefore, I can do without your condescending lecturing about journalism. Did I say it was UNUSUAL? No, I didn't. The fact that you thought I did says something about your lack of reading comprehension.

I have sources.... ("sources" is a journalism industry term meaning providers of information which become the basis of a journalist's report) who have CONFIRMED that Naymik has admitted that this information came from people associated with Fisher.

So it's not childish assumption or assertions, jackass.  It's REPORTING.

And yes, I do think the news should stop playing their old games and hide the fact that alot of times they're carrying water for the people they cover, instead of hiding the fact from the public that a political opponent is using the media to publish their "dirt" on their rival.  That's called a criticism of modern journalism ethics.

Here endth the lesson.