Brian Fitzpatrick and Scott Wallace.
Credit: Tom Sofield/LevittownNow.com
Two election season ads have drawn scrutiny only weeks after Republicans faced similar issues.
The first ad was against incumbent Republican Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick and aired with funding from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), a national organization that works to get Democrats elected to congress and has no direct ties to any campaigns. The ad cites three separate votes that it claimed Fitzpatrick “sold you out” on. The votes related to health care and those with pre-existing conditions.
While the ad makes bold claims, the Washington Post Fact Checker ranked the ad “four Pinocchios” and said it “crosses the line.” It further laid out how Fitzpatrick went against the majority of his party to vote against the President Donald Trump-backed plan to repeal the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. The Washington Post report noted that the three votes cited in the ad were parliamentary actions that did not include any legislation.
The Fitzpatrick campaign seemed pleased with the Fact Checker’s ruling and shared the story on social media and in an email last week to reporters covering the election.
However, the DCCC stood by the 30-second spot.
“We stand behind our ad,” DCCC spokesperson Evan Lukaske said. “Congressman Fitzpatrick voted to gut the Affordable Care Act, which enabled the Trump administration’ lawsuit to gut protections for people with pre-existing conditions like asthma and diabetes. Voters who believe Fitzpatrick won’t protect people with pre-existing conditions are 100 percent right and should reject him this November.”
While Wallace’s campaign noted they cannot coordinate with outside groups like the DCCC. They said that “Fitzpatrick’s sanctimony on this issue is laughable – his own ads have been labeled “Willie-Horton style” race-baiting smears, and his Republican backers earned a ‘false’ Politifact for their absurd attacks. Fitzpatrick has yet to utter a peep about those ads – typical hypocrisy from a typical politician.”
A separate TV spot put out by the Wallace campaign captured some attention on the right due to its star, Tullytown resident Jim Thomson. The Vietnam War veteran was convicted, according to the National Republican Campaign Committee, of illegal possession and sale of a machine gun in New Jersey nearly 20 years ago.
The national Republicans hit the ad – titled “Orange” and focusing on Thomson thanking Wallace for his work to help victims of Agent Orange – for featuring a man who has an apparent conviction that clashes with the candidate’s support of an assault weapons ban.
The conservative Free Beacon noted they spoke with Thomson and he admitted the “mistake” but said he has never had another run-in with the law.
LevittownNow.com briefly met with Thomson and he declined on-the-record comment.
Following the Free Beacon story, a number of Tullytown officials signed onto a statement in support of Thomson.
“Jim Thomson is a decorated Vietnam War veteran who earned a Purple Heart while serving his country. Jim has been a valuable member of our community in volunteering his services for many community events over the last 20 years. He has also volunteered countless hours throughout the years in fundraising activities for his beloved St. Michael’s parish. In short, any political attacks on Jim are unwarranted and his community stands behind him,” said a statement signed by Mayor Dave Cutchineal, Council President Nina Chrzanowski, Council Vice President Joe Shellenberger and members: Holly Kettler, Matt Pirolli, Linda Slemmer, and Maryanne Johnson.
In the same commercial, the Wallace campaign called the Free Beacon a “fake news source” as it showed a screen capture of an article from the publication and a Fitzpatrick attack ad that hit Wallace. The “fake news” claim echoes that of often-false comment made by the president.
The Free Beacon staff did not respond to a request for comment on the campaign’s claim, but it has been linked closely to Republican causes and talking points. However, there is little evidence to back up claims that its stories are fake.
