10 of 43 Documents are recommended to be unsealed by the referee. The judge now will decide whether to use that recommendation or go further.
A couple problems here for Jack! First, we will see probably the items not directly related to his son’s personal issues so anything beyond the child’s medical conditions, etc will be open. If there is anything embarrassing, he takes a hit for not being forthcoming. If nothing, he looks sympathetic, but commentators will cluck their tongue (including me) that there was a better way–reinforcing the amateur hour tag his campaign has gotten to date.
Second, if it fits with the file that is floating out there, and there is anything in the floating file that is embarrassing and not released, the floating file is confirmed as accurate and will probably be used by the press.
Unfortunately for Jack! while releasing the whole file might be uncomfortable, nothing happening now looks to stop the drip, drip, drip.
Unfair, yeah, but who said campaigns were fair? This campaign has already surpassed the Hull campaign in handling these issues poorly and seems on track to make the Jim Ryan campaign of 2002 (one I’ve called the 2nd worst campaign ever (Bill Simon being the worst)) look like a model of good practices.
Is there any real point in this? What is the Tribune trying to do? Bury him? It’s not like he has a shot…