When will the media bring up Vince Illuzzi’s past?

Some confirmation of our recent spate of Republican-ticket rumor-mongering comes from “Blurt,” the staff blog at Seven Days. Reporter Paul Heintz quotes State Sen. Vince Illuzzi as saying the odds are 75% that he’ll run for Attorney General as a Republican, against Democrat Bill Sorrell. (Assuming Sorrell is the nominee; see the same gathering of rumors.

Heintz offers a couple Illuzzi quotes on why Sorrell might be vulnerable and why he’d be a better choice. Nowhere in the (admittedly brief) item does Heintz recount Illuzzi’s decidedly checkered history with legal ethics.

Brief reminder: Three times during his career as a lawyer, Illuzzi has been charged with ethical violations. For four years in the 1990s, his law license was suspended. (Details here.) That would seem to be an important bit of information concerning a prospective holder of Vermont’s highest legal position.

It’s the second time this week that Illuzzi’s possible candidacy has been mentioned in the media. The first was on WDEV’s Mark Johnson Show, in a conversation between Mark and Vermont Pundit Laureate Eric Davis. They tossed around an Illuzzi bid without mentioning his past run-ins with his own profession.

I realize he isn’t the nominee yet, and hasn’t even formally entered the race. But I’d think that his past ought to be the very first thing that’s brought up. And it ought to be brought up and explored thoroughly before Illuzzi gets anywhere near the nomination.  

One thought on “When will the media bring up Vince Illuzzi’s past?

  1. Aren’t ethics violations required for any Republican to qualify for higher office?

    Just look at Newt Gingrich, the ‘formerly disgraced’ Speaker of the House.

    Major ethics violations aren’t a bug, they’re a feature!

Comments are closed.