Posted on 03/04/2020 5:09:58 AM PST by robowombat
Following Walsh's victory in the 2010 Republican primary, it was reported that a bank had foreclosed on his condo and he had been evicted in October 2009, but that he and his family were living in a rented house in the Chicago North Shore suburb of Winnetka at the time. A GOP spokesman said that voters would likely identify with Walsh's financial troubles. He was also reportedly facing a lawsuit by a former campaign manager who claimed Walsh owed him $20,000 for services[151] and had federal and state tax liens in the 1980s and 1990s (all paid by 2001). Walsh explained that the major portion of the past due taxes were on a college trust fund he received from his grandfather and that neither he nor his family had been aware that the funds were taxable. He also explained that his more recent financial struggles have made him more attuned to the difficulties faced by the average constituent.[1]
In July 2011, the Chicago Sun-Times reported that Walsh's ex-wife, Laura, was suing him for $117,437 for past due child support dating from 2005 for their three children.[59] Walsh allegedly had told his ex-wife that he did not have the money because he was out of work; she had later seen from his campaign disclosures that he had been employed.[59][152] Walsh's attorney said that Walsh did not owe "anywhere near that amount," and that he had had no more problems paying child support than "any other average guy".[152] Walsh and his ex-wife began working out a settlement of the disputed past due amount in late July 2011.[59] Walsh's financial problems inspired the proposal of a bill which would forbid people owing more than $10,000 in back child support from running for office in Illinois.[153] On April 20, 2012, a settlement was reached, and the case dismissed. As part of the settlement, Walsh issued a statement on behalf of himself and his ex-wife which read, in part, "Having resolved these issues together and cleared up these mistakes in private, we now agree that Joe is not and was not a 'deadbeat dad' and does not owe child support."[154]
In August 2011, the Chicago Tribune reported that Walsh lost his driving privileges from mid-April to mid-July 2011 because he let his insurance lapse. In response, Walsh criticized the Tribune for "wast[ing] time and ink scrutinizing [his] driving record over the last 22 years rather than Washington's unsustainable spending".[4] On February 1, 2013, Walsh filed a motion to terminate child support obligations, claiming that as he was now unemployed he was unable to contribute to the support of his children- wikipedia
THIS GUY is calling someone a con man?????
Projection
“ “rather have a socialist in the White House than a con man.””
***
Walsh needs to stay in his lane.
Just HOW is Trump a “con man”?? These idiots call Trump every name under the sun but cannot back them up with examples.
False dichotomy. Socialist is not the contrary of con man. Don’t say stupid things, Justine!
bernie is a marxist and a con man.
He wants a man who is BOTH????
With Bernie you get both. And a healthy dose of senile to boot.
So he doesn’t want Bernie.
Um ... what does he think socialists are?!
life’s been good to him so far...
Joe Walsh is a con man and an a-hole...
The good things is that the weak links have exposed themselves and we now know who we can never trust again.
The sad thing is that the GOP and “conservative” movement has many, many weak links.
It sounds to me like Walsh must have been engaged in some malfeasance that he’s hoping not to have to answer for. I’m glad he shined the spotlight on himself.
That should go both ways.
Democrat Joke Walsh: “I’d rather have fanatical partisan Democrat federal judge-presidents running the country from their courtrooms than have the Constitution as the law of the land.”
IOW, Walsh would rather vote for Sanders than for himself.
So, Walsh.
What was it for you? Little boys or little girls?
I’d rather have Walsh in the toilet than listen to his sh*t.
(can’t believe I use to listen to that moron on internet radio)
Right you are.
Further, "con men" never deliver on what they promise. Trump has delivered bigly in Judical appointments, wall construction, other border control promises, removing the obamacare mandate, relaxing federal business-choking regulations, other employment stimulation...
Traditional Republicans were either ineffective or never really meant their promises (Romney comes to mind). These are "con men", if any Republican can bear that title.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.