For awhile, it looked like GOP State Senate candidate David Storobin was leading a charmed life.
His opponent, Councilman Lew Fidler, had spectacularly tripped upon his own tongue, tying up his campaign in a defensive posture for weeks (and eliminating press interest in how radically strange Storobin’s world view was, in the same way that Michael McMahon’s campaign’s stumble concerning “Jewish money” closed off any discussion of the rather serious issue of the method of Michael Grimm’s fundraising from follower of Rabbi Yoshiyahu Yosef Pinto.
Then Fidler fell ill with a bad allergic reaction, putting him out of commission for a long long time.
Fidler had become David Weprin.
But today, it became clear who the real David Weprin of this campaign was.
A key part of the narrative which beat Weprin was that Weprin was a placeholder, chosen by the Party bosses to take a dive when the districts were redrawn.
And it’s now become clear Storobin is the boss-chosen stooge taking the dive.
The new district lines released put Storobin in a prohibitively Democratic district held by Diane Savino.
I've long suspected that David Storobin couldn't care less about New York State Government. In fact, foreign policy seems to be practically the only thing Storobin really cares about (outside of ending progressive taxation); so back when the first draft of the district lines were released, this quote in the Brooklyn Paper did not catch me by surprise (except in that it was honest);
"Storobin spokesman David Simpson wouldn’t comment on the GOP’s apparent plan to pull the district out from under the vice chairman of the Kings County Republican County Committee — upending earlier claims that it expected to spend upwards of $500,000 on Storobin’s campaign.
“THE LAST THING DAVID CARES ABOUT IS WHAT'S GOING ON IN ALBANY," Simpson said.”
Tonight, in the New York One debate, Storobin proved that again.
Errol asked him about Tier Six.
“Here it comes” I said to Domestic Partner, “an issue where I agree with Storobin more than I agree with Fidler.”
But it didn’t come.
Storobin suddenly got a deer in the headlights look as if he was Sarah Palin being asked about the Bush Doctrine.
The most talked about controversy in State Government outside of reapportionment, and Storobin didn’t know what Errol was talking about.
Instead, Storobin blathered out a rambling and incoherent stream of consciousness about helping old people, which didn’t even mention public employees.
Fidler looked like he was biting his lip to keep from laughing.
I thought Fidler’s answer thoughtful, but not quite right, but in context, it was a relief to hear someone who actually had taken the time to understand the issue.
It was hard not to come away with the impression that David Storobin was one stupid fuck.
Which was surely not what I was expecting.
Another deer in the headlights moment came when Storobin was asked to name one example of his civic involvement and could not name any. Instead he said something about Raoul Wallenberg.
The idiocy extended to reapportionment. Fidler urged a gubernatorial veto of the plan which chopped up the Russian community like a Su Chef.
Storobin, who once upon a time decried a similar Senate plan, blaming Democrats for what had been drawn by Republicans, spoke generally in favor of independent redistricting, but refused the opportunity to call for any action which would rectify this wrong.
He resembled nothing so much as a turkey voting for an early Thanksgiving.
There’s an ambitious Orthodox Jew named Nachum Caller, who’s made no secret of his ambition to be the GOP Senate candidate in the proposed “Super Jewish District” Storobin is being drawn out of by his own party. Caller is currently dropping $50,000 in independent expenditures on electing Storobin.
I submit Caller is not doing this because he believes Storobin has a long shelf life.
But Storobin’s resemblance to Weprin doesn’t end there. Storobin’s even given Weprin money.
Another resemblance; once upon a time, Weprin stirred up some controversy by using Nazi imagery in a negative piece about an opponent.
As I said, earlier in this race Fidler made a bad stumble, saying at a private party in a bar that Storobin had ties to hate groups, when in reality, Storobin had only said things which pleased such groups. Caught on video, Fidler doubled down when he should have apologized,
Seeing an advantage, Storobin has unrelentingly attacked Fidler ever since, making sure that everyone in the district has heard about this private moment which supposedly caused Storobin him such anguish that he can never stop talking about his pain.
Tonight it came up on NY-One.
After once again attacking Fidler about it, Storobin then said this was a distraction, and he wanted to talk instead about issues.
A minute later, Storobin was given the opportunity to ask Fidler a question.
Did Storobin ask about Tier Six?
Reapportionment?
Property Tax Caps?
Manhattan Beach erosion?
No.
Storobin asked Fidler about the Nazi/Skinhead white supremacist ties thing.
It was as if Storobin was David Weprin and Fidler Bob Friedrich.
One can’t blame Storobin for talking about Nazis instead of issues. Bringing up the incident must poll well, and unlike issues, it is something Storing actually knows something about.
But the broadcast and the reapportionment bill were not the only reasons why I say that Storobin had a bad day today.
Today, Chris Bragg did an item about Storobin’s law practice, elaborating upon a piece I had published last week concerning Storobin’s law practice defending child pornographers.
Actually, Bragg was harsher than I.
To be sure, everyone, even a child predator, is entitled to a criminal defense. Still, it’s Storobin’s choice whether he wants to take such cases — and up to voters in the heavily Jewish district whether that squares with their values
I disagree. I don’t think Storobin’s legal defense of such clients should be an issue, and I was harsh on those who raised it.
But, as Bragg makes clear, the matter does not end there:
And a further look at his law firms’ two different websites…contains some fairly over-the-top descriptions of the potential motivations of sex abuse victims…
…Then there is this passage, which appears to solicit clients accused of sex crimes, with some sort of amazing descriptions of their accusers’ possible motivations:
More than in any other criminal case, it is important that your criminal defense lawyer is experienced and knowledgeable about the special considerations of sex crime cases…
It is easy to accuse someone [of] a sex crime, and then difficult to disprove. In a case involving accusations of statutory rape, an innocent act can be perceived wrongly or the child can just imagine something that simply did not happen. Scientific literature by doctors and psychologists explains why children make up these cases. They aren’t bad kids. But children live in a different world from adults. The things they imagine – the boogey-man under the bed, a stone monument waving to them – may seem funny, until children hear about sex on TV and imagine that it happened to them.
That is just one type of sex crime. In cases of forcible rape, the alleged victim may just be making an accusation because of greed, revenge or another emotion.
Yes, finally I understand why Storobin was so adamant in denying that the Serbs committed genocide and rape against the Bosnian and Kosovars.
Storobin honestly thought those Bosnian sluts were falsely crying rape out of greed, revenge or another emotion.
Bragg also noted that the firm’s websites “suggest that the firm’s involvement with defending child predators may be far deeper than his campaign has stated.” Called on it the other day, Storobin admitted to doing it just one time. But, as Bragg noted, this is posted on one of the law firms’ websites:
Storobin & Spodek LLP is a criminal defense law firm experienced in defending people accused of all types of sex crimes: forcible rape, statutory rape, child pornography, etc. We’ve defended people accused of sex crime in both New York State and Federal courts. Whether you are looking to take the case to trial to fight the charges or you are looking to plea bargain, you need a criminal defense lawyer who knows exactly what to do in a case like yours. .
Bragg reached out to Storobin’s campaign spokesman, David Simpson “who reiterated that Storobin had represented only one sex crimes client — despite that law firm pages’ description.”
SIMPSON: I agree that makes it sounds like there was more than one client, but my statement to you is coming from David [Storobin’s] mouth, to me,”
Asked to defend both extraordinary statement about the motives of women and children, and the effort at deceptive advertising, all Simpson could do was repeat his boilerplate lecture on the rights of criminal defendants, even though that wasn’t what Bragg was asking:
David believes that people who commit crimes should be held accountable for their actions, and people who commit crimes against children should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. That said, this isn’t a totalitarian state where you’re accused and sent straight to jail (David knows this better than anyone because he escaped the Soviet Union in 1991). Under the Constitution, people accused of crimes are entitled to legal representation before the courts, and a small part of David’s law practice is criminal defense.
For the record, this is a very small part of Mr. Storobin’s law practice. I maintain that during his career David has defended exactly one person who committed a sex crime involving child pornography. That person pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography, received a 12 year sentence and is in currently jail where he belongs.”
But that wasn’t the only piece of Storobin’s writing that Storobin could not bring himself to defend today.
Over the weekend, I did a piece ridiculing Storobin’s deceptive efforts to falsely portray himself as an Orthodox Jew.
The piece included this excerpt from one of Storobin’s essays:
We’ve all heard the Biblical story about the origin of the Hebrew nation: Egyptian enslavement, God’s punishment of the Pharaoh, 40 years in the desert, conquest of Jericho and other Canaanite lands by Joshua, etc. There is just a small problem with the story: there is no evidence of Jewish presence in Egypt or in the Sinai desert. One would think that after hundreds of years in Egypt and 40 years in Sinai, Hebrews would’ve left traces of their culture – but they did not. Furthermore, we now have evidence that by the time Joshua came to Jericho, its walls were already destroyed by an earthquake, so they were not magically destroyed by the noise from the Hebrew’s horns. And most importantly, Land of Canaan was occupied by Egypt at it’s height of power. To suggest that Hebrews were able to defeat the Egyptians and establish a state in part of Egypt is like suggesting that a group of Gypsy migrants could attack the United States, conquer Florida and establish a state there. Such a claim is ridiculous!
This inspired a post on Yeshiva World News which, though it failed to credit me, was even more sarcastic than my own.
The worst part, perhaps, of Storobin’s essay? As proof of his scholarship and accuracy, Storobin cites a television program on the Discovery Channel. Apparently, for Storobin a television station is more authentic then the Tanach.
Today, Storobin responded with a tearjerker. Much of it was pure fantasy, continuing his unhealthy Weprin-like Nazi fetish:
From the start of his campaign for State Senate, Lew Fidler has engaged in nasty, vicious and false negative attacks against me… his campaign and its supporters resorted to character assassination.
They said that I was tied to the Nazis. They questioned whether I’m really Jewish. They’ve attacked my profession as an attorney with a false smear. They’ve even repeatedly attacked my mother with words I won’t write here.
The entirety of what Fidler’s campaign said about Storobin’s mom was that, together with Storobin, she accounted for half the funds raised by the campaign.
What followed was a long detailed essay on Storobin’s Jewish background. As someone whose spouse is a Jew raised under Communism, a lot of what Storobin says rings true.
Shver to be a Yid.
Jews were denied the right to be Jews, and there were gaps in their Jewish education.
Along the way, Storobin sometimes overshares. I learned far more about his father’s penis than I ever wanted to know.
But some of what he says rings false.
In 1991, we were blessed to come to the United States. While we had the right to practice our religion, we did not have the knowledge to know where to begin. Even as we struggled to survive on my mom’s $5 an hour salary working double-shift, we tried to learn. Every Shabbos my mom would light candles. I learned to read Hebrew, and I learned what to say before eating bread or drinking wine. We learned when to fast and when to drink four glasses of wine.
Some things we learned from the right sources. Other times, we’d pick up anything that’s available as a source of information: newspaper articles, TV shows, you name it. As a result, some of the information we got was accurate, but other was not necessarily so. For instance, many years ago, I got an incorrect version of the story of Pesach on the Discovery Channels.
Shortly after my mother-in-law arrived in this country in 1983, and not speaking a word of English, she walked to the first schul she found on the last day of the first important festival, so she could attend Yisgor service. It being a Reform schul, they only celebrated one day, and directed her to a place she would be more comfortable.
It was not a particularly Jewish neighborhood, but she still found a place to go.
By contrast, Storobin was raised in Borough Park. If he really desired to learn about Judaism, there were plenty of places to go. In fact, the Linden Park schul is overwhelmingly Russian.
By the time Storobin wrote his Exodus Denial article, he was no longer a poor culturally deprived Soviet refuge. He was a 24 year old who had lived here 13 years, By then, Storobin had earned a law degree, and a Master’s degree in comparative politics. He’d been President and founder of a Jewish Law Students group, and considered himself enough of a historian on the Middle East to have written multiple articles about its history, going back to Bible days, as well as a history book on Islam.
In his Exodus article, he does not write as someone who’d “pick[ed] up anything that’s available as a source of information: newspaper articles, TV shows, you name it and therefore got an incorrect version of the story of Pesach on the Discovery Channels.
Rather, as he admits in his Exodus Denial piece, Storobin was clearly familiar with the official version of Passover. He just thought the Discovery Channel version more compelling.
Which is fair enough. A man who believes that the ideas of the Minutemen concerning immigration are “reasonable” is probably not all that comfortable with a holiday where one must open the door to any stranger.
As Crain’s has noted, Storobin has consistently stood by his work.
“My views have evolved over the years, but there's nothing I've been ashamed of…I'm very proud of the stuff I've written.”