Well it may be a matter of where his loyalties lie (lie, hehe).
Look at a real estate agent. It's actually against the law for them to be completely honest. How is that for a legal system that makes it illegal to tell the whole truth?
For instance, look at the law regarding the disclosure of the fact that someone died of AIDS in a house. On the surface the law allows that fact to be kept hidden from a purchaser. A bit deeper into it there is a valid interpretation that it actually makes it illegal to disclose the fact that someone died of AIDS there.
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-03-11-re-40-story.htmlThe next year, Congress passed an amendment to the Federal Fair Housing Act of 1968, adding the handicapped--including persons with AIDS--as a new protected class.
That meant that the real estate industry was prohibited from discriminating against those with AIDS in the sale or rental of property.
Although the legislation does not specifically address the issue of disclosure, “such a disclosure could be considered a discriminatory action which is clearly prohibited by the Federal Fair Housing Act,” according to a NAR discussion paper.
What does the real estate broker do when asked specifically by the buyer if the seller has AIDS?
“If you are asked by a potential purchaser, ‘Is there any peculiar history to this house?’ the new statutes do not authorize a broker to lie,” said Mike Finn, director of license law at NAR.
“But there are a number of options for the broker. He can say, ‘Gee, let me ask the seller and find out if there are any things he will tell you.’ But if the seller responds, ‘That’s none of your business,’ that is acceptable under the law too.”
Likewise in California, according to Creel, “the law doesn’t immunize a real estate broker and allow him to tell a lie or make an intentional misrepresentation. But that is very different from saying he must answer truthfully. He could beg off, but he couldn’t say absolutely ‘no.’ He could certainly say, ‘I am not prepared to answer that question.’ ”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's funny to me. Congress passes a law making it illegal to answer a question truthfully. Then they turn around and get on this guy's case when he says he doesn't owe them an obligation of honesty to the media when Congress itself said that real estate agents have no obligation of honesty to home buyers.
Another completely unrelated case regarding politicians' spokesmouths' obligation of honesty to the media, or lack thereof, is when they are running for office and they know they have no chance and really don't have any serious intention of going all the way but they always say they are going all the way anyway even though everyone knows that's a farce and they are really just building up their campaign war chests, getting traction for their favorite issues, setting up their re-election for their lower office, getting face and press time and name recognition, and maybe ogling for a seat at the table for instance in the Cabinet or perhaps an ambassadorship. In that case their obligation is absolutely not to be honest with the media but to serve their campaign and the two are sometimes mutually exclusive.
Show Posts