I listened to the Jackson-Clayton interview several times.
It seems to me that the only threat that Clayton saw was one to his business reputation that might arise from his meeting with an AEA rep / Huntsville teacher at a time when he was marketing his services to Huntsville City Schools, services that were opposed by elements of the AEA.
Clayton seems to have been concerned that hiring Hill, even meeting with her, could be construed as an unethical attempt by him to coopt the AEA / teacher opposition to his services.
It sounds like he messaged Wardynski to advise him of the meeting, which he described as an ethical gray area, to preserve his business reputation, making sure that Wardynski knew the job solicitation was Hill’s doing.
The AEA was opposing Appleton before the meeting and continued to do so afterwards. Clayton says he has no reason to believe that opposition had anything to do with Hill.
Jackson led the witness throughout the interview using the word threat. Clayton evaded that word until the very end of the interview.
No where in the interview or elsewhere does Clayton speak of a complaint to either Wardynski or the DA. It is not clear why Wardynski mentioned a DA complaint in his message to our favorite talk show host.
I conclude that the only threat Clayton was concerned about was one to the professional reputation of his company, a threat that might arise depending on how people viewed his meeting with Hill. Clayton messaged Wardynski to nip that threat in the bud.
Occam a friend. He has a razor and I and I try not to offend him.
Filed under: Uncategorized |