« Tate Indicted | Main | Primary or Caucus »


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Not Bill Howell's Comment:


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I think this "because the SBE changes the wording for disclaimers every cycle" should read General Assembly changes

Assistant Commonwealth attorneys are frequently used for these kinds of investigations - not elected prosecutors. There's only about 500 assistant commonwealth's attorneys in this state they could've brought in to handle this matter - instead they bring this guy?

It's not like perjury is not rocket science or that we're talking about the Enron prosecution here.

Why this guy?

The leaking of indictments seems very strange to me.

I think it might be worth noting that the Rothfeld prosecution was not for an "old" disclaimer, but for putting out mailings under the name of a group that was not filed with the SBE, lacked complete return addresses to find said organizations, oh and also happened to not follow the required disclaimer language. My guess is the first two points were far more important in determining whether or not to go after Rothfeld than any disclaimer error. Basically the mailers were meant to look like they came from someone other than Rothfeld and apparently Mr. Britton thought they came from Rothfeld and were disclaimed to other entities to hide their origin.

Not Jack Herrity

Last time I checked, misappropriating petty cash for a personal farewell party is a pretty serious matter. Sounds like Not Bill Howell also has a partisan axe to grind.


That was just the tip of the Stoffregen iceberg. To this day they're finding deputy badges that were sold to people in backrooms for $500 campaign contributions to Stoffregen. Just happened a few weeks ago at a traffic stop and it made the local papers.

Maybe this guy gets brought in because he is good at going after corrupt public officials.

James Young

This is an interesting, and disturbing, discussion. While each situation/case has to be judged on its own merits, it would be unfortunate if some Republicans or Republican faction were to be found to be resorting to the Democrat tactic of the last thirty years: criminalizing policy differences.

Mike Rothfeld

Well, let me assure you, I pleaded to 9 counts of a civil infraction for mis-worded disclaimers -- ALL were from my campaign, and embarassingly all were in some way incorrect. Paid $100 fine for each. Initially, I was charged with two 1st Class Misdemeanors allegedly for something else, but the 9 wrong disclaimers is all Britton had when he showed up at trial.

Interestingly, while I was served the 1st Class Misdemeanor warrants by two state troopers in my office, Tyler Whitley from the Richmond Times-Dispatch called to ask my reaction as he had it leaked by "folks who want to destroy me."

For whatever it is worth.


All this is nice, but isn't it rather premature to alledge some kind of massive conspiracy without actually knowing what Mark Tate has been charged with?

I believe that information is available--perhaps some of you should try seeing what the prosecution has before judging their case. Call me crazy.

Phil Chroniger

- 2 counts election fraud
- 9 counts perjury

That's what he is being charged with. They've leveled multiple charges against Tate, and since this was a Grand Jury indictment, the prosecution must've had SOMETHING that was notable enough in their case against Tate that warranted the indictment.

Not Bill Howell


I believe the PWSD's petty cash is funded through donations (not public funds) and is controlled by the sheriff. Whether any rules were broken in this case seems to be a matter of contention.

As for partisan axes, not many partisan Dems would defend Mike Rothfeld and Mark Tate. If this sort of thing is going on in Democrat-controlled areas (which wouldn't surprise me a bit), those guys ought to be tossed as well.

Doug in Mount Vernon

James Young, you are pathetic.

Doug in Mount Vernon

Ok, pugs listen up. Say it with me now:


It's an adjective, and the only correct form of it.

Use it.

Yeah, this whole thing is strange. You Pugs who think it's some DemocratIC thing are cracking me up.

We settle our backroom arguments in the light--they're called open primaries. Or sometimes conventions.....yuck.


"Then there was PW Sheriff Lee Stoffregen (D), who incurred the wrath of County Administrator Sean Connaughton (R) and the GOP supes when he vowed to work against their re-elections after they short-shrifted his budget. Connaughton's hand-picked candidate beat Stoffregen, and Bully was brought in to finish the job."

Somebody better start getting their facts straight: The Stoffregen investigation went nowhere until the FBI was brought in and investigated. If he was prosecuted by Britton, he got a pass. Do you really think he would have taken a deal if he was innocent, and there weren't a whole lot of other charges possible if he didn't?

James Young

DiMV, it is even more pathetic that you spend so much time worrying about it.

And those are pretty bold words for a political party which uses the word "gender" when the correct word is "sex," which uses "fair share fees" for "forced union dues," and which endorses redefinition of the word "marriage" to mean something that is never has.

There's very little democratic about today's Democrat Party.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment


NLS Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    Facebook Fan Page


    Blog powered by Typepad