Mark Tate is AWESOME

June 1, 2007

Members of the Executive Committee Republican Party of Virginia

via e-mail

Dear fellow Republicans,

I value my membership in the Republican Party.  I am proud of my decades-long service to the Party and its principles, and most of all, I respect those who serve in Party leadership roles.  It is therefore with sincere regret that I must strongly object to this ill advised inquiry into the legal assault against which I now defend myself and my reputation.

My campaign has become the target of a very well orchestrated political smear campaign. Those involved extend from the grassroots volunteers of my opponent’s campaign to – quite sadly I am forced to say, RPV staff members in Richmond.   

With all due respect to the men and women who volunteer their time and talent to lead our party, I respectfully notify you that under no circumstances will I leave this race before balloting. Therefore, regardless of the Party’s deliberations, the outcome will remain the same.  I will stay in this contest, fight to clear my name, and campaign to win.

The RPV convened inquiry scheduled for tomorrow might have been conceived in the hope that it can shield the Party from criticism by distancing itself from my campaign.  In fact, however, any public action taken as a result of this inquiry likely will have the opposite effect.  The Party has already intruded in a manner that, if debated publicly, will reflect very poorly on the Party.

The possible outcomes available to this inquiry focus on the possibility of suggesting I withdraw from this race; a suggestion already made to me by the Chairman, before I was even aware of any investigation against me.

I expect the resultant charges against me will be dismissed prior to trial.  A copy of the legal motion we have filed to accomplish that dismissal is attached; I do hope you take time to read it.

Obviously, only a judge can weigh the merits of this motion and the entire case.  By definition, prior to a resolution of the court case, the Party inquiry proceeds upon incomplete information and ungrounded supposition.   That is precisely why the Party inquiry being conducted Saturday is fundamentally flawed and unfair and why I will therefore not be in attendance.

I make these following points openly and clearly, and not just from personal opinion or rancor over the flatly bogus charges against me.  Here is just some of what has been uncovered in the press and elsewhere about the charges against me and RPV’s complicity.

A supporter of my opponent filed a complaint against me for mistakes on finance reports – mistakes, I would add, for which I have paid a fine. A prosecutor who is a public supporter of Jill Holtzman-Vogel, my opponent, launched an investigation into these long-ago settled campaign finance matters. 

The Chairman called me via the telephone on April 30th referencing a pending legal problem which had not been reported in the press nor on the blogs, and which was unknown to me.  I was asked by the Chairman to do what is best for the party if the allegations are true. 

Moreover, RPV spokesperson Shaun Kenney was asked by a reporter where the Chairman got the information about this investigation, and he replied: “We got it from monitoring the blogs.”  The problem is, however, the Chairman called me a full day before any blog or other publication or news outlet ever printed one single word about any investigation.   When the story did appear on the blogs it referenced the Chairman’s phone call to me.  I assuredly did not tell anyone – let alone any blogger – about the call, which leaves the likely source as a staff member of the RPV, as the Chairman’s call to me was discussed on a staff conference call.

Other individuals have relayed to my campaign their first hand knowledge of Mr. Kenney being the source of information leaks as early as April.  I must add these leaks appear to be a breach of confidential and privileged information about an official investigation. 

Mr. Kenney, of course, is a former unsuccessful “VCAP candidate” from the 2005 Republican primary who has been exposed in the blogs as one of the people communicating with VCAP Exec. Director Robin DeJarnette about the investigation, even predicting the date of an indictment three weeks before it occurred.  Ms. DeJarnette also predicted the date of the indictment in a phone call to a State Central Committee Member, Kay Gunter. 

VCAP was co-founded by my opponent, Ms. Holtzman-Vogel.  She has served on the board, and she has gained through direct and board member contributions, more than $100,000 for her campaign.  The story about an investigation into me was also originally published on VCAP’s blog.  VCAP and the Holtzman-Vogel campaign also share an employee David Dziok who job title is “VOICE” Program Director; the VOICE is VCAP’s blog.   

Moreover, RPV Political Director, Matt Wells, called my campaign manager – someone he had never met – and referencing the Chairman’s call to me, suggested that my campaign manager would need a job and that RPV could help with a “soft landing.”

Mr. Wells also prepared a document that was eventually attached to the “letter of invitation” you sent me last Friday.  That document had to do with your responsibilities as chairman regarding an indicted candidate.  Simply looking at the document properties under Microsoft Word software showed that the document had been drafted on 3 May – weeks before any indictment, but within two days of the Chairman’s call to me, and contemporaneous with Matt Wells and Shaun Kenney’s actions.

This is a politically motivated indictment set into motion by my primary opponent and aided by VCAP and members of RPV staff. I have an incredible amount of respect for our Chairman and believe that he can accomplish great things for the Commonwealth.  Yet, I remain confident the voters in the 27th District are wise enough to sift through all this on their own without the guidance of this Party inquiry.  I urge you to trust the voters as much as I do. 

Ballot boxes, not the courts, should decide elections.  And today my opponent’s tactics show every indication of appropriately backfiring on her.   I respectfully suggest this inquiry refrain from making matters even more divisive by interfering with the process based on incomplete information. 

And I must advise that if this inquiry proceeds recklessly, the outcome will prove to be disastrous for our chances of holding this State Senate seat.  If the Republican Party should pile on and reward these dirty tricks, it will make it very difficult for the GOP family to come together after the Primary to oppose a strong Democrat candidate here.

Cordially,

Mark D. Tate

Comments

This letter clearly shows that NLS and the Tate campaign have been working closely together for a very long time now. How long as Tate's people been feeding you information, NLS? How long have you all been creating this story?

Rats on a sinking ship.

This just proves that Tate or his staff were the source of the "leak" and have been spinning this in order to try and make him out as the victim in order to garner sympathy votes. Pathetic. He should have withdrawn when he had the chance.

Waldo's hitting the nail on the head:

http://waldo.jaquith.org/blog/2007/06/tate-case/

Where are the real issues here? Tate and Ben are trying to make this about the RPV to cover what Tate has done wrong. Let's get to the issues of the case, not the fake dressing Ben wants to put on it.

[Not Mark D. Tate]

The D stands for Desperate.

[Joel Rutstein]

I don't have a horse in this race, and even though NLS is my second favorite local political blogger (and, no, I'm not my first; like my boyhood football hero, I am third), I often disagree with NLS; for example, I think Dave "Ouch! Mr. Speaker" Marsden is a stand up guy for whom I intend to volunteer again.

BUT, I did find one part of Tate's letter disturbing: "A prosecutor who is a public supporter of Jill Holtzman-Vogel, my opponent, launched an investigation into these long-ago settled campaign finance matters."

Assuming, and it may be a HUGE assumption, everything Tate says (and predicts in terms of his exoneration) are true, the notion that a civil servant can be deployed to do the bidding of a private individual and not the bidding of the prosecutor's true client, the law and the public, is shocking.

If you've read this far and are inspired to reply "oh boo hoo. politics ain't beanbag, and all's fair yada yada yada" save it.

If, on the other hand, you've read this far and are inspired to reply let the Republicans tear each other to shreds...

[J. Sarge]

05:42, your comment makes no sense.

"He should have withdrawn when he had the chance."

What does this even mean? He hasn't lost the chance to withdraw. He still can. What good would withdrawing have done? The violations being prosecuted are from quite some time ago. Your comment implies that if Tate had withdrawn, he would not have been indicted. That further supports the notion that the indictment was politically motivated by his opponent.

"This just proves that Tate or his staff were the source of the 'leak' and have been spinning this in order to try and make him out as the victim in order to garner sympathy votes. Pathetic."

How can he leak an indictment about which he had no knowledge? I haven't heard any allegations that he was brought before the Grand Jury. How would he know about the pending indictments? That just doesn't make any sense.

I don't know anything about the underlying merits of the dispute here, but the volume of comments attacking NLS personally and spinning facially ridiculous stories certainly appears to be giving credence to these posts, warranted or not.

[JMU Duke]

The RPV has their trolls out pretty strongly. I doubt they're going to be able to spin this away. It seems apparent to me that Northern Virginia Republicans have at several recent points attempted to discourage challengers through the legal system...nice to see them get caught for it this time. I've got my popcorn out, keep at it Republicans!

[Phil Chroniger]

Wow, Ben's got an agenda. And that is "get the person Karen Schultz has a better chance against".

Remember when Ben stated that Vogel had endorsements from Russ Potts?

Potts has been saying that he wants a Democrat to replace him!!!

Where's your recant on THAT claim, Ben?

[Phil Chroniger]

That should read "get the person Schultz has a better chance against nominated".

[Jewington Analplay]

Do a style check on the anon comments at the beginning of this thread - my guess you'll have a pretty good match to Shaun "Flying Monkey" Kenney.

Just a hunch. It's certainly an RPV troll one way or another.

[NoVAConservative]

That headline says it all Ben.

'Liberal Democrat Blogger Ben Tribbett: Mark Tate is Awesome."

Ben, a liberal? Let's see:

LtGov: Leslie
US Senate: Webb
VA Senate: Cuccinelli
VA House: Golden
Hates: Connolly and Marsden

Sounds like a mixed bag. Angry Democrat Blogger, probably. Liberal Democrat Blogger, unlikely.

This is a complete disaster for RPV. I certainly hope the State Central takes a good long hard look at this tomorrow. The state party has absolutely NO BUSINESS interferring with primaries much less cooperating with VCAP who are responsible for primarying other good republicans this year. This was an attempted power play by some at RPV and it has failed miserably. If 1/2 of what NLS and Tate are saying is true, this is a huge problem.

[JMU Duke]

It's funny how the Shaun clones, Phil and NovaConservative aren't pissed that the party is interfering on such a level, or that Kenney gave Ben this information in the first place. Spin till the end boys.

[spgop]

I am really enjoying reading how people are tarring and feathering Mark Tate over this indictment, but I am missing one tiny bit of information...

Can anyone hear explain exactly what he is accused of doing wrong???

I mean, we have the 9 perjury counts, but those probably boil down to the 9 times he signed a campaign finance report after the so-called offenses took place. BTW, those state that everything is correct "to the best of my knowledge and belief."

You will never get a perjury conviction to stand on something like that because you have to prove malice and intent, and if it is a screw up, then it is a screw up. No malice, no intent. Nada. Any good prosecuter not out to grind a political axe will tell you that.

So that leaves the two election fraud counts. Anybody know what they are? From what I have read, no one seems to know. All the documents are sealed. According to the articles I have read, Tate doesn't even know what he's supposed to have done wrong.

How is he supposed to defend himself if no one will tell him how he is supposed to have broken the law.

Is that the way you handle a politically sensitive case, or is that the way you try to screw a candidate?

Let's not forget something else. Jill Holtzman's is, according to the Leesburg Today, "a Warrenton attorney specializing in election law and former counsel to the Republican National Committee at the time when current RPV Chairman Ed Gillespie was head of the RNC."

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to connect the dots and look at the past and present relationships and see that this whole thing looks rotten. And I would love to "focus on the charges against Tate" just as soon as anyone can tell me exactly what he is supposed to have done wrong.

Until then, the only thing out there to discuss is the fact that this looks like it has Jill's fingerprints all over it, and that too many people at RPV, including the Chair, may be involved in trying to subvert both the legal system and the electoral system.

And BTW, I am a life-long Conservative Republican.

Bottom Line: RPV should have never involved themselves in this primary much less fed rumors to a democratic leaning blog. This really stains all the staff involved in my opionion even if only 1/2 is true.

[What Next]

Interesting sidenote: My husband somehow got on a RPV mailing list from a (he promises) long ago Republican vote -- and from the survey Ed Gillespie enclosed - sure does seem the "in" thing to do to label Webb and Kaine as "liberals" and paired with Hillary Clinton.

It's amusing to see them distort reality like that. (same for the RPV troll(s) here.)

[Quite possibly an Executive Committee Member]

I'd like to comment on this, as I'll be directly involved in the decision making process and meetings to be held tomorrow in Richmond, VA.

I think it would be hypocritical of us to call tomorrow mornings State Central Committee Meeting into 'executive session', asking good, hard-working republicans to have to leave the room.

If it is, and evidently has been, RPV's in-house policy to email inside information to Democratic Bloggers, than dag-nam-it, we should allow virtually anyone half-republican and half-repudable in to our meetings. Its ridiculous that hard-working republicans, who may be aren't on State Central, even some I know that used to be, but aren't now, should be able to attend our meetings.

As I said earlier, asking those to leave and going into Executive Session is hypocracy given the conversation that I beleive we'll be having tomorrow. That Mr. Kenney is going to have a lot of questions to answer, and I think everyone should hear his answers.

[Kissing Cousins Maybe?]

I wonder if Shaun Kenney is any relation that person in Georgia working for Coca-Cola who stole the secret recipe and tried to sell it to Pepsi.

I bet he didnt think Pepsi was going to turn him in- but they did! What an idiot. (That GA guy and Shaun Kenney)

Hey Shauny Boy- tough lesson comrade; Without Coke there would be no Pepsi. AND without Republicans, there would be no Democrats- MORON!

Don't care about this race or this RPV saga, but if Tate gets nailed for this crap the bar on report enforcement has gotten way too high for anybody to ever want to sign these things ever again. We're talking volunteer campaign treasurers who sign what an overworked, underpaid campaign hack puts in front of him or her.

[ZB]

When did Ben ever support Cuccinelli?

[Not Larry Sabato]

I was just about to ask that same question ZB.

[Pete in Williamsburg]

Ben pointed out the smoke, and at first I wasn't sure there was fire, but now I am. My opinion plus 4 quarters will get you a dollar, but this is a huge blemish for RPV.

Vogel took the lowest road available to her. As for Tate, I thought it was a classy, concise email that told the story very well and clearly pointed out the lies and the villains.

Ultimately, this is an issue that will only matter to ultra-insiders like us. 95% of voters don't read blogs or engage in the fine points that we're hotly debating here.

I was watching the NRCC Chair on Hardball in Oct 2006. He was asked about that totally false campaign ad where they accused a Democrat of billing a phone-sex call to the campaign. What was the Republican Chair's reply: "Life isn't fair." That's the attitude Vogel and Gillespie will maintain.

However, to that small percentage of us who know, Vogel will be tainted. In addition, she'll know, too. Doubt it will matter to her.

[Not Claude Swanson]

In the end, there will be no winners. Tate will look like a felon, Vogel will look like a slime ball, Kenney will look like a dumbass, and Ben will look like an ingrate.

[Unchanged Melody]

NCS-

So in your outcome, much doesn't change then about Kenney.