TAKE A LOOK FOR YOURSELVES, PEOPLE
FITSNews – May 22, 2008 – We’ve gotten quite a few e-mails today from folks wanting to see some documentation for our story yesterday about S.C. Rep. Scott Talley.
In his new TV commercial, Talley brags about how he drives “92 miles” at the end of each day to read to his young kids instead of going to liquor and lobbyist-laden receptions like most lawmakers do.
Well, according to Talley’s ethics filings, that claim is misleading … at best. And even though every word FITSNews prints should be treated as Gospel, here are some pages from his filing for any doubting Thomases out there …
 Â
By Ted C. May 22, 2008 at 1:13 pm
This is silly. On the first two pages, there is only ONE reception that Talley could have gone too if he wanted too. Talley is on Judiciary and a member of the Spartanburg delegation.
When most legislators file their ethics reports, they just attach the entire reception list.
Sloppy, sloppy reporting.
By sid May 22, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Hmmm, if what Ted says is accurate, I guess I have to question the veracity of this reporting. What say ye, FITS?
By fitsnews May 22, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Ted C.-
Since you’re obviously residing in close proximity to Rep. Talley’s cornhole on this one, let’s address your allegation of “sloppy, sloppy reporting” on our part.
We agree it would have been “sloppy, sloppy reporting” had we not called around and confirmed the following:
a) Talley isn’t required to go to any reception he doesn’t want to, whether it’s one for his Spartanburg delegation or one related to his committee assignments.
b) Talley isn’t required to report any reception that he doesn’t actually attend – even if that reception is exclusively offered to his delegation or one of his committees.
c) We have spoken with at least a half-dozen members of the General Assembly who interacted with Talley at several of the specific receptions included on this list, as well more recent receptions.
Anyway, we appreciate yet another attempt to attack us as the messenger and avoid the real issue at hand, the fact that this guy simply isn’t telling voters the whole story.
-FITSNews
By Bo May 22, 2008 at 1:57 pm
I believe that the House Invitations Committee provides House members with a list of every invitation received during the year. I agree that members aren’t required to list receptions they didn’t attend, but most just attach the entire list to cover their bases.
By Ted C. May 22, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Little Willie – A and B just makes no sense because it doesn’t prove that Talley went to anything.
Oh…more anonymous sources in the General Assembly. Like the anonymous sources that told you about the Strom Thurmond problem? Or the anonymous sources that told you Henry McMaster was not running for Governor? Or the anonymous sources that gave you a Republican caucus media buy that doesn’t really exist?
Do these anonymous sources have names or do they only exist in your head?
Are you telling us that half-dozen members of the General Assembly remember seeing one man at several events in 2006? Hell, I don’t even remember who I saw at the bar on Friday night.
If you really want to be Billy Badass freelance journalist, man up and give us some names. If not, shut the hell up dude. I can only think of one name for you. It starts with a P and ends with gina.
By Billy Chappell May 22, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Sounds like but covering from Ted. Why would Talley attach all the events to his disclosure if he attended none of them being home every night like a good little boy. Sounds to me like he just couldn’t remember which ones he attended so he put them all down on his report.
By curtis May 22, 2008 at 2:11 pm
So, according to Ted/Talley, Talley didn’t attend any receptions at all because he was going home to his wife and children, but on his official, legal disclosure he declared that he went to every single one of them “just in case”.
So, what? Is he afraid he would slip up and accidentally attend a reception without realizing it?
Maybe he has Alzheimer’s and doesn’t know when he is being feted by his lobbyist/special interest/trial lawyer masters and when he is in his own home reading to his children.
By fitsnews May 22, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Ted-
We stand by everything we’ve printed – the Strom problem, the McMaster story (back when Bobby Harrell was still actively running for governor, incidentally) and the Caucus media buy – which BTW we have the TV logs and purchase orders for.
As for the diverse network of people who tell us stuff, well, we broke open the competitive grants scandal using anonymous sources, we broke the bar exam scam using anonymous sources and we shared Randy Scott’s DUI arrest with the world using … that’s right … anonymous sources.
We’ll continue to break stories using anonymous sources that generate state and nationwide attention, and you can continue licking the back of Sic Willie’s hairy beanbag while we do so.
Seriously, the reason paid political hacks like you sit around whining and bitching all day and doing everything you can to try and discredit us (using anonymous comments, we’d like to point out) is because we’re right and people know it.
(unlike your crew’s practically-defunct website …)
Have a good one,
-FITSNews
By Billy Chappell May 22, 2008 at 2:34 pm
I don’t blame him for putting all the dinners on his list. I am sure when you do all that drinking at these dinners you might forget where you went…so put em all down just in case you forget one!
By Seeking Truth May 22, 2008 at 3:37 pm
It’s pretty much the same list for most reps and senators. They are provided a copy of the invitations committee list as well as the committee they serve on list(s). This way even if they only stop by at 5:30 to say hello, they are repoting that they got invited. It doesn’t state attendance, you would have to actually get that from the people hosting (if they even keep it..some do and some don’t). Not a story, not even close.
By Recovering Lobbyist May 22, 2008 at 5:27 pm
They all attach the list for two reasons:
If they don’t, and they forget that 5-minute breeze through on their way home, they could get tagged by their Ethics Committee and potentially get dragged through the mud in the press.
In addition, most of those receptions cost a lot more per person than the amount disclosed, and far more than the $50.00 maximum allowed by law. The hosts get around the limit by claiming the invitation list, and not the list of who actually attended. By claiming those who were invited, they report what actually cost closer to $100 per person at less than the $50 limit. By attaching the list, the legislators are winking accepatance of what is actually a violation of the state Ethics law that most of them voted to approve, and then pounded their chests about on the campaign trail the week after the vote.
By Anonymous Source/Legally Blind May 22, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Q1: So, is Henry McMaster NOT running for Governor?
Q2: For all you 100+bloggers on the CSOL article, what is the minimum number of “injusticed” for a class action lawsuit?
Pingback: Speaking of what’s going on in Spartanburg
By Who Cares May 23, 2008 at 8:14 am
Sounds like willie can’t let things go…. He at one time was in the political know and now he just tries to advance his own adgenda…. If you piss him off… he slams you… (ie. Sen. Scott, the Republican Caucus)
By Silence Dogood May 23, 2008 at 8:21 am
I’m not sure I caught the story here. Even if he breifly attended any of these receptions by just showing up (and thus would be required to report it) and then drove home “92″ miles he would still be home – and possible before a lot of people get home from work?
Was the point that he doesn’t drive home as he stated? or that he may, on some unspecified occassions not more than “X” number of times but probably not less that “Y” number of times have arrived home after his childrens bed time. If the point is he doesn’t drive home each night – as he purports – and stays in Columbia during the week – as he purports not to do, then just find out what hotel he stays or even spicier…who he stays with?
Otherwise, if this is all there is to this “story” I am sorry it is a really stupid none story. And I don’t know or care a rip out this representative one way or another, but apparently some one who is putting gravy in FITS plate cares for some reason – otherwise what is the point?
By Voice of Reason May 23, 2008 at 8:21 am
Seeking Truth,
Even if he is just stopping by at 5:30, the point of the matter (and the very origin of this argument) is that he LIED about it on his own commercial by saying that he doesn’t go to receptions. Get a grip Ted and Truth, because your boy Talley has a nice firm grip on those brewski’s at the receptions he ”hasn’t” been attending. At this point I hope and pray that he IS spending the night in Columbia, especially since he has been attending functions sponsered by Beer groups and Spirits groups- that’s just what we need, our representative gettingDUI’s just for the sake of tucking his precious children in bed.
Thank you, fitsnews, for this story. It is refreshing to see a lawyer caught in a lie. I mean I understand it is rare for one to lie, so I am glad you caught him in the act. Who knows when a lawyer will lie again…? It could be years…….
By happydaddy May 23, 2008 at 9:01 am
Unless Talley served on multiple standing committees at the same time (which he obviously didn’t), he clearly filed every invitation, even those for events to which he wasn’t actually invited. That’s kind of a lazy way to do one’s ethics report, but it proves absolutely nothing on the question at hand.
By Gene E. Nowak May 23, 2008 at 9:57 am
I have a real problem with the defense offered by Talley supporters. If, as they claim, he filed an inaccurate and patently false statement in compliance with the law is that not something akin to perjury? If it is perjury, is not perjury an impeachable offense, except for liberal presidents? This inquiring mind wants to know. If his TV ad inaccurate it also calls into play his ethical standards.
While I do support Lee Bright as a very well qualified replacement for our present lawyer/senator. My fall back position is anybody but another lawyer/legislator.
By Allan May 23, 2008 at 10:15 am
No lawyer/politicians!
By Billy Chappell May 23, 2008 at 10:43 am
Voice got it right…the point is Talley claims that unlike other legislators he doesn’t go to the parties. Then he turns around and self reports that he does. It is clear that his consultants (who ever they are) took this ad from a similar one done by the RNC for congressional candidates thinking it sounded good and didn’t think anyone would fact check. Someone did and now its exposed…Good job Willie
By spawn of satan May 23, 2008 at 12:56 pm
The lawyer bashing by so many of you half-wits is just pathetic. “Anything but another lawyer.” “Refreshing to see a lawyer get caught in a lie.” What a bunch of kool-aid drinking sheep.
I can say things like that because I am a lawyer and I am smarter than you. Seriously.
By Talley= hypocrite May 23, 2008 at 2:48 pm
If a politician is trying to sell himself as the real deal – one who is in no way influenced by lobbyists and special interests – then by the simple act of turning in the reports to the ethics committee- he has shown he is just another two-faced politician – yes – he might be dumb or he might be lazy for turning in the reports – but the facts Sic Willie has presented show he is definitely not the “real deal” .
It is a clear line and the document show he crossed it
By Believe It Not (a.k.a. Sic Willie's Stalker) May 25, 2008 at 9:10 pm
sic(k) willie has always been sloppy. We’re interested in the fact that he says he stands by his “Strom problem” story. So tell us willie, who is the Midlands’ Elected Official you claim has a Strom problem?