In Case Anybody Still Cares
From the follow-up file …
Several commenters have questioned our assertion yesterday that S.C. Governor Mark Sanford did in fact raise over $30,000 to help defeat the brother of U.S. District Court Judge Joseph Anderson.
Judge Anderson – satirically interviewed here – yesterday rejected the governor’s argument that a federal court should rule on the application of federal law as it relates to the disputed portion of the federal “stimulus” funds.
We threw the word “federal” in that last sentence three times, just to make sure nobody missed it.
Anyway, here is the actual invitation to the event that Sanford held for Sen. Shane Massey – who defeated Judge Anderson’s brother, Greg Anderson, in a contentious election last November.
The Sanford event – as we noted in our original report – raised at least $30,000 for Massey’s campaign, including $1,000 each from former Sanford Deputy Chief of Staff Chad Walldorf and his wife, $1,000 from Sanford’s Santee Cooper appointee, O.L. Thompson, $1,000 from the S.C. Club for Growth PAC (thet Club’s board is chaired by Walldorf), $1,000 from former Free Enterprise Fund director Mallory Factor (a longtime Sanford backer), $500 from former Sanford DMV advisor J.T. Gandolfo and his wife, and numerous other contributions of various denominations from longtime Sanford allies and donors.
The event was also held at the Sullivans Island home of longtime Sanford legislative ally Greg Ryberg.
Sources familiar with the event say that Sanford personally dialed for dollars, and that his advocacy was “instrumental” in Massey’s victory (a.k.a. Anderson’s defeat).
So again … what part of our original story is wrong?
Exactly …
So “step off,” haters. Or don’t … whatever.
We can agree to disagree as to whether or not Judge Anderson had a conflict of interest when he rejected two lawsuits from a guy who only six months earlier helped defeat his brother in a political campaign, but the facts are (once again) not in dispute …
Sanford raised over $30,000 to defeat Anderson’s brother in a State Senate race six months ago – just like we said he did.
Comments
By Wes Wolfe on June 2nd, 2009 at 5:08 pm
Sweet Jesus — I hope Sanford’s people are giving you good money for a blowjob piece like this. Were you even watching the race when it was happening, or are you just rewriting talking points from the Governor’s Office?
By Silence Dogood on June 3rd, 2009 at 1:59 am
FITS, I still care, and while I appreciate your response, Shane Massey only rasied a little under $35,000 in the ENTIRE month of Sept. according to his filings with the state, are you seriously contributing all of that to the governor’s fund raiser?
The stat ethics filings show that he actually raised $18,200 for the date of this event. I can’t imagine that all of these people would not have given ‘but for’ the fact that Sanford hosted a fundraiser for him. Many of these groups and persons would have given anyway – and frankly I feel there is no need to “step off” since, at best, you were off by only about $12,000.00. Again, that is assuming no Sanford backer would have given to Massey without the fund raiser or other conservative person or group listed.
By eat my shorts on June 3rd, 2009 at 7:11 am
Pretty amazing even by your standards Will. You STILL fail to address what everyone said in your first piece- how was any of this a conflict? Your little “everyone is out to get Mark” theory is beyond stupid. Legally, this case belonged in state court. Anderson’s ruling was legally sound regardless of the fact that Marky Mark may or may not have raised money to help Massey. Also, how do you know these contributions resulted from that particular event? Pretty sure the ethics report does not read: “$1000 from Chad Waldorf. Chad gave this money at an event at Rybergs house because Sanford called him and asked him to so that one day he would have a lame ass excuse to say this resulted directly in a conflict of interest by Judge Anderson.” Kind of reaching a bit there Will? I know you hate it when people blow holes through your make believe self importance. Especially when your chest is all puffed out. But face it buddy, you are a paid off fraud. By the way, when did Karen Floyd stop paying you? You certainly did turn on her. She must have stopped giving you cash under the table which caused you to write mean things about her. So, back to the original question- conflict of interest? Pot, meet kettle.
By fitsnews on June 3rd, 2009 at 9:00 am
Dip-wads,
The $18,000 was the first day take from the Sanford event, but it raised nearly twice that according to the people who were there. We’ve seen $24,000 with our own eyes and have been informed by one of the hosts that it made $10,000 more on top of that.
Accordingly, we’re not backing down on either the veracity of the information we provided or the conclusion we drew from it.
Mark Sanford held a fundraiser that netted over $30,000 for a campaign that defeated Judge Anderson’s brother … in our book, that’s a conflict.
And speaking of that ridiculous claim that we’re in Sanford’s pocket …
http://www.fitsnews.com/2009/06/03/sanford-fired-blanks-throughout-stimulus-shootout/
Yeah … what’s the theory now?
Like we said, we call it like we see it around here.
-W
By tricklovethekids on June 3rd, 2009 at 9:31 am
Like a dog playing fetch, the General Assembly is telling the courts to go get the money that is owed to them by Big Sister, Anderson’s grudge just threw the stick for Princess Toal. Of course the courts won’t object to the bidding of their masters who put them in power. It appears of the three branches we are supposed to have running the state the governorship is lame duck, the general assembly is calling all the shots, and the judiciary is enforcing the will of our new one branch state government. See kids? constitution raping is the new progressive way!
By UpYers on June 3rd, 2009 at 9:34 am
Perhaps Massey has a campaign finance reporting problem similar to that of Geithner and his reporting problem with the IRS?