Tate Defense Shaking Things Up

By Loudoun Insider

Ed MacMahon, Mark Tate’s attorney, filed a bunch of attention grabbing motions in Tate’s defense yesterday, as reported by Garren Shipley at Northern Virginia Daily (link here). I’ve heard that Shipley has been under big time pressure from connected folks to drop his pursuit of this information, but apparently he is undeterred. Good for him.

Three attorneys are subjects of motions to subpoena them - Jim Plowman, Jill Vogel, and Whit Robinson. Others include Laurie Letourneau and Robin DeJarnette, and a bunch of candidates who also had mistakes on their campaign finance filings but faced no prosecution, including Patricia Phillips, Chuck Caputo, Bruce Roemmelt and others. I’m surprised none of the Loudoun supervisor candidates weren’t on that list, since we all know how many mistakes were made there.

I am thoroughly convinced that this was a political hit job and a clear case of selective prosecution, as alleged by the Tate defense. I still give Jill Vogel the benefit of the doubt as to her direct involvement in it, but there is no doubt that her supporters sought to damage Tate just before the primary, in decidedly unsavory ways.Â

Republican State Central Committee member Kate Gunter filed an affadavit that says it all in my opinion. In describing a call from Robin DeJarnette, director of VPAC, who leaked the news of Tate’s imminent indictment, she says “I asked her why they were trying to harm Mr. Tate. Ms. DeJarnette stated as follows: “We took the soft approach at first and had people Mark trusts ask him to step down and he refused. Now, Mark will be indicted for embezzlement and perjury in the next two weeks. Then Mark is going to jail.” I was shocked by these comments”.

This really really stinks. As I’ve said many times, if Tate has done anything illegal he certainly needs to suffer the consequences, but those consequences must be evenly applied across the board. As we all know, those associated with the GOBN in Loudoun County NEVER have to face these types of consequences. This case demonstrates all too well what happens to those who buck the powers that be.


Comments

  • Interesting connection, David. It just happens that many of the same leakers of grand jury/insider prosecution information were also peddling tales that Tate is gay. Supposedly internet search records showed Tate looking for gay porn. I’ve seen Tate in social settings, and I can definitely tell you he likes women (not to unneccessarily bash the other way of swinging!). Search logs are easily forged, and either they really believed this about Tate, or they knew it would be a good wedge between Tate and his hard core conservative supporters.

  • G. Stone says:

    The only thing missing in this conversation is the one legged lesbian midgit lawyer.

  • concerned citizen says:

    - NotMattBritton,

    Be careful throwing stones. Plowman should be looking at ED’s “mistakes” on the legal documents he signed and submitted and ignored the “errors” on his campaign filings.

  • NovaConservative says:

    How about you actually wait until the prosecution presents its case.

    I didn’t go to law school either, but even I’m not stupid enough to fall for a lawyer trying to taint the jury pool with a bunch of stuff he can’t prove and motions that will get squashed.

  • Jose Kinusee says:

    NC,

    For someone that ‘didn’t go to law school either’, you sure use the vocab. . . .such as prosecution presents, tainting the jury pool, motions that will get squashed. Sounds like someone who has done some lawyering.

    Tate is only guilty of being a generalist and not paying attention to details. This is a case of prejudice against someone who has done a lot of good for our community and this is his payback–by someone scratching to the top while pushing others under in their ‘fight quest’ for power.

  • NotMattBritton says:

    NoVaCon -

    HaHa, … i think I figured out who you are, … you are very fluent in the legal process, … you are soooooo familiar with the nuances of the case as to be almost appear to be part of it, … you use jaron and acryonyms like a prosecutor, such as, LCSO – that took me days to realize it meant the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office, … and as you admit, you did not go to law school.

    So, who is inside the prosecutors office, and didn’t go to law school?

    Caleb Kirshner, … spawn of Patrick Henry, corrupted by its president who is a long time Jill Vogel supporter, despite his misogynistic world view and her rather un-savory personal life.

    and, I am, Not Matt Britton, at your service

  • Jose Kinusee says:

    NMB,

    So, if a spawnee of PHC is behind the nonbenevolence towards Tate, then why did PHC support him during his first run?

    It was probably some ‘deal’ related to supporting Jill’s husband’s college roommate and Farris’s man Oprison against Delegate Joe May two years ago.

  • Jose, if they think Tate is gay, then that explains a lot of their motivation.

  • NovaConservative says:

    NotMattBritton,

    Dude–I can’t be Lisa Mauck, Caleb Kershner AND Jim Plowman at the same time. I’m getting confused trying to remember who I’m supposed to be.

    LI–most of the people who feel passionately about that issue supported Mark Tate. Again–that makes no sense. The real rightwingers were anti-Vogel from the start. Kay Gunter (who has no business being on the State Central Committee while opposing the GOP nominee, btw) and that crew.

    The knock on Jill was that she wasn’t “conservative” enough.

    You’ve got your associations all wrong (again).

  • NovaCon, don’t insult me and what I know. I know for an absolute fact that several of the players at the center of this are quite openly anti-gay. Letourneau, as pointed out by David above, certainly has an interest in the issue, and the PHC crowd seems to be involved as well. Once again you’re trying to deflect.

  • NovaConservative says:

    Who did Kay Gunter support? Who did Eve Barner support? Who did Paul Proctic support?

    Answer: Mark Tate, Mark Tate, Mark Tate.

    I can go right on down the line. Who else are you talking about?

  • t says:

    t supported Tate, and there is NO ONE who has fought longer and harder against the destructive homosexual agenda than t.

    t would be both surprised and disappointed if Tate were gay.

  • Jose Kinusee says:

    I find this discussion despicable—speculation is down-right defamation and it’s simply not fair.

  • Jose, I’m with you.

    On a related note, the ethics and blogging thread has no comments to date.

  • Independent Republican says:

    NovaConservative,

    Right wingers! Dick Black and Eugene Delgaudio ringht wing nuts support Vogel.

  • NotMattBritton says:

    Hey Nova-Mauck-Kershner-Plowman-Fischer-Minchew-Con

    AntiGay crowd that supports Vogel -

    Laurie Letourneau – she is borderline psychotic – hasdedicated her life to bashing queers
    Mike Farris – he overlooks that Jill is named as an adultress in her husband’s divorce proceedings from his first wife, but by golly she’s not a homo … (though her married name sounds vaugely Jewish, … hmmm)
    Genda’s – borderline militia homeschoolers and field liuetenants for Farris who held a fundrasier for JVH
    Chris Oprison – the guy who accused Joe May of supporting of the gay agenda! Yep, like Jose said, he was a Jill supporter too – and moreover, she was a supporter of his.
    Pastor Ahlman – big Jill supporter
    Morton and Helen Blackwell – those fossils, anti-gay, pro-Jill
    Robin DeJarnette – former Family Foundation lobbyist who is also Jill biz partner
    etc etc etc

    Oh, and by the way, remember, the Vogel Holtzman campaign also had a whisper campaign aaginst Karen Shultz, … then sent that mailer with a picture of lipstick and an unflattering picture of Shultz which accused her of a “makeover” by media consultants who once got a lesbian elected.

    But here is the funy part, … from

    http://www.pageoneq.com/news/2007/jhv.html

    GOP candidate rails against marriage equality as husband lobbies for pro-gay media giant

    by PageOneQ

    The husband of a self-described “pro-traditional marriage” Republican candidate has made more than $500,000 by lobbying for a corporate leader in gay media programming, PageOneQ has learned.

    Jill Holtzman Vogel, a candidate for State Senate in Virginia’s Shenandoah Valley, launched an advertising campaign Thursday touting her position as a “strong voice for pro-family” legislation. Holtzman Vogel’s husband, Alex, is a high-profile D.C. lobbyist and a key advisor to his wife’s campaign.

    While his wife runs a campaign with strong anti-gay messaging, Alex Vogel continues to serve as a lobbyist for LGBT-friendly Viacom, which broadcasts shows denounced by conservatives, such as Queer as Folk, The L Word, TransGeneration, and the cartoon Rick & Steve: The Happiest Gay Couple In All The World.

    Filings at the US Senate’s US Lobby Registration & Reporting Disclosure Page reveal that Vogel’s firm has been paid $510,000 in the last 3 years for its work lobbying on behalf of the media giant. Six months after hiring the firm, Viacom officially launched the LOGO network, which so-called “pro-family” groups immediately condemned.

    The station began broadcasting on June 30, 2005 in 18 million homes. Last December, Time Warner Cable and MTV Networks announced a joint program to expand the distribution of LOGO.

    Responding to the launch of LOGO, Dr. Janice Crouse of Concerned Women for America’s Beverly LaHaye Institute said, “Gay activism, solidly established in our schools, is now spreading right into the nation’s living rooms… LOGO is an assault on our children’s innocence.”

    According to Robert Knight of conservative Concerned Women For America’s Culture and Family Institute, “Viacom’s dalliances with the homosexual lifestyle, both on subscription cable and network television, have always been ‘in your face.’ Viewers should be given a cut-off switch to prevent this from pouring into their homes and polluting the minds of their children.”

    In 2006 Viacom received a 100 percent rating in the Human Rights Campaign Equality Index. A cadre of benefits is extended to LGBT staff, including the ability to designate same-sex partners to receive benefits. Additionally, the company insurance plan covers medical, dental and vision for same-sex partners and short-term disability payments following gender reassignment surgery. All employees of Viacom are required to attend diversity training on sexual orientation and gender identity/expression.

  • I Heart Howard Beale says:

    You’re exactly right, Not Matt Britton.

    The scandilous Holtzman-Vogel clan initated a whisper campaign about Mark Tate and Karen Schults alledging homosexuality, as if that’s tantamount to conspiracy to manipulate the court system to sway an election.

    What I also find amazing here is the WaPo has ignored the fact that a sitting state senator has been subpoenaed. We all know Sandhya Somashakear is an abysmal reporter, but this thread has drawn almost 70 comments. It would seem to indicate this is newsworthy.

    But the question is why is the WaPo ignoring this? Well, it’s been said that after the WaPo had to correct its story about Jill’s second home in Washington, the H-V scandilous clan threatened lawsuits. They applied the same pressure LI alluded to concerning the Northern Virginia Daily. What happened soon after the HV clan threatened the Post? That’s right, the Post endorsed H-V. Shameful.

    So, what we learned here is that the Northern Virginia Daily doesn’t cower in the face of political pressure but the Washington Post does. The Post is an embarrassment. Let me ask, if a sitting US Sentaor were subpoenaed, would the WaPo not at least make mention of it?

  • Mike Rothfeld says:

    Well, right and wrong, NMB

    There definitely was a whisper campaign alleging Tate was homosexual. But MANY of Tate’s supporters — I was and am one — have as good a record of opposition to the homosexual agenda as anyone you name.

    And I was Mike Farris’ consultant for LG in 93, FYI.

    And still believe Britton, like Plowman, is a dirty operator … and that is very dangerous when combined with power to prosecute.

    best regards

  • NotMattBritton says:

    I Heart “I Heart Howard Beale” … and I don’t mean that in a gay way.

    You are SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO right about the Post. Don’t believe the Post.

    I think NVD reporter Garren Shipley will earn a pulitzer before this is over,… this is just the kind of small town currption politics (think Fred Thompson and the crooked parole board member in TN, think the expose book about the crooked politics in Shenandoah County regarding that landfill – Jill’s home county by the way).

    NMB

  • NovaConservative says:

    I find this discussion despicable—speculation is down-right defamation and it’s simply not fair.

    - Jose Kinusee

    Finally we agree on something. It is despicable. Everyone seems nice and eager to take the word of a lawyer who makes his living defending terrorists despite the fact that there’s not one iota of evidence backing up his theories.

    Let’s see what a judge thinks.

  • I Heart Howard Beale says:

    I stand corrected on the Post. They did write about this today.

    The link is here: http://loudounextra.washingtonpost.com/news/2008/feb/27/ex-candidate-seeks-subpoena-leaders-fraud-case/?latest

    Not one iota of evidence???? HAHAHAHAHA.

    What do you call emails between Plowman and Letourneau? What do you say to Shaun Kenney fingering Whit Robinson (who is tight with Jim Fisher) as the source for RPV. Are we to believe that all of these Jill supporters acted independently of her campaign? Please, it doesn’t come close to passing the smell test.

    For me, howver, I’m most interested in this regarding Plowman. He can’t on one hand give JHV’s campaign updates on a criminal investigation into her opponent (through Letourneau) and on the other hand ignore complaints or treat complaints differntly for others who might not be allies.

    Jim Plowman is done in Loudoun politics. He might as well just resign, because he’ll never recover from this stench.

  • NovaConservative says:

    Beale…did you not read the emails? They were released months ago…he DIDN’T give updates about the case. She kept asking, but he kept saying he couldn’t comment on it.

    He also said that he wasn’t handling the case anyway. Read the actual emails.

  • Question for you, NovaCon, did LeTourneau get a threatening nasty letter from Jim Fisher for daring to ask about the status of a complaint investigation, as Jey Jeyanathan got? How did Plowman react when Jey asked about this at an LCRC meeting – he practically took Jey’s head off. All this before Fisher, Plowman’s chief deputy, issued an opinion that cleared Snow (who is the only candidate that shows up as receiving money from Plowman on VPAP). Noooooooooooo, LeTourneau receives personal email updates from Plowman. This is the kind of inequitable BS that irks me so.

  • NotMattBritton says:

    Hey NoVaCon -

    You are right, do read those e-mails, they are hilarious!

    They are full of disclaimers like a drug ad on TV – Letourneau writes, “I have not been in contact with any campaign” out of left field!

    Plowman writes: “I don’t know what blogs are saying.” Of course, his whole story that he tried to leake to Charlie Jackson is about 100 pct verbatim to what the VCAP blog, run by Dave Dziok, who was loaned to the Vogel-Holtzman campaign, had publised.

    Also – interesting comment nOvAcOn on Tate’s lawyer – because he, in your words, makes his living defending terrorists(partly with tax money you pay, by the way, so that makes you complicit, you terrorist defense contributor!!!) But anyway, … you think that lawyers with bad clients are therefore compromised along the lines of their clients?

    Good point.

    Holtzman Vogel law firm – worked for Rudy Guiliani. Therefore Jill is s lib.

    Holtzman Vogel law firm worked for Frist’s World of Hope. Therefore she is a scam.

    American Center for Voting Rights – another HV legal client (which had WhitRob on the board) – was tied in with Rep Bob Ney and thus Jack Abramoff.

    Need I go on NoVaCon?

  • I Heart Howard Beale says:

    To NovaCon’s question about the emails, I’ll just refer you to NMB’s comment above. And I love you too, NMB.

    On another note, I re-read the WaPo article this morning on this scandal. Let’s take a look at what Fisher, freshly in the public eye, had to say.

    “Much of the information in this case involves gossip, rumor, innuendo or suspicion as opposed to factual information. Such being the case, I will rely upon the orderly and fair litigation process. Moreover, since the matter is the subject of pending litigation it is not appropriate to comment further.”

    This strikes me as somewhat ironic and, of course, contradictory. It sort of reminds me of the idiotic way Plowman handled initial public comments. He’d spout off, then say “But I have no comment.” You can’t have it both ways, geniuses. Isn’t Bob Maistros advising you?

    Mr. Fisher–since I know from people in your office you read this blog–I’d just point out to you that it might not be wise to talk about spreading gossip, innnuendo and rumor when your office was instrumental in spreaeding word of a pending indictment to your buddy Whitson Robinson, and when the candidate you endorsed and help win a primary, the not so honorable Jill Vogel, used spread the most salacious rumors she could get her hands on to defame Mark Tate and Karen Schultz. Mr. Fisher, were you and Mr. Plowman behind any of the smear aimed at alleged (read: contrived) homosexuality? I only ask because many of us have seen you, Mr. Fisher, rail against gays with the soon to be former Commonwealhts Attorney in Loudoun.

  • Get Off the Fence says:

    Jill Vogel is just dishonest. This comment below is so typical of her Clintonian “triangualtion” – she wants it both ways.

    She wants to tell her pro-life friends she’s their spear carrier, …

    and then

    She also wants to tell her pro-choice friends she not a radical pro-lifer.

    This is from the Roanoke newspaper:

    Senate Bill 437 (sponsored by JHV), the most hotly debated, would require the regulation of all abortion clinics as ambulatory surgery centers.

    “Vogel said SB 437 was “not meant to be an abortion bill,” but rather to address the issue of women’s health. She and other bill advocates argued that requiring more regulation of abortion clinics would make them safer for any woman having surgery done there.”

    One of Jill’s faces is pro-life, her other face just wants “safe access.”

    Doesn’t that sound like Bill Clinton who wanted “safe and rare” abortions?

  • NovaConservative says:

    God forbid she was actually savvy enough to try to sell her bill as something that would actually PASS the Senate! Of course, this exact same strategy has been used on the federal level but staunch, savvy pro-lifers, and nobody has questioned it.

    But I think that post pretty much sums this whole situation up.

    For most of the people who are fueling this story, this is not about Jim Plowman. This is not about Mark Tate. They don’t care whether he is guilty or innocent. This is about taking down Jill Vogel, pure and simple. Facts aren’t going to get into the way.

    I think LI thinks differently, and maybe a few others…but they’re just getting duped. They don’t realize who the real enemy of good government, of honesty and ethics is. I’m optimistic, though, that when the truth does come out about this whole situation, those guys will at least have the courage to stand up and admit they were wrong. I don’t expect the same out of most–they’ll just move on to another way to smear the Senator. Its just politics to them.

  • I’ve said a thousand times, NovaCon, that I don’t see Jill Vogel as the mastermind behind all of this, and I do think she will be an effective State Senator. You are absolutely correct about her approach to difficult issues, she is conservative but not obnoxiously so.

  • NotMattBritton says:

    She is “savvy enough” to lie about her pro-life agenda – and she is savvy enough to mastermind the ACVR, le affaire Tate, to defend Mike Huckabee against the Club for Growth, aftern having aligned her own VCAP with the CLub for Growth. She is savvy enough to call herself a conservative and to work for Rudy Giuliani’s campaign too.

    Jill is plenty savvy – so was Jack Abramoff, Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton, Tom DeLay, Richard Daley, Alcee Hastings, Wes Cooley, Duncan Hunter, William Jefferson, Mike Espy and so forth and so on. But savvy isn’t integrity.

    It is not whether she is “conservative” or “moderate” – it is that she is corrupt to the core.

  • NotMattBritton says:

    oooops, … I stand corrected, … I didn’t mean Duncan Hunter – he’s just the moron San Diego area Congressman – I meant Duke Cunningham – he’s the corrupt San Diego Congressman who is now in jail.

    Thanks to my good friend Paige from San Diego, who likes to keep up with Virginia politics, for pointing that out to me.

  • G. Stone says:

    NotMattBritton;
    If I were Duncan Hunter, I would still be trying to remove my shoe from your ass.

  • NovaConservative says:

    She’s a lawyer who runs a firm. In case you didn’t know, State Senator is not a full time job in this state. Her firm has various clients. Certainly if its ok for Mark Tate to be defended by a guy who gets terrorists off, than its ok for Jill Vogel’s firm to represent various political candidates.

    LI–I know you keep saying that, but in effect you betray it by giving rise to the various conspiracy theories around, all of which are predicated on a contradictary theory that you say you don’t believe. You can’t have this both ways. I know you are trying to, but it doesn’t work, and in doing so you are aligning yourself with people whose sole interest in this is taking her down.

    All I’m asking from you is to give HER–and the prosecution–the benefit of waiting to see what the case is against Mark Tate before you condemn everybody involved in this. Your kick is the “selective prosecution” of Mark Tate, but as I’ve told you, you can’t judge whether Mark was singled out unfairly unless you know what the prosecution’s theory of the crime is.

    Over the time I’ve posted on her, you should notice that I’ve agreed with you on corruption in Louduon, on growth, on the sleaziness of Jack Ryan and a bunch of other things. I’m a huge fan of some of the same people that you are like Lori Waters. Obviously that hasn’t bought me any credibility with you, but you should at least be giving thought to what the various motives are for pushing this story.

  • NovaCon, once again I tell you to stop telling me what I know and what I think. I am absolutely not trying to have it both ways. I think JHV is relatively insulated from this, but that doesn’t mean that some of her supporters didn’t hatch this harebrained scheme and fail miserably at it. Of course my thinking so may align me temporarily with those who are out to harm JHV, but that’s just the way it is. You should know by now that I speak my mind no matter who it may harm politically. Unfortunately that kind of blind partisanship is what has this country and the GOP especially in the ethical and moral abyss.

  • NovaConservative says:

    But exactly what do you think “her supporters” did? Seriously..spell it out for me, and I don’t mean Ben Tribbet style. Give me facts. Tell me who did what and what proof you have.

    I suspect that ultimately, what you’ll say to me will be all about Jim Plowman, because I think that’s who you are really after and what your interest in this is. But hey, prove me wrong.

  • It looks like I’ll be a witness in several phases of this wicked web, so the full disclosure of my factual knowledge will have to stay somewhat limited at this time. I’m not after anyone – I simply put out blog items for public debate, but I obviously believe there to be a crooked cabal running this county. Jim Plowman has shown absolutely no initiative in going after the real political crooks in this county, if my pointing that out means I’m after him, then so be it.

  • NovaConservative says:

    Ha. I’d love to see that, LI. Sign me up. But don’t get your hopes up…I think this whole line of “defense” is going to get shut down pretty early anyway, seeing how it doesn’t in any way exonerate Tate from the crime.

    But maybe that nugget explains the lack of actual facts in your posts–can’t post them up here!

  • There are a load of facts in all of these posts – you just seem to be oblivious to them.

  • NotMattBritton says:

    G-Stone -

    You are right, … comparing someone to Jill Voltzman Hogel is despicable. The “Honorable” Duncan Hunter has every right to be placing his San Diego beac flip-flop up my San Diego beach thong a–.

    My fear is that I might actually enjoy that particular lodging and then Jill might sick Mike Farris and Laurie Letourneau and NoVaCon on me!!

  • [...] defense attorney’s motion to subpoena her is in this link at pages 20-21 of the PDF.  Here’s an old TC post of mine discussing those motions, even though I did not call out Radtke’s name specifically at the [...]

Leave Comment