- ‹ previous
- 826 of 2794
- next ›
About Those Sanford Emails to Maria
On Wednesday evening, The State newspaper in Columbia, South Carolina, published a series of steamy but well-written and mature-sounding emails between Republican Governor Mark Sanford and his gal-pal in Argentina. The paper also reported it had received these emails six months ago from an anonymous tipster. Why hadn't the paper rushed this hot stuff to press? It could not confirm the emails were real, and Sanford had no rep as a philanderer. So the paper sat on the hot docs all this time. Apparently, the newspaper did not ask Sanford about the material.
Journalists and others can--and will--debate whether the paper ought to have approached the governor. But this part of The New York Times report on The State's actions was particularly odd:
But with one mystery solved, another endures: Mr. [Leroy] Chapman [the political editor of the paper] said he still did not know who sent the e-mail to the paper in the first place. “It’s kind of a moot point,” he said, “but I’m still curious.”
A moot point? Not at all. Whoever had those emails had been in a position for six months to pressure--or blackmail--Sanford. An enquiring newspaper person might want to know more about that. Had Sanford even been aware that someone possessed these emails? If so, did he take any actions based on that realization? The State engaged in great traditional reporting to get the scoop on Sanford's secret trip to Argentina. But now it seems it's ready to turn the story over to bloggers.
You can follow David Corn's postings and media appearances via Twitter.
who sent the emails?
wasn't it the hamptons?
Stanford emails
this is really an interesting article .thanks for sharing this one..
emails......
this is really an interesting article .thanks for sharing this one..free food samples
It is a little bizarre.
It is a little bizarre. Presumably whomever sent the emails wanted to reveal the affair, but then why sit on them for six months after it became obvious that State wasn't going to run with the story.
On the other hand, I think ~6 months ago is when Sanford's wife claimed to have first discovered the affair. So perhaps whoever sent the emails eventually just decided to tell the wife.
Who dunnit, and why?
For the conspiracy-minded, here's an idea. Let's say some people in the political world thought Sanford was a very strong contender to become the party's nominee in a few years. Let's say those same powerful people sorta wanted that slot for themselves. And, if those people had access for all phone calls and e-mails for the last 8 years, then they would certainly be able to blackmail Sanford into making an ass of himself over the stimulus bill to avoid the embarrassment and end of his presidential plans.
But, with that kind of power it might have been impossible to just blackmail him and be satisfied with that. If their intent was primarily to end his presidential hopes then they achieved that. If they thought his idiotic stimulus bill would do the trick they were wrong. Apparently the Repubs were pretty much okay with that. So, they simply leak the e-mails to his wife 6 months ago and away the story goes.
Let me ask a top-of-your-head question: with Sanford (and presumably Palin) out of the presidential lottery who would be the front-runner in 2012 for the Republicans?
who benefits
disagree
What makes you think that Palin is out of the running? I realize that she's a complete idiot, and I realize that she's got a family that was tailor-made for daytime television, but she may very well be their go-to gal. She's religious, she's photogenic (if not exactly telegenic, since you need to hit the mute button in order for her to make sense), she's virulently anti-choice, anti-global warming, & anti-government. And Republicans have already proven themselves adept at dismissing any criticism of her as elitist, sexist, and/or anti-family. I'm pretty sure we haven't heard the last from her. And I'm not sure that I mind. She gives good spectacle.
"I'm pretty sure we haven't
"I'm pretty sure we haven't heard the last from her. And I'm not sure that I mind. She gives good spectacle."
She does, and it's hard to tear one's gaze away from the flaming pile of dung, but more and more I'm finding it unfunny that she could be considered a suitable candidate by even a small proportion of the electorate. Shallowness, ignorance, lack of curiosity, viciousness and cowardice all in one package -- that none of this turns off her true believers is cause for dismay.
russian dating now this
russian dating now this appearance became more and more distributed. Many foreign rich men wish to get married on an common Russian or Ukrainian woman. Why do alien millionaires want to live only with Russian lady? All over the world there are many beautiful ladies, so why do they select only Russians? No one knows answer for this important russian dating and joyful question, but this note can show you a little truth. What do you think about Russian and Ukrainian ladies. Let me tell you. They are beautiful beautiful, kind, cheerful, funny and clever. Many them are very smart, but they choose a joyful family against their russian dating profession. Most of them wish to get married on a nice person and to raise a kid. They love their parents, they will help everybody who need them. In a dialog with common Russian or Ukrainian lady you will find many good feelings. russian dating Conve
simple. russian dating
simple. russian dating Russian or Ukrainian girl are fond of cooking, their delicatessens are really tasty. russian dating Russian lady will wait you after your work with russian dating your child, she will love you. She will do all flat housecleaning while you are at work, she would take care of your kid; family life with her will be like a fairy. Look russian dating at ordinary American russian dating woman and tell me her good russian dating characterizations. I think that you won't russian dating find them. American women are lazy and rude. They are fond of beer, cigarettes, russian dating simple stupid series on the TV and they prefer to discuss them with their girls. It isn't interesting to talk and live with them, they can't grow a kid. That's why really clever men don't want to get russian dating married on them. Russian or Ukrainian ladies are much better then American. So if you want to start a really good family life with really good lady, the best method for you is to find a russian dating woman in Russia or Ukraine. Nowadays there are lots of ways of dating in the web, so prospecting of Russian or Ukrainian girl will be really simple for you.
The two people I would
The two people I would suspect first are Sanford's wife and the husband of the mistress...
Some facts: The emails were leaked to the paper in December... Sanford confesses to it 5 months ago which would make it about January-February... He left for Argentina when his wife told him not to call 2 weeks ago... Sanford got involved with the mistress when she and her significant other were separated...
One Jenny Sanford Scenario: She looks through his inbox in december... get's majorly pissed off... copies them, doesn't want to be linked to the leak, so she sends them out via some hotmail account(note the nytimes calls the leaker a she but they don't know who the person really is)... waits a few weeks and nothing comes of the story, and she doesn't want to verify it with reporters... she cools a bit and somehow gets a confession out of him... it's possible she didn't bring up the emails and used other evidence or sent him on guilt trips(bring up Argentina all the time)... he doesn't reform ... they separate he probably didn't stop contacting her... while he does tell lies about his whereabouts, it's obvious that he was mostly worried about his wife...
I gotta go, so I can't list the other scenarios... it's possible he confessed because someone contacted her or him ... maybe someone at the papers asked around about the emails or tipped him off about them..
"The paper also reported it
Fine, that may be a decent explanation for the six months prior to Sanford's 'disappearance'. But what about about appropriate journalistic practice for the week in which the 'state CEO' was missing and a Republican state senator had issued a statement asking who was in charge of the state government?
If I get this right, The State didn't go public with the information that they had these emails until after Sanford's press conference. If he hadn't fessed-up, would they have continued to keep quiet?
What about the NSA?
We know they've been caught more than once reading emails of prominent people for kicks. Isn't this the most logical possibility?
Love the theories
I'm still surprised the State didn't see (at least from the business interest of selling more papers!) the value in making more of this whodunit. And did Sanford have any reason to suspect that someone had gotten copies of his emails? If so, was he pulling a John Edwards. I hope some enterprising reporter in the SC media is pursuing this angle. On to other posts....
NYT (aka "pot") calls out The State (aka "kettle")
Times questions another paper's journalistic decisions? Build up to war, Judy Miller, getting WH permission to run stories, Bill Kristol...it boggles the mind.
government emails can be public
If they're on the sc.gov account, it also could be any secretary in the governor's office offended that he's using his public account to send such emails. The State stories don't say what account they were supposed to be under.
Not a secratary
I find it hard to believe that Sanford would have written these emails on an account monitored by his secretary. My hunch is that the emails were discovered by some fun loving guys in the IT department.
Let me guess... a right-wing paper?
Fox News/GOP TV does the same thing all the time... propaganda by omission.
I'm not pleased with how The
I'm not pleased with how The State apparently handled the e-mails, but it's possible those notes did eventually make a difference anyway. When Sanford went "hiking on the Appalachian Trial", The State already had its suspicions raised. Don't the e-mails suggest the other person was in Argentina? How many flights can there be between Argentina and Columbia (or wait, it wasn't Columbia, which city did the guv land in?) Obviously I know very little about how it went down, but it would appear that The State had everything it needed to just wait for the governor at the gate for the one flight he would have to be on if he was hiking in Argentina. ..... But there's still a story in who sent the e-mails to The State. They may know and are just protecting the source.
Wife
Wife did it. Marriage was in shambles. She read his email and was pissed.
As I understand it, The
As I understand it, The State staked out the Atlanta and Columbia airports looking for Sanford returning from a flight from Argentina. That's how he got caught. Before that, they had the emails, and they had Sanford's disappearance, but nothing to connect the two. Once Sanford was forced to admit he had been to Argentina, and his staff knew that The State had the emails, he knew the gig was up. I think The State handled it exactly as they should have.
As for the identity of the anonymous leaker, it would certainly be fun to know. But I think that person has a right to remain anonymous.
An enquiring newspaper
An enquiring newspaper person might want to know more about that.
Yeah, but this is The State. That newspaper sat for two months on the news that former SC Treasurer Thomas Ravenel (former great GOP hope, think younger Sanford) was staggering and had to be dragged away from the mike at a GOP function.
AFTER Ravenel got busted for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, The State printed that story.
Rich father-in-law
I think it was the wife's rich daddy. He had the means [$$$$$] and the motive [bad Sanford hurting his little girl + grandkids].
I think Pops probably employed several private eyes and they got the goods on him.
If you recall, Sanford referenced "having a talk with my father-in-law."
It seems they found the
It seems they found the sender now. See what Argentine newspaper La Nación reports:
http://www.lanacion.com.ar/nota.asp?nota_id=1144382