A Portsmouth grand jury is scheduled next week to hear the misdemeanor case against a campaign manager who produced an Election Day flier anonymously linking President Barack Obama with the manager's client, now Virginia Beach's mayor.
Portsmouth Commonwealth's Attorney Earle Mobley, a straight shooter who doesn't flinch at controversial cases, is seeking an indictment against advertising consultant Dave Iwans on campaign disclosure violations related to the controversial flier.
It seems incongruous that more than four months after prosecutors began investigating, a grand jury's time is being taken up with what amounts to a misdemeanor - a political trick that should be punished with a fine and public reprimand.
The flier was distributed at some predominantly black precincts in Virginia Beach on Nov. 4 and showed Will Sessoms, a Republican who supported John McCain, side by side with Obama. The material did not say who authorized or paid for it, a disclosure required by law. The campaign of then-Mayor Meyera Oberndorf, who lost to Sessoms, filed a formal complaint.
There is no evidence that Sessoms, who won the election by 6,852 votes, knew about the flier or approved of it, which would be a much more serious matter. Iwans, his campaign manager, paid for the flier out of his personal account, not from the $600,000 in Sessoms' campaign chest.
If failing to list Iwans as the ad's sponsor were a simple oversight, a civil fine would seem enough. But Iwans is no neophyte; he's a seasoned media consultant who, angered by Oberndorf's public appearances with Obama, struck back with a flier that linked Sessoms and Obama in a way that seems designed to deceive.
A grand jury will consider whether omitting Iwans' name was intentional and, thus, a violation of election laws and punishable by up to a year in jail and a $2,500 fine.
Such cases often result in a plea, negating the need for a grand jury's involvement. But absent that, Commonwealth's Attorney spokesman Bill Prince said, involving a grand jury is more expedient than going first to General District Court and then to Circuit Court, where it goes on appeal.
It's highly unlikely the flier changed the result of the election, but it may well have affected the margin of Sessoms' victory. For that reason alone, Iwans should be held accountable for his political stunt. It reflected badly not just on its author, but on Sessoms, the city and its elections process, which is supposedly nonpartisan.
If Iwans is guilty, punish him. If others were involved, find them and hold them accountable, too. But bring this to a close, and quickly. Prosecutors - and Virginia Beach - have other issues begging for attention.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Sessoms Camp lies part 2
Sorry... ran out of room.
I also feel Mr. Sessoms and Mr. Williams know more than they are saying about this flier and is letting Dave Iwans fall on his sword. What consultant has a flier made up that his principal is posed with a candidate Sessoms had spoke out against? Who then tells paid staff to hand out those fliers only in urban polling centers? Who by “mistake” only leaves off the paid for an authorized by line on those inaccurate fliers? What campaign puts out info on it's principal that goes against the core of who Sessoms supports? How was it not supported by the campaign but the paid consultant, and person slated to speak be at public forums in Will's place for his many missed public Q and A sessions paid for them? How is someone a paid decision maker, and spokesperson for the camp but then not because he paid from them out of pocket? Was this paid out of Iwans pocket in advance or after the news hit the airwaves? Am I the only person who sees this as much deeper than just a simple typo?
The Sessoms Camp Lies
This follows the lines of a case a few years back where fliers were handed out showing a Senator as Pro-Choice and one as Pro-life. A church filed the lawsuit because 300 members of its parish voted on that point alone. People make huge mistakes when picking leaders. However, if it was important to a voter to support Obama(I did not)and support those who represented themselves as Obama supporters get into office to help this "Change" talked about were handed this flier at the polling booth it's very easy to see the outrage. Voters vote just because someone has an R or D in front of their name. Is that educated? So to me it is even more important for those running for office to represent what they stand for with integrity and honesty. Sessoms' camp in my opinion DID NOT DO THIS! I wish we could make everyone take a test prior to casting a ballot. I also feel Mr. Sessoms and Mr. Williams know more than they are saying about this flier and is letting Dave Iwans fall on his sword. What consultant has a flier made up that his principal is posed with a candidate Sessoms had spoke out against? Who then tells paid staff to hand out those fliers only in urban polling centers? Who by “mist
A job perhaps?
Anybody who can equate this inane, moronic issue of campaign fliers with Watergate ought to receive serious consideration for an editorial writer's position with the Pilot! Points of view that completely divorced from reality should be given the same format for expession.
Ask Willie Weasel
"The VP editorial board doesn't respect the electoral process and the voters, so why should Sessoms, his campaign and his cronies?"
Ask Tricky Dick
OK, so they WERE trying to sway the election by deceiving voters. There's no proof that it worked (Really? Check out Vivian Paige's analysis)."
"Just because TWO mayoral candidates -- Oberndorf AND Scott Taylor -- filed complaints, doesn't mean anyone cares. Just because Sessoms and his buddies tampered with an election doesn't mean it would have changed the results. And we certainly know that Will Sessoms didn't know anything about it, don't we? Or do we?"
"Oh,that's right -- he said he didn't. Just like Bruce Williams and Dave Iwans said they didn't know anything about it. So Sessoms probably is telling the truth, even if no one else is."
"So the VP editorial page is right -- why are we wasting time looking into an election that was tampered with? Slap Iwans on the wrist, assume Sessoms is telling the truth and let's get on with doing the developers' business and letting Iwans go back to work for Paul Fraim/Will Sessoms (one and the same)."
"After all, the VP endorsed Sessoms without asking any real questions, so why take a chance on embarassing them by finding out he actually knew something. Those pesky grand juries and Commonwealth Attorneys!! "
They CAN'T be lying - Ask Tricky Dick
While not on the same level or degree of crime, don't some of these points sound somewhat like the Nixon White House defense talking points for Watergate?
"It was just a break-in . . no big deal. No one at the White House or close to Nixon had anything to do with it. Nixon certainly didn't know anything about it."
"This didn't have any effect on the election. It was no big deal, just someone leaving a disclaimer off. I know they all said they had nothing to do with it at first, and now the campaign manager not only KNEW about it, but paid for it out of his pocket. But that still doesn't mean others knew about it, including Sessoms. And sure, they all met in the law firm offices of Sessoms' best buddy, Billy Harrison, the night before the election, but that doesn't mean the Mayor knew anything about it, just because his campaign manager and best friend did."
"It's still not that big of a deal. They just left off the disclaimer; it's not like they were trying to tamper with the election results. Uuuhh, actually they were. But so what? Just because they tried something illegal so as to deceive voters doesn't mean it worked and actually swayed the election. OK,
In your twisted opinion
How do you know there is no evidence? Hvae you seen all the evidence gathered?
Would you rather the legal process be allowed to work, or just close our eyes and forget it since the pilot is so slanted toward politicians?
No evidence that Sessoms knew?
How can they state that as a fact? Is the Pilot Op Ed board sitting on the Grand Jury? This is just more Libel Pilot one sided thinking. I wish, just once, just once, these far left writers would actually address the facts instead of spewing hate to get one side elected.
This is Incredible
I thought Iwans just last week denied having any involvement in the flier controversy. Now the Pilot says he paid for them? What is the truth? The editorial seems to want this matter to go away, maybe because the paper endorsed Sessoms. But something stinks here. Iwans supposedly financed the fliers on his own, because he was upset that Meyera Oberndorf was trying to hang with Barack Obama during the campaign. Fact is she had every right to do so. After all, Sessoms endorsed McCain.
Let the grand jury meet and get to the bottom of this. Given all the conflicting statements coming from the Mayor and his erstwhile campaign manager, it's obvious there is much more to this story than we have been told so far.
More hypocrisy!!
Here, we have yet more editorial hypocrisy as only the Pilot can deliver! This is the bunch who spins and lies to discredit virutally every Republican and/or conservative who has a profile, especially if and when that person runs for office. They want to link someone with another official to discredit them, like the Pilot did with Thelma Drake (among lots of others in this life!), then they whine about a ridiculous flier that, if it did indeed effect the victory margin, that in itself would be an indictment of the knowledge (intelligence?) of the individuals who did vote based on that flier! If fliers alone can alter elections, the electorate really has been dummied down to a level where those people shouldn't even be voting to begin with!
The hypocrites that comprise the Pilot's Editorial Board (EB) long ago ceased having any credibility on matters like this. Quick, who uttered the term 'Taliban Republicans' because they had a snit over the GOP not wanting to resort to a tax increase to resolve a budget matter? If you said Pilot EB, you would be correct!