News accounts of the Mark Sanford Saga have included a disturbing tidbit:
In an interview on CNN’s “Larry King Live,” State reporter John O’Connor said the newspaper was sent the messages from the governor’s personal e-mail account by an anonymous person.
Several things come to mind.
First, even if the Governor used a “personal e-mail account” for corresponding with his paramour, if he did so on a state government computer, does that mitigate the “privacy” of the emails? Are they still FOIA-able?
Second, who knew about the emails? Immediate speculation suggests a staffer. Apparently, the State was sent the notes several months before Mrs. Sanford is supposed to have been aware of the affair, so it probably wasn’t she. If not a staffer, might it have been a personal or professional confidante?
Next, who is this “anonymous person” and why would provide the emails except to bring down Mark Sanford? Might one (or more) of his political rivals – which must include Republican leaders in the General Assembly – have acquired them and used them to do exactly what they have now done?
Clearly, Governor Sanford’s privacy was violated. Who is responsible and were laws broken?
The timing of all this is also curious. Roll back two weeks (when he was asked to leave the family home) – right after he lost the fight to hold “stimulus” funds. Did his political rivals (or the newspaper) threaten to use those emails if he had won his lawsuit? Is that how the Sanfords learned that his secret was out? With others “in the know,” is that what led to the separation?
We reached a point where I felt it was important to look my sons in the eyes and maintain my dignity, self-respect, and my basic sense of right and wrong. I therefore asked my husband to leave two weeks ago.
Not to detract from Mark Sanford’s misdeeds, but there may be grounds for an investigation into the circumstances of these revelations.
More concerned about Sanford’s privacy than his illegitimate use of taxpayer dollars, Charlie? Why am I not surprised?
Don’t be so snide, Snead. I said (previous post) that he should resign. Any (as yet undetermined) misappropriation of funds is not at the top of this list of sins. And whatever sum it might have been would certainly pale compared to what others in SC politics have done.
The man’s privacy is, also, a minor issue. In the post above, I was just postulating. If laws were broken in violating his rights, Micah, I’m sure you would line up to defend those rights. Right?
Would I defend rights protected by laws? Sure.
But here’s a newsflash: If you don’t want someone to read something, don’t write it.
I look forward to hearing your opinion on the $9,000 taxpayers spent on Sanford’s trip to Argentina last year, which he will now pay back, naturally.
The trip last year was an official one in concert with the Department of Commerce. He has said he will repay the state for the costs because he met with the woman while there.
Frankly, I don’t think that’s necessary. Government officials traveling on the company’s dime do a number of personal things during off duty hours.
C’mon, Micah. Surely you went TDY when in the Corps and went to a bar or a movie when the business of the day was done. Had Sanford conducted no business or very little, then restitution should be made, but right now, I don’t know that enough facts have come out to indicate otherwise.
I bet his wife sent them to the paper.
And here’s another headbanger: what if the girlfriend had been a spy?
http://www.samueljohnson.com/blog/archives/0906c.html#26a
What is all this crap about Sanford’s privacy Snead. Back a few years ago when you Democrats were trying to stop Bush’s Judicial appointments and you Democrats were buying votes with your methods you were screaming about privacy and What Sanford has done to this point is not even close to the cookedness Kennedy and the Democraps were doing. Remember “Mempgate” and Manuel Miranda? Short memory uh!