Comments Off

By Marc, January 7, 2013 6:21 pm

Having taken a bit of a hiatus of late, I’m very proud to announce a new addition to the LMM team.

O.Hank! is a pseudonym for a local writer, who has worked in all levels of government – as a staffer and as an elected official. He works as a marketer and an advocate for innovative-based economic development. O.Hank! will use this platform to write and comment on local, state and federal politics…and other things that make him angry and happy!

I hope to announce other additions in the coming weeks. In the meantime, I hope you enjoy some additional perspective and some exciting new topics.

Comments Off

By Marc, July 17, 2012 9:11 pm

At a campaign rally that I attended for Wayne Powell (D-VA-7^th District) this past Sunday, with special guest Madeleine Stowe, Powell derided Eric “For Sale” Cantor’s Auction of America.

With actress Madeleine Stowe, star of the hit TV show “Revenge,” looking on, Powell had the following to say, “This election, this year, is our ‘Revenge’ for Eric Cantor – who sold out this country every time he does anything.”

Powell proclaimed that the only pledge that he would take would be the pledge of allegiance. “Not the Norquist pledge or the Cantor pledge for the powerful and greedy.” And, in a shot at Cantor’s “Las Vegas Sugar Daddy”, Sheldon Adelson, Powell says, “And if you happen to go to Vegas and see Mr. Cantor at one of the craps tables with Mr. Adelson, you can bet on that!”

As the campaign recently pointed out via email,

Eric Cantor’s Las Vegas Sugar Daddy, Sheldon Adelson, is under federal investigation for violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The law strictly forbids American companies from paying bribes to foreign officials for business gain.

More than half of Adelson’s money comes from his casinos in China. Even John McCain is outraged at the possibility of foreign money being funneled into Republican campaign accounts.

Topping Adelson’s expense report is the $5 million he gave to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s “SuperPAC”.

They don’t call him Eric “For Sale” Cantor for nothing!

Also, Cantor’s “jobs plan” is to pay back his sugar daddies by getting rid of all of those pesky, job killing “regulations”.  Powell joked, “Those job creators out there, they can’t create jobs as long as they have all these regulations, like laws against fraud and theft and robbery. That’s a lot of regulations that they need to fight, you know, I understand that.”

Also, amid the recent controversy surrounding the ridiculous transvaginal ultrasound bill in Virginia, Powell chided Cantor’s or any politician’s interference with a woman’s right to control their own bodies and make their own medical decisions.

No politician, no governmental entity should be between you, the woman, or man for that matter. I mean if it has to do with vaginas it has to do with penises as well. No one can tell you what you can do with your body

In a recent poll by Hickman Analytics, when residents of Virginia’s 7^th district were asked whether they supported a candidate who is pro-choice or one who is anti-choice, 68 percent of respondents said that they support the pro-choice candidate versus 23 percent for the anti-choice candidate.

These same respondents would like to replace Cantor. 43 percent would like to see him gone, while 41 percent would reelect him. These aren’t great numbers for an incumbent that’s in a perceived “safe” district.

From what I’ve seen of Wayne Powell, he’s going to give Eric “For Sale” Cantor a real run for his Las Vegas money! You can bet on it!

Comments Off

By Marc, July 16, 2012 9:53 pm

I was out on the campaign trail this past weekend and attended a rally for Wayne Powell (D-VA-7^th District). He’s a very impressive candidate and is going to give Eric “For Sale” Cantor a run for his Wall Street money.

Actress Madeleine Stowe, a 2012 Golden Globe nominee for Best Actress for her portrayal of Victoria Grayson on the hit ABC show Revenge, was out campaigning for Wayne Powell this weekend. She certainly didn’t pull any punches.

Amen, Madeleine. All Virginians and Americans would love to see this “bugger go” too – well except for his Wall Street buddies. You can learn more about Wayne Powell here. I’ll be posting Wayne’s speech in the next day or so, so keep an eye out for it.

Comments Off

By Marc, May 15, 2012 8:26 pm

Glad to see that SOMEONE is getting help from VDOT. Yes, that’s Mark Dudenhefer’s (R-VA-2nd) (a.k.a. Mudslide Mark) house on Legal Court in North Stafford (the one with the car backed into the driveway). And yes, he got VDOT to completely repave the area in front of it. As you can see, VDOT also paved a small portion in front of his next door neighbor’s property. But still…

Between having the 2^nd house district line drawn less than 30 feet from his property line—to getting VDOT to spend money it doesn’t have budgeted to completely repave the part of the street in front of his property—we know at least one person is benefiting from Mark Dudenhefer’s incumbency…MARK DUDENHEFER!

And OBTW, nice vote last night Delegate Dudliness.

Comments (1)

By Marc, November 4, 2011 11:01 pm

In case you missed it earlier today, the petition for a Writ of Quo Warranto by David Johnston, challenging Eric Olsen’s residency, was dismissed on procedural grounds by Judge Ferris. It wasn’t dismissed because it lacked merit, as some sources wrongly reported. It’s a BIG distinction!

Olsen’s legal residency was not decided in today’s hearing. The judge did not make a finding that Olsen was a legal resident of Stafford. You can read more about today’s hearing here.

In this post, I want to address the hypocrisy that is Eric “Law & Order” Olsen. At today’s hearing, Judge Ferris advised Olsen that he had a right to a jury trial if he so wished. Olsen said that he didn’t want a jury trial and that he was fine with a bench trial, before launching into a challenge of the whole hearing on procedural grounds.

This is the same guy that had the following to say, when he announced his run for Stafford County Commonwealth’s Attorney:

I’ve tried many jury trials ladies and gentlemen. I can tell you that there is no better arbiters of justice then twelve citizens chosen at random, asked to come into court and take a day off and decide the facts of the case and administer justice. I believe in the jury system.

What a hypocrite! This is just another example of how duplicitous Olsen can be.

The topic of jury trials is somewhat complicated for the average person, but it’s an important one to understand. The Commonwealth of Virginia is part of a minority of States that allow the Government to force a jury trial. If the Defendant wants a jury trial then under the Constitution he/she can have one, but the Defendant also has the right to waive that right. If a Defendant waives their right to a jury trial, the Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office does not need to insist on a jury. Why you ask?

First and foremost, jury trials are slow and expensive. Every other jurisdiction in the Commonwealth understands that fact. So they have jury trials about 15 percent of the time while Stafford has them about 95 percent of the time.

As the Free Lance-Star previously reported:

Olsen and Chichester have relied heavily on jury trials throughout their careers. In fact, Stafford was second only to the massive Fairfax County in the number of juries convened in 2010. Stafford had 79, according to figures compiled by the state Supreme Court.

Spotsylvania County, with a population similar to Stafford’s, had 13 jury trials last year.

This is a point of pride for Olsen, who prefers to let county residents determine the outcome of trials.

Yeah, Olsen takes pride in jury trials as long as they don’t involve him. Something is seriously wrong with this picture. Fairfax County is massive and Stafford has the second most jury trials to them?!

Jury trials are typically very slow and it could take an entire day to try a jury case. In Fredericksburg, where bench trials are the rule, Judge Willis can knock out six trials to Stafford’s one. Plain and simple, jury trials just clog up the entire system. As Independent Stafford County Commonwealth’s Attorney candidate Tim Barbrow puts it,

In addition to the cost of a jury trial to the taxpayer, the policy of requesting a jury trial in nearly every criminal case puts a strain on the entire judicial system. The Circuit Courts also hear a wide variety of civil cases including divorce, child support, custody, adoption, lawsuits between private parties, condemnation, and personal injury and medical malpractice. By tying up the Court’s docket with unnecessary requests for jury trials in the majority of criminal cases, most of which never go to trial, the citizens of Stafford County often have to wait months if not years to have their civil cases heard.

Jury trials are incredibly expensive. Each jury costs the taxpayers of Stafford County about $2,300. That doesn’t sound like much for one trial, but Olsen and Chichester ask for a jury trial in nearly every case. The Clerk of the Court spent ¾ of a million dollars on jury trials last year. That is money coming directly from the taxpayers of Stafford County.

Olsen likes to say that the money is from Richmond and not Stafford, but he is flat wrong. Go ask the Clerk of the Court!

I’ve said it time-and-time again, we need to start making smarter fiscal decisions in the county; otherwise, we will continue to divert funds away from education, transportation and public safety (e.g. see the wasteful public radio communication system). If a Defendant doesn’t want a jury trial, don’t force one on taxpayers!

This is another example of Olsen saying one thing and doing another. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

On November 8, let’s vote for a new direction by casting a vote for Tim Barbrow!

Comments Off

By Marc, November 4, 2011 6:41 pm

LeavingMyMarc.com has attained “publicly available information” that raises some pretty serious issues about Timothy “Tim” McLaughlin’s, candidate for Spotsylvania Supervisor in the Chancellor District, actions leading up to his run for Board of Supervisors.

Based on publicly available information, we have discovered some pretty concerning information regarding McLaughlin’s residency.

In the Free Lance-Star’s recently published Voter’s Guide, Tim McLaughlin claims to have lived in Spotsylvania County for 9 years and lists himself as a retired Marine Corps officer. Based on information we’ve gathered, McLaughlin retired from the United States Marine Corp in 2009. So based on this timeline, McLaughlin was in the service between 2002 and 2009 while living in Spotsylvania County. During this time he claimed 1003 NW 167th Avenue, Pembroke Pines, FL 33028 as his “legal residence.”

So you ask, what’s the problem here? The problem is that McLaughlin sold his home on April 29, 2005 (recorded on 5/9/05); however, between 2005 and 2009, he continued to claim his Florida address as his “legal residence.”

It’s is completely legal for a member of the military to have “legal residence” in one state, but be stationed in a different state per the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act.

[This act] allows military members to pay taxes, register vehicles and vote, etc., in their “state of legal residence,” rather than the state they are stationed in. This can sometimes result in a tax advantage because several states exempt military pay from state taxes.

Does that mean a military member can change their “legal residence” anytime they want, and therefore avoid paying state taxes? Not quite. Under the law, “legal residence” is the place that the military member intends to live after they separate or retire from the military. It’s the place that they consider their “permanent home.”

[…]

The easiest proof is “physical presence in the state.” If you are currently stationed in a state, and wish to make it your permanent home, it’s generally pretty easy. If you are not currently stationed in the state you wish to make your permanent home and have never been stationed there, it become [sic] much harder. Generally, you need a specific address, not just the state in general. You can show your intentions to become a legal resident by registering to vote in the new state, by titling and registering your car in the new state (notifying your old state of the change), by getting a driver’s license in the new state, or by preparing a new last will and testament (indicating your new state as your legal residence). Buying real property in the new state will also reinforce your claim.

Unless you can show clear intentions, the military will probably not allow you to change your “legal residence.”

So, if McLaughlin bought a home in Spotsylvania County, which he has, and sold his Florida residence in 2005, he clearly did not intend to live in Florida after he separated (and did not have a physical presence any longer in the state). He clearly intended to live in Spotsylvania County, which is also why he established a business there. What it does appear that he intended to do is to avoid paying Virginia State Income taxes! After all, Florida doesn’t have a state income tax.

Making matters worse, he continued to vote in Florida using the address of the residence he sold in 2005. According to public records, he voted absentee in Florida in 2006, 2007 and 2008 using the residence that he sold in 2005 as his “legal residence.” So not only has he avoided paying Virginia State Income taxes, but has he also committed voter fraud?

I’d love to stop right there, but it gets even worse. According to Broward County records, his vehicle remained registered at the Florida home he sold in 2005. He re-registered it in 2006 and 2008 using that same address. According to Florida, in order from him to have registered his vehicle there, he would have had to provide his “Florida address of residence.” He did that by providing an address of a home that he sold in 2005. It’s clear why he didn’t want to re-register his vehicle in Spotsylvania County. He didn’t want to pay the car tax?!

He should have registered his car within 60 days of moving here, after he sold his home in Florida in 2005.

So there you have it. While all the hard working folks in Spotsylvania County were paying their taxes, McLaughlin was doing everything he could do to avoid paying them. Sounds illegal to us?! He also continued to vote where he clearly no longer resided. Voter fraud?

McLaughlin would have you believe that he has been living here for nine years, all the while he has done everything he can to claim “legal residency” in another state where he sold his home over six years ago.

And, yet another example of a local candidate who believes that he is above the law (see Eric Olsen). Integrity matters. Our local elected officials need to be held to the same standard that all of us would be held to – and maybe even higher.

Frankly, I don’t understand why anyone would support this guy in the first place. The Chancellor District already has one of the best Supervisors in the entire region in Hap Connors. You don’t have to take my word for it. Many Democrats and Republicans have endorsed Hap because he gets things done and knows how to work effectively across party lines. Constituents in the Chancellor District would be well served in returning him to office on November 8.

Comments Off

By Marc, November 4, 2011 5:45 pm

This afternoon Eric “Law & Order” Olsen was in court to answer questions on whether he was a resident of Stafford County and, thus, eligible to run for Stafford County Commonwealth’s attorney.

Prince William County Judge Lon Edward Ferris, Stafford County judges had recused themselves, indicated that he was prepared to immediately move forward and hear the case. He advised Olsen that he had a right to a jury trial. Olsen said he was prepared to move forward, without a jury trial, and have the case heard by the judge but had some procedural concerns (we’ll get to this in a minute). That was one of the more comical parts of the entire hearing. We’ve heard Olsen time-and-time again suggest that jury trials are the only fair way to go. What a hypocrite. We’ll have more to say on jury trials in a separate post.

Of note, David Johnston’s attorney, John L. Bauserman, Jr., presented the court with new allegations. As we mentioned previously, Olsen switched his voter registration in September of this year to 133 Onville Road. Bauserman said that he had been presented evidence by a private investigator that Olsen’s supposed neighbor, at that address, had never seen anyone come or go from that property. He also said that they had also been provided information that the electricity meter was not active; thus, suggesting that the home didn’t even have electricity. He argued that in order to present the merits of the case that he would need to be able to call witnesses. If they were to move forward today, he wouldn’t have the ability to call any witnesses.

Olsen then argued that he wasn’t aware that the judge had actually issued the Writ of Quo Warranto, based on the petition to do so, and began challenging it on procedural grounds. At times he was so nervous that you could see him visibly shaking.

During his arguments on the procedural matters, he protested the merits of the case quite loudly. At one point Olsen protested so loudly that the judge told him to return to the law challenging the procedural issues. Olsen seemed extremely angry and seemed to present the opinion that no one should have the right to challenge him. Would an innocent person try to get a case thrown out on procedural grounds?

The two major procedural issues had to do with standing and the filing time. Olsen argued that Johnston didn’t have standing to actually file the petition and that such a petition couldn’t even be filed until after the election. Bauserman believed that his client did have standing and that the law makes clear that such a petition must be filed within 30 days of an election.

Ultimately, the judge ruled that Johnston did not have proper standing to file the petition and that such a petition couldn’t be filed until after the election. On standing, it’s my understanding (I’m not a lawyer) that the judge ruled that the only person that could file such a petition would either be the Commonwealth or an opponent of Olsen’s in the election. That would mean that Olsen’s opponent, Tim Barbrow, would have to file something.

Based on my conversations with some attorney’s, they aren’t completely sold on the standing or filing ruling. It’s quite possible that Bauserman will appeal it. Personally, we feel, that Barbrow should file something right away. Voters deserve to know the truth!

I just can’t believe that a voter in Stafford County doesn’t have standing to actually file such a petition in court. Why should we, as a voters and residents of the county, not be able to challenge a candidate’s residency for a constitutional office to represent Stafford County? If you live in Stafford County, don’t you have a vested interest? After all, why should he be allowed to appear on the ballot, if he doesn’t live in Stafford County?

The merits of this case were never given a hearing. Stafford County voters deserve to hear all the evidence, not after an election but before. Olsen has displayed a disturbing pattern, throughout this campaign, of thumbing his nose at the law (e.g. trademark infringement, accepting campaign contributions from a foreign national, not listing his campaign headquarters on his campaign financial disclosure forms and this continued issue of residency). An innocent man doesn’t hide behind procedure. Is this what Stafford County voters should expect from him, if elected. Let’s hope that it doesn’t come down to it.

Stafford County voters deserve a Commonwealth’s Attorney that displays integrity and trustworthiness at all times. While the legal wrangling continues, Stafford County voters can take care of business on November 8 by electing Independent candidate Tim Barbrow to this critically important position!