Let me see if I understand this.
Chief Justice Elliott “Spike” Maynard said he is all for an “independent investigation” into his trip to Monaco with Don Blankenship. As Maynard told the Charleston Gazette:
Maynard said he would welcome an independent investigation of the incident, so he could display his receipts from the vacation he spent with a Supreme Court employee, to show that he received nothing from the Massey chief.
Now we learn the Associated Press is suing the West Virginia Supreme Court. Why? Of course: for refusing to reveal information about Spike’s vacation for an independent analysis.
The AP asked for Spike’s phone records, e-mails and what-not that probably would have showed that the Monaco meeting was anything but a coincidence (as Spike claims.)
Mind you, the AP didn’t ask for his private, personal records. They asked for public stuff. Documents on his government computer, his state-taxpayer-paid-for cellphone, his state-taxpayer-paid-for landline, his state-taxpayer-paid-for e-mail and internet account.
Maynard refused to turn over most of the information, and the receipts that were provided were gibberish. C’mon, you want me to believe that there isn’t a detailed record of his cellphone usage that the public can see? I mean, my cellphone bill runs for 50 or 60 pages.
At the same time that the Court says it can’t, or won’t, produce Maynard’s records – ostensibly as a matter of constitutional ”principle” — the Court promptly revealed detailed records of all of Justice Larry Starcher’s phone calls in response to a FOIA request. The Associated Press can’t see Spike’s records, but the West Virginia Record and Charleston Daily Mail get all of Starcher’s? Gee, no double standard there.
Or how about the computer records? Several weeks ago, there was a story in the papers about a lawyer caught breaking into a competitor law firm’s computer system. He was caught because the law firm’s computer system recorded exactly when, where and how he got in.
Yet we’re supposed to believe that Spike’s computer didn’t record any usage data? Or that all of that data is top secret and exempt from public review?
So we’re supposed to believe that Spike wants an independent review of his actions, at the same time he’s refusing to release any information about his actions?
Give me a break. Whether Spike wins or loses on Tuesday, it’ll be fun seeing the AP roast him over the hot coals of the First Amendment.
Oh, two more things. First, did the AP’s Freedom of Information Act request ask to see if and what kinds of porn Spike downloaded to his computer? Second, as a legal matter, is a justice’s use of a government computer to look at porn a confidential record exempt from disclosure?
May 10, 2008 at 11:59 am
I just can’t believe that on the one hand they can hand over Starcher’s records and then turn around and say that Spike’s are “protected” how on earth does that even compute?!?!? Guess Spike knows all those calls to Blankenship and political cronies might raise more eyebrows (and investigations) and he will fight tooth and nail to keep more examples of his dirty secrets and unethical behavior under wraps. He has far too much to hide and this scrutiny has to be making him hot under the collar.
May 12, 2008 at 8:05 am
It is amazing to me that idiots can make statements about things that they obviously are not well informed about. I am told that Starcher became furious when he learned that his e-mails were not turned over when the FOIA request came in. He INSISTED that his be turned over in an attempt to make it look as if Maynard was hiding something in his. Do you people not know anything about politics?
May 12, 2008 at 9:54 am
Phillip, you’re wrong.
Starcher was furious because he never saw the FOIA requests. Period. The Court’s administrative office — people shilling for Spike’s re-election — got several FOIA requests for Starcher’s stuff, quickly answered them, and then told him about the requests after the fact.
These are the same bureaucrats being sued by the AP for not producing Spike’s stuff.
Like I originally said, there’s a double standard at work here.
Don’t you know anything about politics?
May 12, 2008 at 10:19 am
Well those spineless wonders shilling for Spike will have some chapped asses come Tuesday. Wonder how it feels to put your ass on the line for a unethical hack who won’t even have the power to protect you in a few months?
May 12, 2008 at 7:53 pm
This was going to be the basis for one of my upcoming blogs but I don’t think I could add much to what you’ve said. What is amazing to me is that the WV Record, the Daily Mail and a few other papers and organizations like the Chamber of Commerce around the state seem to be much more concerned with Starcher’s emails and who knew what when, than wanting to get to the truth about Blankenship’s and Maynard’s friendship. As a matter of fact, it sure seems to me that those groups are willing to do anything to keep the truth from coming out. Someday, someone is going to talk, or those emails and phone calls will be made public and when that happens, I’m going to be the first one in line to tell them …I told you so.
May 12, 2008 at 8:29 pm
What the fuck Hugh!
Do you really have time to sit around and blog shit all day? Get your ass to work. Someone has to work and pay taxes so my ass can stay home all day.
Damn bitch…get job at the Gazette or something if you wanna talk shit trash all day.