Stewart Denies Campaign Involvement In Anonymous Attacks; Has Their Email Database Been Compromised?

Pr. Wm. Co. Chair Corey Stewart went on the John Fredericks Show this morning to deny allegations that his campaign is behind a series of anonymous attacks against fellow candidates for Lt. Governor. Here is the live blog of it:

8:15 Stewart calls Jim Riley a good guy, a smart guy, but a supporter of Scott Lingamfelter. Corey says he’s clearly in the lead, been accused of virtually everything, all of this came out after the Tea Party / Middle Resolution endorsement.

8:16 He throws Lee Bond under the bus, says he’s worked for any number of folks, calls it nonsense.

Stewart denies that he or anyone in his campaign have anything to do with the negative ads against Lingamfelter and Snyder.

8:18am – Stewart says Shaun Kenney takes his conclusion from Riley, he hasn’t done any separate analysis, spreading rumors as fact. Shaun’s a good guy, but he’s a big Pete Snyder supporter.

8:20pm – Fredericks talks about Tea Party endorsement and criticism of Stewart’s record of tax hikes. Stewart says he did not raise taxes. Signed the Taxpayers Alliance pledge and held to it. During his term, tax bills are flat

Tax bill when he came in was $3,500. Today it’s $3,500

8:23am – Fredericks points to 2011 vote, Stewart starts to get into the weeds about tax rates not being important or assessed value, it’s rate times assessed value.

Corey’s getting tangled up on this. He’s never been able to explain this on a bumpersticker

Fredericks – if the value of my home goes down and you increase the rate, you voted to increase my taxes.

8:27 – Fredericks bring up Lee Bond’s working for Harris and that’s how you hooked up, any truth to that?

Corey – I don’t know who that is or who he’s taking about, i’ve worked with a lot of consultants.

Fredericks – Vince Harris.

Corey – Yes, it’s my understanding he worked for Vince. He’s well known, runs Too Conservative, he’s done work for dozens of folks in the past and presidential campaigns.

Fredericks – So is he a consultant now?

Corey – No. Every time you run a campaign all your former vendors want to take part in it but you can’t hire them all. A lot of times they get upset and the next thing you know you’ve got some retribution goin gon. I don’t know, I haven’t talked to Vince in a long time, he’s a good guy.

(So Corey starts by saying “I have no idea what you’re talking about” but when Fredericks names names “Yeah, I knew that” and then throws Vince under the bus.)


If this is true that the Stewart campaign was not involved in the production and/or dissemination of these videos, then they have a real security problem with unauthorized access of their email database.

You see, one of these videos was brought to the attention of Virtucon by way of an email sent to a particular email address of a contributor here. That address is rarely used for anything, few people have it, and only one campaign has been sending messages to that address – the Stewart campaign.

This would mean that the person who wanted to bring public attention to these videos, if not a Stewart campaign staffer, would have to gain unauthorized access to the campaign’s email database, select who they wanted to distribute the emails to from among those listed in the database, and then send out the link on their own. Why someone would go to the trouble to do this when there are easier ways to gather email addresses (like the “CONTACT US” link we have in our sidebar) is at least beyond my comprehension.

This leaves just two explanations – someone on the campaign is behind distributing the video or the campaign’s database has been hacked.


13 thoughts on “Stewart Denies Campaign Involvement In Anonymous Attacks; Has Their Email Database Been Compromised?

  1. So the alternative theory out there is that someone stole Corey’s list and then spent their own money producing and distributing attack pieces against other candidates. The simpler explanation here is FAR more plausible.

  2. And Occam’s Razor points us to the truth. I find it hugely implausible that the campaign has been hacked or compromised when the evidence points squarely at Lee Bond’s involvement, and Lee Bond has two separate employment connections with Stewart, including in a campaign consulting role.

  3. When it looks, walks and quacks like a duck … its a duck. Hacked the DB and then uses it to PROMOTE Corey? Uhhh, no. Standard sequence usually runs along this path – hacked and the your opposition gets to see your dirty laundry put on display.

  4. i can swallow most of corey’s bs..BUT, any politician who signs a PLEDGE, signs away the discretion to vote MY INTERESTS, and not the pledge takers interest…………a pledged politician effectively is a eunich, castrated by special interests that are not my interests!!!!!

  5. I just got another one of these calls-of-dubious-origin, this one was pretty provocative… and – at least on its face – anti-Stewart. If you get a recorded call with a voice with a heavy Hispanic accent, that’s the one I’m talking about.

    The plot thickens…

  6. Not passing judgment on who did what. As the reaction shows, I don’t think the videos particularly matter in the grand scheme of the election.

    But one thing to consider is that politicians will often rent out their lists to help pay debts, and to keep their lists current. Not saying this happened, but it is possible that Stewart’s team has rented out their list in the past, and it fell into the hands of whoever made the list.

  7. I’m not going to the convention, and I haven’t supported any of the candidates. So I believe this is an independent opinion.

    First, a campaign gets e-mail addresses FROM somewhere. So maybe the person who sent out this e-mail also provided e-mail addresses TO Stewart’s campaign, or maybe they have the same general mailing lists of people. If they’ve been around long enough, even a personal e-mail list might have the look of a campaign’s e-mail list.

    Second, if your house value goes down, and the tax rate goes up, and the total tax you pay stays the same, that is NOT a “tax increase”. It is a tax RATE increase, but not a tax increase.

    And there is no logic to CALLING it a tax increase. The county has a limited number of available tax vehicles. The property tax is a big part. It makes sense for the county to hold the amount of property tax paid level, rather than having it drop. Because just because the houses are worth less doesn’t mean the county has less it has to do. The county spending is not dependent on the housing prices, but more on the number of houses.

    In fact, it would make more sense to tax people for their house on a fixed rate basis, maybe based on broad criteria, rather than taxing the particular value of a house. After all, the house value doesn’t even indicate how much money a taxpayer can afford, since you can buy a house and then if they build a lot around you, the value can shoot up, but you aren’t making any more money. Or you could lose your job.

    So, for any year where they set a tax rate that held the average existing homeowner tax amount constant, it is fair and accurate to say they did not raise taxes.

    You might as well say you got a tax increase because your boss gives you a raise so you have to pay more money. And I doubt anybody whose housing prices tanked was celebrating a big “tax cut”.

    And I’m sure Fredericks would be saying that, if he didn’t support a different candidate. Of course, Fredericks is still arguing that McDonnell’s transportation bill is a great tax bill, so I don’t know why we would take any tax advice from him.

    Stewart isn’t my cup of tea, and I have no idea if he was involved in any negative campaigning.

Comments are closed.