State GOP To Judge Tate Saturday

Before a jury or judge renders a verdict on state Senate candidate Mark D. Tate's guilt or innocence, the Republican Party of Virginia plans to weigh in.

The state party, on May 3, two weeks before a grand jury indicted Tate on nine counts of perjury and two counts of election fraud, began drafting a policy statement outlining how the party leaders would respond in the event one of its candidates were indicted. Tate is expected to head to Richmond Saturday to take part in a meeting of the RPV's executive committee, which according to the new policy, will determine the party's course of action.

At least one member of the executive committee, longtime 10th District GOP Chairman Jim Rich, raised questions over the timing of RPV's new policy on indicted candidates. He called the policy and the meeting Saturday "unprecedented." According to Shaun Kenney, communications director for the state party, the policy was drafted in light of circumstances unrelated to Tate. He mentioned U.S. Rep. Bob Ney's (R-OH) indictments surrounding the Jack Abramoff scandal. But the May 3 date was suspicious, Rich said.

A day before RPV drafted its new policy, the Virginia Conservative Action PAC, a supporter of Tate's Republican primary opponent Jill Holtzman Vogel, stated on its Web site, citing "reliable sources," that Tate was under serious criminal investigation. Kenney admits the timing may look odd for RPV to draft a completely new policy, but he maintains that the policy was not drafted with Tate in mind.

If nothing else, Rich has questions.

"I think the timing needs to be looked into," he said today. "There is no doubt about that. I'm also concerned about leaks, about supposedly secret information from a grand jury being leaked. We have to see if [the charges against Tate are] politics or real substance."

Earlier this week, Kenney, who in 2005 ran for delegate in the 54th District and was endorsed by VCAP, said the state party had heard "scuttlebutt" on the Internet about an investigation into Tate, but RPV's spokesman went further Thursday.

"[We were] hearing it from activists on the ground on both ends," Kenney said today. "We'd hear it from the campaign staff on both sides. We heard it from unit committee volunteers. We'd hear it from outside the district ... and Democrats kind of licking their chops as well."

Tate is in the midst of a contentious bout for the Republican 27th District nomination with Holtzman Vogel, a Warrenton attorney specializing in election law and former counsel to the Republican National Committee at the time when current RPV Chairman Ed Gillespie was head of the RNC. The Tate campaign questions the timing of the policy written by RPV and suggests the state party has gotten involved in the primary process, something the party plan forbids.

Kenney has confirmed that Gillespie phoned Tate shortly after VCAP posted on its Web site that Tate was under criminal investigation. But Northern Virginia blogger Ben Tribbett said Kenney, on May 2, floated him information specifying the date the indictments would come down. Kenney denies that. On Wednesday, Kenney denied having any contact with Tribbett, who operates the Web site Not Larry Sabato, concerning the investigation into Tate. But an e-mail, provided by Tribbett, indicates Kenney communicated with that blogger on May 2 concerning Tate.

That e-mail from Kenney to Tribbett, which Kenney acknowledged Thursday, suggests that a "birdie" said state Sen. Ken Cuccinelli (R-37) would confirm for Tribbett that he had called and asked Tate to withdraw from the senate race. Kenney declined to say Thursday who his "birdie" was. Cuccinelli declined to comment. Kenney said he and Tribbett have a long-standing feud-for a period Kenney was a blogger and the two have exchanged barbs in the past.

"He was trying to communicate with me and not vice-versa," Kenney said. "Unfortunately, I'm trying to treat him like a reporter."

As for where Kenney heard of Cuccinelli's phone call, which couldn't be confirmed, Kenney said: "I can't let that source go. I can deny who it was, but I can't tell you who the source was."

The timing of the RPV's new indictment policy led Tate Campaign Manager Rick Gorka to question whether the state party has gotten involved in a contested primary.

"It shows to us the Republican Party of Virginia had inside information and was putting together contingency plans," Gorka said.

Meanwhile, the executive committee will meet in Richmond Saturday morning for an 8:30 a.m. hearing. According to the new policy, the executive committee can vote to appeal privately to Tate and ask him to voluntarily withdraw, publicly call for the candidate to withdraw, publicly disavow Tate, or take no action at all. In the event the committee decides to disavow Tate, a three-fourths majority vote would be required.

Gorka said, as of this afternoon, Tate did not plan to attend the hearing in Richmond, but would send a letter to RPV outlining his case.

"We just don't see the point," Gorka said. "It's a waste of his time to drive two hours to Richmond. Our position is this is a relatively new policy they drafted on May 3 directly related to Mark. To me it's like the Salem witch trials. Let's just wing it and see how it goes."

Asked if he knew what the committee would look at to make its decision, Rich scratched his head.

"That's a good question because its unprecedented. I'd like to know what I can legally see. I'd like to get into this matter, when did this matter get out of the public domain and how? And the politics and timing I would intend to inquire about. It kind of worries me as well, if this is a new weapon in the arsenal of politics. I don't know of anyone that has ever been indicted for campaign finance."

Kenney, too, is concerned about the leaked information in this 27th District battle.

"There is only so many people that can know about [a pending indictment]," Kenney said. "The direct routes are [Loudoun] Commonwealth's Attorney, [Jim Plowman], [special prosecutor] Matt Britton and anybody on the grand jury. All three of those parties go to jail if they talk."

Kenney added that Tate could have leaked the information as well, though Tate has said he had no knowledge of his pending indictment.

Plowman-a Holtzman Vogel supporter-began the investigation into Tate, after a Holtzman Vogel supporter filed a complaint with the State Board of Elections. Plowman recused himself from the case, he said, after a motion to subpoena Tate's bank records indicated to him the complaint was worth pursuing. Britton, King George County commonwealth's attorney, was subsequently appointed as special prosecutor. The motion to quash the indictments filed this week by Tate's attorney centered on Plowman's involvement before and after he recused himself. The motion to dismiss states Plowman should have recused himself from the case immediately upon receiving the complaint, and that his involvement tainted the investigation.

Tate is due back in court Tuesday for a scheduling hearing. Voters will judge Tate next, as he and Holtzman Vogel are set to square off in a GOP primary on June 12. Holtzman Vogel has not returned phone calls from reporters since the news of Tate's indictment broke last week.