Stewart, a Republican, is best known for groundbreaking illegal immigration reform in Prince William County and his statewide Virginia Rule of Law proposal.

You heard it first on The Schilling Show!

The 2011 Pat Napoleon Community Service Award was presented to co-recipients at City Hall at last night’s City Council meeting.

Honorees Rob Schilling (host of 1070-AM WINA’s “The Schilling Show”) and Carole Thorpe (chairwoman of the Jefferson Area Tea Party) were commended for their accurate yet unheeded warnings to City Council against their allowance of the Occupy Charlottesville encampment. With media present, Mrs. Napoleon awarded the pair with certificates of merit and hardbound printings of the U.S. Constitution.

Occupy activists were evicted from Lee Park by city police on November 30 following over 40 days of encampment. The action resulted in 18 arrests and the unnecessary subjection of Charlottesville’s Finest to despicable shouts of obscenities that police officers calmly and professionally endured in the line of duty.

From the outset of the occupation to its end, Mr. Schilling and Mrs. Thorpe exposed multiple abuses of power and unequal protection under the law by City Council and its agents which included unprecedented waivers of numerous city codes, the issuance of a verbal directive by City Manager Maurice Jones to restrain police from enforcing park curfew prior to the grant of a legal permit, and an effort by Mayor Dave Norris to unfairly burden city taxpayers with the cost of over 40 days of electrical expense incurred in Lee Park.

Both recipients expressed gratitude for their prestigious recognition.

Mr. Schilling stated, “It is my great honor to receive this award from one of Charlottesville’s finest citizens, Pat Napoleon. Pat has been fearless in confronting corrupt government officials with difficult issues that would not otherwise have been discussed. Carole Thorpe, my co-recipient, although not a city resident, has done more to benefit Charlottesville citizens in the past few months than has the present City Council during their combined elected tenures.”

“I am humbled to receive this honor from Pat Napoleon, a great lady and patriot whose opinion matters more to me than the whole of Charlottesville city government”, Mrs. Thorpe said. “The sharing of this award does not diminish the honor by half, but its value is doubled when the co-recipient is the inestimable Rob Schilling. This award validates my efforts through the Jefferson Area Tea Party to serve our community with honesty, integrity, fairness, and respect for the law – objectives that I wish were practiced by Charlottesville City Council.”

A celebratory dinner with entertainment at another location followed the presentation.

It appears that the United States Department of Justice (DoJ), Criminal Division, is working with United Kingdom police to pursue the leaker of the 2009 and 2011 “Climategate” emails.

I have learned that last week DoJ sent a search-and-seizure letter to the host of three “skeptic” blogs. Last night, UK police raided a blogger’s home and removed computers and equipment.

The leaked records derailed domestic “cap-and-trade” legislation in the U.S. and, internationally, talks for a successor to the Kyoto Protocol. The emails and computer code were produced with taxpayer funds and held on taxpayer-owned computers both in the US and the UK, and all were subject to the UK Freedom of Information Act, the US FOIA, and state FOI laws.

They also were being unlawfully withheld in both the UK (by the University of East Anglia) and the US (Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, including stonewalling me for two years, and three others for longer).

The hunt involving US and UK law enforcement is now escalating.

Wednesday night, UK time, six detectives with the UK police (Norfolk Police Department) raided the home of at least one blogger, removing his equipment to look for clues to the identity of leaker “FOIA 2011”.

On December 9, DoJ sent a preservation letter under 18 U.S.C 2703(f) to the publication platform (website host) WordPress. This authority authorizes the government to request an ISP to preserve all of the records of a specific account for 90 days while the feds work on a warrant.

Norfolk PD affirmed to the subject of at least one of their raids that this international law enforcement hunt is for the leaker, meaning not for those whose acts the leaker exposed, releasing admissions in their own words.

In the U.S., the academic and other political Left have had fits about the Virginia Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli, exercising even more specific, anti-fraud authority to seek further records from University of Virginia, following up on indications from the first Climategate release of possible fraud against the taxpayer.

Apparently, that represented an abuse of the police power. No word yet if they are outraged by DoJ’s current foray or the UK raiding team.

The DoJ attorney sending the preservation letters, as it hapens in this small world, a graduate of the University of Virginia (UVa). UVa is also the subject of litigation a group I am associated with, the American Tradition Institute (ATI), has filed on behalf of Virginia taxpayers seeking Climategate-related emails it holds.

This is a case which, I have it on reliable authority, has the Virginia faculty and establishment beside themselves and demanding an all-out effort to oppose production wear us down (and also Attorney General Cuccinelli).

So far UVa has spent upwards of a million dollars in privately donated money just to fight the AG’s request. They continue to fight us in court every step of the way. Clearly, this is no small matter in the quarters insisting that this taxpayer-financed information ever see the light of day.

Even the criminal legal apparatus of the US and UK must be invoked against this threat, apparently.

So, to review, the UK police and the US Department of Justice, Criminal Division, are pursuing a leaker of public records subject to one ore more freedom of information laws, unlawfully withheld under those laws, which leaks indicate, e.g., apparent civil violations (tortious interference by seeking dismissial of certain “skeptics”), and raising reasonable questions of fraud against taxpayers.

And they are pursuing the leaker.

The content of what your Department of Justice has sent follows:

Pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 2703(f), this letter is a formal request for the preservation of all stored communications, records, and other evidence in your possession regarding the following domain name(s) pending further legal process: [DELETED] (“the Accounts”) from 00:01 GMT Monday 21 November 2011 to 23:59 GMT Wednesday 23 November 2011.

I request that you not disclose the existence of this request to the subscriber or any other person, other than as necessary to comply with this request. If compliance with this request might result in a permanent or temporary termination of service to the Accounts, or otherwise alert any user of the Accounts as to your actions to preserve the information described below, please contact me as soon as possible and before taking action.

I request that you preserve, for a period of 90 days, the information described below currently in your possession in a form that includes the complete record. This request applies only retrospectively. It does not in any way obligate you to capture and preserve new information that arises after the date of this request. This request applies to the following items, whether in electronic or other form, including information stored on backup media, if available:

1. The contents of any communication or file stored by or for the Accounts and any associated accounts, and any information associated with those communications or files, such as the source and destination email addresses or IP addresses.
2. All records and other information relating to the Accounts and any associated accounts including the following:

a. Names (including subscriber names, user names, and screen names);

b. Addresses (including mailing addresses, residential addresses, business addresses, and e-mail addresses);

c. Local and long distance telephone connection records;

d. Records of session times and durations, and the temporarily assigned network addresses (such as Internet Protocol (“IP”) addresses) associated with those sessions, including any log history of when username “FOIA” uploaded posts to the Accounts;

e. Length of service (including start date) and types of service utilized;

f. Telephone or instrument numbers (including MAC addresses);

g. Other subscriber numbers or identities (including the registration Internet Protocol (“IP”) addresses); and

h. Means and source of payment for such service (including any credit card or bank account number) and billing records.

If you have questions regarding this request, please call me at 202-XXX-XXXX.

Sincerely,

XXXXXX

Trial Attorney

 

Christopher C. Horner serves as a Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute

As predicted by The Schilling Show yesterday, OC members planned to move their makeshift tent city to from Charlottesville’s Lee Park—where the protest has resided since October—to George Rogers Clark Park on the Corner, which apparently rests on University grounds.

An open letter to OC from UVa Chief Operating Officer, Michael Strine, makes it clear that the University will not tolerate violation of their property and threatens potential Occupiers with citation and prosecution. A University Police car stationed at the Clark site this afternoon shows that UVa means business.

Occupier Jon Grainger, in today’s Daily Progress said OC’s fallback location is the “free speech wall” on Charlottesville’s downtown mall, directly in front of City Hall—a site recommended by John Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute.

Downtown merchants, at the height of their Christmas selling season, certainly would take issue with such relocation. In this event, how will Charlottesville’s invertebrate, incompetent City Fathers respond, now having painted themselves into a very tight Corner?

Read Michael Strine’s open letter to Occupy Charlottesville:

November 30, 2011

 

Dear Members of Occupy Charlottesville:

We understand from news reports last night that members of your group may intend to establish an indefinite encampment at the University of Virginia.  By way of this open letter to your membership, we are providing notice to you as soon as reasonably practicable that such an encampment will not be permitted on the University’s Grounds.

While the University cherishes and protects robust exercise of the rights protected by the First Amendment, the University must continue to fulfill its core functions of education and patient care.  The erection of camping structures on the University’s Grounds would impair our mission by diverting necessary resources from our core functions.  Such an encampment also would create significant health, hygiene, and safety problems for the University community and the citizens we serve.  Quite simply, the University is not a campground and is not set up to support an indefinite encampment.

By providing this notice to you in advance, we are hopeful that you can plan accordingly.  The University will take enforcement action to prevent the attempted establishment of an encampment on University property including issuing Trespass Notices and the subsequent enforcement of such notices, if necessary.  We also remind any of your membership who previously may have been issued Trespass Notices for prior conduct on University Grounds that such notices continue to remain in full force and effect and will be enforced.

Thank you for your anticipated cooperation.

Sincerely,

 

Michael Strine

Executive Vice President and
Chief Operating Officer

Edd Houck, a longtime legislative partner of Planned Parenthood and a reliable pro-abortion (warning: graphic link) vote in the Virginia Senate is now desperately trying to convince uninformed 17^th District voters that party labels are not important, and that conservatives should vote for him.

Fatt chance, Edd.

Read Senator Chichester’s unintended poison-pen endorsement of fellow liberal Edd Houck:

EDD HOUCK FOR STATE SENATE

For Immediate Release, October 27, 2011

Contact: Craig Bieber (804)-307-6166

John Chichester Endorses Sen. Edd Houck

REPUBLICAN CITES HOUCK’S RECORD ON JOBS, EDUCATION AND TAX RELIEF

FREDERICKSBURG—Republican John Chichester, former State Senator from the Fredericksburg area, today endorsed State Sen. Edd Houck (D-Spotsylvania) for re-election in the 17^th District.  “Senator Houck worked closely with me and other Republicans to pass common sense legislation that helped to protect and create jobs, make critical investments in core services, and cut taxes,” said Chichester.

Speaking at the University of Mary Washington, Chichester noted Houck’s consistent and influential support for UMW, Germanna Community College and K-12 education.  He praised Houck’s efforts to cut the sales tax on food and income taxes while balancing the state’s budget and maintaining Virginia’s tradition of fiscal responsibility.  “Edd Houck’s re-election is crucial for this area and the entire 17^th District, Chichester continued.  “Party labels are not as important as someone’s commitment to principle and willingness to work in a bipartisan fashion to find solutions,” he stated.  “Edd will continue to be a leader on issues important to Virginians like improving our economy and keeping taxes low.”

“I am grateful to John Chichester for his very strong endorsement,” Houck said.  “During our service together on the Senate Finance Committee, we worked to maintain Virginia’s hard-earned reputation as one of the most business friendly and lowest tax states in the nation,” he stated.

“I strongly encourage all of my fellow Republicans and other friends in the 17^th District to send Edd Houck back to the State Senate,” concluded Chichester.

Sen. Houck is third in seniority in the 40-member Senate.  The 17^th District consists of all or parts of the counties of Albemarle, Culpeper, Louisa, Orange, and Spotsylvania and the City of Fredericksburg.

###

Paid for and authorized by Friends of Senator Edd Houck

 

Shortly after Carole Thorpe, chair of the Jefferson Area Tea Party (JATP), submitted a city application for the planned JATP “demonstration” in McGuffey Park this Friday, stories regarding the as-of-yet unapproved event appeared on the evening newscasts of both NBC 29 and the Newsplex.

Thorpe has filed a complaint with Charlottesville City Manager Maurice Jones (copied in full below), who responds that he “will be looking into the questions and issues” raised and hopes “to learn more in the next day or so.” ABMF4JQWACH4

Following is Carole Thorpe’s letter in its entirety:

From: Carole Thorpe
Subject: JATP Inquiry of Charlottesville City Government
Date: October 19, 2011 07:29:41 AM EDT

To:
Mr. Brian Daly, Director of Parks and Recreation
Mr. Maurice Jones, City Manager
Mr. S. Craig Brown, City Attorney

Sirs:

Yesterday, I mailed a completed application and the required $25.00 fee to the Parks and Recreation Department to request use of McGuffey Park by the Jefferson Area Tea Party (JATP) for a demonstration this Friday, October 21.  Typically, I submit such applications weeks in advance of our events, but I hoped - like the park application approved for Occupy Charlottesville – it might receive equally fast approval.  I called Events Coordinator Michelle Christian to notify her of the date so she could note it on her calendar, pending receipt of our application.  She told me I would likely receive a phone call about the status of our application sometime Wednesday.

Because approval was pending, I purposely chose to wait to publicly announce our demonstration.  It was the responsible thing to do and I thought it was my decision to make.  So, imagine how shocked and offended I was to watch reports on last night’s CBS-19 and NBC-29 six o’clock newscasts (citing information they said was given to them by an unnamed city representative) which disclosed that the JATP submitted an application for a demonstration to be held in McGuffey Park on Friday night.

Worse yet, CBS-19 also reported that our demonstration would be a counter-rally!  This is categorically UNTRUE. I called and spoke to that reporter less than an hour following the broadcast, and I was told the source of description of “counter-rally” came from a City representative.

I am appalled and livid by what I consider to be a dubious act conducted by someone in City government.  As a result, I am writing you with several inquiries for which I request immediate answers:

1. Please clarify your official policy for handling event applications.
2. Is it standard procedure to notify the media of applications submitted by organizations, whether pending or approved?  If not, what justified a breach of policy in this instance involving the JATP?
3. Who is the person (or persons) who authorized notification of the media about our application?
4. Who is the person (or persons) who failed to contact me to clarify the nature of our demonstration prior to erroneously telling the media it will be a counter-rally?
5. What was the goal or intent of City government behind contacting the media with this information?
6. Late yesterday afternoon, Michelle Christian left a phone message to say that a decision had been made to waive our $25.00 application fee.  Why?  She gave no reason, so what’s different now?  Please explain. Strangely, she never stated that our application had been officially approved – and we still await that confirmation.

In my opinion, this ”leak” to the media was unjustified and unconscionable.  Furthermore, it recklessly placed me and the JATP in an awkward position.

Following the broadcasts, I rushed to make several phone calls to halt the spread of misinformation and prevent misunderstanding.  I called a representative with Occupy Charlottesville to ensure the group that the purpose of our demonstration is not nor was ever intended to be a counter-rally to their effort.  I am left to wonder what possible benefit City government could gain from an artificial friction between our groups?  I also placed calls to CBS-19, NBC-29, and other media outlets to implore them to correct the story.

In addition to your answers to the six questions posed above, I ask for two other reasonable actions from the City.

The first is an appropriate reprimand of the person or persons who created this mess.  And the second is for the City to issue a media release which includes a correction of its erroneous information and an apology to the JATP.

For the sake of transparency, I am copying various members of local media on this letter and ask that you copy all of these contacts when you reply to me.  I am certain they will be interested in pursuing the answers I seek if I do not hear from a City representative in a timely manner.

Respectfully,

Carole Thorpe, Chairwoman
Jefferson Area Tea Party

Mr. and Mrs. Smith, of Rose Hill Drive, were threatened by Zoning Administrator, Read Brodhead, with “legal proceedings” and fines of up to $5,000 if they did not remove the disputed sign from their property. The story was first reported by The Schilling Show Blog and later picked up by Newsplex. In addition, the Rutherford Institute, a nationally renowned civil liberties organization, was preparing a First-Amendment-based legal defense of the Smith’s right to free expression.

The city, unable to justify selective enforcement of its own sign ordinance, relented by placing an unstamped letter of retraction (text copied below) in the Smith’s mailbox after normal mail-delivery hours.

Congratulations to Mr. and Mrs. Smith for standing up against unjust government persecution, and shame on Zoning Administrator Brodhead and his department for their abuse of regulatory power.

October 4, 2011

Mr. and Mrs. Smith
Charlottesville VA

Re: Rose Hill Drive

Dear Mr. & Mrs. Smith

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that I have reversed my decision on the legality of the sign that is in excess of one (1) square foot, located on your property. After further reviewing the sign ordinance, it is my belief that the code section referred to is erroneous and thus inapplicable to your sign. You may keep your sign and still be in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance.

I apologize for any inconvenience that my earlier letter may have caused you.

Sincerely,

 

Read Brodhead
Zoning Administrator

Minor has partnered with Tim Dixon, the Boutique & Lifestyle Lodging Association’s (BBLA) 2011 Hotelier of the Year. Dixon, highly regarded as a creative hotel visionary, is perhaps best known for his award winning Milwaukee property, The Iron Horse Hotel, which recently garnered BBLA’s Boutique Hotel of the Year award.

Although still mired in legal morass with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Minor expects Landmark to emerge from bankruptcy within four months and for construction to resume shortly thereafter.

Dear Charlottesville Voters~

Due to the media response following the Democratic Primary I felt the need to write to you the voters of Charlottesville to explain a few things that may be unclear about me and my “integrity”.

For 22 years I have served as a Deputy Clerk in both the General District and Circuit Courts. The term for the Charlottesville Circuit Court is up and available in the November 2011 General Election.

After first speaking with Jim Nix (co-chairman of the Democratic Party) and a couple of local attorneys regarding whether or not Paul Garret would be running again, and my interest in this position, I was given a thumbs up to go ahead and consider to run. After careful consideration and the verbal backing of some attorneys I met with Jim Nix and signed the Democratic Candidacy form and submitted my check for $250.00 to the Democratic Party. I had never ever been involved in any political race but because of the great response that I was receiving from the people that I had discussed my intentions with I felt good about becoming involved in the political scene! What an eye opener that has turned out to be!

Once I had signed the Declaration form for the Democratic Party and submitted my $250.00 check I never heard anything else from the Democratic Committee members or the few local attorneys that I had felt supported me in the beginning. I did however speak with Llzelle Dugger to let her know of my intentions when she informed me that she had decided that she was going to run as well. She told me that she would be announcing within the next month but still had some more “signatures” to get first. I hung up the phone wondering what she needed signatures for?  That is when I decided that maybe I should be gathering signatures as well; so that is when I started also to obtain signatures.

I want to first let everyone know that I am in no way a professional politician. I was only competing for a position for a job that I had been doing most of my adult career. I am a native of Charlottesville; born in the now “old” Martha Jefferson Hospital and living in the Charlottesville area my entire life; having graduated from Charlottesville High School.

Yes, I do work under my sister, Debbie Shipp, Clerk of the Albemarle Circuit Court. What the citizens are failing to be told is that I also worked along with her for 14 years as we were both Deputy Clerks.

No, I don’t have a law degree. What I do have is something far better for the position for which I intend on running for, which is EXPERIENCE.
I have worked for over 22 years in the clerk’s office in every department that there is so I do have the knowledge and the experience to know what goes on in this office and the procedures involved in the day to day functions.

After submitting my Declaration for the Democratic Party nomination form and my $250.00 check I then found out that Mr. Garrett was also going to run and my supporters that I once felt that I had were now backing another candidate that had decided a month from my announcement to run as well.

I was now basically on my own; involved in a race in which I was completely new to, but I have always been one to give everything that I do 100% and fight until the end! If the Democratic committee would have been honest with me from the beginning and would have told me that they were considering another individual to support as their choice candidate then I would have clearly stepped aside and run as an Independent and would have saved my $250.00 toward my campaign fund.

I would see this thing through with or without the supporters that I once thought that I had. If I had one thing going for me it was my experience. I do know the duties inside and out of the clerk’s office as that has been my life.

With the help of a few family members I proceeded to attempt to run a campaign. I had no idea that I would be fighting an uphill battle with a Democratic Party that was controlled by a few prominent members of the city. I guess you can say that I learned all this the hard way but in a way that I will never ever forget.

As far as forums, there was only one forum held for the Clerk of Court.
With a position that pays $112,000.00 a year don’t the citizens of Charlottesville have the right to decide which candidates truly have the knowledge of the duties and responsibilities that the Clerk of Court has? The one forum that we did have conveniently was held the Saturday after an article appeared in The Daily Progress regarding the past audits of both the Charlottesville Circuit Court and the Albemarle Circuit Court which the mediator addressed first putting Mr. Garrett and myself in a negative environment from the beginning.

I raised the least amount of donations of the 3 candidates that were running for Clerk of Court. I did not have supporters who were shelling out $2,500.00 checks to me. I would never even think of asking for this amount of money for a local Clerk of Court race. What I did have was a prominent named attorney here in town writing blogs online in the area papers and TV stations and on Face book, questioning my financial reports and their accuracy. Yes, you can check it out for yourself.
Ron Wiley, a/k/a “RangeRon” made several negative statements and blogs pertaining to my knowledge and truthfulness. Later I found out that he was also a member of the notorious Democratic Committee who helped out with the “Unassembled Caucus” and helped to count the votes that night. In my opinion a committee member should not publicly support or publicly try to discredit another Democratic candidate prior to the Unassembled Caucus.

I find this to be very unethical especially for an attorney in our local community and a member of the Democratic Committee. And they question “my” integrity?!

The Democratic “Unassembled Caucus” was held on Saturday, August 20th and I did not win the Democratic Nomination. It never surprised me at all as my deck of playing cards had been stacked against me before the first hand was ever dealt out. I felt as if the Democratic Committee members had only used me as a pawn in a chess game to gently and quietly slide Paul Garrett out of a position that he had held for over 30 years. I feel as if the Democratic Committee used me to obtain my signature on their declaration form so that they could corner the market as to who their possible opponents would be in the upcoming November election. I felt as if they already had their candidate of choice waiting in the wings to uproot Mr. Garrett.

My feeling of defeat was a huge and emotional low blow. I can only imagine the hurt and deceit that Mr. Garrett must have felt.

Now I have decided to run as an Independent Candidate for the upcoming November Election. I have read the articles concerning my credibility since I had previously signed the Democratic Declaration saying that I would support the Democratic Nominee in the next election.

Yes, I did sign the Declaration.

Yes, I know exactly what it said.

Yes, I am still running as an Independent Candidate.

Why am I still running you may ask?

I am running now because of my EXPERIENCE. The experience that I have in the Clerk’s office and the experience that I just went through with the “prominent” inner circle from the Democratic Committee members who try to control the one right that we should all have – the right to VOTE for who we want to VOTE for! I felt as if I never had the support from the Democratic Committee once I had pledged to run on their ticket. Why should I feel any disloyalty to them now that I have chosen to run as an Independent?

Over the course of my campaign trail I can honestly say that I have met many, many wonderful DEMOCRATS, REPUBLICANS and INDEPENDENTS and have come out with one conclusion- “We ALL bleed red”.

Hopefully I will get by to see some you during my remaining weeks of my campaign, but if not, I just wanted everyone to know my side of the story and the truth about what has made me decide to run as an Independent in the upcoming November Election

I do have the future of your Clerk’s office at my best and sincere interest. I am trustworthy and dependable and extremely knowledgeable about your Clerk’s office.

I was naive the first time around but now I am a more “seasoned” and wiser player of the game.

Thanks for taking your time to hear me out~

Pam Melampy
Independent Candidate for Charlottesville Circuit Court Clerk

In letters obtained by The Schilling Show, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has asked the U.S Army Corps of Engineers to rescind the previously issued permit, and the Corps has complied, leaving the project in limbo.

You heard it first on The Schilling Show Blog and News!

Read the VDOT letters and the Army Corps of Engineers response:

McIntire Termination Letter

VDOT Notification Letter

Corps Response Letter

According to campaign spokesperson Danielle Thurmann, Aldous’ official announcement is scheduled for 1:00 PM on Tuesday, June 28 at the Albemarle County Circuit Court.

Aldous is a Trust and Estate attorney with Zobrist Law Group in Charlottesville.

Seen by many as an interchangeable surrogate for retiring Democrat, David Brown, McIntosh told select supporters over the weekend that he was a reluctant entrant, coerced by local party bosses into joining the council fray—which currently includes six Democrats and four independents. A Republican candidate is rumored to be announcing shortly.

While McIntosh has not formally declared his retreat, he is expected to do so within days unless establishment stalwarts can convince him otherwise.

You heard it first on The Schilling Show Blog and News.