« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The Curious Tale of the Amended Complaint and the Three Day Countdown

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  June 4th, 2010 at 02:21 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

We haven’t done enough to promote Tom Graves at RedState. We’ve been — okay I’ve been — so busy it’s fallen by the wayside.

But Tom is in a real dogfight in Georgia’s 9th Congressional District. The runoff is rapidly approaching for the special election that could make Tom Graves the next Congressman from North Georgia.

He is in the runoff against an obnoxious RINO named Lee Hawkins whose greatest claim to fame is siding with the liberal Democrats in the Georgia legislature to try to kill a jobs bill Tom Graves wrote because the bill was too free market and didn’t rely on government enough.

I. Am. Not. Kidding.

So let’s rewind a bit.

Tom Graves and State Senator Chip Rogers are partners in a company that owns a motel. A church in their area uses it for rehabilitation of drug addicts and others. Graves and Rogers transferred ownership a while back to someone else and are now in a lawsuit regarding the mortgage on the property — Graves is experiencing the business impact of the Obama economy first hand.

Well, the day after Tom Graves won the primary and headed into the runoff, the plaintiff in the lawsuit curiously amended the complaint to allege a fraudulent transfer of the hotel ownership. Formerly being an attorney representing banks, that’s a frequent allegation — but it is very curious the bank amended the day after the primary instead of putting it in the original complain when it is clear from the facts of the original complaint that the bank knew of the transfer.

Made more curious — RINO Lee Hawkins had a copy of the amendment in the press’s hand before Tom Graves‘s attorneys had even responded to it. It looks like, though obviously can’t be proven, that the amended complaint was part of a well orchestrated hit job.

We should not reward Lee Hawkins for dirty campaigning.

I take this race personally because I know Tom Graves. I like Tom Graves. He will be a fundamental freedom fighter in Congress. He will be a conservative before he is a Republican. Lee Hawkins will not. Hawkins will fund bridges to nowhere and bring home bacon while throwing freedom under the bus. We can’t let that happen. We need Tom Graves to win.

Whoever wins the runoff next week becomes the next United States Congressman from the Ninth District of Georgia.

We have just over three days until the runoff. Give every dollar you can. Get Tom Graves to Congress.

Tags: ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • eburke

    Oh, and fwiw, just sent him a hundred bucks. Decided I’m spending most of my money in primaries between movement conservatives and conservative wanna be’s.

    Keep plugging away, Erick!

  • surfjake

    after that kerfuffle last week with the “proof” statements and phony build up you foisted on us, saying “I am not kidding” have me very skeptical.

    Maybe a bit less “I am not kidding” and a bit more rebuilding trust would be in order.

  • Adjoran

    It was over-hyped to be sure, the flashing light could have been dispensed with, but the salient point was made: he did EXACTLY what Folks had been doing for several days, but he only did it once and look at the reaction!

    Where was the media – legacy and “new” – in any sense of similar outrage against Folks’ dribbling of nothing over a week or more?

    Look, he fooled me too and I was ticked at first, but then I got the point. It was a good point, if brutally made. I got over it.

  • joshm

    I can’t believe you’ve been so easily fooled, Erick. Even Club for Growth knows they’ve made a mistake on this one, but they’re in too deep.

    Hawkins didn’t oppose the (un)jobs bill because it “was too free market and didn?t rely on government enough.” In fact, it won’t cut any taxes immediately. Lee opposed it because its provisions contain a $1billion state surplus trigger (who knows when that will ever happen?), a requirement that its employment tax credit be approved by the federal Secretary of Labor (yeah, right), and a net worth tax repeal that doesn’t happen until 2012.

    The reason these anti- supply side provisions are in the bill is that Governor Perdue told Graves last year that he was not a ‘supply sider’ and would not sign his bill. So Graves had to bow to the Governor’s opposition to conservative economic beliefs to have a chance at getting a bill passed this year that’s nothing more than a campaign catch phrase.

    Supply side economics does not wait for the economy to produce surpluses to enact tax cuts. Instead, it cuts taxes in a slow economy to boost revenues and build a surplus. This year’s version of the bill is counterintuitive to supply side fiscal conservatives.

    Lee Hawkins worked with State Rep. Ron Stephens on a bill that would give tax credits to employers as of Jan. 1, 2010. It wasn’t as safe a vote, so obviously it didn’t go anywhere in this session that will likely be remembered for tax/fee increases.

    Lee Hawkins is the supply side fiscal conservative of these two candidates, and I’m amazed and dismayed that he’s been so vilified by the ‘Right’ while they try to support a guy who claims to hate stimulus money while reportedly taking it to help some needy folks in a hotel he wouldn’t pay for.

    From the AJC article Tom’s been publicizing… ?Officials from the Gordon County school system and the Tallatoona Community Action Partnership said they have spent federal taxpayer funds on rent for needy families to stay at the inn. The partnership spent its federal stimulus funds on rent there this year, while the school system spent federal grant funds at the inn last fall, officials said.?

    Umm… hypocrisy.

    It’s apparently okay to you for CFG to put outright lies about Lee in a mailer, but if Tom’s actual shady business record is exposed, it’s “negative campaigning”.

    You’re smarter than this.

  • josephpaine

    Erick, I would like to get your comments on the following, from a lawyer’s perspective:

    1) Why didn’t the lawyer for Graves and Rogers assert a defense to Bartow Bank’s lawsuit based upon the fact that Graves and Rogers had sold the hotel and were therefore not liable for the debt?

    2) Why didn’t he assert a defense based upon the fact that Graves and Rogers rented rooms to charitable organizations like the Belmont Baptist Church?

    3) Why didn’t he assert a defense that Bartow Bank is under a FDIC consent order?

    4) I have read the complaint. It appears to me to be a boilerplate suit on a Note and Guaranty. Yet, you claim that “it is clear from the facts of the original complaint that the bank knew of the transfer”. You must be seeing something I am not. Can you tell me what paragraph of the Complaint you are looking at?

    5) Have you seen any facts that actually back up the conspiratorial claim that Bartow Bank is in cahoots with the Hawkins campaign? The Bank is not located in the 9th District or in any part of Graves’ old legislative district. What possible reason would anyone at Bartow Bank have to curry favor with Hawkins and to slam Graves (particularly when it is clear that Graves is going to trounce Hawkins?) You call the amended complaint “curious”. What exactly are you trying to say and, again. do you know of any facts that back it up? For all I know, the Bartow Bank’s CEO is Lee Hawkins’ brother — I haven’t seen anything like that though. We all laughed at Hillary’s “vast right wing conspiracy” comments .. but isn’t this “curious” post out of the same play-book?

    From a political point, Graves has handled this matter brilliantly: Blame the failing Bank, Blame the liberal media, Blame the sleazy opponent, Jesus is on my side. I sold it. I know nothing. From a moral point, he has mishandled this issue in a disingenuous manner. What would have been wrong with saying: ” I made a bad investment, the economy went sour, I am in over my head, I will do all I can to pay the Bank back and make this right” Maybe, accept some responsibility for his actions?

    The only thing more certain than Graves will say and do anything to get elected is that he will get elected and be the 9th District’s new Congressman and probably one of the next talking head wonder boys of the GOP.