Skip to main content.
May 12th, 2008

Legal threats from Mr. FSP

lee_in_dewey.jpg

Update V: Was just on-air with Judge Lee on WDEL where I attempted to alert him about this latest development. He claims he has no clue. Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to finish what I had to say because the station disconnected the call. Hmm…

Update IV: Uh-oh. Dana’s done gone and posted all the emails. Wonder how that happened. Click here to enjoy.

Update III: Oops. Looks like the emails have leaked and Dana Garrett’s already started some posting. I bet he’ll have lots of fun with this the next few days.

Update II: From the comments at DelawareLiberal’s thread: Dave just keeps bringing the funny. Says the man himself: I can’t wait to see how I become the bad guy in all of this.” Cute. Very cute.

Update: Ryan Cormier gets in on the fun and includes a hot picture of Dave Burris in his post. Dave, don’t you know it’s not wise for boys of our immense size to be sitting on tables? As I tell my students, “Tables are for glasses, not for little girls’ and boys’…bottoms.”

_____________________________________________

I like Dave Burris. Generally, I think he’s a good guy though I like to call him out on his partisan bullshit every now and then. But he’s crossed a line. A line I’m ready to hold in front of me on behalf of my fellow bloggers around Delaware.

I received a threat of a subpoena roughly an hour ago by Mr. Burris should I not give up the source of the Bill Lee photo I posted last week. The unretouched photo is at the side. I, of course, used my minimal Microsoft Paint skills and added the obnoxious white writing.

I told Dave I was posting about this as my own preemptive strike. In his usual glib, arrogant way, he responded “Have fun.”

Dave, haven’t you learned by now that you can’t always get what you want?

Above: Click image to enlarge

Posted by Mike Matthews in First State Filth

This entry was posted on Monday, May 12th, 2008 at 1:49 pm and is filed under First State Filth. You can follow any responses to this entry through the comments RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Possibly Related

125 Responses to “Legal threats from Mr. FSP”

  1. LiberalGeek says:

    You’ve got to be joking. Why doesn’t Bill Lee know who snapped his photo? Hmmm.

    Is Dave saying that he would sue you for the information? If so on what grounds? It appears that Bill is in public, and as such, he has no expectation of privacy.

  2. Hube says:

    I was wondering what Geek asked.

  3. Jesus tap dancing christ says:

    Dave -

    You fucking moron. Do a fucking google search. It’s from Ryan Cormier’s blog, you asshole.

    Google “Bill Lee” and “Rusty Rudder”

    It doesn’t take a rocket scientist.

    http://www.delawareonline.com/.....lture.html

    Save the court fees there buddy.

  4. jason330 says:

    Mystery solved.

  5. Disbelief says:

    That is funny.

  6. jason330 says:

    Man.

    Scrolling through that Cormier blog I became convinced that there really are two Americas.

    …and one of them is drunk off its ass.

  7. FSP says:

    What were the search terms you used to make that picture show up in Google? I can’t seem to make it appear.

  8. Disbelief says:

    Go sue google, Dave.

  9. Ryan Cormier says:

    Ha ha. That photo has been up on my blog for, oh, about 21 months.

    That Dave dude is quite the researcher. (Is it wrong I have no idea who he is?)

    Anyway, what is up with all this subpoena talk?

    Does the photo show a murder suspect or something? On what grounds could he possibly demand information from you?

    If he’s too dense to read the comments section of your blog or too cool to read my blog, just have him send the subpoena over here to The News Journal, I guess.

    Now it’s time to Google Dave Burris…

  10. Nancy Willing says:

    punked!!

  11. Nancy Willing says:

    the caption:
    8:33 p.m. Bill Lee (former candidate for governor and judge in the Tom Capano case) shows his support for Claire Walsh in next month’s town election.

  12. Rob Foraker says:

    This is Halarious…..

  13. Rob Foraker says:

    But… I agree if the photo wasn’t authorized, it is invasion of privacy…..and against the law…

  14. donviti says:

    can we sue the Rudder, for letting a creepy old dude in there? I mean, at 35 I feel a little old hanging out there? Some grey haired old Republican Judge starts to peg the creep-0-meeter in my opinion….

  15. J. Lyman says:

    Beg to differ, Rob. Lee was in a public place, and the rules of privacy in photography on a legal scale are extremely lenient; nonexistent when somebody is in a store, a bar, on the street, or at work.

  16. Disbelief says:

    Rob Foraker
    Legal Problems Solved and Pizza Delivery
    Call for fees

  17. Disbelief says:

    DV, you’re 35? I didn’t know you were 17 years older than Mrs. Hotviti.

  18. Ryan Cormier says:

    Just to clear this up a bit, I introduced myself to him, asked if I could take a photo and he was nice enough to pose for it.

    And we were actually at the Bottle & Cork’s 70th anniversary bash. It wasn’t the Rudder.

    I’ve got to know him since then and he’s a really cool guy. Just don’t badmouth Duke basketball!

  19. Rob Foraker says:

    No, Not really, the owner of the bar has to approve of event….

  20. Rob Foraker says:

    Public photography on the street falls under a different of rules…..

  21. FSP says:

    This has nothing to do with anyone taking or possessing the picture, or with Mike posting it, writing on it or having possession of it. The picture itself and its use on this site is harmless.

  22. anonymous says:

    Dave, what a dumb ass you are.

  23. wtf? says:

    dave, when can cromier expect his subpoena?

  24. Burris lover says:

    Burris just took a simple photo that probably 50 or so people viewed here on DWA, and has turned it into something that will hit WDEL and other talk shows around the state where possibly 25,000 listeners will look at the photo out of curiousity, and see Lee in this very un-governorlike state of intoxication. Boy, I bet Bill Lee, and his campaign cronies will bitch slap Burris over his latest “f” up. Burris just can never leave anything alone.

  25. Liz allen says:

    In oh about Sept….post the picture on Bill boards on Rt.l and I-95…a picture is worth a thousand words!

    Would you elect this man, Guvnor!

  26. anonymous says:

    Dave Burris sueing bloggers since 2008

  27. FSP says:

    “Burris just took a simple photo that probably 50 or so people viewed here on DWA, and has turned it into something that will hit WDEL and other talk shows around the state”

    You have no idea how right you are.

  28. anonymous says:

    Time for Tyler Nixons legal answer. Is it a unlawful act to print a photo, that was taken in a public place, with Lees permission, and has been on the NJ website for 21 months? I don’t think so but i’m not a lawyer.

  29. J. Lyman says:

    You need the owner’s approval my ass. Even if Cormier hadn’t directly told us that he got permision, the fact that Lee is smiling at the camera signals to me that this was not a peeping Tom shot of any sort. There is no reasoning for forbidding the photo that would apply here. Your definition of legal photography would illegalize 90% of all photos — those taken in private property open to the public. Read up on the law between comments and deliveries and you’ll know.

  30. FSP says:

    “Is it a unlawful act to print a photo, that was taken in a public place, with Lees permission, and has been on the NJ website for 21 months?”

    No. It’s not. That’s not what this is about.

  31. kavips says:

    What I find astounding in all of this: is that this is the “Best” the “official” Republican Party has to offer. Meanwhile they have a candidate running rather well, head to head against two of the most formidable Democrats in recent memory.

    Just an another example of the type of shennigans we can expect to see if another Republican, endorsed by the Republican party, ever sneaks past the primary and general election, and gets elected to office.

    I have to admit, Republicans “Not” endorsed by their party, are some of the better candidates available in this state……..

    If the Republican party could ever pull its head out of its ass, they by running the likes of TPN could begin the push to regain their lost ground.

  32. jason330 says:

    I second that Kavips.

    These hot house flowers that the GOP likes to cultivate are too fragile.

  33. anon says:

    Just to clear this up a bit, I introduced myself to him, asked if I could take a photo and he was nice enough to pose for it.

    Damn! Cormier caved and gave it up; the Burris people must have gotten to him.

    I like the pictures of Dave and Bill paired on Ryan’s blog: Lee will be sober in the morning, but Burris…

  34. kavips says:

    Let me add, for a brief moment last year, when we saw one man of raw principle, take out Atkins, I thought there might be another great Republican willing to tackle wrong and injustice……I still believe that part of him is hidden somewhere, but his recent tack of “falling in line”, coming from one of great courage and moral conviction, has the muff oder of cowardice.

    A great opportunity is being squandered in the current vacuum of leadership.

  35. Benjamin says:

    FSP says:

    This has nothing to do with anyone taking or possessing the picture, or with Mike posting it, writing on it or having possession of it. The picture itself and its use on this site is harmless.

    FSP says:

    “Is it a unlawful act to print a photo, that was taken in a public place, with Lees permission, and has been on the NJ website for 21 months?”

    No. It’s not. That’s not what this is about.

    Me says:

    So we now know all the things this was not about. We are still waiting an explanation as to what possible ground for a “lawsuit” or even a temper tantrum you have here.
    If you concur that the picture is harmless and its use perfectly legal, what for the love of the Almighty prompted this brouhaha ?

  36. Sam Carpini says:

    THE HAPPY HOUR JUDGE
    GOP is in a PANIC of their nominee and their whole ticket. Here’s why:
    First state GOP has used very bad judgment in nominating a fatally flawed candidate which will reflect the ticket all the way down the line. The very same morning he was nominated, a front page story about the potential nominee being called a drunk by another candidate looked them in the face but their arrogance and incompetence made them commit a horrific error in judgment they must pay the price at the polls for nominating a fossil in a change election and not taking heed. They have put them selves in a perilous position that he becomes the issue.
    FSP INTIMADATION BRINGS ESCALATION & A DOUBLE BLUNDER
    This blunder can even bring down Mike Castle. With FSP threats, this story will probably go national. Turn out & mood of the voters is a very serious situation that will sink GOP candidates and fund raising up and down the ticket with a reputed excessive drinker and skirt chaser on top. The Sussex County contingent of the GOP should have known better as small as Delaware is with no secrets. How many more devastating photos of the Happy Hour Judge are out there?
    THE PHOTO
    It is said that a pitcher is worth a thousand words and this one says it all.
    The GOP candidate’s creditability, character and judgment are destroyed. No wonder they’re uptight for such a fatal blunder. Their arrogance and incompetence has set the stage for a wipe out in November. Forget the national scene, first state GOP is dead on arrival in Delaware by their own choosing leading to one party rule. A sad day for Delaware.

  37. RickJ19958 says:

    I’m still trying to figure out a few things:

    1) Why was this elevated to a federal case? The picture isn’t that damning. Now that I can see a higher-res version of it, it doesn’t look nearly as bad as the one that was originally posted here.

    2) How was it found? I tried the google search terms recommended by “JTDC” in the third comment, and it didn’t come at all. “Bill Lee” and Cork? Nothing. “Bill Lee” and Cormier? Nothing. “Bill Lee” and Cork and 70th? Nothing. If someone can find me search terms that work for this, I’d be interested in seeing them.

    3) Even Ryan Cormier who took the picture has said, “I’ve got to know him since then and he’s a really cool guy.” Why is there continued hostility toward the candidate here? Be pissed at Burris all you want, it sounds like he doesn’t care.

  38. miscreant says:

    Mike - Great picture of Bill Lee. Hey, I’d rather have a Governor that likes to openly party, than one who pretends he doesn’t.

    Anyway, you’ve finally hit the big time. Gaffney just discussed this on WGMD. Gaffney can’t conceal his little boner for Burris, probably because he contributed to the demise his good friend, J. Atkins, who has been getting a lot of prime airtime lately. He’s also been rather critical of Lee lately. So you two have much in common.

  39. Mike Matthews says:

    Rick,

    Huh? I have no animosity toward Lee. I don’t know where you’re getting that. If there’s a picture of Protack, Graham, Markell, or Carney out there in the same light, then I’d love to put that up as well.

    I’ve stayed out of your beefs with Dana, but I’m beginning to think you really are just Dave Burris’ lap dog.

  40. Dana Garrett says:

    “So we now know all the things this was not about. We are still waiting an explanation as to what possible ground for a “lawsuit” or even a temper tantrum you have here.
    If you concur that the picture is harmless and its use perfectly legal, what for the love of the Almighty prompted this brouhaha ?”

    Dave has no explanation. He was caught bullying once more and he is trying to pretend there is a deeper basis for a lawsuit when there is none just to save face.

    Beyond all that, Dave Burris has no legal standing to sue on Bill Lee’s behalf. Dave’s threat was just the usual bluster coming from Delaware’s most notorious gas bag.

  41. RickJ19958 says:

    Mike -

    Sorry to be unclear - not from you, but from the commenter(s). Several anons and Sam Carpini have been less objective than you. I understand that Burris was your target here, but Lee is the “club” than the masses seem to be hitting him with.

  42. jason330 says:

    I am in love with wishful thinking as any red blooded American liberal but this:

    This blunder can even bring down Mike Castle. With FSP threats, this story will probably go national.

    Is a bit much

  43. Mike Matthews says:

    Dana,

    Just to be clear, it isn’t a lawsuit, but a subpoena. Dave promises there’s more meat to the matter, though I still find his intimidation tactics to be nothing more than thuggery.

  44. Dana Garrett says:

    “haven’t you learned by now that you can’t always get what you want?”

    Egomaniacs never do. The world exists to serve their purposes.

  45. RickJ19958 says:

    As for Dana, I think it’s remarkably odd that he’s had 14 posts in the past three months (and could have had more) tagged with someone who currently holds no position in party politics, comments on every thread on other blogs that mentions him, and seem to take such delight in any mistakes he makes. I’ve commented as such. I haven’t started a blog of my own to point these out, so my feeling is I’m less crazy/obsessed than he is.

  46. Dana Garrett says:

    “Just to be clear, it isn’t a lawsuit, but a subpoena.”

    Important distinction. Thanks.

    “Dave promises there’s more meat to the matter,”

    What could it be? It’s BS.

    “though I still find his intimidation tactics to be nothing more than thuggery.”

    Exactly. Nevertheless, if I were you, I’d make sure I have a witness around me at all times just in case any suspicious fires happen to a Republican.

  47. anon says:

    FSP is old whine in new bottles. I can’t wait to see the fuss he makes when the wind blows down one of Lee’s campaign signs.

  48. Dana Garrett says:

    “As for Dana, I think it’s remarkably odd that he’s had 14 posts in the past three months….”

    Did all those posts make Burris the principal subject of the post? No. So you are being deceptive.

    All that has happened here is that Dave Burris has been exposed for the political thug he is…what I’ve been saying. And though I was a lone voice about him for a short while, Burris has now made my perception of him commonplace. He self-destructed far sooner than I imagined.

    I predict the bigwigs in the GOP will start putting more & more distance between themselves & Burris from now on. He’s become a liability to the GOP.

    It really is a shame. Dave has considerable talents. But Dave has no one to blame but himself.

  49. Dana Garrett says:

    “I’ve stayed out of your beefs with Dana, but I’m beginning to think you really are just Dave Burris’ lap dog.”

    To be more precise. RickJ is Lee’s lapdog, but Burris is a source of information & support about Lee’s campaign and attacks on his Dem competitors and Protack. FirstStatePolitics is the vehicle.

    If Burris is shown to be an unreliable and reasonably suspect as a source, then his usefulness to Lee’s campaign is damaged.

    That’s RickJ’s angle.

  50. Sam Carpini says:

    Is this the same guy that said awful things about a former state rep’s wife on the radio a short while ago and made the GOP look real bad? Is FSP and Dave the same guy? If it is, he is problematic and all the posters are right about him. He is very bad news.

  51. RickJ19958 says:

    Dana, your typical method of insulting someone until they return the insult and you can use them to draw traffic to your site won’t work here.
    I have made no secret of my support for Bill Lee. I am no more his ‘lapdog’ than you are Karen Peterson’s, or John Kowalko’s, or any of the people in this arena you admire and support. I should include that you once admired Dave Burris, but now specifically attack him several times a week. Karen and JNohn, watch your back.

  52. Sam Carpini says:

    I thought this was about a blog bully and intimadator?

  53. JTDC says:

    http://64.233.169.104/search?q.....=firefox-a

    Google cache. The new post by Cormier hides the previous result.

    I’m sure glad you guys want to put all of the state’s financial records on the internet and talk about how easy and cheap it is…

    you can’t even work google.

  54. RickJ19958 says:

    Too cute by half, JTDC. The search you provided included knowing exactly which page to search. Remove that information, and the result does not appear.

    So, since you knew exactly which page to look on, it isn’t really a ’search’. Can I presume that you clued Mike Matthews in on its whereabouts, or the other way around?

  55. Dana Garrett says:

    RickJ,

    Your threat has been duly a href=”http://uploads.screenshot-program.com/my.php?image=upl4065668016.jpg” title=”noted & recorded”.

    Bill Lee Supporters for Revenge!

  56. Dana Garrett says:

    Let me try that again:

    RickJ,

    Your threat has been duly noted and recorded:
    http://uploads.screenshot-prog.....668016.jpg

    Bill Lee Supporters for Revenge!

  57. Nancy Willing says:

    er, ….Dana, tongue-in-cheek?

    RickJ was implying that YOU were likely to turn on Karen and John …you are the threat because you have turned on those you once admired.

    Somehow I think you missed it like you missed that it was not a lawsuit.

  58. RickJ19958 says:

    Has the world gone topsy-turvy? Nancy Willing needs to translate for me?

  59. LiberalGeek says:

    LOL, RickJ. I think the problem is that Dana has started to view everything with suspicion.

    I heard an interview once with Paul Simon and he said that originally, Joe DiMaggio thought Mrs. Robinson was an attack on him, because he had started to assume that everyone who talked about him was an enemy.

  60. Dana Garrett says:

    I did miss Rick’s meaning because I don’t think in terms of turning on good people, only people who turn out to be scumbags.

  61. Dana Garrett says:

    “I heard an interview once with Paul Simon and he said that originally, Joe DiMaggio thought Mrs. Robinson was an attack on him”

    Poor LG,

    Sadly, your analogy doesn’t work. I didn’t think the comments referred to me.

    Nice try, though.

  62. LiberalGeek says:

    Hmmm. Pretty sure they did. The only one that doesn’t see it is you. And maybe Foraker.

  63. JTDC says:

    Rick -

    I included the cache link so you could see the page and search string highlighted. “Bill lee” “rusty rudder” - type that in. You see, since Cormier’s newest post is the first hit, you have to look back. A week ago, it would have been the first hit. If you guys don’t know how google works, then I’m sorry, I can’t help you.

    I didn’t clue Matthews in on the pictures but I did see them before, since they’ve been there for like two years now…. and anyone who typed in “Bill lee” “rusty rudder” would have it come up…

    For the record, I don’t think the picture is a big deal, but I think Burris made it a much bigger deal. What I don’t understand is why is this such an issue now? I don’t think Bill Lee has a problem with drinking, AT ALL, but I’ve heard the salacious rumors going back years, why is it so much more prevalent now? I think the guy likes to go out for a cocktail, and hell, he’s retired, let him do what he wants.

    How about blaming Bill Lee for being stupid enough to let Cormier take his picture? I know he didn’t know he was going to be “drafted” at that time, but still, dumb move.

  64. LiberalGeek says:

    At the risk of ruining the joke…

    RickJ’s point was to say that where you once slobbered all over Dave, today you cast him as the source of all evil. Some day you may turn on Peterson or Kowalko in the same way.

    I disagree with RickJ on many things, but I don’t rule out his assessment.

  65. Dana Garrett says:

    LG,

    Now you don’t get it.

  66. Al Mascitti says:

    I thought this was ridiculous when it seemed the Delaware GOP was upset. If someone is wasting the FBI’s time with this, the explanation had better be good.

  67. Pandora says:

    I just read the emails. Nuts, just nuts. Dave sounds like a character on 24.

  68. anonymous says:

    24, Pandora? I was thinking more along the lines of Scooby-Doo. But your right Dave is nuts.

  69. Pandora says:

    Anonymous, I defer to your comparison. Scooby-Doo reflects the correct maturity level displayed in those emails.

  70. Liz allen says:

    Good going Mike: Calling the Judge on Jensons show and getting his take on the photo! It appears the Judge has no problem with the photo taken,….but after you got off the air….Bill ? called in to see if the Judge was still supporting George War Bush….the Judge said “I voted for him and I won’t back off that” Bill said, “but do you think Bush has done a good job”…haahah says Judge Lee..I don’t agree with everything but yes, I do believe HE HAS DONE A GOOD JOB….GOOD job Brownie….wasnt the Judge Bush’s Delaware Campaign manager in 2004?

    The Judge says he will be honest if elected guvnor why couldnt he be honest enough to back the horror that is George Bush?

  71. required says:

    the delaware blogosphere. the den of iniquity

  72. RickJ19958 says:

    Excellent citizen journalism. I especially like the part where you repeatedly state that the exchange is ‘OFF THE RECORD’, then provide it in its entirity for publication.

  73. Dana Garrett says:

    Poor, poor Rick,

    I feel sad for you, very sad; you’ve embarrassed yourselves:

    Print the emails if you want, Mike.

    Also, I wouldn’t say “I own this story” when you don’t even KNOW the whole story. But hey, do what you want.
    http://www.delawareliberal.net.....rris-lost- it

    That’s your god’s words made hours ago. He gave permission.

    Now what were you saying about ethics?

  74. Mike Matthews says:

    Rick, you fucking moron. I didn’t say the complete exchange was off the record. Just that little segment. At this point, I’m not upholding my journalistic ethics for a thug who seems to be working outside the party mainstream.

    The part where I stated we’d be off the record is something everyone heard about even before the emails were published, so it doesn’t make a bit of difference.

    Go back to licking Dave’s ass. I know you can’t come out against him, so maybe the best thing for you is to just shut your damn mouth.

  75. Pandora says:

    I didn’t read the “off the record” comment in relation to the emails. I read that if Dave ANSWERED Mike’s question about what was going on, Mike would keep that info off the record.

    From what I read Dave didn’t supply names or motivation. Other than the heightened emotions the end of the emails read pretty much like the beginning.

  76. Mike Matthews says:

    Pandora,

    Thank you for better making the point I attempted to make in comment 74.

  77. anonymous says:

    Rick is Dave.

  78. LiberalGeek says:

    Rick is not Dave

  79. FSP says:

    “At this point, I’m not upholding my journalistic ethics for a thug who seems to be working outside the party mainstream.”

    Flexible ethics. Not exactly the inviolate kind you displayed so haughtily when comparing yourself to Judith Miller. Now we know you’ll waive your ethics when it suits your purposes.

    You’re really going to look like a fool at the end of this.

  80. Mike Matthews says:

    I can’t wait, Dave. Like I said earlier. Bring it, bitch.

  81. Mike Matthews says:

    And, by the way, Mr. I-Went-to-the-number-one-journalism school, don’t ever lecture me on ethics. Your blatant thuggery these last two days should give no one any cause to trust you. Rather than debating the reams of common sense being made in the comments above, you go after a ridiculous red herring in one of my comments. Yes, I said off the record, but as Pandora alludes, there was no meat to the matter, therefore, the off the record makes no difference.

    This is one of your frequent tricks when one calls you out on your bullshit. You obfuscate and then rip apart a wholly trivial piece of the puzzle. People are on to you, Dave. Your holier-than-thou preaching will eventually come back to bite you in the ass when you finally decide to run for governor in 15 years. That is, if the people of Delaware are “ready for you.”

  82. FSP says:

    Hey, I’m sure you can justify just about anything now.

    We’ve established what you are, now all we need to know is where the line is. Unless it continues to move to suit your needs.

  83. FSP says:

    And as far as the “reams of common sense,” none of those people have the other half of the story, so their speculation is nothing more than that.

    I don’t fault them for speculating, just like I don’t fault you for your immense overreaction to get attention.

  84. Benjamin says:

    All of this is very pleasant, me says.
    Cough.

  85. FSP says:

    And finally, the reason I haven’t commented all day is because I haven’t been in front of a computer yet.

  86. Kilory says:

    Well one thing for sure, the photo of Bill Lee shows him to be fit and healthy!
    Many of the bloggers including myself are way out shape. 79 years old he looks great!
    He doesn’t look a day over 59!

    Come on guys isn’t there more important things to discuss like the rock’em sock’em school board election in Red Clay?

    So how about the New Castle County Bloggers getting together for a blog fest at the Bulls Eye?

  87. Mike Matthews says:

    Anytime, Kilroy. Save a roast beef sandwich for me!

    And, Dave, your full of shit. I know you too well for you to say you’re just now sitting down in front of a computer. Your day revolves around this blogging BS and your ego can’t take a minute without knowing what people are saying about you.

    And, like I admitted on DL, I don’t doubt there’s a story here. Do you think I’m denying that? What I’m fighting is the ridiculousness in threatening me with a subpoena. IS YOUR CASE SO FUCKING WEAK THAT YOUR END GAME HINGES ON THE RELEASE OF THE NAME OF THE PERSON (IF ANY) WHO SUPPLIED THE PHOTO TO ME?!?

    You all at the GOP are fucking delusional. No wonder you keep losing elections in this state. Under the tutelage of the Grand Poobah Burris, I predict many losses in the future.

  88. Mike Matthews says:

    Ah, what the hell…let’s get this thing to 100.

  89. FSP says:

    “IS YOUR CASE SO FUCKING WEAK THAT YOUR END GAME HINGES ON THE RELEASE OF THE NAME OF THE PERSON (IF ANY) WHO SUPPLIED THE PHOTO TO ME?!?”

    No. In the grand scheme of things, you’re an insignificant twit. Sorry to disappoint you. I know you were looking forward to the attention.

  90. Dana Garrett says:

    “I know you too well for you to say you’re just now sitting down in front of a computer.”

    Now, now, Mike. Dave has been busy all day w/ the FBI helping them to find J. Hoffa’s body.

  91. Mike Matthews says:

    So there’s no subpoena? Whew! I feel better. Than case closed and I can look forward to my two week vacation at the Grand Canyon next week?

    I guess we can just file the emails under the heading of “Fantasy in My Mind” where you don’t tell me you’ll attempt to get the name via subpoena should I not originally comply?

  92. Dana Garrett says:

    “In the grand scheme of things, you’re an insignificant twit.”

    Well, we are all insignificant twits compared to the great majesty & splendor of Dave Burris.

    Still, that comment by Burris ought to go on an opponent’s campaign literature should he ever run for office.

  93. jj says:

    Dave is helping the FBI find Hoffa’s body. TOO FUNNY !

    Dave your a rich fat kid you have the money to pay people to do stupid dirty work. Start acting like a real G O P person.

  94. Kilroy says:

    1. Al Mascitti says:
    “I thought this was ridiculous when it seemed the Delaware GOP was upset. If someone is wasting the FBI’s time with this, the explanation had better be good. “

    Maybe Beau Biden should form a Blog Strike Force to clean this town up! Keep an eye out for guys in dark blue jackets with BSF written on their backs.

  95. snark says:

    So this is what it takes to get over 90 comments on a post???
    looks like there is some magic left in the old Burris name.

  96. snark says:

    MM

    can we assume if you had stumbled across the photo on Cormier’s site, you would have given him credit when you posted it?

    it does leave us to wonder who is using you…

  97. Mike Matthews says:

    Snark,

    It’s an unfortunate sin of mine that I never give credit when I post photos. Could be out of sheer laziness. Either way, I’m not saying where I got the photo.

  98. Kilroy says:

    Mike Matthews says:

    “It’s an unfortunate sin of mine that I never give credit when I post photos”

    Mike before you find out I used the picture of you in your cave! Thanks ! Don’t sue me please!

  99. Kilroy says:

    I’ll pay you in food ad drink!

  100. snark says:

    100!

    do I win a door prize?

  101. Disbelief says:

    Is this our first mega-thread?

  102. Call It says:

    This is freaking hilarious…

    I have been away from any internet access for 2 days and this is what I get to come home to! What a fucking clown show. I must thank you Dave… I just made peppercorn crusted 7 oz filet with a mushroom and wine sauce topped with jumbo lump crab meat. I was planning on enjoying a bottle of wine and a movie with it, but this is FUCKING AMAZING. You just lost a ton of credibility bud. Thanks for the free negative pub, as well as making my night.

  103. ThisIsJournalism? says:

    Let me get this straight. Dave Burris asks for your source for a photo that you posted on your website over a week ago. He’s not particularly polite in his request (there’s a surprise), and, not surprisingly, you say no. There is an exchange of emails in which you ask Dave why he wants the source for the photo, and you tell him the conversation is “off the record.” Dave makes clear that his request has nothing to do with the fact you’ve posted the photo on your website and nothing to do with you; but still doesn’t tell you why he wants to know who gave you the photo. You refuse to name the source, but then have the “off the record” emails posted. Very nice. I can see you’re a guy who can be trusted to keep his word.

    As to Dave Burris and his request, if he or the party were truly upset about a photo posted over a week ago, one thinks he or the party would have reacted then. No, there’s something more going on here, and Dave Burris still hasn’t revealed why he’s asking for the source of the photo… but I wonder if “Jesus tap dancing Christ” (the very third poster in this thread) knows. He or she was awfully quick to indicate where the photo came from…

  104. Disbelief says:

    idiot

  105. Dana Garrett says:

    “You refuse to name the source, but then have the “off the record” emails posted. Very nice. I can see you’re a guy who can be trusted to keep his word.”

    You must have had a little too much wine when you missed Burris comment at Del Lib in which he tells Mike to go ahead & post the e-mails.

    He effectively withdrew the confidentially aspect of the exchange.

  106. Mike Matthews says:

    An off the record promise generally implies there’s something to be told “off the record.’ As anyone with very minimal comprehension skills can see, there was nothing of any earth-shattering importance in what Dave wrote. Therefore, I didn’t feel it necessary to follow through. Had Dave said “The person involved and who may have sent you the photo is involved in mail fraud, which is a federal offense,” then I would have honored it.

    Watch. Burris will continue to play this card while at the same time side-stepping the real fact that he and whomever he’s representing threatened me with legal action should I not bow down to their holy requests and give up my source. He’s fucking pathetic.

  107. LiberalGeek says:

    So, Mike, are you saying that if Dave had asked you politely and had a compelling reason for the request, that you would have given him your source?

    I ask that because I am starting to think that this is a big test balloon for someone (your source or Burris) and that you are in the middle (lovin’ every minute of it, I might add).

    So if Dave does produce evidence that this is in some way a person committing a crime (I don’t see exactly how that is possible), would you give up the source and/or no longer accept other “scoops” from the source?

    I ask partly because I’m not sure how I would respond and partly because your answer could dissuade people from using you as a conduit for whatever the lawbreaking activity might be.

  108. James says:

    It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to tell what’s happening: Burris is in the sunset of his career (calling Star Jones!) and he’s now in the slop with Matthew — a man who has boundaries that Burris cannot fathom and a blogger who rightfully loves the spectacle.

    And with every Burris post here, his value goes down tenfold and Matthews’ goes up.

    By the end of this, Matthews will be more of Delaware’s Drudge than he ever has, thanks to Dopey McDopesAlot.

  109. JTDC says:

    As Jesus Tap Dancing Christ I can say, no, I wasn’t the “source” for the photos…

    I am, however, someone with an IQ over 30. Thusly, I can use the Google device and find things on the internet tubes.

    I’m very glad that the “Delaware Plan” includes so many IT related proposals. You fucktards can’t even use basic searches on the most popular search engine in the world. Jesus fucking christ. I hope no one ever figures out how to work Lexis Nexis, then you guys are really in trouble.

  110. JTDC says:

    BTW since we’ve been talking about Dave Burris’ alleged qualifications ala Dana Garrett saying he could be Governor (something which I hope he will now say was totally wrong)… where did Burris go to school? If he went to the number one communications school, I assume he received his money back. He sounds like he, perhaps, graduated with Ruth Ann in her speech therapy classes.

  111. jj says:

    Dave you big fat rich kid with way too much time on his hands. a comment from above was wright. The fucking picture came fron the News Journal!!

    Better call the F B I and change your story.
    I’am so glad i left Rep. party.
    It just goes to show everyone:

    In the Rep. state party Money talks and Bullshit walks… oh no ..Bullshit stays right the fuck in the party with their money.

  112. Lawsuit says:

    A subpoena can only get acquired when there is an existing legal matter before the Court and information to enlighten the Court is required in that matter. There can be no subpoena without a case before the Court.

  113. Dana Garrett says:

    “something which I hope he will now say was totally wrong”

    Utterly, totally repudiate that statement. In fact, I only made the statement after a dittohead smacked me in the head with a hardbound version of one of Limbaugh’s book. I plead temporary insanity resulting from head injury.

  114. Dana Garrett says:

    “there is an existing legal matter before the Court”

    I wonder about that/ Would a Grand Jury collecting evidence count? My question is does the suspect have to know a Grand Jury is seated?

  115. LiberalGeek says:

    I think a Grand Jury is always seated, no?

  116. Nancy Willing says:

    There can be no subpoena without a case before the Court.

    *
    Right, the subpoena implies a law suit. The threatened subpoena was not a threatened law suit aimed at Matthews, however.

    It is a threat of possible contempt of court etc..

    The law suit itself is presumably involved with someone/something of the DE GOP.

  117. LiberalGeek says:

    It could be a criminal investigation. In which case, Burris shouldn’t have been meddling. A lawsuit wouldn’t move as quickly as Burris is implying.

  118. Nancy Willing says:

    The law suit could be well underway.

    The picture is ‘relevant’ ‘because it was used’ somewhere else, presumably sometime since it was first post