In the first financial quarter of this year, candidate for sheriff Eric Noble took in almost ten times the amount of donations that Sheriff Chapman garnered. Chapman’s total donations for the period were just $2,445 with the bulk of that, $1,900, coming from six people. His biggest donation, $1,000, came from a property manager in Shadow Hills, California. (A rather suspicious sounding town.) Another of the six lives in Florida. [read_more]
In contrast to Chapman’s donations, Eric Noble took in $23,000 with the bulk of his big donors, 24 in total, being former or current employees of Sheriff Chapman, men and women who have worked with Eric Noble, and residents of Loudoun county and Winchester.
The full report of Eric Noble’s donations can be found here. Mike Chapman’s donation report is here. These reports make it very apparent who has the most support in the sheriff’s department and in Loudoun county.
102 comments
If only you knew how MISERABLE ALL the deputies are in this county under Chapman. As soon as you say something, your FIRED
So we’ve heard. It’s awful.
Again, Commonwealth’s Attorney Jim Plowman is intimately familiar with the goings on within the LCSO and has opted to endorse Mr. Noble for Sheriff. That is very telling.
Agree that it’s telling. It tells me that Plowman is blind to the character flaws of Noble and his acolytes. As a reminder, Eugene Delgaudio, the county bigot, is also on the same bandwagon.
Last election Mr. Plowman supported Chapman. After seeing what Chapman has done to the LCSO Mr. Plowman has elected to support Mr. Noble, stating that he feels that Noble is the best person to be the next Sheriff. Mr. Plowman is a smart man who had nothing to gain from endorsing the challenger to the incumbent. He is not blind to anything, in fact, of all people, you and me included, he likely knows more about this whole matter than anyone.
I read about all the deputies at the LCSO who dislike Chapman and work here and I think it is more like 10-15 % dislike him and a lot of those will never be happy. All you have to do is go back in the archives of Loudoun Times Mirror or Leesburg Today comments and you will see the comments about Simpson and his command staff. It is funny to see some of the prior command staff talking about how great it was under them and how if they elect Noble we will return to those days. Funny this is how I and other deputies remember the past.
Flexing overtime which created staffing shortages and caused leave to be denied most of the time because of the shortages. Flexing training hours we caused us to work bizarre hours like me example coming in at 0400hrs to finish the midnight shift.
A commander who was too busy playing on-line games to review a search warrant “Come back in an hour when I am done”
The black suburban that was used for golf outings in the Carolinas by a certain group of golfers (commanders/ supervisors)
The deputy who was at First St car wash getting their cruiser washed when they observed the driver in the van in front of them sign the county log. Being a trained observer they found out that the van was the personal vehicle of a certain supervisor and tried to report it but was quickly threatened to shut up by a commander.
The son of a commander who fled from deputies and caused a high speed pursuit which ultimately ended in a crash and the son being arrested. However while being transported to the ADC he was ordered to another location where he was met with that commander and another supervisor and they took control of his son. The son was supposed to be an informant for narcs and the charges were dropped because of his work as an informant but no one recalls any drug cases that he provided actual information.
I could go on and on about the things that routinely occurred for years under the good ole boys.
Chapman got rid of flexing court and paid us overtime and fixed the issues with flexing training. I think that is why he went over budget on the overtime because he was trying to do the right thing. Now being fair there are some moral issues but they are mostly caused by some of the people that he kept from the good ole boys. I could talk about all the thing that have improved but that is not why I had to finally write in it was the comments made by one of the people who posted a comment about Chapman checking private emails. I think you need to be enlightened!
There was an email scandal at the NVCCJA in which offensive and inappropriate emails and attachments were being sent around by some instructors. I think when they were conducting their investigation some of Nobles comments with other instructors were uncovered and they notified the LCSO. That’s what we heard on the street about how Chapman started looking into Noble. The comments were made on government computers which anyone with half a brain knows that the LCSO can view them at any time. That’s why some of those instructors no longer are employed at the NVCCJA and funny some of them are Noble supporters and delegates so when he talks about high moral standards it makes me laugh.
I know the Chapman haters will start whining but LTM or Washington Post FOIA the emails from the email scandal at NVCCJA last year and publish them so everyone can see. I need to be fair with NVCCJA when they found out what had occurred they took the correct actions but when they looked into Noble since he was command staff and was in on the offensive and inappropriate emails and attachments that lead to a separate investigation on him and Frye–who everyone on the street hates and does not want to see back in.
Well it looks like there are 2 deputies now that support Chapman. Looks like these statements about how all the deputies hate Chapman are beginning to unravel. I agree there was plenty of corruption in the old days that is gone. You don’t have that good ole boy we grew up together agency that we had from the past. You can see those good ole boys in some on the recent retirement parties! The LCSO does not need to go backwards, keep Chapman and let’s continue to move forward and get better!
For those who are trying to make an informed decision, I think the answer can be found quite easily, and that is the fact that the one who knows both candidates much better than anyone blogging on this and others sites is Commonwealth’s Attorney Jim Plowman. Mr. Plowman knows all the details of all of the stuff that is being tossed around. He has endorsed Eric Noble to be the next Sheriff.
One must ask why Mr. Plowman would back a challenger instead of his fellow Republican incumbent. That in and of itself is very unusual and almost unheard of. Mr. Plowman has absolutely nothing to gain and everything to lose by his choice to endorse Mr. Noble.
I would like to know how (partial) documents from the internal affairs investigation which was used in a confidential personnel matter involving the County Attorney wound up on this 34 questions website and in comments all over the web, LTM, L2D? In my view, these documents are not FOIAble, in that they are protected, private and personal personnel records, and are prohibited from being released according to State law to protect the privacy of Mr. Noble. Now that there has been an internal affairs investigation/personnel inquiry, I wonder how this anonymous and highly secretive website got these documents that only someone very close to Mr. Chapman would have? It seems to me illegal, unethical and misleading to post excerpts and ask readers to FOIA for proof of misleading and outright wrong conclusions, when these documents are confidential, and part of an internal affairs investigation and legal/personnel matter. Does Mr. Chapman know about this website, about these confidential documents being published? Also, Mr. Chapman should not even be discussing the matter publicly or saying that he wanted to fire Mr. Noble, since he accepted Noble’s resignation? Chapman cannot have it both ways, allow an honorable resignation and then smear a man saying he wanted to fire him… Mr. Noble has been very damaged by all of this, and quite illegally and unfairly. It would be highly improper for Mr. Chapman to tell a prospective employer that he really wanted to fire Noble for insubordination, or unbecoming behavior, or because of the budget overrun (after many outstanding recommendations in the same time period.) Just because Mr. Noble’s new employer might be Loudoun County and he is hoping his new job will be Sheriff, does not mean the current Sheriff can ignore the personnel rules or state law. Mr. Chapman should have more respect for the law, and his obligation to enforce it in his office. He should be demanding the 34 questions site be taken down, and doing another internal investigation to see who posted confidential documents from the first investigation, which should never have landed in the public domain.
Nice try “attorney”. Noble sent emails to Rick Frye’s government account, making them fair game for FOIA. Nothing confidential about them.
It proves that Noble and Frye are not only unethical, but stupid as well.
And this info SHOULD be damaging to Noble’s future employment prospects. Would you really want to hire someone who will stab you in the back? Future employers have every right to know about gross breaches of integrity.
My response is above. Personal emails are exempt from FOIA as are documents that comprise an investigation into a personnel matter and any personnel determination. Whoever put it that information on a website to hurt Mr. Noble’s chances of employment should be a defendant in a civil lawsuit, especially since the claim is Mr. Noble was terminated (and other apparently false claims) when he resigned. In my opinion, the person or persons who put up that website will be identified, and could be guilty of not only libel but of willful criminal conduct.
Although I posted this to you in another comment above, Mr. Attorney, please know you are wrong as follows.
if you email a .gov account with/by your personal email address, your email to the .gov address and the originating email address (personal or not) is NOT protected under state or federal law and certainly not under any FOIA protection.
If an I/A investigation revealed personal to personal email transmissions, then a case could be made, but not the case here. Once Frye left LCSO, he went to work for a contractor who works for FFX Co. Frye has a FFX .gov email address. Noble would email Frye from his personal email account to brag about posting negative, defaming or false comments on LCSO investigations, staff, Chapman, etc., to Frye at his .gov address. Dumb.
Because of this, the investigation immediately allowed them to look at Frye’s FFX .gov emails which revealed a myriad of information on Noble.
So, you are wrong Mr. Attorney, because you are not understanding that these two clowns were not wise enough to simply go personal to personal where the emails would be protected from FOIA. Well, somewhat–based on latest cases, an agency head only uses FOIA as a guideline, they can reveal whatever they want.
Also, the request for FOIA into the LCSO and its contents were, as I understand, run through the County Attorney’s office first before being released. When the FOIAed docs were forwarded to me by a third party who did the FOIA request, one of the emails from the records administrator indicated there was a delay due to a legal review. They were eventually released by the records administrator after legal review, not by/through Chapman. Take it up with the County Attorney, not Chapman.
FYI, I noticed a comment similar to this in the LTM which was posted by Ron Speakman. If this is Speakman, it indicates why you really don’t know what you are talking about but also indicates why you are a hack for Noble/Frye as the FOIA of Frye’s emails in FFX revealed you were BCC’d on things including Frye attempt to find out who was doing the FOIA request on him.
Another FYI, as you will see in the attachment below, FFX does not redact their emails and gives an option for the full Outlook file so you can see the BBC. Once again, Frye was not wise enough to know this and FFX DIT released all of his emails.
You posted this comment twice, so look above to see my response. However, it bears repeating that the email ON ITS FACE says it is protected and private and may not be released under FOIA. Did you actually get this from a FOIA request or by some other means?
Again, Commonwealth’s Attorney Jim Plowman is endorsing Mr. Noble for Sheriff over incumbent Chapman. That in and of itself says it all.
The FOIAs were sent to me by two third parties who FOIAed them prior and then after seeing 34Questions, I FOIAed Frye’s FFX emails myself. From what I understand, the LTM, LT, and recently the WaPo have also FOIAed them along with many other voters. I suggest you do the same because “On its face” means by it self or prima facia, at first look or glance. So, before you stick your neck out and attempt, as a professed attorney, to tell folks something which is incorrect because you did not look past a cursory review, I suggest you do your homework.
I guess you can’t read. The email you posted has an all caps warning that the document is either privileged, confidential, private, etc. and not subject to FOIA and is not to be released. On its face, as I used it, means it is typed on the document. and throwing around words like prima facie etc show you really do not know the law.
Question for you Brian: Can you tell me why you think Republican Commonwealth’s Attorney Jim Plowman endorsed Republican candidate Noble over incumbent Republican Sheriff Chapman? I would like to hear your thoughts on this.
Question for you Brian: Can you tell me why you think Republican Commonwealth’s Attorney Jim Plowman endorsed Republican candidate Noble over incumbent Republican Sheriff Chapman? I would like to hear your thoughts on this.
In this case you published an email that is not a public email, but a private and protected email ~ that had an all CAPS warning that it was not public and should not be released…many categories of emails on public servers with .gov email addresses are private or confidential or exempt. You are not allowed to publish those, and I doubt the Fairfax County Attorney approved the release of this particular document you published here. The release of the email you published here on this site appears not to have been done through appropriate channels.
If I may, Noble admitted to me, personally, in my driveway just before he, I and another person went on a motorcycle ride, that he was under internal investigation, suspended, showed me his blank badge case where his credentials were removed, admitted that it was sparked by some inappropriate email comments he made about the Academy and that he was likely to receive a letter of termination and was considering just retiring instead of fighting it. But also that he had an attorney who he consulted with, looking into it. At another lunch where Noble was present, I sat next to him and he had disclosed the Notice of Termination which was given to, sent to him or he was served with and he was still deciding whether to retire. If Noble disclosed all that to me and others at that time, its was disclosed by him everywhere.
That said, Noble has also discussed this in detail in public beginning at the YR forum where Ramadan’s former aid asked him about the termination and he gave a lengthy speech, equally with the LTM or LT where he [falsely] stated that he and the Sheriff worked it out and he retired.
Based on all of this, the Sheriff can and has corrected inaccuracies that Noble has put out, one of which is the fact that nothing was worked out–the investigation revealed many violations, the County Attorney and County HR recommended the immediate suspension and later recommended his termination and in fact, drafted the Notice of Termination (which I have not seen). From my understanding, Noble had 5 days, per that letter (as told to me by Noble himself) to come in alone or with his attorney and go over the entire internal investigation results, answer to them, challenge them, etc. Noble refused, instead, he submitted notice of his immediate retirement.
So, there was no “resignation” Mr. Attorney, technically, he was terminated, did not challenge that termination, instead submitted for his immediate retirement.
Oh, and brush up on libel, Noble would have to prove a published false statement that is damaging to his reputation. Noble’s actions are the damage to his reputation… all he had to do was go in, speak to Chapman, retire, walk away with his TS Clearance still in tact and go get a high paying 150K/yr retirement job and his life would have been great. Instead, he allowed Frye, according to the FOIAed email trail, to push him into this campaign and placed himself in this situation.
And, there is this whole issue of the TS Clearance… want to tackle that one next?
Brian, do you ever get tired of being wrong? Chapman himself said that Major Noble retired. At a Republican committee meeting in December Chapman praised Noble’s service. What is the matter with you?
It is one thing to repeat a conversation you might have had and another thing to publish private emails that are marked “THIS EMAIL IS NOT TO BE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC.” You are out of order, Mr. Noble did not “waive” any of his privacy rights to those specific documents with any conversation with you ~ just because you believe so vehemently in your cause does not mean you are judge and jury and are above the law, and can publish exempted/private/confidential documents or documents that are part of an on going investigation or false conclusions that you get from putting together bits of information that do not show the whole picture. He might have been worried Mr. Chapman was angry at him, that Mr. Chapman might retaliate against him, that Mr. Chapman might try to terminate him (wrongly), but that does not mean that there was any cause for termination (just your speculation based on one sided hearsay and pretend lawyering.) The fact is Mr. Noble retired honorably ~ with quite a few awards. Something neither you nor Mr. Chapman can seem to accept.
Brian, seems like your ducking the question. Again, why do you think that Commonwealth Attorney Jim Plowman is endorsing challenger Noble instead of incumbent Chapman? All three are Republicans and in virtually any primary the current office holders within a party always support the incumbent? Your thoughts on that?
You will have to ask Mr. Plowman what has or has not occurred between he and Sheriff Chapman and his endorsement. While I do not agree with his endorsement, I respect his decision and have the utmost respect for Jim–this is simply not about him.
I do find it a shame that there is not a unified front–I feel the democrats have the strongest slate in some time, anchored by Umstaddt on one end who is in regardless and can spend her time, effort and money stumping for Randall and others. Then you have Wexton on the other end who pulls in her power, Herring’s power and McAuliffe–both of which will be pushing for a partisan shift. This is a year where primaries can, are and will divide and conquer, unlike ’11, and for a few not expecting or prepared for the democrat voters in the general to simply go by their sample ballet, they may find that they are not as popular as they believe.
I have told every one of them this same theory and thought, to no avail. So, while I will help in any way I can, I believe what I wrote above is the elephant in the room.
I do believe if you ask Mr. Plowman you will find that deputies from throughout the agency have come to him and made him aware of all the bizarre things going on under Chapman. I am sure Mr. Plowman did not make this decision without weighing the ramifications of such decision. Obviously he knows all about all this babble on this and other blogs and he still believes Mr. Noble is the best choice to be Sheriff. I think the recent debate sealed the deal for those who were on the fence. I know of several folks who attended who were leaning Chapman and afterwards said they were now going to support Noble.
You address yourself as an attorney but the problem with most attorneys–they are walking cases of ineffective assistance of counsel.
If a case is being actively investigated, internal or by CID, and it involved .gov emails, then yes, while the investigation was ongoing, it is likely those emails would not be released. In the event that an investigation ends and, as here, there is no prosecution, just because those .gov emails were “viewed” or used by I/A, the County Attorney or County HR to determine violations of General Orders, ethical violations or breach of trust, does not shield those .gov emails from later being exposed via FOIA once the investigation has concluded.
Could you imagine that being the standard and you had a client who could prove wrong doing yet all the agency had to do was say, sorry, we used it for an I/A investigation so too bad. I really should not have to tell you this if you are an attorney–hence my opening sentence.
Also, once Noble began discussing the investigation, suspension, notice of termination, loss of security clearance, in public, then the general interest of the public takes over. Had he not discussed these in public (which began at a Young Republican forum), then Chapman would have a difficult time discussing matters.
Also, I suggest you look into the recent case in FFX where even I/A investigations themselves, having a greater public interest, have been opened to the public.
And, of course, there is the novel thought that the higher you go up in an agency, especially one which has a political or constitutional officer label–you forgo most all of the privacy nonsense. This includes candidates for that top seat. Noble does not get a pass, especially, as mentioned in another comment below, for being stupid and using his and Frye’s .gov email accounts.
That site, 34questions.com site has been noted in newspapers, social media and blogs so it is likely everyone in the LCSO knows about it.
And, frankly, if you feel the FOIAed information is “misleading” and/or somehow illegal to print, expose or interpret… go offer your services to Mr. Noble, become his attorney and present your case. Even if your services were for free, Noble would not hire you because that file is two inches thick. A judge would laugh you into next year.
FYI, Chapman offered to have Noble and his attorney at that time come in and review the file and each allegation, each violation, each breach of trust and the evidence against him–Noble refused–why, simple, he did not want his attorney at that time seeing what was there.
Why would you go to an attorney, have that attorney call Chapman, then when Chapman reveals to the attorney what was in the investigation–why would Noble then refuse the opportunity to come in with his attorney, sit down with Chapman informally and go over the investigation? Likely because the story he gave to his attorney was a watered down version of what was revealed in the investigation.
Criminal law, and what must be produced during a criminal investigation, is different from FOIA. Under State FOIA law, personal emails, even on a .gov server are not FOIAble ~ they are personal. A supervisor may look at them, but may not publish them. The investigation did not result in “nothing” but in a personnel action, which is protected by State law. You need to bone up on the privacy that our State laws afford employees at their job and with regard to their employment.
Actually, Mr. Attorney, if you email a .gov account with/by your personal email address, your email to the .gov address and the originating email address (personal or not) is NOT protected under state or federal law and certainly not under and FOIA protection.
If an I/A investigation revealed personal to personal email transmissions, then a case could be made, but not the case here. Once Frye left LCSO, he went to work for a contractor who works for FFX Co. Frye has a FFX .gov email address. Noble would email Frye from his personal email account to brag about posting negative, defaming or false comments on LCSO investigations, staff, Chapman, etc., to Frye at his .gov address. Dumb.
Because of this, the investigation immediately allowed them to look at Frye’s FFX .gov emails which revealed a myriad of information on Noble.
So, you are wrong Mr. Attorney, because you are not understanding that these two clowns were not wise enough to simply go personal to personal where the emails would be protected from FOIA.
Also, the request for FOIA into the LCSO and its contents were, as I understand, run through the County Attorney’s office first before being released. When the FOIAed docs were forwarded to me, one of the emails from the records administrator indicated there was a delay due to such a review. Take it up with the County Attorney, not Chapman.
FYI, I noticed a comment similar to this in the LTM which was Ron Speakman. If this is Speakman, it indicates why you really don’t know what you are talking about but also indicates why you are a hack for Noble/Frye as the FOIA of Frye’s emails in FFX revealed you were BCC’d on things including Frye attempt to find out who was doing the FOIA request on him.
Another FYI, as you will see in the attachment below, FFX does not redact their emails and gives an option for the full Outlook file so you can see the BBC. Once again, Frye was not wise enough to know this and FFX DIT released all of his emails.
I am not Ron Speakman, and Judge Horne has ruled on this, very specifically with respect to Loudoun County employees. The State law is very clear, and it does not matter if you are a .gov address emailing another .gov email address. Government employees are protected in their private emails to friends or family who also work for the government. “I have a dr’s apptmt today, I will be late coming home” etc. are all private emails and should not be released. If the FOIA was reviewed by the County Attorney then I supposed there is a measure of protection for you. However, if the Sheriff is shown to have coordinated this stunt through his campaign and you, then you are both in trouble with the law… very clear law, I might add.
I just looked at the email you supplied and on its face it says it is exempt from FOIA and may not be disclosed. Did you read that? It was released by accident, and should never have been published.
My email can have a disclosure that I am the King of Prussia–means nothing, like a judge saying, disregard what you just heard. Sure and laughable. Just like a person can put up a sign which says no people with red hair allowed–it has no force or effect of law. FOIA exemption is a codified guideline. Man, you need a crash course–I suggest a CLE for FOIA and a brush up on media based 1st amendment cases and someone to walk you through the Greer case in FFX.
That email from Frye to Gore is absolutely FOIAble, not a mistake and every comm Gore or anyone from DIT send out has that blanket disclosure–he is no more exempt than anyone else.
Here is a FOIA CLE from the American Bar. Take this an others and come back when you are better prepared. http://www.americanbar.org/groups/government_public/events_cle/foia_101_dl.html
All you have is insults. The email in all caps says “THIS E-MAIL…IS NOT TO BE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC. THIS E-MAIL IS EXEMPT FROM THE DISCLOSURE OF THE VIRGINIA FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT.” It was obviously not obtained through a formal FOIA, as I assume information about an ongoing FBI investigation and other privileged employee information. You need a better lawyer, Brian. Or maybe you just need a lawyer instead of you trying to cut corners and pretend to be one yourself.
That came to me right from DIT and Charlie Gore. If you contact me personally and disclose who you are, I am glad to share with you the entire email trail between me and FFX DIT and the file they sent. You are wrong, it was absolutely through a formal FOIA request.
I don’t need a lawyer–you simply need a better [legal] education or grasp of what you have been taught.
The emailS marked as “THIS E-MAIL IS NOT TO BE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC” should not have been released, and it begs the question if someone in the Fairfax Police was cooperating with Sheriff’s Chapman’s campaign? inappropriately? in disregard of State law? Of course Mr. Chapman’s campaign is behind all of this and it is conduct unbecoming of our Sheriff at a minimum. How embarrassing to be associated with a secret website using emails and other information only someone very close to the Sheriff would even know about, and publishing information that is not supposed to be public, making completely false conclusions (“terminated”) and asking the public to FOIA documents that cannot be released as proof? Releasing small portions of a document about an ongoing FBI investigation (which you admit is not timely to release) and information about that ongoing FBI investigation, trying to smear Mr. Noble with out of context and redacted partial documents that should not even be public in the first place does not respect the FBI investigation, or the public and shows very poor judgment and an amateur campaign, in complete disregard of the legal ramifications of doing so…. Quite unbelievable, the short sighted tunnel vision on Mr. Chapman’s part, and yours, too, Brian.
Well, Mr. Attorney–find out for yourself. FOIA the documents. Its easy. They have, from my understanding, released them to many news outlets… they both should have them packaged up for easy electronic return to you at no or little cost. Request them on Monday morning for yourself and once you get them, come here and be big enough to apologize. Or, become Noble/Frye’s attorney, sue the jurisdictions for releasing it and see how quickly their respective county attorneys lay you out or tell us how quickly you get laughed out of court, Loudoun, FFX or both. But, do the FOIA Monday morning and tell us when you get all of it back.
Not a great example–the case you are speaking of by Horne is not on point. The context of the emails are judged on a case by case scenario so while your example is correct in its own context, where no harm to an agency or its staff are being discussed, no collusion, no conspiracy, etc. your argument would hold weight, although there are still other factors. For this discussion, here, we are not speaking of a Dr’s appointment–Noble/Frye were commenting on internal LCSO business, investigations, staff, manipulating the media to discredit an agency head and bolstering conduct which was in violation of their General Orders. The veil of protection does not extend in this case and certainly when you take the totality of the “this was not my finest moment” and demonstrate that the finest moment was over a period of a year or longer, neither Horne if he was still active or any judge would extend that protection. Just because one party is not wise enough to realize the veil of protection does have a boundary, does not extend that veil to cover their malfeasance.
Nice try… next?
Brian, you do not know what you are talking about. You know enough to be dangerous and have not studied the intricacies of employees rights under State law. You or the 32 questions site have only published a portion of some of the emails, and you make false conclusions, like Mr. Noble was “terminated.” He was not terminated, and to continue to say so, and ask people to FOIA the sheriff’s office for proof, is ridiculous… the documents related to any “termination” or any personnel procedure are protected documents. That is the end of the story. The only full document that you have published states on its face that It is not to be disclosed and is not subject to FOIA, that it is either personal, privileged, or confidential. So how did you get that email? And many of the emails referenced in that email are clearly personal emails to Rick Frye, that should not be published. Are you working in a formal capacity for the Sheriff? Did you not see those ALL CAPS warning? Again, how did you get the one email you just published on this site that says on its face it is not to be disclosed?
Sir, as I have disclosed, the FOIA documents from LCSO were send to me via several third party individuals, voters, apparently after they reviewed 34questions.com. I did not place any FOIAed documents on that 34Questions site. I do find it interesting–the amount of traction it gets from folks like you attempting to stomp your feet and say its illegal–when, in fact, its information apparently from the FOIAed documents.
As far as Frye, after reviewing the 34Questions.com site, I did contact Dent and Gore in FFX and submit a FOIA request personally, paid for personally. In FFX, DIT gives an option of having a hard copy, electronic copy or the raw MS-PST binary file format for Outlook. If you select the PST option, you get to see the BCC, such as that one showing these guys are in bed with good ol Ron Speakman famous for his escapades in the last Sheriff’s election http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-state-of-nova/post/loudoun-sheriff-candidate-ron-speakman-has-eventful-past/2011/09/22/gIQAcfwOoK_blog.html
So, if you have a problem, take it up with FFX DIT who will likely tell you to pound sand as FFX has been in so much hot water lately that they are being as transparent as they can. In other words, its Frye’s problem–if he doesn’t want things disclosed, don’t use your .gov email account.
I find it humorous that not one person addresses the content of Noble’s emails and how he breached his oath, integrity, trust–the General Orders which he expected others to follow. Great example of leadership, going out hiding behind little alias, as you are now.
And, on LTM, Speakman has been actively commenting on this very FOIA issue. Interesting.
regarding FOIA, if one is discussing public business in ANY account, including personal accounts, it is subject to FOIA. It is a nice official sounding sidetrack to state that personal items like confirming doctors’ appointments for family members are exempt from any specific FOIA request in a government account. Of course they are–they aren’t public business (and should thus not be in public accounts). But the fact remains that anything on any .gov account is a public record, and more than one person has gotten into trouble at ALL levels of government for forgetting that. It is why some at the highest levels create alternative email accounts (or even establish entire servers) in order to get around public accountability. side note–Mr. Reynolds, why do you assume “an attorney” is a man?
True, if you are discussing public business on any account, private or government, it is subject to FOIA. And the same is true, for discussion of private matters ~ it is still a private matter whether it is an email from a public or government email address. Private emails on public servers are not subject to FOIA unless the private message also contains some public business, then the private part of the email is supposed to be redacted. Private emails, emails about an ongoing criminal investigation, and emails regarding a private personnel matter should not be released to the public or published on a secret anonymous website as part of the Sheriff’s campaign. It is clear that someone very close to the Sheriff provided these emails, and there was a coordinated effort… the only email released in full had a statement on it that “THIS E-MAIL IS NOT TO BE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC” The Sheriff should not be taking such a low road to try to win… disappointing, at a minimum… and perhaps illegal.
Wrong, as I keep saying, simply FOIA them for yourself and then when you get them come back and be big enough to apologize for accusing anyone of obtaining or releasing them in and underhanded manner.
Excellent points and you are correct Barbara… it may not be a man. I am assuming this because I have looked at Noble’s financial report and see who the attorneys are who have contributed to him and this person does not seem knowledgeable enough to be Sally. And Speakman said nearly the same in a comment the other day on the LTM article about the debate.
FOIA the documents yourself like I did. Easy, you will get the same. FOIA them on Monday morning and report back to us when you get them.
Whatever Chapman is paying you is not enough.
No one should lose their job because they wrote an email critical of an inept boss.
You are correct–I am underpaid!!!
One email, no, I agree Jeanine. A year plus worth of email, blog comments, media comments, conspiring to manipulate the media, create additional aliases, bragging to others about what you are doing and many other violations of General Orders–enough so that Chapman did NOT make the decision, it was the County Attorney’s office who received the internal investigation results and recommended immediate suspension to get Noble out of a position of trust and then, after the conclusion of the investigation, again, the County Attorney and County HR who recommended immediate termination. Noble has admitted to me and publicly some of the violations, the investigation, the suspension, loss of credentials, badge and gun, getting the Notice of Termination (and has a copy–ask him to see it, ask him to post it), but the County/Chapman gave him 5 days to come in and speak to Chapman about it, his attorney communicated with Chapman and Chapman again invited them both to come in and sit down to discuss this, review the entire investigative file but Noble refused to do this. Why, likely because he was watering down the story to his attorney and if they reviewed it, his attorney would know what really occurred.
Mr. Reynolds, are you billing all of these hours spent blogging to the Chapman campaign or is this on your own dime? I see that last time you had $8,500 in in-kind donations to Chapman and shortly after he got elected you received a contract for work for him for $14,000+ of taxpayer money. Sounds a little fishy to me. What is your hourly rate that you charge Chapman?
Pete, neither I nor my business have EVER received a contract from the LCSO or Loudoun County–EVER. I suggest you figure out how to look things up. Nice try. Commenting is on my own dime.
Do you work for the Chapman campaign?
It’s common knowledge that the Sheriffi’s handling of the seized assets is currently the subject of an FBI investigation. People who were recently interviewed in the matter were asked how confidential documents, which are under the control of the Sheriff and are critical to this investigation have appeared on that 34 questions website. Empirical evidence points directly at the Sheriff.
Add hypocrisy (again) to the list of Mr. Chapman’s shortcomings: His involvement in an anonymous (and illegal) website.
Currently, from Tom Jackman’s WaPo articles and the rumor mill, it was a rouge investigator who embezzled nearly $240K over a long period therefore an “empirical” observational view would indicate that your statement about the Sheriff’s handling seized assets and it, the office, being under investigation is incorrect. What is not shielded once they indict this character are those who knew about it, looked the other way, took advantage, used it, etc. Likely, that will come out. I agree, the common knowledge or rumor mill is that the other investigators and some CID and accounting staff have been interviewed recently.
For 34questions.com, where do you find any documents or what appear to be screenshots which were not part of FOIAed docs? The only reference I find in the FOIA docs is one where budget supervisor Michelle Draper actually rolls Noble under the bus–but again, FOIAed docs.
Who FOIAd the docs? You will tell us, if we are to believe that they were actually FOIAd and not just handed over and posted on a secret website anonymously after documents were gathered for the Internal Affairs investigation, the protected personnel matter, and the ongoing FBI investigation? Seems like these documents should not have been released is the whole point ~ especially the document that says in all caps, “THIS E-MAIL IS NOT TO BE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC”
I have mentioned several times, the LCSO FOIAed docs were sent to me by two parties, separately, both of whom FOIAed them. If you were at all versed in this, you would know, you could FOIA the FOIA requests. You will likely find several individuals as well as all of the news outlets did so–but not me, I did not place documents on 34questions.com. For FFX, I did FOIA Frye’s emails. I will gladly show you and share everything if you simply contact me and come out from behind that little alias.
Once again, you can write, anyone can write, anything they like on an email–subject line, disclosure, etc. It has no force or effect of law. And, a simply communication from Frye to Gore on a .gov email account–laughable that you would even suggest it could be exempt. None of them were.
Go FOIA the documents for yourself Monday morning and then report back to us when you get them. We will be waiting.
Mike Chapman does not blog or post online at all, and he certainly wouldn’t do it during working hours. Only Eric Noble does that.
Exhibit A: http://www.34questions.com.
Exhibit B: Noble’s own admission at the debate
Really? I hear Mike Chapman hasn’t returned to work since Monday’s debate. He’s been home calling supporters using his county provided cell phone. I believe that’s illegal.
Know It All (Brian Reynolds) will surely provide a 15 paragraph explanation to how this too is Mr. Noble’s fault, or is somehow connected to the 34 questions website, or being out of the office is really being in the office because Chapman is omnipresent and doesn’t phycially need to be anywhere.
Que the “big boy pants” and “I am rubber and you are glue” retort.
Well said under your little alias, Value… and whenever you want to put your big boy pants on and tell at least me who you are, I will show respect. But I do like the Know It All label–always here when you would like to volley.
Jeanine, once again you are wrong, Chapman’s schedule is hectic; he HAS been in the office, meetings, Plowman’s office for a meeting on a case with other attorneys, at the banquet for the auxiliary guys, at AG’s retirement presentation, at the Valor awards presentation, press conferences and media interviews, the DARE graduation, at Ashby Ponds for a joint agency discussion on public safety… you name it, Chapman has been there.
I would assume all of this activity by Chapman would be good for Noble and you would hope Chapman’s time being taken up so he would not be able to make calls would be the better angle. If you had your facts straight, you would have more inside knowledge than just some rat saying he didn’t “see” Chapman. Instead, as I just gave, your angle would indicate that Chapman is all over the place busy with LCSO business, not making calls which you then could report back to the Noble camp. Of course, we have that covered, but you guys always limit your thinking to 90 degrees opposed to 360.
It’s a little creepy that you know Chapman’s full itinerary by the minute. Do you accompany Chapman everywhere, or he just keeping you apprised of all of his county business to include sharing sensitive documents with you? I want you to keep talking though, nothing like someone digging their own hole.
If you follow Chapman on FB, most of where he goes is posted. Are you hiding behind and alias because you, yourself, have something to hide? Believe me, the strategy of me being on here is the opportunity you and others allow to discuss facts opposed to conjecture. Its not done for me, or you, its done for readers with common sense and simply need to be informed.
Brian, once again you are wrong. I am sure that once the dust settles In the Know is going to introduce themselves to you and invite you to sit down for a beer and conversation, and you can rest assured you will not be sipping with either Noble or Frye.
I am wondering why Brian isn’t blowing a gasket over Avatar? Probably because there are two sets of rules.
Nope, Avatar has not said anything which indicates a falsehood, conjecture or misleading statement. If they do, I am all over Avatar as well. But remember, as I had admin access here, I also looked at the email addresses and IP addresses of those commenting and for the most part could tell who folks were. In fact, if you recall, I called out Noble and Frye when the campaign first started because they were still posting under aliases but the email in the admin indicated exactly who they were. Noble and I discussed this by phone and from that time, mainly because, once again, they were caught, neither have done this.
I do not like anyone using aliases.
Who is leaking LCSO/FBI investigations to you (see post above)? What information are you privy to as a Chapman campaign consultant? You have been paid by the campaign and seem to have access to sensitive information. Worse yet, you see no problem sharing this on blogs and probably social media. I am sure there are people that are concerned about what type of information you have access to, who is giving it to you and why you seem to think it is your job to put it out in public. Very troubling.
Funny coming from a person who hides behind an alias to two.
If “In the Know” posted comments publicly, and those comments could only be from someone with inside knowledge at a high level, and they slipped up, it doesn’t take a genius to dot lines–just takes someone paying attention.
Set aside your little alias, put your big boy pants on, get whoever wants to admit to being “In the Know” and the three of us can sit down and chit chat Why does the dust have to settle?
Whomever was “In the Know” at that time did slip and divulge knowledge publicly which pulls in another department. I bet we should see some scrambling and or abrupt silence from ITK while they are busy peaking out the window to see when (not if) the FBI comes knocking.
And, maybe we see another abrupt retirement at the LCSO?
Lighten up, Francis.
I hope so and invite it. Will be interesting. I actually respect tactical elements of a campaign, whether I agree with them or not. If you look at the history of ITK however, its way way to much info, long before much of this began and with the comments concerning Easton McDonald and others, which had to do with situations not involving Chapman, yet conversations which, I have heard, could ONLY be known at the top level–not much indication of who that beer would be shared with besides prior assumption.
Here is a good one for ITK–whomever posted as ITK back when the asset forfeiture corruption case was hot and heavy, they slipped a bit and publicly indicated that the CA’s office knew of that problem prior. Fairly safe bet, once all of the FOIA was done on Noble/Frye that the assumption ITK was Noble has the FBI now digging into who ITK is (or was at that time.). If that was true, once the former detective is indicted (likely soon), and they dig to figure out who ITK is–its not going to be pretty.
You’re grasping at straws sir. You may be surprised at how many people knew about some things you refer to. By what you have written you are admitting to the fact that back at the time the internal corruption case at the LCSO was exposed, Chapman lied about it. So, now you have admitted to Chapman lying in that circumstance; do you also admit that he lied at the debate the other night regarding his claim that he didn’t know about being over budget? You know, the question where he blamed Noble for not telling him but then Noble turned right around and produced documentation that showed Chapman and he were at a meeting with the County Administrator where being over the budget was discussed? Funny how Chapman had no comeback for that. You’re a pretty sharp fellow, what do you think of that? Either you believe that meeting didn’t happen (again there’s documentation of it) or Chapman is lying. What is it sir?
Chapman’s assertion was/is that Noble failed to identify the $3M+ budget deficit. At the debate, Noble brought up a County forecast, and slammed it on the table, which indicated a foretasted $1.6M deficit–mostly due to overtime from SWAT call outs, the jail, a ton of presidential posturing where the Secret Service gave last minute word to Loudoun, etc.
Nobody ever asked if Chapman acknowledged that report or forecast of $1.6M. He certainly did and does.
But, in reality, both the report and Noble/Draper were way off. Most revealing, both were way off UNDER Noble’s budget oversight–which was part of his job once promoted.
Also, never did Noble state that he informed Chapman of the $3M+, he does not say there were any memos, emails, etc. Why? because we could all FOIA those. Neither he nor Michelle Draper advised anyone in command staff that from the 1.6M forecast, this had somehow doubled.
At end, once Noble and Draper were removed from budget oversight, even Ralph Buona had to apologize to Chapman as the true number was around $500K.
Glad to go toe to toe on any of these issues.
Again grasping at straws Mr.Reynolds. Chapman is the man responsible for the budget, perhaps if he spent more time in the office and less time jetting around the country on the taxpayers dime he wouldn’t be in this pickle. It’s really not that complicated. Mr. Noble and Ms. Draper are professionals who did their jobs. The fact that Chapman threw tons of unneeded personnel at events (standard in the Federal system which he came from where money grows on trees) was the major factor in the overage. People told him not to do it but the inexperienced federal retirees be brought in gave no regard to worrying about going over their budgets. Noble and Draper tried to tell him but being the autocrat he is Chapman didn’t want to hear it. Then when caught he took the really high road and tried to blame it on others. Seems like now that the proof has come out he doesn’t know how to respond to the fact he got caught lying at the debate. Oh wait, he does know how to respond…… let’s just not come to work all week after the debate. And he had the gall to complain about former Sheriff Simpson not coming to work? Chapman is supposed to be in the office working, not sitting at home using his County cell phone to politic.
BTW, he transferred Noble because Noble stood up to him and he didn’t like it, much like every other time someone with experience tried to tell him something. He would ask for advice then as soon as someone gives him advice he rants and raves at them. After that people became afraid to say anything. Great leadership style there huh?
Ask you buddy Chapman what happened early in his term when he paid like $7,000 for the nation’s foremost law enforcement leadership trainer to come in and present to the command staff for a few days. Guess what? At the end of those few days, after hearing Chapman present his management views this highly respected national expert did something he had never done before while teaching these leadership classes. This gentlemen, based on what he heard, predicted organizational failure. Looks like after 3 1/2 years he was spot on.
Organizational failure? Is that a joke?
1) Highest approval rating ever – 91.5%
2) Biggest drug bust in Loudoun history
3) $4.5 million returned to taxpayers
4) Crime down 18%
5) 8x fewer grievances than previous administration
All accomplished under Chapman’s leadership. This is a stellar record by every metric.
LOL 1) the approval rating has always been around that figure
2) a big drug bust, but not the biggest one in Loudoun history
3) over budget by 1.5 million first year, asked for much more money the
strangled patrol staffing in our to be able to return the unneeded money asked for
4) Homicide rate up 100% in western Loudoun, and crime has dropped all over the region so really a meaningless statistic
5) The real laugher here: ask any deputy and they will tell you they are so scared to even think about filing a grievance because of Chapman’s revenge tactics. Don’t believe me, just ask any deputy about the so-called grievance policy. The deputies are scared to death. That is no way to run an organization.
Pete, when we worked on Chapman’s ’11 campaign we heard the exact same things from the guys on the street about Simpson.
Except, they were not scared of Simpson, they were scared of his number two, Badura. We heard, pay was not good (which has been fixed as much as the BOS allows), we heard the equipment was not good (now the guys have new uniforms, cell phones, air cards, new guns, vests and the vehicles are being replaced–none of which Simpson did), we heard staffing was terrible, nobody could suggest anything, people were leaving, etc. We heard Frye was a tyrant with anger management issues, Badura was as well… the list of complaints went on and on, including, no supervisor was approachable or if they were, they didn’t run it up the flagpole. And, one by one, Chapman has addressed and fixed what he can within the parameters of running a huge agency or more importantly, what he knows about.
One problem is the mid level management, as was the case under Simpson, does not take street level, patrol generated ideas, up the chain. They would rather suppress the idea, than have it reach Chapman. But, those with backbone who go to Chapman (he has an open door policy) get what they ask for more times than not. If you contact me privately I can get you in touch with patrol guys who will be glad to confirm this.
As for any deputy being scared to death–absolute BS. Patrol on up are not cowering in a corner afraid to complain, these are tough men and women, more telling–there is a chain of command at least 5 deep before Chapman even hears about anything with the buck really stopping at Harmison or Buckman before it reaches Chapman. As anyone knows, Harmison will resolve any problem as needed unless it needs the Sheriff’s attention. So the problem is likely with those mid level folks between the Sgt, Lt, Cpt or Major levels because once a problem gets to Chapman, he wants answers from his management as to why it was not resolved prior or what needs to be done to resolve it. Nice try..
Also, things such as homicides–If you have 0 in western Loudoun and then 1, you have increased by 100%. Unless you want Chapman to be God, the LCSO is not going to prevent homicides in domestic situations–they are responsive and after the fact. Fire departments don’t prevent fires–you don’t blame fires on the Chief. For LCSO, there is no little ball that rolls down a shoot telling Chapman send your guys out to western loudoun and sit outside of 123 Maple because there will be a homicide and you need to prevent it. For that matter, Chapman is the one who pushed and finally got the Round Hill station so there could be a growth in patrol and additional presence.
Name the largest bust in Loudoun besides the one which just occurred. Good luck.
Actually, prior to the debate we had the figures for all approval ratings–it hovered in the 80% range–never hit 90%.
Drops in crime rates are never meaningless and the details are important.
Do you ever shut up? Honestly, you need to post under the name “KIA” Know It All. I have never read such pumped up half-truth, wanna be BS in my life. It’s too incredible to take on point by point.
LOL Reynolds sure claims to know a lot about the LCSO and law enforcement in general for someone who has never even worked at the LCSO or in law enforcement. Where is he getting all these supposed details about the LCSO? I think maybe Chapman has borrowed Reynolds picture and could be doing these posts himself, if not that maybe they are camping out together in a desperate attempt to save Chapman’s job (and also keep the consultant fee money and County contracts flowing into the Reynolds coffer).
“Supposed” details presented as fact, as if he was in the room. Who else makes those kind of assertions? Not only is Reynolds a law enforcement expert, he is also a lawyer. Some would like to know what academy he attended, where he served as an LEO, and where did he graduate from law school.
Pete, the main problem with the budget was overtime. Simpson and team use to solve it so it did not look bad by taking from operations, aka, monies to be used for equipment, etc., and push it on overtime so he did not have to go back to the BOS or be blasted by the media or public. Instead, he took heat internally which is why the guys wanted change.
When the smoke cleared and Chapman revealed that the BOS had withheld 1.9M from the budget and the overages where actually not as significant, the first year budget was only over $500K or so, not the projected 1.6M, not the 3M+.
Also, I don’t see you out hear lambasting the Fire and Rescue department who, due to overtime, each and every year, goes back to the BOS for emergency appropriations to the tune of 1M+. Each and every year this occurs. And, just like the LCSO, all overtime driven.
Factually, Noble was over the budget. As such it was his duty to inform Chapman–he NEVER reveals that he did so. He only points to one forecast for half the amount. If you are in charge of the budget and find that there is going to be a 3M deficit, would you not send a memo, email, etc., with all of this information to command staff? Never was that done which is why Noble will not say he communicated the deficit as the administrator over the budget.
If Noble was not over the budget, its like saying Chapman should be out personally writing tickets.
As for Draper–ha, ask folks about how professional she was. And, she rolled Noble under the bus on the asset forfeiture case in a letter (part of the FOIA) to the County Administrator after she abruptly resigned. You say, “Noble and Draper tried to tell him” concerning the budget… well, FOIA the docs and show us. Its been tried, there are none.
Glad you brought up the law enforcement leadership training. What that person said was that, with these people in leadership (Buckman, Frye, Noble, etc.) it is doomed to fail and they will likely backstab (Chapman). If I remember correctly, he was noting that none of the leadership held over or promoted from the Simpson regime had any clue how to lead nor were they willing to learn or change. Nice try, again.
Brian were you in that leadership training? You profess to know what went on in there.
I am not Mike Chapman, nor am I affiliated with his campaign.
Mike Chapman does not blog or post online at all, and he certainly wouldn’t do it during working hours. Only Eric Noble does that.
Exhibit A: http://www.34questions.com.
We’re hearing from credible sources in high places at the Sheriff’s Office that the blogger Avatar may in fact be Sheriff Chapman himself. Also hearing from command staff that Chapman has been averaging 2-3 hours per week (yes, that is week, not day) in the office and it has been this way for some time. Funny, the issue of not being in the office was part of his previous campaign platform when he lodged the same complaint about Simpson. Pot calling the kettle black? Guess that would give him plenty of time to blog. Another thing I find disturbing is that during the daytime (work time) Chapman has making calls to delegates and politicking from his work-issued cell phone. Is that what we pay him $175,000 per year for? I know this for a fact as just in the past week several people I know have told me that they have received such calls from this number. I believe that most people’s expectations are that work time is work time and off time is when the politicking should be accomplished.
Is that the root cause of Chapman reading his bio in the third person during the debate? Guessing he was in Avatar mode?
My hat is off to you you Chris, at least you post as yourself and not hiding behind the little aliases like these others. Avatar is not Chapman and not me (as I post under my name) but is obviously a supporter. Chapman would not lower himself to 1) blogging, 2) commenting or 3) commenting under an alias as Noble and Frye did for well over a year while in senior command positions and now, after being caught, having to admit to it, even going so far as to say, “…that wasn’t my finest moment.” No doubt–a moment which lasted over a year according to the FOIAed docs. Chapman is above that.
Of course, at the same time, the rumors are going around that since In the Know, Loudoun Lifer and other aliases Noble and Frye used have been exposed, that “Astute Observer” is either Noble or Frye.
Brian – Astute Observer is not Noble or Frye. That is a fact I know to be true. Eric neither posts online (in any forum) nor does he waste his time reading blogs or other forums.
Chris is correct. It is neither Ricky or Eric. Neither of them have posted on this blog.
Jeanine, wrong again. I called them out publicly for commenting on TBE. 5 months ago as Noble began his campaign Frye used yet another fake little alias, even though he no longer worked for LCSO. On TBE Frye used, “Watchingitall” and in the admin I could see it was from his usual aol email account (rfryee4@aol.com). It is still there, just go in the admin and look it up. At the same time, a person using the alias “A-Mids” posted with an email of inthknow@yahoo.com. It is also still there.
Both Noble and Frye lied to folks about posting thinking they would never get caught, forgetting that their .gov emails could be FOIAed so when they bragged to each other, time and time again, after posting under various aliases, and did so using their .gov accounts, the gig was up.
Now, Chris is stumping for them, which is fine, but lying about Noble/Frye not posting or commenting doesn’t make any sense at all considering Noble has admitted to it.
Noble attempted to tell me the same thing Chris–I don’t have time and don’t read the blogs–then all of the FOIA docs came out revealing he did. So, he lied to me directly.
Oops, you are right. Ricky Frye posted on this blog twice, in 2014. Noble has never posted here.
How about an oops you were right after I revealed your bogus statement that Chapman “had a nice carry over of money” from his ’11 campaign. The report reveals it was only $141.00 left over from last campaign–not a nice carry over. I have asked you before to source your information and you continue to look the other way when something is not favorable to your position.
Chris, you mean he does not post recently–weren’t you at the debate where he, once again admitted and said if wasn’t his finest moment? Of course, a moment which lasted a year or more.
Noble and Frye have both posted online using aliases in LTM, LT other blogs, the Post and even here after Noble announced (until I call them out),
The internal investigation (which is now open to anyone since Noble has openly discussed it) and subsequent FOIA of their emails revealed the names, Loudoun Lifer (Noble), Yosemite Sam (Frye) just to name a few, and Noble telling Frye he wanted to create more aliases. Its all on the 34questions.com site where anyone can FOIA the documents to confirm.
Further proof of how Mike Chapman is out of touch with Loudoun County. He had money left over from his last campaign, which includes a $2,000 loan that he made to himself, and he’s blowing through it to stay afloat.
When an incumbent can’t raise money right before a convention then that incumbent is toast. It’s that “Go get the butter” kind of toast that says we are going to have a new Sheriff in town.
$141.00 was left over form last campaign. 2K loan to get things kicked off. Over 80K raised for this campaign since. Still 37K in the bank. No reason to “raise” money just before a convention when you have money.
Nice try, Martin, in yet another blatant attempt to prop up Noble despite astounding character flaws. Chapman’s ending balance is $37k, and Noble’s is $6k. The net numbers indicate overwhelming support for Chapman over a sustained period of time, which mirrors his approval rating of 91.5%.
Yes, in 2011, many people support Chapman. He had a nice carry over of money from that campaign. After working for him for 3+ years, his deputies, and Loudoun voters, have seen how ill prepared he is for office and they no longer support him as is obvious in the latest financial filings.
Jeanine, if you actually look at the financials, there was NO carry over from the ’11 campaign besides $141.00. Chapman ran on a shoestring in ’11 and spent every dime. Starting with only $141.00 this cycle is why I believe Chapman loaned himself $2K for his first event to kick off fundraising for ’15. When you have an ending balance of $31,461, the campaign does not need to spend time stumping for donations–in total, the campaign raised over $80K in a short period with just a few events–a very strong indication of the support Chapman has and certainly why Noble and his camp is sooo very worried about a run outside of the party. As always, would be nice if you checked and reported on the actual information clearly available in the reports, such as the $141 carry over rather than falsely stating that “[h]e had a nice carry over of money from [2011]…”
So you are confirming that Chapman is considering an independent run? As you have with a variety of other people?
First, instead of hiding behind a little childish alias, why don’t you put on your big boy pants and stop peaking around the corner and comment under your own name? Second, where in my comment to correct Jeanine is anything remotely indicating this?
In fact, going back to Jeanine’s assumption about York and the money/actions being an indicator, the fact that Chapman is not stumping to build a war chest should be a good indication that the only goal on his mind is winning the nomination.
Feel free to name those I have spoken to–when you have the guts to do so under your own name.
Haven’t you guys learned anything from Noble’s campaign–part of Noble’s problem is that he used and once caught had to admit to using alias names. Big boy pants folks.
Lack of donations is usually an indication of lack of support. I don’t know too many politicians or elected officials that think they can take their foot off the accelerator when they are challenged, as a matter of fact it seems odd that anyone would stop fundraising in this environment.
Still hiding behind your little alias I see… As long as you have money for messaging, which Chapman does, believe what you want. When you run for office or run a campaign, do it how you see fit. Fiscal fundraising, only taking or asking for money when you need it, is simply opposite of what you see in most politicians. It would be irresponsible for Chapman to go out and stump for funding now when he has plenty enough to last the next two weeks. Not odd, you are just used to scumbag politicians asking for money at every turn–that is not how Chapman operates his campaign–very frugal, very responsible.
His approval rating!? That statement right there is exactly what’s wrong with Chapman, his campaign and his administration. That approval rating belongs to the men and women of the Loudoun County Sheriffs Office not one person. He has treated the employees, both civilian and sworn, like steeping stones under his feet since day one. He has no idea the true meaning of leadership.
That seems to be the consensus among those who have worked with Chapman.
Out with Chapman hit the nail on the head. Chapman is good at one thing: self-promotion. For the past 3+ years if you ever listened to him when he speaks it’s all about him, what he did, how great he is, etc. It’s NEVER about the 700 men and women who work for him. As the other commenter states, it’s NOT Chapman’s approval rating. On that note, under the previous two Sheriff’s the approval rating has always been right around that figure so really this number is not a big deal. Those who have occasion to speak to Chapman in person are quick to be turned off by his inability to stop talking about himself, and he’s even been told this by his advisers yet he still can’t stop.
Actually, during the debate I heard Eric Noble call himself “outstanding”, “excellent”, brag about his performance evaluations, talk about his personal decorations, and brazenly assert that he has “saved lives”. Talk about narcissistic!
And agree that it’s not Chapman’s approval rating; I phrased that poorly. But it is the approval rating of the department he leads, and it has never been higher.
He will win the nomination handily.
Eric Noble was quoting a performance review that was penned by Chris Harmison. Those weren’t Noble’s words, they belong to Harmison.
And, please provide facts to support your comment that Eric Noble “brazenly asserted” anything. Are you stating that Eric Noble did not save lives during his career?
Mr. Noble is a four time Valor award winner, and yes, Mr. Noble has saved lives. Yes, he had exemplary reviews. It is a matter of record. Unbelievable that you will not give the man credit for anything. Not much has changed with the cult of personality campaign, we suffered through this in 2011 and here we go again.
Her comments were in reference to 2015 Q1 donations … not ending balances. Chapman’s Republican campaign is quickly spiraling downward.
Will he run as an Independent? Hmm, he said, “No,” albeit hesitantly, at a Republican Committee meeting earlier this year. His attempt to avoid the question during Monday’s debate bombed. For that matter, I’m still trying to decipher his response.
He’s clearly not going to win the Convention and running as an Independent will serve as the final nail in his coffin.