Jenny Sanford Lays The Wood To Lovey Govey
Holy smoke Batman. You don’t tug on Superman’s cape; you don’t spit into the wind. And you don’t mess around with Jen.
AP’s Bruce Smith has, through Yahoo News, put up an interview with Jenny Sanford; and it is a doozy. Do go read the entire piece, it is totally deserving. Many key questions are addressed, and Jenny Sanford puts on a tour de force.
How did Jenny find out about her husband’s affair:
Sanford said she discovered her husband’s affair early this year after coming across a copy of a letter to the mistress in one of his files in the official governor’s mansion. He had asked her to find some financial information, she said, not an unusual request considering her heavy involvement in his career.
Fascinating, and it means Jenny was not the one who forwarded the salacious Romeo/Juliet emails to The State newspaper, because The State received them in December of 2008. I have a feeling that eliminates her father too, and militates in favor of someone in the South Carolina state government, probably around the Governor’s office.**
What does Jenny think of Mark having gone to Argentina to see Maria?
That he had dared to go to Argentina to see the other woman left her stunned. "He was told in no uncertain terms not to see her," she said in a strong, steady voice.
Heh, well maybe not that stunned because:
…her husband repeatedly asked permission to visit his lover in the months after she discovered his affair.
Oh. My. That’s gonna leave a mark. It is not the kind of thing you put out on the record unless you are leaving a serious marker to own the narrative, and boy is Jenny Sanford doing that. And Jenny is not blind to anything going on here either; she has a grip.
On her philandering husband’s pelotas.
Think Jenny has any illusions about the extended stroll Mark just took through Buenos Aires? Nuh uh. Asked whether she thinks he has ended the tryst with Maria:
"I guess that’s what we will have to see. I believe he has," she said. "But he was down there for five days. I saw him yesterday and he is not staying here. We’ll just see what kind of spirit of reconciliation he has himself."
As Marcy emailed a bit ago:
The State had reported yesterday that he was at the Island with the family.
I guess that didn’t last long. And I guess she’s got the same doubts we do that a man books a ten day trip to Argentina to break up.
No kidding. Hey King David Sanford, I don’t think you are exactly married to Bathsheba. What, on the other hand, does the once and future Skill Power Tools heiress have to say for her efforts in the case at bar?
"You would think that a father who didn’t have contact with his children, if he wanted those children, he would toe the line a little bit," she said.
and
"I’ve done everything in my power possibly to keep him from going to see her and to really make sure she was off the table, including asking him to leave."
and
"Parenting is the most important job there is and what Mark has done has added a serious weight to that job," she said.
Well okay then; guess that about sums it up. There are other nice little facts of the story, such as the State of South Carolina never had any intention or plan to have an Argentina leg for the South American trade development junket. The one in 2008 which Romeo Sanford created on his own desire.
What a delicious passion play we have brewing in the Palmetto State.
I wonder what kind of battery of lawyers the heiress to the SkilSaw fortune has? Man, if Mark Sanford was smart, he would pack his bags, write out his resignation and head for the pampas of Argentina. Tonight. There is nothing left for him now. Jenny Sanford owns him. Lock, stock and steely cold chain around the cajones. And don’t forget, even according to Mark Sanford, it was Jenny’s skills and money that won him every election in the first place.
South Carolina elected the wrong Sanford Governor; it should have been Jenny.
**UPDATE: Per FrankProbst in comments, the New York Times has a timely new story out on the source of the juicy emails suppied to Columbia South Carolina’s newspaper The State:
The mystery of who revealed Gov. Mark Sanford’s e-mail messages may finally be solved. A business associate of Mr. Sanford’s Argentine mistress said Friday that private messages between the two lovers had been sent anonymously to a South Carolina newspaper last December by an Argentine man the mistress had briefly dated.
The associate, who asked not to be identified, is a Buenos Aires television executive involved in hiring the woman, whom he identified as María Belén Chapur, a producer at the television network America from 2001 to 2002.
Last December, the executive said, Ms. Chapur was dating a young Argentine a few months after her affair with Mr. Sanford began. The man happened to see the e-mail messages being exchanged between the governor and Ms. Chapur, said the executive — who said he had direct knowledge of the situation — and hacked into her e-mail account to see the rest.
Infuriated, the man sent the messages to The State, the newspaper in South Carolina’s capital, Columbia.
Wow. This just keeps getting better and better. It was Maria’s young cougar bait that ratted her and Sanford out to the press. Booyah.
Looks like the e-mails may have come from the mistress’s ex-boyfriend: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06…..38;emc=rss
Hacked in, eh?
My, my, that end of it could get rather ugly, too, there being so little at stake.
(I was about to call it a night, but now I’m hooked back in!) Yeah, she seems to be playing this VERY smart. And he has been a complete idiot.
What pitiful cocktail of hubris, stupidity, and lust and/or infatuation has been at work for poor Markie? He has stepped in it every way imaginable.
One more bit o’ news to add to the collection. According to the NYT, it was a guy Maria dated and worked with who anonymously sent the emails to The State.
Oh those wacky tangled webs.
hell hath no fury like a woman scorned
an this dude’s wife is PISSED
she put some MAJOR FUCKING HOLES in his boat
in fact, the dude’s got more holes than boat, right now
get the fork ready, this guy is about done
praise the Lord an pass the popcorn, this is gittin good …
Round one goes to Jenny.
And Mark Sanford has opened round two by comparing himself to a Biblical king who cheated on his wife with another woman, had the other woman’s husband killed so that he could have her all to himself, and then lived not-so-happily-ever-after. That doesn’t strike me as terribly repentant. In fact, it seems like just the sort of thing that’s going to absolutely infuriate his wife. His approval ratings are going to drop like a stone over the next two weeks. I don’t think he’s going to leave voluntarily, but I think there’s a chance he’ll be threatened with impeachment pretty soon. It already looks like he engineered one nookie-run to Argentina on the public’s dime, and I’ll bet a dollar to a doughnut that they met up on some of his other “business” trips.
And what sort of man repeatedly asks his wife if he can fly to Argentina to see his mistress?
I’m afraid it’s the same kinda guy who listens to his wife say, “I told you in no uncertain terms…bla bla bla…” and at age 50 (+/-) decides he’s had enough. And decides it’s worth it to throw everything away just to get out from under the bitch and her family.
Just a hunch that he decided he wasn’t going to ask anymore.
From the little that I know about Kings. Generally they do not ask.
So who will Sanford appoint? Will he have that power? Where is Ensign now?
These two guys must really love that Micheal’s passing is taking a bit of heat off of them
“Lovey Govey.” Ha. That should stick. I am tired — that took me a while. G’nite all.
the kind that really sucks at conducting an illicit affair
what I want to know is how did this putz get this far in the first place
I smell an oxygen movie special in the making
you guys wanna start a pool on who goes on Oprah first ???
If it’s him, it’s Jerry Springer! Oprah would be an upgrade.
an about that “King David” crap
does this asshat really want us thinkin all biblical and Old Testament about this topic ???
cuz I think it says we can stone his sorry ass, or sumtin …
an we’re NOT talkin bout stoning you like rainy day women do
dude better check his neck, cuz I think the Bible says Jenny gets to cast the first stone, and I’ll bet she’s got an arm …
I think only the woman gets stoned; the man gets high fives.
I’m worried that the “Little Woman” may decide on a political future for herself. She’d be formidable.
Heck, she might be competent.
I have a coupld of problems with this interview
I have no idea what she is talking about, she caught her husband having an affair, this is clearly not what their relationship is about and it looks like she’s not only giving him another chance but she knows her husband still wants to have that affair
this is a women who stayed together for no reason I can determine, she is clearly not enamored with her husband any longer and clearly sees he is in love with another women…I am having a hard time understanding anything here but deception on her part, she is keeping the relationship together for his political career and some kind of expediance as far as I can see from this interview…I have developed a dislike for her
and now the bad news for mark
from what I understand of human nature, this women was interested in mark as a broker of power in american politics…power, probably the greatest seduction…it even made kissinger a player
mark is no longer a power broker and has lost his appeal as far as my understanding goes and this affair will not remain kindled
I have no idea if the women was using mark for her own power or if she was seduced by his power but I sincerely doubt this relationship will last regardless
If Jenny listened crefully to her husbnd t the news conference then she wouldn’t ta ke him back for the world.
“QUESTION: Did you break off the relationship? SANFORD: Obviously not.
QUESTION: Were you alone? SANFORD: Obviously not.
QUESTION: Did you break off the relationship?
SANFORD: The — no, it was interesting in how this thing has gone down, John. I think (inaudible) way more detail than you’ll ever want… I met this person a little over eight years ago. Again, very innocently. And struck up a conversation, and I want to go back to the bubble of politics. This is not justifying, because again what I did was wrong, period, end of story.
…This person at the time was separated, and we ended up in this incredibly serious conversation about why she ought to get back with her husband for the sake of her two boys; that not only was it part of God’s law, but ultimately those two boys would be better off for it.
And we had this incredibly earnest conversation and at the end of it, I said, “Could I get your e-mail?” We swapped e-mails, whatever. And it began just on a very casual basis — “Hey, I’ve got this issue that’s come up with my life,” or vice versa, “What do you think?” … And we developed a remarkable friendship over those eight years. And then, as I said, about a year ago, it sparked into something more than that.
I have seen her three times since then, during that whole sparking thing. And it was discovered… five months ago. And at that point, we went into serious overdrive in trying to say “where do you go from here,” and that’s where the Cubby Culbertsons and the others of the world began to help with, you know, how do you get all this right? How do you — again — be honest?
SANFORD: And so, it had been back and forth and back and forth and back and forth. And the one thing that you really find is that you absolutely want resolution.
And so, oddly enough, I spent the last five days, and I was crying in Argentina so I could repeat it when I came back here, in saying, you know, while, indeed, from a heart level, there was something real. It was a place based on the fiduciary relationship I had to the people of South Carolina, based on my boys, based on my wife, based on where I was in life, based on where she was in life, and places I couldn’t go and she couldn’t go.
And that is a, I suspect, a continual process, all through life, of getting one’s heart right in life.
And so, I would never stand before you as one who just says, “Yo, I’m completely right with regard to my heart on all things.” But what I would say is I’m committed to trying to get my heart right, because the one thing that Cubby and all the others have told me, is that the odyssey that we’re all on in life is with regard to heart. Not what I want or what you want, but, in other words, indeed, this larger notion of truly trying to put other people first.
And I suspect, if I’d really put this other person first, I wouldn’t have jeopardized her life, as I have. I certainly wouldn’t have done it to my wife. I wouldn’t have done it to my boys. I wouldn’t have done it to the Tom Davis’ of the world. This was selfishness on my part. And for that, I’m most apologetic.”
So where does he say…”it’s over”? He says he still loves the other woman, never says he loves his wife. Keeps referring to his “heart”…nd some sort of process of finding it. Despite all the counseling with Cubby and strong discussions with his wife he still could not break off the relationship…everything else is “responsibility” and “apologies” for the “way he really feels” in his heart.
He doesn’t apologize for being nuts about Ms. Argentina at all. He’ll end up kicking himself to the moon for losing his family (and Ms. Argentina), but he’s in luv.
he doesn’t even know it’s over but it is, I doubt this women will continue her affection for a fallen politician
and he understands this on his own subconscious level too, that’s why he says he’s not going to resign
with resignation he not only loses his job he, he also loses his mistress…maybe not immediately but eventually
illicit affairs are all about the alpha and mark has shown himself the antithesis of alpha
okay, hokey 80s reference but remember “An Officer and A Gentleman” and the second the guy goes DOR the girl rejects him? Same situation here. (Well, he then commits suicide…)
I think you are right. Not over.
freep @ 3/7/8 –
It’s really hard to type doubled over with laughter; yer killin’ me here, darlin’. Beg to differ in only one respect: he ain’t “done”; he’s way past charred.
Maybe asking permission to go to Argentina is her version of “asking for a divorce.”
And Jenny is not blind to anything going on here either; she has a grip.
On her philandering husband’s pelotas.
Question: does she enjoy the grip? Does it give her pleasure?
If so, then the marriage is solid and the interview is its own reward.
if I had time I would do a diary titled;
“it’s easy to be seduced by a presidential candidate, it’s hard to stay attracted to an inept buffoon”
Sanford’s affair is toast even though his wife is leaving him, his mistress will make a show of it but he is now phallus non Grata
Great post bmaz!
Seems there’s far more to this tawdry lil’ affair than has ’til now met the public eye (as is usually the case). Spin was in!
I feel like I’m watching the “Soaps” on afternoon TV with both Sanford and Ensign.
Bought a paperback for some light reading on Thursday and the quote with which it started is as follows:
Struck me as terribly appropriate to l’Affair de Sanford. *g*
Sounds to me like she’s using the kids as a threat — stay away from the other woman or you can’t see your kids. Who gives her that right? They are his kids, too.
I read the article in NYT’s this morning where it describes how Mark Sanford had referred to himself in terms of King David from the Old Testament. It sent chills down my spine.
Just last night I was beginning to read Jeff Sharlet’s “The Family” when I read an interesting discussion with David Coe, son of leader Doug Coe, and many of the newer workers in the House. David Coe wanted to discuss “heros of the Old Testament“. Several were mentioned like Moses, Noah and others but David Coe was stopped in his tracks when someone mentioned King David.
Coe ask the group why it was that David was regarded as a hero in the Bible even though he had sinned so badly so many times. Finally, Jeff Sharlet himself gave the correct answer…
“Because he was chosen, I said. For the first time David looked my way.
“Yes, he said smiling. “Chosen. Interesting set of rules, isn’t it”
After reading about Ensign and the others who actually live on C Street, I have looked more into this movement. However, in this scene and now the comments by Mark Sanford, you really understand the concept behind the entire program. You can use God, the Bible, and the sins of those described because this is God’s Word. Your sins can be forgiven. Even mortal sins. Why…? Because you are chosen. The Family is a group of fundamentalist who consistently violate laws like the Logan Act as they seek to counter our government in foreign policy and in their own lives.
I see Dick Cheney in this picture as he has Hallibuton to continue dealing with Iran on military and nuclear equipment long after Clinton and Congress declared it illegal. He simply had a sub-company to organize out of Dubai or the Cayman Islands and they ignored our government’s laws.
So these men who operate behind the scenes from C Street and other locations worldwide see themselves as “The Chosen”. God has a plan for them. It is no wonder that Doug Coe often refers to Hitler, Lenin, and other powerful leaders as his reference point. All religions have their leaders but when we combine politics and secretive religion, it is a bad mix for our future as a nation.
GReat comment, NCDem. One of the reasons that “chosen” moment in Sharlet’s book is so interesting is bc he was able to answer it because he was raised half-Jewish. Thus, he was the only one being asked who had a solid understanding of the Old Testament.
I guess Stanford has done his homework, too, quite possibly at C Street.
I have a little biblical advice for Gov. Sanford. You might want to read up on David’s home life before you start comparing yourself to him. You don’t want your kids imitating Amnon and Absalom.
Seriously, Sanford’s take on the David and Bathsheba story is very much the philosophy of “the Family”. In their version, it’s the story of an anointed king who commits a private sin, confesses, is forgiven by God, and gets to keep his power because God needs him.
The actual story is almost the exact opposite of that. In the Bible, God doesn’t want Israel to have a king and the story of David is used to illustrate the idea that even the most heroic human will inevitably stumble and abuse their power for private gain. The larger story arc shows how the one moment of failure initiates a long train of tragic events that has horrific consequences for the entire people.
Wow, think perris and Loo Hoo are on the money.
The interview raised my hackles.
First, no man keeps a letter on file like that without an unconscious wish to be caught. But nothing he has said rings of real ernestness when it comes to repentance and a desire to repair his relationship with his wife. He wanted to tell Jenny he was no longer emotionally invested in her, but there’s a reason he couldn’t just tell her. Career? maybe. Fear? possibly. Other?
Second, NCDem (24) has an interesting point as well, about the chosen. But let’s put a spin on this, look at who was chosen and by whom. Sanford’s emails indicated he’d fallen in love for the first time – so what the hell was his marriage to Jenny all about? Was he chosen for her, or was she chosen for him, a mariage de convenance?
Third, why did Jenny give the interview? Can you imagine what it takes to sit down with a reporter and dump like this? We’re talking some real, raw rage even after knowing about the affair for five or more months, not just hurt or disappointment, the kind of rage which burns the house down. Her previous comment about Sanford’s career not being her priority was telling, but this was not merely indifference. This was adding fuel and fanning the flames to ensure there’s nothing left.
This is far from done.
Jenny Sanford is taking turns between taking large caliber potshots and placing the shackles of ownership on Sanford and his soul. Their marriage is done; the only question is whether a hollow shell of it soldiers on.
Oh, hollow shell soldiering on has all the earmarks of a reality TV show in the making.
Rather like “Mark & Jenny plus Four and a Mistress and a mess of white Christian fundies.”
Wow, what an amazing post. And every single comment here is a gem of insight.
From reading this post and the little else that I’ve seen, I’m reminded of friends whose marriages have split (or, as bmaz points out, entered ‘the Empty Shell Phase’).
Looks to me as if Sanford and Ms Argentina really have a very deep bond. Who does he ask for help and advice on very personal matters? Her. This isn’t just about sex; he’s not asking his wife for her thoughts on how to make decisions in his life, he’s asking Ms. Argentina.
Who does he seem to trust more with his heart? Ms. Argentina.
IMHO, Jenny’s a woman who wants political power, and she’s getting it through her spouse b/c she has four kids and can’t figure out how to claim it for herself. I don’t even want to count the women that I’ve encountered with this dynamic, and IMVHO, it’s nasty. It’s bad for them because they become manipulative, and it’s bad for their spouses who maybe just wanted to be an attorney with a nice practice until wifey says, ‘Hey, your practice will flourish if you run for office and… yadda, yadda’.
To Jenny, I’d say: you have four great kids, none of whom need the toxic dynamics of a pissed-off mom who thinks she’s sacrificing her life for them, or for their dad. To be the best mom she can be, she needs to step up to the plate and realize she has some responsibility to stop living through the fiction of a spouse she imagined — who probably never actually existed. If she remains bitter, antagonistic, and judgmental those four boys are really in for a rough ride.
To Sanford, it sure looks to me as if this is a man who’s tried as hard as he knew to live by ‘other people’s rules’ and do what he understood to be right. But it sure doesn’t look like Jenny has ‘fed his soul’ in eons — if ever. I’d be surprised if she really knows who he is or what HE wants.
To Ms. Argentina, well… she’s presumably in sympatico with the father of four.
Honestly, it doesn’t look to me as if the Sanford’s have a true marriage. What they have is an ongoing power struggle.
Given Jenny’s remarks, that doesn’t look like it’s going to change until one or both wakes up and realizes that it was over a long time ago.
If Jenny cares about being a good mom, she needs to figure out how to move beyond blaming herself for being blind, and her husband for being — as long as he could — willing to participate in that false narrative.
It looks like Sanford feels really guilty and awful because of his boys, but it’s hard to see how a man caught in a power struggle with his wife can really be the kind of father that he probably wants to be.
I got no answers.
But I think a lot more New Testament reading about the phenomenal, healing power of forgiveness Jesus would be of more value and guidance to all these people than the fulminations and retribution of the Old Testament, tribalist Yahweh.
Here’s hoping those kids end up with a dad they can respect, who can honestly enjoy each of them without the constraints and hostility of an angry mom. If they get there, it will probably take awhile. But I’ve seen it happen, and so I do believe that it is possible.
Not bad commentary yourself!
There’s something about Jenny’s interview which is positively odd; at the risk of pissing off a lot of women, I have the sensation of watching a predator coiling.
Why cry AFTER the interview? How convenient. In the same shoes I’d have a tough time granting the interview, let alone choke it out and save the tears for the END of the interview.
I’d like to know who initiated the interview, too. Did the reporter do it on their own — a positively gutsy and heartless move? or did the editor? Or did Jenny call and say she’d allow one interview with someone she knew to be sympathetic? (The reporter’s body of work certainly doesn’t look like that of a hard-bitten aggressive journalist…)
And if Jenny was so bloody worried about what her kids were going through, why offer an interview at all? The kids end up being invisible props in this mess.
The publicity is unavoidable, unavoidably salacious and won’t dissipate quickly. That her children will be affected by the storm and/or a divorce is equally unavoidable. Her interview is a way to control the game, to frame the issues and to protect herself and them. It also suggests that in private, Sanford is as lost a soul as his public behavior the last two weeks suggests. Under the circumstances, I’d be surprised if his friend in Argentina would have him back.
Predator coiling. Exactly what I was trying to convey, albeit it in a somewhat more lighthearted fashion, in the post. Jenny Sanford is cold and calculating, she has got Mark by the short and curlies and is playing this on her terms. I don’t know what kind of marriage they had to start with, but the thrill is gone now and it ain’t coming back. Ever. (assuming it was ever there).
I’m not sure I believe the newfound providence of the emails; not positive I don’t either. Does sound a little convenient and implausible on one hand; but, hey, who knows? The NYT was a little thin on their support.
Sure would like to know who owns the Argentine media, wouldn’t you?
It’s a little more cryptic to get to than I expected…
That’s a great post and covers a lot of ground, and I think covers it well. Sanford is yet another bible-thumping Jesus-freak-of- convenience, the bible has a quote for anything and everything. Guys like him use it well; most Republicans do this because they’re hypocrites. But I think the larger issue is why Sanford never became a man with his own balls, because I think this got him in his present difficulties. It appears others charted the direction of his life, from what’s been written here. Had he been his own man his wife and kids would have respected him and he wouldn’t have to be worrying about either, as he is now. He would have been a husband and lover to his wife and a father to his children. Too bad.
You know, I don’t necessarily buy that the Argentine guy is the one who sent out the emails–not least bc of the State’s “that’s interesting” comment. But also the timing is off–why wait until December to send out emails when she dumps this guy in July for the governor?
Also, remember that multiple outlets have reported receiving the emails, which would be less likely for a guy working from another country.
When I heard about the discovery of the letter, I wondered whether the guy who leaked the emails also planted the letter in a place where Jenny was likely to find it.
Oh, we’re on the same page with regard to the source of the emails.
Jeebus, there’s no way some young buck in Argentina would know to email The State and not any other paper in South Carolina? Taking an awfully big chance at getting the attention of that paper given the nature of the tip and with no follow through.
And why would a young Argentine hot head bother with this kind of retaliatory behavior? Most sweet young things would simply move on to the next amour in a heartbeat, not like there aren’t enough other cougars if that’s the type he’s prowling. Something just doesn’t ring true about this; perhaps he was a plant?
I do buy the accidental find of a letter, though, especially given the nature of Sanford’s response-sans-contrition. I know of enough examples I can point to from personal experience where men left things in places they shouldn’t have if they did not want to be caught – in pockets, in wallets, in bank statements, you name it. The M.O. is the same, the guy ends up leaving the woman who finds it. (Jeebus, I can even think of a postmaster in a small town who ran up the joint credit card on flowers for his mistress, with whom he eventual ran off after he was confronted by his wife.) This part does ring true, and Sanford’s reaction only makes it look more likely.
Somebody inside the office sold him out. They were able to see what was really going on. It wasn’t a secret to MANY, including, if I understand correctly, the Christian brotherhood. Good call on the availability of cougars in Argentina and probable lack of both motive and selective targeting skills of suspected leaker.
Their marriage persists ONLY because of church ‘obligations’ IMHO. She will get whatever the law allows in such circumstances should they divorce. It would be my hope that she would not continue to use the children as weapons against him. Better to forgive him and let him move along. Lesson for the kids. Life sucks, but you do the best you can. Even God can’t guarantee shit.
The happy ending….Ex Gov and his Argentinian goddess settle on a hillside, grow grapes (and old) together.
What are the odds?
Enjoy.
But don’t they have teh Google and teh Yahoo in Argentina too? Seems like it would be easy enough for someone in Argentina to access multiple U.S. news media.
You are correct. Pssst. Wanna know a secret? i.e., where the emails came from? Come here, get a little closer, let me whisper in your ear. Here it comes, just 3 few words. Ready? Then think about it: 1) ElliotSpitzer. 2) RodBlago. 3) DonSiegelman. There. Now, go watch the German movie, The Lives of Others. Again. And then, ask yourself, duh, gee: Who the eff could be watching every move they make? Fill up yer gas tank, and before you get into yer car, they have the record. Oh, you think it was this incredibly convoluted story of some young guy who just happened to see some of the emails — and also had the ability to hack into her email — and also knew to send it to the right paper in SC — and that another unidentified individual anonymously verified all this — and you believed that wacky story? Oh, — and this, er, unlucky woman just happened to be in NYC on 9/11, ready to report? … Duh, right. Talk about gullible… Sanford had been the most formidable R candidate in ‘12. Not any more. Gee, I wonder who that places at the ready to take his place?
Jeebus. Where you come up with this stuff? There is no evidence whatsoever – none – that Sanford has anything to do with Blago, Siegelman or Spitzer. Who are the “they” you refer to? No clue on what basis you assert Sanford was the most formidable GOP candidate for 2012, that is sheer nonsense. He wasn’t even in the top six (Romney, Palin, Pawlenty, Gingrich, Huckaby and Barbour) and was hated by Republicans even from his own state. You have waltzed in here and left a bunch of bull and have been rude in doing so.
Don’t see the issue with the timing, personally. Seems that Ms. Chapur was dating the younger guy after she was starting her involvement with Sanford (i.e. she was two-timing him, as well) and the younger guy got jealous. Say he started dating her in October and discovered the parallel relationship in December, got into her email while she was out, and downloaded them to his mail account. “Just checking my email”.
If he wanted to find out who to send it to he could have simply done search on Sanford and the more critical newspapers, or send them to several. The State would have been a likely recipient.
Of course, he might have also sent it to Mrs. Sanford…and the story about her finding it in a file might be a red-herring. But the fact also could have easily led to blackmail.
I don’t know about her grip on his pelotas, but I suspect she applied it to his cojones. Possibly not hard enough, given his little trip to the south, and he certainly hasn’t learned enough from the experience.
Comparing himself to King David isn’t the brightst idea in the world, either, when you’re trying to appeal to a constituency that has read the Bible since early childhood. (Even evil lib’ruls know that story.)
bmaz-
you have been writing some very, very enjoyable essays recently. i feel obliged to move from merely enjoying them to complementing you on writing them.
the story on judge walker and the cia attorney was another in this line – truly fun reading with lots of sharp observations.
and “Jenny lays the wood to lovey govey” – what a great title.
you’re assured a place in the FukinDemocraticLiberal “titles hall of fame” with this one.
rayne@26, et al –
i looked at sanford’s face when he was “doing the talk”, the talk we have all become accustomed to hearing from philandering pols. i saw neither neither contrition nor shame in that face, just a hint of lack of sleep.
of physiognomy in general, sanford left the impression of a lank-haired, sharp-faced, anglo-saxon redneck of a type well-known in my part of the country.
Sorry bmaz. I have to disagree with you.
Mrs Sanford is definitely being an idiot. You might be able to make a case for her actions 6 months ago, if it was the first time she found her husband cheating, but now after what just happened, she appears to be trying tp stand on one foot on top of a bouncing ball, singing the chorus to the old “stand by your man” song while wearing her old Wall Street VP demeanor and power suit. (She was in mergers and acquisitions by the way.)
She should just close her mouth to reduce the flak, and walk quietly away, while starting divorce proceedings and deciding on child visitation rules. Anything else is just showing weakness and uncertainty.
I think though that just like Mark Sanford can’t let go of the Governorship, she is unable to let go of this marriage she put so much into. I see them both crashing and burning and the 4 children bearing the brunt of it.
Take it from a guy who went through 3 1/2 (yes 1/2, go figure) marriages during 31 years in the Navy who had a “dear friend” in every port, and for every season as well.
Or the young cougar is an enabled cut-out. In any case, Sanford has discovered that political enemies and personal misdeeds can lead to misfortune, in Mr. Sanford’s case, apparently wholly deserved.
Mr. Sanford’s King David comparison fell flat. Apart from Sanford not being the scion of a biblical house, he hasn’t a small Middle Eastern potentate’s freedom to commit murder and mayhem in pursuit of sexual desire. Nor has he the brains or charisma to convince people to ignore his faults. Not without Jenny Sanford’s help, certainly not with her opposing him. And in case he hasn’t heard before, women’s rights have come a long way since King David, even in South Carolina.
Mr. Sanford’s resignation would be the best thing for him personally and for South Carolina. If Ms. Sanford sticks to her guns and divorces him, a fate he seems to deserve, he won’t have a leg to stand on in negotiations or in court.
Bmaz’s suggestion that he head back to B.A. is good. But he should be forewarned. He ought not to confuse the sound of the Limbaughs, Becks and O’Reillys with the fury he may find in Argentine among those who think he’s wronged them.
as to the emails ..and who sent them ..and to where .. i’d point out that the “other parties” down south in argentina ..are newsies themselves .. they are involved in media .. and that involvement would give them an inside track as to where ..and who.. to send the garbage to “up nawth” … to get maximum effect ..
what if maria’s oldest son doesn’t like the guv .. or his mom’s involvement with him .. ??
and thank ya bmaz .. this is your usual “good work” ..
This may well have been why The State sat on the e-mails for so long — they didn’t want to give her betrayers in the Argentine newsroom the satisfaction of seeing their revenge work. But then Sanford made his last trip, and that was that.
Sanford’s reference to Jenny’s magnanimity, to her being a “good Christian woman”, may sound gracious and hopeful. I’d say it smacks of condescension, of trying to keep her politically pigeon-holed in the role of the good, stay-at-home mom and wifey.
Under the circumstances, expecting that from this Georgetown educated former Wall Street Vice President is as unreal an expectation as that he could continue with his affair and remain “happily” married, or that he could abscond for a week to Argentina and return with no questions asked. It’s a sign of his current debilitated state and his unfitness for public office.
Not that it’s any of my business, but I’m liking this woman less and less. This is reading to me like revenge – and whether the two of them stay “together” or not, Sanford is going to pay big time. Not that he doesn’t deserve to face consequences, but still… Plus she is clearly willing to use the kids as a bargaining chip. If it wasn’t for that Kind David crap, I might start feeling a little sorry for him.
Yeah, that’s what it looks like to me as well. Sanford comes across as a ‘lost soul’, a la EOH.
And having watched a friend have to go get an AIDS test after she realized what her husband was doing, it’s fairly easy to connect a couple dots on why Jen if furious and I don’t blame her for that one bit.
But at some point, she needs to be a good parent.
Like, starting yesterday.
She can’t undo what’s done, but it sure doesn’t appear that she was very in tune with her spouse. Part of me wonders whether he felt that the only way out was to create one hell of a conflagration. I’ve watched a couple of those, and whoa… those were the situations when the kids really got screwed.
Yup. Asking her to look for some papers, in a spot where he had a printout of one of his e-mails to Maria — that was his way of trying to bring matters to a head. And as usual with the passive-aggressive way of doing things, it backfired spectacularly.
Oh, and about Mark moving to South America? Sounds like whatever Maria’s virtues are, faithfulness is not one of them. I suspect the affection here is a little one-sided.
Evidence suggests that many bible-belt-Republican voters do not actually read the bible. Consequently, Sanfraud can and did invoke King David not knowing the details of the fable. The “Palin/Sanfraud 2012 Small-Gubmint-No-Tax-American Taliban” do not know the details of the King David/Bathsheba tale (tail?) with all its murderous deception. They know a little bit of the story, maybe.
In the end, the important thing is that God forgives Sanford. When Sanford strays again, he will thusly be forgiven again. That’s the way Christianity works. Repentance and forgiveness for any sin. All sins have been paid for by the cleansing blood of Lord Jesus. Including my sin of blasphemy if I repent.
I just can not fathom how anyone, anywhere – even in the Republican party – saw anything remotely potentially presidential in this guy.
Just like no rational person in 1999 could fathom why anyone saw anything presidential in George W Bush.
Throw a plain-speakin’-law-n-order-Newt-Gingrich-Canned-Republican Kit on a lank-haired, sharp-faced, anglo-saxon redneck and you got cherself a Republican candidate.
(Vivid physical description of Sanford by orionATL at 8:01 am)
Ummm… yes, that is true. You and Quake both make excellent points. Scary.
I remember hearing this guy years ago when he was in Congress yukking it up and referring to his constituents as “trailer park trash”. He just comes across as that perfect blend of phoney family values, low taxes, small-government conservative with a sense of entitlement and condescension that excludes him from those rules he thinks the rest of america should follow. So yes, in short, a modern Republican, sad to say.
On the one hand, it sucks that he was AWOL from his job as governor. On the other, the state probably ran better without him around.
Even so, he’s still going to be impeached over this, I reckon. Sex is one thing; dereliction of duty another.
But this will set Jenny on the career path to be a Senator or President herself. (Which is why she doesn’t want a divorce — not only would she lose the backing of The Family for her nascent political career, but she can’t let Democrats like Hillary Clinton or Elizabeth Edwards or Silda Spitzer outdo her in the Stand By Your Man department.)
That is interesting and fits a certain kind of MO, but I’m not sure South Carolina is ready to elect a woman for Senator or Gov yet. Or whether it will ever get there.
That sure sounds right to me.
Right, the outfit that see’s Palin as a front runner.
Amazing how different media from outside the U.S. looks, and the difference in detail in reporting.
Even the text of the report which included the video of Belen Chapur contains different information:
[quirks in translation mine, sorry, my Spanish is weak.]
Looks like the New York Times didn’t think the station she worked for was of any importance — that’s Canal 5.
oh i dunno about how prescient one has to be to figure out who to email in south carolina .. it’s a small state ..columbia is the capital ..and “the state” is the newspaper of record …
even someone with a room-temp IQ ought to be able to wade through that …
Not sure it’s about politics or values or religion. Life gets mundane and thrills, cheap or expensive,have a certain lure. Consequences? Whatever they are, they aren’t mundane.
Gratuitous tabloid journalism on FDL? I’m surprised you are wasting your time on this when you could be attacking Barack Obama.
Elizabeth Warren: ‘TALF cannot be the primary means to stimulate credit for small business and family borrowing’
Don’t say I never gave you anything.
I guess South Carolina isn’t a no fault divorce state? Anyway, as a father who doesn’t think a person’s rights as a parent should be based on “toeing the line,” I think this interview is obnoxious.
*snap* shuts the SkilSaw changepurse!
Jenny is horribly pissed because it went public. She was just plain old pissed before the news conference.
I don’t think “passion play” means what you think it means.
Well; I wrote it, therefore I get to decide what it meant at root value. For me, it has always been a medium or genre of literature and film involving adultery, betrayal and, obviously, passion. So, indeed, it means exactly what I think it does.
Wouldn’t it be great if Mark left us all behind in the USA and lived happily ever after in Argentina? A republic turned tango dancer.
You know, assuming he made right by his boys, I would actually respect him for doing that. For as completely lame as Sanford is, it truly looks like the sap was/is in love for, probably, the first time in his life. Whatever he had with Jenny Sanford, to whatever extent it was, is done. That looks pretty clear, at least to me. You cannot help the kids by maintaining a false front.
Ah, the perils of a solid Family Values morality. One ends up a Self-Righteous Southern Governor on the outside and a naughty, prepubescent boy at the first stirring of the beast within. Jenny invokes the call of fatherhood. Mark, ever the repentent, adds “a fiduciary responsiblity to the people of South Carolina,” to the laundry list of Family values [while dreaming of Bathsheba]. But Jenny’s emasculating comments, “I didn’t think he had it in him” and “He was told in no uncertain terms not to see her” may tell the why of it all. Rather than Biblical stories, Mark might turn to the softer sentiments of “Summer of 42″ for guidance [or maybe a random romance novel at the corner convenience store].
This kind of drivel gives us southerners a bad name…
‘evening, all-
This guy seems to think that a very gracious, Christian thing for a gracious Christian wife to do would be to shut up, be grateful she gets to sit in his shadow, and allow him to boink whomever he pleases. After all, if he has permission, then it’s not cheating, right?
Jeff Sharlet explains the reference to King David in a year-old interview:
This is the craziest shit I’ve seen in a long time. These people cannot be serious … but they are. Sanford is not fit to serve. As for the marriage and the mistress, he has absolutely no plan. He’s so deep into his own subconscious dramas and projections he actually does think he’s in love for the first time. He’s out of his mind. All that ”follow my true heart” stuff is a dead giveaway.
I see no authentic feeling for the kids from Sanford. How could he dump the kids on Father’s Day. He had to claim to be hiking alone to have any chance at making that fly but it never would. The kids know he doesn’t care about them. Too bad.
He’s seen this Argentine woman 3 times????? That’s classic infatuation. I bet he’s saying stuff to her like she’s perfect and his wife had never wanted to work on their relationship. If it weren’t for the kids, oh boo hoo. What’s a poor guy to do. He wants a fairy tale and real life is just too complicated.
He’s probably already talked marriage with the mistress … but she’s not doing THAT again. Also, she’s 41 and from her language in the e-mails is apparently going thru her own midlife crisis. What’s going to happen to her if she doesn’t want to be married again, she’s wondering.
And that wacky King David stuff: exceptionalism, it’s not just for countries. Perhaps the wife believes in personal exceptionalism too. Certainly saying you’re sorry to god and it’s all done is a problem for all these ”Christians.” The *real* world doesn’t work like that when you blow off your responsibilities to the state to disappear for 10 freaking days.
The wife has run his campaigns: the minute she said ”his career is his problem” it was clear that she’s cutting him lose. She wants nothing to do with him … she’s installed at the beach house and is limiting his access. But it’s to her benefit to appear to want to reconcile and patch things up … especially since she probably KNOWS what we are discovering, that Sanford is not capable of anything like the maturity and stability that that would require.
I agree with much of that. But what he thought was his life is over now. His political life is toast; his “home ” life, if it ever was great, is done now. All that gone for what does really look to be an honest case of love. He has fucked it all up for that, might as well have the balls to go see whether it was worth it or not. Republicans always paint themselves as the he man Hemmingway types. Well Hemmingway would have the balls to go all in once he had blown the ante. Sanford has blown the ante; what will he do now? I don’t think he has the balls to go follow his suddenly active heart.
I’m sympathizing with Mark Sanford. Their rigid Christianity provides few useful tools for the resolution of marital conflicts. If he was going to make a sincere try at fixing his marriage, Jenny Sanford has just blown that away.
Palin/CSanford in 2012! (Only, who would get to headline the ticket?)
After all of this, going forward, I think someone should be monitoring the Governor’s mental health, for his safety.
Thinking it over, I’m also fairly sure that their marriage was in trouble before Mark Sanford’s affair. They stayed together, apparently, to maintain their position. To my bright and beady eyes, this puts an entirely different complexion on the affair.
HA!
I guess Ms. Timmon’s takes wide stance on what is a “legitimate” use of the taxpayers dollars. The fact that argentina was in default to its creditors would not only make trading with them violate US Policy but also would be damn stupid. They had shafted many of South Carolina’s producers already.
Sanford trip violated US Policy
Jenny doesn’t need him and neither does Maria. South Carolina certainly doesn’t. I bet even his old friend Tom Davis is really burned as being the last to find out….even after the wife. That breaks all the rules. He’s going to end up spending a lot of time down on the farm in that dirt moving machine.
Maybe the C Street gang buy the King David as The Chosen One image but no one else will especially all those who are to get a bit of the stimulus package that he tried so hard to keep from them. He then set up an oversight requirement for the stimulus spending but refused to budget any money for it so state employees had to take on a lot of extra work to meet reporting requirements. The Cabinet member reporting on this right after the King David speech kept referring to the ‘generous’ zero budget for all that extra work load. Nope. Jenny is not the only one feeling crapped on by the Governor. I bet even his dog will growl when he sees him.
I don’t think things are as mysterious as you think. The business associate of Mr. Sanford’s Argentine mistress “is a Buenos Aires television executive involved in hiring the woman, whom he identified as María Belén Chapur, a producer at the television network America from 2001 to 2002.”
That would be Daniel Hadad – who is now the CEO at Canal CN5 who has been covering the scandal with great interest in Argentina. Note how fast CN5 broke the story and obtained the video of Chapur. It was also the source of Chapur’s autobiographical information…none of which was available through open-sources on the internet. Hadad seems to have had personal access to all of this as well as the lurid love story.
NSA not necessary, I think.
http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/…..62298.html
I still cannot understand why The State did not do more to authenticate the e-mails between The Governor and Maria when there was so much information to go on. If you were an editor, what would you do? If nothing else, why didn’t they ask the governor himself back in December?
Very reasonable questions. Maybe they did ask Sanford and he denied, but I do not remember seeing them say that. This isn’t the first time he has been in the news and thus a ripe target for a full on press; there was the long dustup over the stimulus funds. I wonder if they ever sent anybody down to Buenos Aires to investigate? They should have.
“Maybe they did ask Sanford and he denied, but I do not remember seeing them say that”
I’d be surprised if they’d asked: they could lose access, and risk being outed as dupes, maybe end up looking like clowns in the regional press community. The emails might have been treated like an intriguing loose threads, something to squirrel away for hurricane season; plus they weren’t around all that long before this incident, and for most of that time, there’s been another big state/national story surrounding Sanford, his playing hard to get with the Stim; locals might suspect ‘pol’ticks’ or resent the outlet appearing to try to take down a local hero if this one apparently involving the cliche of a South American cuchi-cuchi [sic] girl one came out at the same time [I do get this impression there’s more than one SC pol with an out-sized need to assert national relevance; maybe they consider the state construction material the stepping stone.].
But it’d make sense for them to start keeping closer tabs on unexplained behavior. How quickly after the disappearance burbled up as a news note did we start hearing references to his being ’something of an odd duck’?
Oh bmaz, you are more of an optimist than you realize. There’s no way a local news paper would pony up the cash for a round-trip to Buenos Aires, accomodations and any translation services based on emails received without follow-up from the source. The State indicated they tried to contact the person(s) who sent the emails by reply email and received no response; where would they go from there?
And given Sanford’s crazy-making position on stimulus funds, they already had quite a bit to report without running around BA.
Believe that The State also had layoffs in Feb/Mar time frame, same as many other newspapers around the country, suggesting they had a financial pinch, too.
The State is a McCaltchy property; I think they could have either sent someone or coopted an affiliate asset on the ground in the Buenos Aries area to do some work. Could be wrong, but that is my take. Heck, they may have and came up dry, who knows. The backstory here sure is fascinating though; I wonder how it all went. Am sying to know.
Affiliate asset in Argentina? I don’t think they have that reach, bmaz. They’d have to go to AP and then they’d lose the scoop altogether.
After working on this kind of stuff for nearly a couple of years, I can see how this wouldn’t have risen to the level which deserved investment. If I’d had to make the call based on what I know right now, I’d have said no because there wasn’t a second corroborating source. I’ve had to push back or spike stories with two corroborating sources because I couldn’t get anything on the record and the sources had agendas, too — and sources here within a short drive, not a timezone, 6000 miles and a language apart. A newspaper can still be sued for libel, no matter what the protections are for first amendment rights.
My guess is that they were watching for a source inside the governor’s office to crack; if Jenny was trying to keep this on the down-low, she may well have squelched any chance for sources to leak more info. Could be the other reason she is so damned pissed. After any potential work she’s done to keep his career afloat while batting clean-up, Sanford goes walkabout on her? Whew.
That The State’s reporter jumped on the link to the airport says to me they were ready to pull the trigger, but just needed that one more piece to cinch it. So they waited a few months and it fell in their laps; the outcome will be the same, and several thousand dollars cheaper, while letting them cover Sanford’s stimulus funding crap.
I get the connection with gov blago and Spitzer but from another angle. An angle coming from waay out of left field. I have been noticing potential 2012 runs for the WH. John Edwards in particular. He was actually brought to trial because his girlfriend did a documentary out of campaign funds. I am no John Edwards fan but I think he has been railroaded.
Chris Dodd ..when he took CEO caps out of the Please God Save the Banks and Wall Street bill. He said he was asked by the WH to do it and then back tracked. Thought it was a dem thing.
But with Sarah Palin and McCain as the last contenders..Mark Sanford had that nice crazy edge repubs seem to like these days.
I also think Obama is being set up to lose. Who picks and chooses the most?
Rahm Emmanuel and the DLC.
I choose the clintons as being behind it. They also have that crazy edge…like thinking she is popular.
Sanford is NOT in love, he’s in delusion and all that ”heart” language is the tip-off. It’s a defense. Its (subconscious) purpose is to legitimize the illegitimate. I’d bet anything he proposed during this last visit. And he’s STILL not aware that he has misread the mistress who seems to be playing him.
If he’s considered an ”odd duck” why would he be any less odd about his ”love” life. Or his marriage such as it may have been.
Both Sanford and his wife may have been living separate delusions about their marriage, ”happy” or not.
Jenny seems to be awake now. Sanford not so much. He’s out of his mind ~ maybe he always was. He’s surely missed a big point that you cannot be repairing the marriage and jetting off the Argentina at the same time. Like I keep saying, delusional.
He blew off NOT only his legal requirements to the State but his responsibilities to his sons. His ”heart” should have told him Father’s Day was not a good time to sort out the thing with the mistress.
In ”love” my ASS.
You may well be right, all I am saying is that I think the story of how it played out after they first got the emails would be fascinating to know. Neither one of us really knows what they could have, should have, or did do; but man am I interested. Maybe at some point they will do a narrative and tell us. I do not disagree with anything in general you have said though, well made points. I would point out that McCaltchy does have a South American Bureau in Rio, so they do have people down in South America.
There’s some of the back story coming out in today’s edition.
http://www.thestate.com/sanford/story/844260.html
The new story in The State answers some of the questions but not all and raises some new ones.
The e-mails were sent copied and pasted in an e-mail sent to the letters to the editor. The editor sent an e-mail to the AOL account in UK and got no response. They also sent an e-mail to Maria’s e-mail address and got no response. Maria must have known at that time @Dec. 30 that the newspaper had copies of the e-mails sent to The State Why didn’t she tell the Governor then??????
The editor didn’t get a response and just put the e-mails in a drawer. They give some rather feeble excuses for not checking with the governor in December/January and asking the questions that they asked last Wednesday. The morning of his press conference and after he lied to the reporter in Atlanta, they threatened the governor with a public questioning if he did not talk to them in private about the e-mails. It was at this point that the Governor must have realized his affair was exposed and he could not hide it any longer. He does not appear to realize how reckless he had been.
After the tip-offs of last week, the paper did ask McClatchy to have a free-lance reporter go to look for Maria at the address they had been sitting on for six months. Yes, it was Maria and no, she wasn’t home.
There’s a theme in the comments following the article that make it sound as if the Lt. Governor is even more unpopular that the Governor and that the political enemy/tipster about his AWOL is disliked even more than the both of them. Not much respect for the newspaper for sitting on the story and then springing it in the way they did.
Oh, South Carolina. You have some house cleaning to do.
Just put up a new post on this, with thanks to you.
Lots of other good stuff in that piece:
‘The names of two other women tumbled into the newsroom. …
And more names of women were coming in over the transom. The total was at three and counting.
“Women?!” Davis responded, sounding incredulous. “Women?!” …
Later, Sanford said he had been unfaithful to his wife only once, with his lover in Argentina. …
Maria knew her e-mail traffic with Sanford had been compromised, according to the Times. But did she tell Sanford?
If so, his trip last week to Argentina was even more reckless.’
Still some web to untangle.
Well. I hope the Lovey Govey rots in his own personal hell and I don’t give two cents for his wife since she is the brain behind his politics and neither of them cared twobits for the poor or middle class of South Carolina.
This story abounds with lede ammo suitable for Hearst’s olden days.
Like the Argentine media references to “El Gobonador”, short form ‘nads. Plus adapting that naughty old Spanish popsie Charo’s cucci-cucci trademark.
‘Just Met a Dear Old Friend Named Maria: South Side Story: El Nads Caught in Cucci-Cucci Trap: Exclusive Q&A Tell-All With Love-Nest Doorman: “El Gobonador Is No Big Tipper” ‘
Reader @ 99: “Sanford is NOT in love, he’s in delusion”.
There’s a difference?
bmaz writes:
“On her philandering husband’s pelotas.”
it’s very late in this post, i’m just mopping the floor and putting the chairs on the tables,
but i want to say thanks bmaz for using “pelotas” instead of that effete eastern intellectual word “cajones”.
the guys i work with use the spanish word “huevos” (”eggs”) for the (american)english “balls”.
“cajon” in spanish refers to a drawer, e.g., in a piece of furniture.
maybe jfk learned his slang from cubans, but i did not.
it seems to me, a barely literate spanish speaker, that one might say “tengo mis huevos (o pelotas) en mis cajones.”
a liberal (and aren’t we all) translation of which might be: “i keep my balls in my drawers.”