spacecoastweb: blog

Q: As I understand the situation, your criticism of early endorsements of primary candidates by Greer and other state party bosses, (specifically, the RPOF leadership backing Crist over Rubio in the Republican primary race for U.S. Senate), has triggered a backlash, in which the state party leadership has aligned itself against you. You seem to be taking the position that Greer and the RPOF leadership should remain neutral in the primaries, and allow Republican voters to decide which candidates should prevail. Is this essentially correct?

A: YES. The Florida primary election process puts the decision making power in making partisan nominations in the hands of Republican voters, and the Republican Party has an obligation to respect that process.

Q: A party grievance was filed against you, charging that you violated your Republican loyalty oath, and a subsequent grievance committee hearing placed you on probation within the RPOF. I’ve seen a number of pundits, (notably among them, Doug Guetzloe), describe this action as part of a "Florida Republican Party purge". Do you believe that state party leaders are seeking to purge vocal conservative critics from the party?

A: I certainly believe that there are those at the state party who think the party would be better off without the more vocal conservative elements. I am not one of these, obviously. Quite contrary to this belief, I would like to see our party accept that our conservative roots are the real strength of the Republican Party.

Q: The BCSO investigated a fake Twitter account that impersonated you. The account posted messages that could have been seen as damaging to your reputation. Such impostors are common on Twitter, and public figures such as politicians are often the target of fake accounts. Twitter has simple procedures in place for shutting down impostor accounts. What made you feel it was necessary to instigate a criminal investigation, rather than pursuing a civil case to resolve the matter?

A: Because something is common place, does not mean it is acceptable. It is particular unacceptable when this behavior is engaged in by a professional political operative. We need to send a message to those who would accept this behavior as the norm, by prosecuting these crimes to the fullest extent allowed by law. Also, because this identity theft took place in the political arena, I think it is important that the prosecution go forward. It is very disillusioning to worthy young people who will not enter public service because of this sort of "dirty politics." This sort of behavior that I was the victim of must stop.

Q: In the U.S., public figures who bring an action for libel have the additional legal requirement to prove "actual malice". It is often difficult to prove actual malice. Was this a consideration in foregoing a civil resolution to the matter?

A: No. The fact of this matter is that the very nature of several of the posts establish a clear malice. It is my belief that action for this belongs in the purview of law enforcement, not personal gain. This fraudulent behavior needs to be addressed, but litigation cannot restore the damage to my reputation or the embarrassment and humiliation that my family has suffered. Let’s focus on fixing the problem!

Q: Often, these impostor accounts are intended as parody and satire of public figures. Do you feel that this impersonation was something more egregious than that? If so, do you think it rose to the level of a malicious libel?

A: I do. I can respect a parody. If properly disclaimed, and understood to be a political satire, then while I find it sometimes distasteful, it is a form of free speech. In this case, the author of this account clearly wanted his audience to believe that it was me. I think the anonymous nature of the account speaks clearly to that intent. Saturday Night Live is usually pretty clear that they are making fun of someone, this account was not like that.

Q: What crime did you think may have taken place when you asked BCSO to investigate the fake account? More specifically, what alleged crime could have been committed that might justify BCSO serving subpoenas to Twitter and Nungesser’s ISP?

A: Given the use of both my name and photograph, I believe it could be identity theft. Also, I am neither a law enforcement expert nor a lawyer but there could be other serious crimes that are implicated.

Q: Do you believe there were other individuals within the RPOF, beyond Nungesser, involved with the creation and maintenance of this impostor account? If so, and if a crime is alleged to have taken place, do you think that this warrants a further investigation into possible charges of conspiracy?

A: Yes. We know from conversations we have already had, that others at RPOF knew of this and at the very least implied approval by not insisting the sight be taken down. If it is proven that these RPOF employees had an active hand in this, then each and everyone involved should be subject to a full accounting under the law.

Q: What would you consider to be an appropriate resolution to this case? Do you wish to see Nungesser, (or others who may have been involved), prosecuted?

A: This case will not be resolved as simply as the legal prosecution. To really reach an acceptable resolution the Republican Party needs to look long and hard at how we use electronic media, and what kind of behavior is acceptable. We need to set a standard, and that is my primary focus. I also believe strongly that the Republican Party of Florida owes the Brevard Republican Executive Committee a formal apology for its involvement in the false Twitter account as well as for their complicity in the filing of the grievance against me.

Q: Do you think that the BCSO would investigate a Twitter impostor if the complainant was an average citizen of Brevard, rather than someone who holds a powerful position in local Republican party politics?

A: I would certainly hope so. I cannot speak to the policies of the BCSO, but knowing Sheriff Parker, I would bet that he would treat every violation of the rights of our citizens as a top priority for his office.

Q: Do you believe that the cost of the BCSO investigation is justified, given that budgets are limited and that every dollar spent on this investigation is money that won’t be spent investigating violent crimes?

A: Yes. Enforcing the law is the primary focus of our law enforcement agencies, and that includes all laws. It is sad that such crimes occur at all, but when they do it is incumbent upon our law enforcement agencies to investigate. I do agree that times are tough, but that is particularly why we need to crack down on this in order to discourage future crimes of the same nature. Stealing someone’s identity and publishing remarks that ruins or damages a person’s reputation is a serious crime.