The Scarlet E-Mails
Mark Sanford's lovelorn e-mails to his Argentinian muse were the first documents that actually made me feel bad for the governor. These were very human, very touching, missives. They were overwritten in the way that lovers overwrite when trying to impress one another. They were guilty and excited and sorrowful and surprised. They were, above all, not political documents, and their entrance into the political sphere is a pity.
But they also raised some strange questions. These e-mails were, presumably, private communications between two people. How did The State newspaper get them? And why have they been sitting on them since December?
My initial assumption was that a member of Sanford's family had broken into his e-mail and leaked them out of anger. But if humiliation was the aim, why not give them to someone else once the State refused to publish them? David Corn, however, has another hypothesis:
Whoever had those emails had been in a position for six months to pressure--or blackmail--Sanford. An enquiring newspaper person might want to know more about that. Had Sanford even been aware that someone possessed these emails? If so, did he take any actions based on that realization?
But how did that person get them? I still think this was a personal, rather than professional, leak. But I've been wrong before.
Photo credit: Getty Images Photo.
By
Ezra Klein
|
June 25, 2009; 10:12 AM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: A Crisis of Legitimacy
Next: Dead Tree Hyperlinks
Posted by: user435 | June 25, 2009 10:33 AM | Report abuse
I'm fuzzy on why a personally leak (from family, staff, or friends) would be sent to the state capitol's newspaper. I don't see the motivation. However a political leak has lots of motivation.
Posted by: JimPortlandOR | June 25, 2009 10:38 AM | Report abuse
I don't know. The explanation in the NYT for the delay seems perfectly plausible. The State received the emails by email from someone who identified themselves as a woman. The State emailed the sender to follow up and get confirmation, and the sender never responded. I don't think any responsible reporter would, under those circumstances, do anything more with the emails without some further independent indication that the emails (and the story behind them) was something beyond a fabrication.
I'm also putting money on Sanford's wife being the source of the emails. She sent them in the heat of emotion, she regretted it once she had time to think, and so she didn't respond to the follow-up emails from the paper. Easy to imagine. I also doubt the emails were sent or received on state computers, because there's no way a reporter would leave that fact out of a story about the emails themselves.
Posted by: nolo93 | June 25, 2009 11:21 AM | Report abuse
Agree with your sympathetic assessment of Sanford in the emails. He compares favorably with the heartless, caddish skirt chaser Bill Clinton. The question of who did him in is fascinating. If political, it might have been even someone from the administration. Has anyone considered the possibility that the mistress might be the one who did it? Might have been bought out by some political enemy? I don't see this coming from the wife. It is such an extreme act, and she would have thought how much it would embarrass the boys.
Posted by: truck1 | June 25, 2009 2:57 PM | Report abuse
Just a bit of unsubstantiated thought, but didn't Sanford say in his press conference that he and his wife have been taking about his Argentina problem for "months"? Could it be that their discussions started because she found his emails? Just speculation, but it seems the only people to know about this for "months" was Sanford, his wife, and The State. The source therefore seems obvious.
Posted by: jimmytex | June 26, 2009 2:11 AM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.
Could it be that the governor just used state-provided computers and the newspaper, doing its typical public records search, found the evidence?