Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...

Shawn Mitchell Should Reveal The Truth

By Greg L | 26 September 2011 | 13th VA Senate, Loudoun County, Prince William County | 16 Comments

Shawn Mitchell, the Democrat running in the 13th Senate District, sure has a lot of explaining to do.   You’d think that someone touting their business credentials would actually have a good business record to run on rather than a history littered with stealing from their employers.  The Washington Times ran an article on this the other day, and now the Dick Black campaign weighs in with commentary that rises well above the usual campaign rhetoric and poses some hard questions that Mitchell shouldn’t duck.  This race is getting mighty interesting.

Just last year, Democrat Shawn Mitchell was sued by his former employer. To put it mildly, his business ethics were in serious question. But Mitchell got the Judge to seal the court record so the details are secret.

Mitchell said in his own court filings that his employer called him “untrustworthy” and told others that Mitchell “had stolen 16,000 customers from Parrish when he left the company.”

Mitchell isn’t just a business operator. He’s the Democrat nominee for State Senate. Voters deserve to know if–as his employer said–he is “untrustworthy.” Voters should know if the Court agreed with Mitchell’s employer who said Mitchell “had stolen 16,000 customers” when he left the company to start a similar company just nine days later.

According to the Washington Times, Mitchell admitted he was still employed by his former employer when he formed his own company. Mitchell’s contract barred him from starting a competing business within 50 miles of Parish. But his new business was located nearby. [Times, “Va. Senate candidate draws heat for small-business legal dispute” Sep. 25, 2011].

In court, he claimed he wasn’t in a “similar business,” so the contract didn’t apply. But his website advertises for “heating, a/c and plumbing services.” That’s precisely what his old employer, Parrish Services does. So claiming he wasn’t in a “similar business” seems quite a stretch-much like asking what the meaning of “is” is.

Every election, we hear that so-and-so is a “new” Democrat. And every time, the “new Democrat” is just like the old Democrats. Why should we believe Mitchell’s promises to voters if he broke his promises to his employer?

“The dispute was settled under seal, and Mr. Mitchell has declined to answer questions about the charges despite emphasizing on the campaign trail his record as a business owner,” said the Times.

But voters want the truth. If the Democrats’ candidate is untrustworthy–if he breaks his promises–then we deserve to know. Mitchell had the court seal the record, so he can ask the Judge to open it for voters to see. Why won’t he do so?

Good idea.  Let’s give voters all the facts and let them decide.  If Mitchell won’t do this, we really can’t conclude anything other than that Shawn Mitchell is a thieving dirty-dealer and entirely unfit for office.



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.

16 Comments

  1. The BulletProof Monk said on 27 Sep 2011 at 12:47 pm:
    Flag comment

    Nice of you to get the word out, Greg. Appreciated!
    Tip of the ‘o hat to Lovettsville Lady for running with this, too.

  2. Holly said on 27 Sep 2011 at 8:52 pm:
    Flag comment

    He sounds like he could working undercover for team Obama, he meets all the their requirements.

  3. Loudoun Lady said on 28 Sep 2011 at 5:49 am:
    Flag comment

    People need to ask Mitchell about this when they see him, watch to see if he squirms.

  4. Lovettsville Lady said on 28 Sep 2011 at 2:44 pm:
    Flag comment

    Shawn Mitchell asked to have the court records sealed. He can also ask to have them unsealed. Why won’t he do that?

  5. Satchmo said on 28 Sep 2011 at 2:57 pm:
    Flag comment

    LvL, what a ridiculous comment. Even if there was something to this whole concocted story, to have it unsealed would take both parties to consent. You really need to try and sound less emotional about these things.

  6. Loudoun Lady said on 28 Sep 2011 at 6:14 pm:
    Flag comment

    “Satchmo” - I see you have been extremely interested in this unsettling revelation about Mitchell on other blogs, but what makes you think that Mitchell’s former employer, that he took a client list and employees from - would not want to open this case? Have you asked them? Are you now claiming to “know” how the owners and operators of Modern Mechanical think about this case? You seem to know so much.

  7. The BulletProof Monk said on 28 Sep 2011 at 7:22 pm:
    Flag comment

    He knows squat. Mitchell and Parish could have settle on as little as an agreement where Mitchell agrees to pay damages if he dips into Parish’s list again. That same agreement could have also redefined an understanding of geographical boundaries in which Mitchell is allowed to operate, since he had violated the previous understanding.
    Court is expensive, and if Parish got what they wanted, they might well have settled early.

    As to Mitchell…I guess even as a business owner, he’s used to other people’s business benefits.

  8. Satchmo said on 28 Sep 2011 at 7:34 pm:
    Flag comment

    I wouldn’t expect any of you to understand the art of compromise. Monk is right this thing was settled on business terms. Now he stretches into the hopeful side a little but his premise is correct. Each side gave a little and got a little. No right or wrong is decided in these agreements. To assume MItchell or for that matter Parrish were at fault or injured is a naive assumption. It happens in business all the time. Any speculation of what happened between two parties that came to an amicably settlement is nothin but politics.

    What is really happening here is a bunch of mudslingin’ hogwash trumped up for hopeful political gain. Most of this is already washed down the sink.

  9. Greg L said on 28 Sep 2011 at 10:09 pm:
    Flag comment

    Fine then. Release the records. Voters deserve the truth, which is a lot better than us being left to speculate why Mitchell wanted this kept secret.

  10. Padre said on 28 Sep 2011 at 11:06 pm:
    Flag comment

    Non-compete agreements are not that uncommon. They rarely amount to much because people do have a right to earn a living. I expect it is Parrish that would object to unsealing the records. Settlements are usually not open to the public. A settlement could consist of everyone just walking away.

    Perhaps proving that the 2 businesses were the same might be the place to start.

  11. Loudoun Lady said on 29 Sep 2011 at 5:37 am:
    Flag comment

    “Satchmo” knows about mudslinging, this is ONE thing he is an expert on. And yes, it is politics “Satchmo” - you do understand this is a political race between a Republican and Democrat and once again the Democrat thinks he is entitled to someone else’s treasure.

    This is not mudslinging, and labeling it an agreement with a handshake and cigar is ridiculous.

  12. Satchmo said on 29 Sep 2011 at 7:51 am:
    Flag comment

    LvL, one does not even need to leave this webpage to see proof of Dick Black mudslinging. Just because Black creates a political email doesn’t make it true. It is what it is; a political attempt to make something out of nothing. I know that doesn’t serve your purposes and it frustrates you, but that’s the breaks.

    Nice try by Black and his supporters to get the focus off of Black’s dismal record, but I just don’t see it getting much traction beyond a couple of blogs.

  13. Ronald said on 29 Sep 2011 at 11:36 am:
    Flag comment

    Isn’t this race a slam dunk… why are we worrying about it anyways?

  14. Loudoun Lady said on 29 Sep 2011 at 11:54 am:
    Flag comment

    Ronald, I don’t know any campaign that considers their race a slamdunk, most operate as if they are 10 points behind - as they should.

    The State Senate is the number one priority for Republican’s in VA right now, and in Loudoun we have great opportunity to take a newly created Senate seat and make another gain. That is why people are talking about this, it’s important on many, many levels.

    So goes Loudoun, so goes VA, so goes the country.

  15. The BulletProof Monk said on 1 Oct 2011 at 11:44 am:
    Flag comment

    LL, that IS the focus here, and the reason that the Dems are so heavily invested (see Mitchell’s money trail to see why. Dems are literally pouring cash into his run. Thankfully, they have a history of throwing good money after bad at problems- where that money doesn’t change a thing.)
    Dick Black has better than even odds of pulling this race out, and together with two or three other Senate wins in the State, the fiscal books will get tightened, cuts will be made, and a whole plethora of issues that are currently open arteries will be closed and sewn shut.
    That’s what they’re terrified of. Unfortunately, they haven’t made the connection that it’s actually the voters who are demanding these sutures.

  16. freedom said on 6 Oct 2011 at 11:05 am:
    Flag comment

    …ain’t buyin’ what you’re sellin’ Satch….:)

Leave a Reply



Views: 1117