CT Blue

The full text of an article from this morning’s Day:

The Republican challenger for the 39th District House seat has received several endorsements, including one from Newt Gingrich.

“I am very pleased you share my commitment to transforming government at every level to save America,” the former U.S. Speaker of the House wrote in an Oct. 5 letter to Andrew Lockwood. “Policies you are supporting … will also provide lower taxes, less government, and real job creation.”

“Callista and I wish you all success, on Election Day and in the all the exciting days that will follow,” Gingrich wrote, referring to his wife.

Lockwood, who is seeking to upset three-term incumbent Democrat Ernest Hewett also received endorsements from the Connecticut Citizens Defense League, a gun rights group, and the Family Institute of Connecticut, a nonprofit foundation that promotes Judeo-Christian ethical and moral values.

I really don’t see how taxes can get any lower for Andy, since he doesn’t pay his anyway, but let that pass.

I’m interested to know whether or not Newt charges per endorsement, or whether he gives them away for free, hoping to cash in his chits in 2012, when he will make another abortive attempt at the presidency. If the latter, he might think about vetting his endorsees a bit.

I’ve noted before that I’ve sued (on behalf of clients, of course) Lockwood at least twice in the past. The first time was on behalf of three sets of homebuyers, to whom Lockwood flipped run down houses at an approximate average markup of 400% to 500% of what he’d paid for them, courtesy of a corrupt appraiser. a subprime lender and closing lawyers who were adept at looking the other way. Back then (the late 90s) I guess you still had to pretend that borrowers were qualified. One house was purchased by a couple that was getting SSI (a form of disability benefit paid only to the disabled and impoverished) because they were mentally retarded. At least that’s how they made their money in the real world. In the subprime world the husband of the pair pulled down $5,000.00 a month managing a car dealership that Andy owned at the time. Now I’m not saying (though I said it then) that Andy provided that false information to the lender (not that the lender cared all that much, since it sold the note faster than greased lightning), but he was the only person in a position to do so. I never pushed that case to judgment against Andy (we got money from other defendants) because I’ve been in this business long enough to know when a defendant will turn out to be asset free- what we call “judgment proof”. It would have been a cakewalk to get a judgment, however, had I been so inclined.

In the course of my dealings with Andy, his lawyers, and his victims, I’ve heard him called a lot of things, but this is the first time I’ve heard him called an exemplar of ” Judeo-Christian ethical and moral values”. Maybe that’s just a synonym for “your average, everyday Republican grifter”.