Has Pete Candland Lied . . . Again?

You might remember that back on May 7 we reported on Gainesville Supervisor Pete Candland’s attempt to pay a hyper-partisan political vendor with county funds. In a follow-up post on May 8 we disclosed that this extremely partisan vendor had actually been sued by none other than former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who in his lawsuit alleged that the Candland vendor was part of a “malicious scam PAC.” Although Candland had previously used a nonpartisan vendor on multiple occasions, in late 2015 he for some reason attempted to use this hyper-partisan vendor for county business. Probably, we believe, because of a personal connection there or to curry favor with them.

Candland eventually responded to the allegations by posting an 87-page tome on his website. In the tome’s Executive Summary, Candland denies the allegations that he paid this hyper-partisan vendor. Of course, as is usual with Supervisor Candland’s pattern of dissembling, disinformation, and distraction, one has to go beyond the Executive Summary and wade through the lengthy document to discover that Candland did actually try to pay this hyper-partisan vendor, but was dissuaded by county procurement staff. In fact, his office went so far as to approve an invoice from them, but county procurement staff paid the subcontractor directly instead.

But we’ve been through all that already. What interests us today is a communication from a commentator reminding us about an as of yet unrefuted additional apparent lie by Supervisor Candland right up front in the Executive Summary of his 87-page tome. You see, Supervisor Candland has asserted that the accusations above came from Prince William County Democratic Party activists. He then went on to say very specifically in the Executive Summary that “the Democratic Party activists argue that Supervisor Frank Principi (D-Woodbridge) uses a well-respected tele-town hall vendor that is free from any taint of partisanship, and Supervisor Candland should use that company.” Here, so you can see for yourself, is a screenshot of the second paragraph of Supervisor Candland’s Executive Summary where he makes this claim.


What’s notable about this? Well, when it comes to the Muckraker, who broke the story, and as far as we know are the only ones who covered it – Supervisor Candland’s assertion IS NOT TRUE! We never mentioned Supervisor Principi in connection with this issue in any way. Nor did anyone who posted a comment. In short, it appears that once again Supervisor Candland has simply made something up! (He also lied insofar as he may have been asserting the Muckraker accused him of violating county procurement regulations; we never did, but we also don’t care what he thinks on that score.)

Now perhaps Supervisor Candland can produce an email from a Democratic Party activist, or a phone record showing a call from one of them who specifically said something like this. We doubt it, and he has yet to do so.

Why would he lie about something like this? Two reasons, most likely. First, the nonpartisan subcontractor the county paid is the one Supervisor Candland had used in the past, as have other supervisors like Mr. Principi. Although Candland apparently tried to direct a portion of county funds to the hyper-partisan vendor, the county staff directed it to the nonpartisan subcontractor, and Candland wants to now pretend he was just doing what everyone else did.

Second, after making self-righteous pronouncements about how meals with him would be paid for by the participants, a FOIA from the School Board Chair revealed that Supervisor Candland had LIED about that, and that he not only used county funds to pay for others’ lunches, but for his own as well. So, how did he respond to the exposure of that lie? FIOA requests were submitted to various Democratic officials. In other words, with the School Board Chair having submitted a FOIA request only for Supervisor Candland’s office expenses – since it was Candland alone who had claimed (falsely as it turns out) that meals with him would be self-pay – Candland needed to manufacture an excuse to FOIA the expenses of Democratic officials who had not made any such representations.

Sometimes people just get things wrong. They forget or remember something incorrectly or are in a rush and don’t have time to reflect, or perhaps they interpret something that’s ambiguous differently than someone else does. Those situations are not lies.

But it is clearly a LIE when someone consciously makes up something that is contrary to what is easily verifiable, and it’s especially malicious when it is specifically done by the liar to gain advantage or to denigrate someone else. Supervisor Candland posted this directly on his web site, and therefore cannot blame the lie on an anonymous blogger or a member of his staff.

So, the question remains . . . has Pete Candland lied . . . again? Seems clear, doesn’t it?


10 comments on “Has Pete Candland Lied . . . Again?

  1. -

    This is classic Candland. He can’t compete on the facts so he even makes up what he claims others say about him. This guy has no moral compass whatsoever.

  2. -

    I think Pete probably got confused while cutting and pasting between the SoN and his website and didn’t realize he posted the lie on his website.

  3. -

    One of the things Mac Haddow went to jail for was directing contracts to a group that then paid his wife to write speeches. Given how similarly some of Pete’s stuff is compared to the SoN blog, wouldn’t it be a hoot if it turned out Alice Haddow was writing a bunch of stuff on the SoN. Just a thought.

  4. -

    With a few starry eyed residents, everyone in the Gainesville District is talking about what a fraud Candland has turned out to be. Folks are now questioning how Candland could allow unlimited access to a convicted felon. Nothing is secured or sacred in that office when this individual has relatives in the office who are sending him private emails and information.

    I have heard the the Gainesville District is the least trusted office in the county. They have to be very careful what is transmitted to the Gainesville office because it could end up n SON, and other nasty sites.

    Candland has only himself to blame for the lack of trust of his own office. He was warned by his colleagues years ago that Haddow is trouble with a Capitol T.

  5. -

    I heard that there are at least 2 groups who want Haddow to resign from county committees.

    Is this true?

  6. -

    “Has Pete Candland Lied Again?” Seriously?
    Has he ever said anything that wasn’t a lie?
    He’s so accomplished at fabrication, the Prime Ribster can lie without speaking a word (a/k/a lying by omission).
    Look no further than the expert pervaricator who taught Pete the art, the infamous Mac Haddow. In order to get his convicted felon sugar daddy, Haddow, onto the County’s Strategic Planning Team, Pete had to first nominate Inmate 11661-016 (Haddow) and then he had to get the other supervisors to vote for his appointment.
    Now, it’s probably pretty hard to get someone appointed to an important position like the County’s Strategic Planning Team if you have to disclose to your fellow supervisors (and the general public) that Mac “I’m no friend of Khadafy” Haddow did prison time at the Federal Correctional Institution in Petersburg, VA for a financial crime and that he was also indicted by a federal grand jury for committing several other crimes.
    If you’re a congenital liar like Pete Candland, it’s just a lot easier to withhold that little bit of troubling information from everyone. I mean, why does anyone need to hear about Mac’s past run ins with the law? “Whatever Mac wants!” is the motto Pete lives by.
    Don’t believe me? Here’s the link to the actual notice on the BOCS meeting agenda just this past February.
    It’s really interesting to see that of the 33 people appointed to board and committees at that BOCS meeting, only Mac Haddow and one other appointee provided no background information or statement of qualifications to the public or to the other supervisors. Who was the other one? Well, it won’t surprise anyone to learn that it was none other than Pete Candland’s Chief-of-Staff and Mac Haddow’s son-in-law, Mark Allen. Here’s the link to his “application” for the Service Authority:
    Pretty weak stuff here from the King of the Prime Rib Dinner and the self-proclaimed Champion of Transparency, right?
    Does Pete lie? Of course he does – all the time. And he can do it without even moving his lips!

  7. -

    How can you tell when Pete Candland is lying? ….. His lips are moving.

  8. -

    I think it’s Mac lying not Pete. Mac writes all his stuff.

  9. -

    Same in PWC,

    Pete does quite a bit of lying himself without Mac’s help and it is usually to citizens.

    What I suspect is happening here is that Mark Allen Mac’s son in law is being positioned to run in plac as the Gainesville Supervisor when Pete attempts a sure losing fight for Chairman. Actually that might be a blessing in disguise because Pete can’t win chairman because everyone hates him throughout the county and Mark Allen won’t win either. If that was to line up that way, Mac would be gone forever!

    Also, Pete appoints family friends and Mac’s relatives to county committees that offer financial reimbursement for volunteering on them such as the Service Authority!

    Mac never gives anyone the truth in any of his bios. What is he going to write that he served time in a federal pen for a crime against the Executive Branch of the US government? He also pads his bio with the HOA and other self appointed leadership roles he runs over folks with.

    Mark Allen has no bio because he has not done anything other than being the son in law of of the real Gainesville District Supervisor C McClain Haddow

  10. -

    I read this blog for two reasons: 1) it is about time that someone started exposing the Candland/Haddow cabal and the harm it is doing in this community and 2) Muckraker makes it a point of presenting factual, scrupulously researched information. You have a point of view of course, but opinions are stated as opinions, information presented as fact actually is fact, and you make it a point not to sink to the depths of personal vitriol so common on that other blog. That’s why I think it’s important to point something out in the post from “Lyin Pete” above. The post includes a link to the document submitting Mr. Haddow’s name to be appointed by Candland to the Strategic Planning Committee, and it implies that the document does not submit any qualifications for Mr. Haddow. However if you read the document you will see that in the qualifications section it says “see attached” – so one can assume there was a separate document attached, probably listing qualifications, that is not part of the .pdf document. Trust me, I believe Mr. Haddow’s record absolutely does disqualify him from such an appointment, and he should be asked to resign — but the link to that document is not proof that nothing was submitted listing whatever “qualifications” he may claim to have. Please keep up the good work Muckraker – the people of PW County need to know the truth.

    [Editors Note: The Muckraker agrees with this comment. We’re not sure we fully understand the “Lyin’ Pete” comment to which “Anonymous Too” is referring. “Lyin’ Pete” appears to be suggesting that Haddow and his son-in-law were approved for appointments without submitting qualifications, but we don’t know if he/she is making that assertion because the county just didn’t attach the qualifications in what they posted online or because he/she actually submitted a FOIA for the information and it does not exist. The former is certainly possible and probably likely, in our opinion. “Lyin’ Pete is certainly entitled to his/hers.]

Comments are closed.