What Marshall Said

I’m posting this here until Tyler can correct his post below. Jim Marshall did NOT say in the debate that Cagle approached him about using Austin’s Scott’s divorce record. What Marshall did say was that Cagle first started discussing the divorce record. When Austin was considering running against Cagle before he got into the 8th district race, Cagle had his hands on the divorce records. And he was giving reporters bits and pieces of what’s in there. This is an “open secret” among reporters. It’s the kind of thing that has gotten around, and I can only imagine the secondhand knowledge about this is what led the person in Macon to file the motion to get it unsealed. Afterall, if Cagle has it why shouldn’t the rest of us?

But look, don’t take my word for it. Below, I link to a clip from a WMAC radio show from last week where one of the hosts dicusses the fact that Cagle was shopping the info in the files back when Cagle was trying to bigfoot Austin out of his race. So, where did Cagle get the divorce records? Dunno, but I do know that he and his staff didn’t shop them to Marshall, and that Tyler’s quote is incorrect.

Link to WMAC interview:
click here


  1. Tyler says:

    My post doesn’t say that Cagle had Austin’s divorce records. I paraphrased Marshall who claims that he got tipped off by Cagle about the divorce records b/c Cagle had allegedly been flaunting the idea around the state. Very different from being handed divorce records.

    • Tyler you said:
      That’s right, Marshall claimed that Cagle’s staff approached him about Austin’s divorce records and wanted Marshall to use it to his advantage in the race. Marshall claims that he refused, but did say that Cagle has been after Austin since he was rumored to challenge Casey for the Lieutenant Governor’s seat.

      Marshall did not say that Cagle’s staff approached him about the records and wanted him to use them for his advantage in the race.

      If that were true, that would be an explosive claim. What he said was that a lot of people know about the divorce records and it is because Cagle was shopping them around back when Austin was considering challenging Casey. There is a big difference in those two statements. Cagle didn’t tip off Marshall – he tipped off numerous reporters and politicos way back when and all Marshall is saying is that’s how people know about it.

      I know this seems like a minor difference, but you can admit there’s a big difference between Cagle did this and that’s how people know about it and Cagle told me to use this. The former is true, the latter is not but implied by the incorrect paraphrasing from the debate.

        • Well journalistically there is a difference between you alleging this and you alleging that Jim Marshall said it. If you’ve got proof of this you should present it. But the way to get it out is not to put what you want to be said into someone else’s mouth, it’s for you to say it yourself. That’s the difference.

          How would you feel if I said Austin Scott admitted that had he been in Congress at the time he would have supported TARP? Do I think that’s true, yes. Did Austin say that? No.

          • Tyler says:

            I actually got confirmation from people at the debate that Marshall did say what I originally posted. I guess we’ll find out when the video comes out.

            • polisavvy says:

              You couldn’t be further from the truth. In late January or early February of this year, when someone posted on here something similar, the ex-wife was more than happy to deny this charge. I doubt seriously that anything has changed since then. Lies, rumors, and innuendo appears to be Marshall’s MO. Keep hating on Austin Scott if you’d like; however, perhaps you should get your stories straight.

            • Messenger says:

              Austin Scott’s divorce records would have also been in his attorney’s office. The attorney and staff would have access to the records. Does anyone know which attorney represented Scott in his divorce? Or which Superior Court Judge granted the motion to seal the records? An attorney here in Tifton also sealed his divorce records, maybe he represented Austin Scott –it doesn’t always have to be the ex-spouse that leaks information.

              • polisavvy says:

                Further, we don’t know who even requested they be sealed: was it Austin or his ex-wife? Either or both parties can request something be sealed. Do we even know who the plaintiff was in the divorce or who the defendant was in the divorce? As for Cagle, well he was never president of Austin Scott’s fan club, that’s for sure!

                • Messenger says:

                  The worst part of this is yet to come for Austin Scott. The motion to unseal those records will most likely be granted. Austin Scott has alot of support in Tifton but so does Judge Cross. I feel all legal issues should have been moved out of this circuit. Judge Cross has alot of influence and as we all know supports Jim Marshall. This is a sad situation and desperate act.

                  • polisavvy says:

                    Actually, Messenger, he said at the debate in Perry that he and his ex-wife would respect the decision of the court. That statement kinds of leads me to believe that this could be a case of “much ado about nothing.” The whole thing stinks!

                    I do question just how much influence a judge could have who has only been on the bench about two years. Plus, the word “influence” concerns me more than anything. Influence over whom and what, particularly since she and her husband both have been contributors to Marshall?

  2. Nixonstheone says:

    What could possibly be in those divorce records that even remotely approach the rumors around Macon about Marshall and the health club and the state senator and . . .

  3. Spacey G says:

    Huh? Cagle is shopping someone else’s *open secrets* junk around?! Now that’s just plain reckless behavior… given all his own *open secrets* smack that floats all over the Third Floor.

  4. ACCmoderate says:

    So Casey was spreading rumors to get someone out of the race?

    Did he learn that trick from the “doctor” that told him his back couldn’t handle a state-wide race for governor?

  5. TPNoGa says:

    Marshall must be behind. I just read this on the Townhall.com tipsheet.

    In an interview Thursday afternoon with Roll Call, [Democrat Jim] Marshall said that now that the divorce issue has come up, the public should have a right to know what’s in the sealed documents

    “I’ve heard consistent allegations of what’s in there and it’s not pretty stuff,” Marshall said. “There are things that go on in marriages that can shed light on the character of the individual.”

    I am really getting to hate Marshall. Scumbag.

    • Lady Thinker says:

      I think Marshall is immoral. He wants these records released in hopes it will help him gain votes but I hope this despictable action costs him votes.

  6. TPNoGa says:

    Is this really the only argument Marshall has left for why he should be re-elected? His opponent’s divorce is all he has left. That is disgusting and really sad for Marshall. I guess the cupboard is bare at Marshall election HQ.

  7. I take it that the posters here don’t really collaborate or share their stuff for review in advance of publication… It just seems a little unusual for two posts & two authors on the same blog to contradict each other openly & quickly.

  8. Doug Grammer says:

    Congressman Marshall wants to talk about Rep. Scott’s divorce records much in the same way Clint wants to dig up 20 year old stories on Congressman Deal and distort them to try to paint him in a bad light.

    They focus on negative soap operas because if they got down to discussing real issues like Gov. Barnes wanting illegals to be able to vote and get benefits, or Congressman Marshall’s 4 votes for Pelosi for Speaker, the average voter wouldn’t like them so much.

  9. Tyler says:

    From the debate:

    “Cagle’s team came up with all kinds of stuff they put out about Scott and his divorce and his divorce papers…”

    “…they came…you know…that was brought to my attention. And one of the questions was whether or not I would find an attorney for a reporter in Atlanta who would then seek to open Scott’s records. I said “No, we’re not going to have anything to do with that.””-Jim Marshall

Comments are closed.