The corruption in South Carolina is showing more and more. If you wonder how treasonous warmongers like Lindsey Graham and bootlickers like Tim Scott stay in the US Senate, this might be closer to the truth than people actually voting for them.
In a recent post at Palmetto State Watch Foundation, JanisPSW gives us an inside look into a particular law firm that just acquired $75 million, and decided the best thing to do with that money was not invest it or share it with the community or anything like that. No, they decided the best thing was to give it to some of South Carolina’s biggest political parasites.
Janis PSW writes:
A Rather Large Thank You For Helping With The Plutonium Settlement
Imagine your small law firm just got a windfall settlement of over $75 million to share with one other small law firm. What’s the first thing you’d spend money on?
“Why, I’d make sure to give some away in political donations immediately!” was probably not at the top of your list, or anywhere on it, if we’re being honest.
So why did three members of Willoughby & Hoefer and their wives–six people in total–all do just that the day they received their cut of the $75 million contingency fee from the Department of Energy (DOE) Plutonium Settlement in 2020? Combined, the six of them donated over $210,000 on just the federal level alone on the day the funds were wired into their account: September 21, 2020.
Even though these guys are no strangers to the political donation scene, with histories dating back to the early 1990s, the $210,000 ought to raise some eyebrows as it represented over 40% of all 6 of their total federal donations up to that point. Of that, $60,000 went to the South Carolina Republican Party and the remainder went to Lindsey Graham’s various campaign funds PACs. At the time the Plutonium Settlement was issued, South Carolina Attorney General (SCAG) Alan Wilson credited U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham and Tim Scott, along with U.S. Congressmen Joe Wilson (his father) and Jim Clyburn for supporting his strategy and providing a united front. It was well-known at the time that Graham was integral to the issuance of federal funds.
It is interesting to note that just 4 days before the settlement funds were received, and after the SC Attorney General’s office had authorized the transfer of the $75 million, Lowell contributed $10k to Protecting Our Vote PAC, which according to OpenSecrets.org, supports 100% Democratic candidates.
Background
In 2016, SCAG hired two law firms under Litigation Retention Agreements (LRA) to assist the state in recovering $600 million statutorily owed to the state by the U.S. Department of Energy because of its failure to complete the MOX project and requirement to remove plutonium from the Savannah River Site, subject to the availability of appropriations: the first LRA terminated on January 4, 2019, and the second LRA was executed in June 2019 and backdated to January 1, 2019. Here is a link to the other LRAs from the AG’s office. You can see that the second LRA is substantially different than the template used for the other LRAs executed by the AG’s office. Some of this was the subject of a lawsuit regarding the amount and disposition of the attorneys’ fees that the SC Supreme Court recently opined on, but is not the thrust of this article. Although, as the language for recovery of funds was already in U.S. Code some might wonder why outside counsel was needed in the first place for this situation, especially since it turned out that it was ultimately political pressure that got this case settled, not courtroom prowess.
There is no shortage of commentary online about this case and the exorbitance of the attorneys fees, as well as criticism of the South Carolina Attorney General for using one of his favored law firms for this settlement. Let’s look a little more closely at one of the relationships here. Prior to winning a campaign for SC Attorney General, Alan Wilson spent eight years working for Willoughby & Hoefer, a law firm that was connected to his father, Congressman Joe Wilson.
After switching to public office, Alan Wilson continued to foster a close relationship with Willoughby & Hoefer. In fact, our recent FOIA revealed that for over a decade Randolph (Randy) Lowell has been lead attorney for the Savannah River Maritime Commission, which was formed in 2007 by Joint Resolution, “to represent this State in all matters pertaining to the navigability, depth, dredging, wastewater and sludge disposal, and related collateral issues in regard to the use of the Savannah River as a waterway for ocean-going container or commerce vessels.” Until July 2022, Lowell was at Willoughby & Hoefer, when he and three other attorneys left the law firm — two of the three went with Lowell to Burr & Forman, and the other went to work as Chief Legal Officer for the company co-owned by Alan Wilson’s brother, Julian Wilson, JJE Capital Holdings, the parent company of Palmetto State Armory.
Why do we mention Lowell? For a couple of reasons. The first is that he, being the lead attorney on the Plutonium Settlement, was one of the people whose political donations to Graham/SCGOP on September 21, 2020, boosted the total to over $210k. Additionally, we noticed something interesting on the state level about Lowell’s campaign contribution activity.
For starters, Randy Lowell has been a major donor at the state level, having contributed almost $190k to local and statewide candidates in the 12 years prior to the September 21, 2020, Plutonium Settlement. He really kicked it up a notch after the settlement though, contributing over $265k in the intervening 5 years. Just to confirm the existence of the Uniparty in SC, approximately 20% of Lowell’s contributions have been to Democrats, which makes sense, because it appears he may have been a dues-paying member of the South Carolina Democratic Party as recently as 2014. Randy Lowell also seems to be backing Stephen Goldfinch for South Carolina Attorney General.
Just to reiterate, contributions are a form of free speech, though they are governed by contribution laws. For example, for a local office like state senator or state representative, a person may give a maximum of $1000 per campaign cycle. Additionally, their spouse may give $1000 and any of their businesses may give $1000. For a statewide office such as Governor or Attorney General, the limit increases to $3500. So conceivably, if someone owned 10 car dealerships, you might (and do!) see $3500 x 12 donations (1 for each spouse and 1 for each business), and potentially another for the the general election.
What’s interesting about Lowell is that he has over a dozen businesses that list him as the Registered Agent. Many of these actively make campaign donations. Again, nothing strange here. Where it becomes interesting is when we look at the details of a handful of them. In this day and age, most businesses have some sort of internet presence. A Facebook page, a website, or an associated address on Google Maps. We are aware many people form LLCs and use them to purchase their home to shield their property from liability. There are lots of legitimate reasons to create an LLC. And honestly, I hope that is the case in what we’re going to discuss next.
Starting in 2021, two companies started showing up on donor lists that caught my eye: Copper Walrus Ltd. Co. and Iron Elephant Ltd. Co. There are others, and we’ll list some of those below, but these will serve for the illustration at hand. Both of these businesses are registered to Mr. Lowell. Neither has an internet presence. And both were incorporated on June 19, 2019, just six (6) days after Mr. Lowell signed the second LRA with the Attorney General’s office on June 13, 2019.
What’s with all the metals? Copper…Iron? We puzzled over that for a while until we realized that they are also elements, just as plutonium is an element. Putting that together with the dates of formation being less than a week after the second LRA was signed, leads one to believe that perhaps these companies were formed to handle the proceeds from the settlement because in some cases, law firms create special-purpose LLCs that receive contingency fees from settlements.
Where these donations cross the line ethically is when these companies with no internet presence or brick and mortar store are used to a) shield from the public eye who the actual donor is and b) to exceed state laws for campaign contribution limits.
How Much Is Making Its Way Back Into Uniparty Campaign Coffers Around The State?
Another major question that ought to be asked right now: Have funds from the Plutonium Settlement, and potentially other similar settlements been funneled back into campaign coffers of the Attorney General and other politicians, without whom those settlements would not have been possible? And is this a deliberate attempt to conceal the true donor, as he hasn’t donated in name to Alan Wilson since 2010, even though since 2010 his companies have donated over $81k to Wilson’s campaign ($49k of which was in the last 4 years)? And since 2020 about $65,000 has gone into Democrat’s campaigns.
Echoes of a 2013 Settlement
The public outcry over a massive contingency fee in the current case bears a striking resemblance to a 2013 settlement involving bad investments initiated by the South Carolina State Treasurer’s Office in January 2011 with a similar LRA. In that case, attorneys were awarded $9 million in contingency fees, with $7 million going to the firm of Willoughby & Hoefer.
That history raises another question. Could Cobblestone Trading Ltd. Co. (trading…investments, anyone?), registered to Mr. Lowell on December 1, 2010, serve a similar purpose? As shown below, the company has donated nearly $100k to members of the Uniparty since the lawsuit settled.
Coincidence? Or a Pattern?
This is not a Democrat-versus-Republican issue. Instead, it raises an uncomfortable question: are attorneys’ fees generated by large, state-initiated settlements ultimately finding their way back into the campaign coffers of the political establishment that holds power in Columbia?
The pattern is difficult to dismiss as coincidence: a lucrative settlement, companies formed days after a key contract was signed, and hundreds of thousands of dollars flowing into political campaigns soon after the money arrived.
If settlement proceeds are being routed through little-known LLCs that later appear on campaign donor rolls, the public deserves to know why. Are these simply legitimate business entities exercising their right to political speech, or are they functioning as vehicles that obscure the true source of political money while multiplying the number of allowable donations?
The Plutonium Settlement was unquestionably a victory for the state. But when enormous contingency fees flow to insider private attorneys and some of that money later finds its way into political campaign accounts, taxpayers are left to wonder whether such outsized awards were necessary and whether the system that produced them deserves closer scrutiny.
