The Thugs Continue To Lie
...but we knew they would do that didn't we?... now it is not just Patty Wentz, but it is Becky over at preemptivekarma.
Thuggette Patty Wentz and Our Oregon (OO) are still lying concerning the Rainy Day Amendment and other initiative efforts. Wentz and OO continue to lie by making statements like “because they're not following the law," (June 7, Statesman Journal), and “out-of-state companies who are now breaking the law with wild abandon,” on the OO website. These statements are patently false because if they were breaking the law there would be penalties. If Wentz wanted to be truthful she would say that: There are some folks under investigation because OO has been tossing accusations around like a bad ham sandwich.
Case in point is the Rainy Day Amendment (http://rainydayamendment.com/) . Patty Wentz (PW) and OO made their absurd claim months ago that the folks behind the initiative were violating the law. P W and OO , after making the charge, placed it on their website as though the committee was already guilty. (Of course in liberal thug America there is no such thing as "innocent before proven guilty.)
PWOO then got the smackdown from the Sec. State’s office that said the initiative could indeed create a Rainy Day fund. What did PWOO do? She (they) tried to make it sound like the Sec. State smacked down the initiative sponsors because the initiative sponsors removed the “rainy day” wording from their website. PWOO even went so far as to lie on the OO website by saying “after the TABOR campaign changed language on its website and literature, the state elections department closed an election law complaint against the chief petitioners…”
I have news for W and OO. The site is back up and the name of the site is rainydayamendment.com. That would be lie number one. I wonder if OO will change their website to reflect the truth?
Lie number two in that story is that the campaign is a TABOR initiative. It isnÂ’t. Guess what... It is a Rainy Day Amendment. The fact that the website changed merely indicates normal updates.
Yet the hyperventilating does not end there. Becky over at PK really went kookie here and here. In her long and tedious accusation filled screed here Becky uses the words "money laundering" at least 7 times and even out and out claims that "The people who have created this network routinely engage in money laundering." However like a good union shill she never backs it up. It might be handy for the readers of liberal sites like Preemptive Karma and BlueOregon to have a disclaimer as to which of their authors have actually pled guilty to felonious charges.
Let me tell you something Becky. Just because you say something over and over again (despite what the guys in the white jumpsuits tell you) it does not make it true. Just look at the times PWOO has been shown to be nothing but a bunch of blowhards. Back in 2002 PW filed so many complaints that I have lost count. How many actually resulted in anything? None. The only complaints that turned into actual legal actions were the complaints file by initiative sponsors themselves against employees.
Another thing that Becky fails to mention is that under her definition of "money laundering" the union thugs are just as guilty for funding the non-profit group Our Oregon. Our Oregon takes part in political activity and has yet to file any C & E reports. Some members of the press have asked for financial statements, however OO has refused to comply.
One last thought. Say it with me Patty and Becky:
www.RainydayAmendment.com , www.RainyDayAmendment.com , www.RainyDayAmendment.com , www.RainyDayAmendment.com.
Sounds beautiful doesn't it? hehe....
Yip Yip
Posts
28 comments:
Ted, I posted this at PK and I'll post it again here for you (contrary to your claim, I do know what money laundering is):
I'm sure know what money laundering is in terms of campaign finance. But in case you need a refresher, it's when someone gives your campaign money, but they either don't want anyone to know they did, or they figure it will be more impressive if it looks like it comes from someone else, so they filter it through someone else first so when the campaign finance reports are filed, the public can't tell where the money actually came from. It's like if someone hand-delivers a check from a third individual to an organization and then waits at the front counter while a check of the same amount is written to them by that organization. It's against the law.
Not really the same thing at all as a union choosing to contribute money directly to an organization it supports - an organization that isn't required to report its contributions and expenditures. That's more the equivalent of a church using some of the tithes collected from its members to help fund a pro-life foundation. Nothing illegal there. And the complaints about Our Oregon's activities are kind of like the complaints abortion clinics file about a pro-life foundation sending out protesters to hand out literature to people in front of their clinic to try to convince them not to have abortions.
But if you have a problem with the unions' and Wentz's organizations reporting practices and/or their choice of activities, try to change the law or file a complaint or lawsuit. Put your money where your mouth is. Go ahead. I dare you.
Becky,
Your misleading accusations are meant to make people think that there is some kind of illegal activity going. There is not.
We do know that the unions in Washington state were busted for illegal activity and we do know that Patty Wentz was actually working up here at one point.
So you can do the math on that one.
We also know that the Nevada equivilent to "Our Oregon" has run into some MAJOR legal problems some resulting in assault convictions.
They were practicing much of the same tactics that the OO have been doing for years in Oregon. Threatening signature gatherers and petition signers as well as spreading false accusations.
Nebraska (or was it Oklahoma?) has hired Jeanie Berg who happens to be the political god mother to Wentz and OO and she is carrying on with the same anti-democratic practices there.
You have absolutely no idea what is going on in Rainy Day Amendment campaign. You know that there is a HUGE seperation between your old boss Bill and Don McIntire so you are being decieptful by even trying to pretend that there is some kind of "guilt by association." (in saying that, I am not giving the union thugs, and you, the argument that Bill was guilty. As far as we know for sure there was only one person guilty from that whole sordid affair.).
So Becky if you are going to continue the "money laundering" angle you do so knowing full well that it is a lie. C'mon call it what it is now.
Or should we just be polite and say you are being "deceptive?"
"Not really the same thing at all as a union choosing to contribute money directly to an organization it supports..."
What about the rest of us, Becky? I'm REQUIRED to belong to a union that uses my "dues" to pay for political stuff that is diametrically opposed to my views.
They're nothing but thugs.
They steal my hard-earned money.
They use it to support "causes" with which I totally disagree.
And when I ask for that part of my money back, they don't reply.
They are true Democrats.
Having been forced by law to surrender a large part of my pay to Union thugs that always support Democrats, I've become much more politically aware.
Democrats strip off and lie down for the "Unions", and neither represents the will of the people.
Becky,
" try to change the law or file a complaint or lawsuit. Put your money where your mouth is. Go ahead. I dare you."
I was doing a little research regarding the union blocking thugs around the country. You might want to be careful what you wish for. One simple for-instance:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=M2NlZThmNTU0YTQ5MDYxZTYxY2FkZmZlYzNmNTM3M2M=
yip yip
golly it feels good to be in the right and knowing full well that you have done nothing wrong.
i have an even better idea - since becky believes this "money laundering" is taking place, why doesn't she put her money where her mouth is, and file a complaint with the attorney general or secretary of state?
my personal belief is that any time a public employee union spends money for any political purpose, it should have to disclose where all its contributions to make that expenditure came from. individual union members who contributed and their home addresses should be listed in the c&e reports of public employee unions.
"You might want to be careful what you wish for."
Ted, you mistakenly believe I would support lawbreaking if it was done by Our Oregon. Not true. If they're breaking the law, do something about it. I don't want to see that, either.
I've never said Don McIntire was a Bill Sizemore, and for you to say that tells me you're not reading my comments very carefully. Why don't you take a deep breath and read them all again because I have very clearly addressed this point. I'm asking questions. Someone knows the answers.
And Ted, you do know that Sizemore broke the law, but you're afraid of being called a traitor. You'd rather be loyal to your party and make derrogatory statements about people who are trying to do the right thing than be loyal to doing what is right. You're just what you accuse Democrats of being.
I don't dispute that people have legitimate concerns about their union's activities and I don't dispute that Patty Wentz is primarily working for the unions. What I have been saying all along is that she is playing a role that needs to be played because before she did what she is doing, people were breaking the rules with impunity. You say I have no idea what they're doing. BS. I've been involved in petition drives and I remember well. But as I said before, tell me how what she and her people are doing is any different from what anti-abortion activists or anti-fur activists or any other sort of aggressive activists do every day? What laws are being broken? Just because you don't like it doesn't make it illegal. And conversely, just because you like a measure and the people involved doesn't mean you should tolerate shady dealings if they are involved in them.
I think I have been asking some legitimate questions. You don't like my questions because you support the measures. You are a very innocent person, Ted, and I don't think you are capable of recognizing the sorts of things that go on - even when they're involving you. So I'm not surprised you're flabbergasted at what I'm writing. But the people who have engaged in the kind of activity I'm writing about know I'm telling the truth.
One more thing, the very fact that Grover Norquist is involved in funding something virtually guarantees there is illegal activity of the type I described involved. As I have made abundantly clear if you take the time to read what I have written, that does not mean that the front faces of the initiative have any knowledge about that activity. They should answer my questions at Blue Oregon and PK, because that will make it clear whether anything untoward might have occurred, with or without (likely without) their knowledge.
As long as Sizemore and Norquist are involved in anything, I think people have a right - even an obligation - to go poking around looking for rule bending and rule breaking. And I would say the same for any petition getting money from a group with any Tom DeLay affiliation, as well.
But then, I'm not a blindly loyal cheerleader for the Republican party.
Becky didn't have to plead guilty for her criminal conduct, instead she was granted immunity by the Attorney General in the hopes that she would produce useful evidence to assist their office in the prosecution of Bill Sizemore.
But then Sizemore was never prosecuted for anything. That's some deal the state made...allowing Becky to confess to violations without legal repercussions for nothing in return...but it did hand the unions the ability to leverage Becky's personal guilt into a stronger civil case against Sizemore.
I feel sorry for Becky. She did some stupid things for causes she believed in; rationalizing it, I suppose, by "the ends justify the means".
But then she was caught and had to cut a deal.
Fine so far, but why is she trying to extend her 15 minutes of fame by publicly speculating (for the benefit of lefty activists) whether folks like Jason and Don are playing fast and loose with the law?
I suppose she expects they will pardon her indulgence as she drags their names through the mud during her personal public healing process.
And they probably will.
Sorry -
Sizemore wasn't prosecuted for anything because to prosecute him would have meant having to prosecute Grover Norquist. Oops! We can't be having that, now, can we! It helps to have friends in high places.
Sizemore was the "ends justify the means" person. He still is.
I'm not interested in any fame - in fact all of this makes me quite queasy and I really hate it. I'm only interested in one thing: doing my part to end the corruption in the Republican party so they can be a party to be proud of again. I don't talk to the media and I'll never run for office.
Sorry, or is it Sizemore, you may be pretty good at the BS (interesting coincidence of initials there) with the innocent types in the party like Ted, but most people have been around the block enough times to recognize what you're shoveling. And anyone who doubts what I say about the influence or corruption of Mr. Norquist can easily do a Google search and find all sorts of amazing reading that will prove I'm right about him.
Unless, of course, they're one of those pathetic types who doesn't believe anything bad that anyone says about a Republican because the liberal media is evil and liberals are evil and you can't believe anything bad you read about Republicans.
No, I'm not Bill Sizemore, I'm not even a fan of his.
And I do believe Republicans are capable of all sorts of bad things. I'm sure there's several republican versions of Jefferson Davis in Congress sweating bullets over whether their offices may be searched.
What I don't believe is that you really know that much about any of this.
Weren't you just Sizemore's frickin' secretary in 1998!?!
Now you want everyone to believe that you are the resident "expert" on Grover Norquist.
You know his "M.O."
I just have to wonder:
Did you ever even meet him?
Would he even recognize you if you met again?
Have you ever been in the same room alone with him?
How many conversations did you share?
What did you talk about?
I've just got this sneaky suspicion that you are trying to blow this personal knowledge thing way out of proportion.
I won't argue about whether Norquist helped conceal a donor for Sizemore eight years ago or whether you were a witness to it. I have no way of knowing either way.
But what I can ask is how that qualifies you to assert that "the very fact that Grover Norquist is involved in funding something virtually guarantees there is illegal activity of the type I described involved."
That's the part that sounds like BS.
Sorry,
You're right – what was I thinking? I guess if I didn't meet the man personally and wasn't the person making the arrangements, then I don't know diddly.
Never mind that I had photocopies of checks that Sizemore collected from several prominent conservative backers (not just one "special backer") and Fed-Ex'ed to Norquist to launder for him. Never mind that he admitted it to me. And never mind that he explained the cover story they had concocted: that the contributors were all instructed to say, if asked, that they supported Norquist's cause and hoped he would see fit to support Sizemore – but had no guarantee he would. Never mind that on multiple occasions Sizemore asked me to call Norquist's office to find out why it was taking him so long to send the money he had received from Oregon back to us. And never mind that Norquist has a long history of laundering money for people, while magically not being prosecuted for it. I suppose if I didn't actually lay eyes on the man, then I'm full of crap.
Whatever. But at least get one thing straight - I wasn't just a secretary. I was his executive assistant. His "top aide."
Executive Assistant = title you give your dumb-ass secretary instead of a raise.
it's not "magical" that norquist has never been prosecuted. for that to happen, you have to have actually, or at least seemingly, done something illegal. the clinton administration dug into everything about grover norquist and found....nothing.
too bad the state cut a deal with you becky. i think a couple of years at coffee creek would do you a world of good. perhaps sheridan's still a possibility.
Becky,
Unfortunately you have been wrong on so many fronts that attempting to address them in one comment stream would seem like piling on.
First I have been anything but a blind cheerleader for the Republican party. An even cursory scan of this blog would tell any objective observer that. I have been quite critical and I am not "evil" liberal media. You furhter erode your credibility when you make such outlandish claims.
Secondly you say "I'm only interested in one thing: doing my part to end the corruption in the Republican party so they can be a party to be proud of again."... Oh? Since when did you become a proud Republican again Becky? Are you now a Republican? Working actively within the party to make sure it is clean and pure?... Or are you just saying that to try to sound like you care?
Third... You seem to selectively overlook "the-end-justifies-the-means" Union Thugs. You know those folks who have been found, in a court of law, to break campaign finance laws in Washington. Didn't Patty Wentz work for the union thugs in Washington? Do you care to point that connection out? You would show more credibility if you did.
Finally (for now) you really need to stop this conspiracy theory stuff. This idea that somehow Norquist has not been prosecuted for anything because he has these mysterious friends in high places is just plain silly.
Of course that did not stop the authorities from convicting Ken Lay did it? Ooops...
The reason Norquist has never been prosecuted is because he has never done anything ILLEGAL.
He has never forged signatures.
You know the reason the folks that you name have never been prosecuted is because they actually DID play by the rules. Unlike some others.
Becky,
Further you say " tell me how what she and her people are doing is any different from what anti-abortion activists or anti-fur activists or any other sort of aggressive activists do every day?"
Well there are laws that are supposed to protect election integrity. Interfering with someone's right to vote or partake in legal election activity hold some very high penalties. You know some southern folk used to try to prevent blacks from voting. That kind of activity has left a bad taste in the mouths of Americans.
As such people don't normally take kindly to that kind of activity.
I am not flabbergasted at what you are writing because it is sad. I know all the players that you know and probably more. I know that people work very hard to make sure things are square. After all there is just too much money on the line.
You are making false accusations Becky and you should be ashamed of yourself.
Case in point: "the very fact that Grover Norquist is involved in funding something virtually guarantees there is illegal activity of the type I described involved"
That Becky is a lie. While you have a constitutionally protected right to make that statement in a political sense, you are morally and ethically guilty of declaring someone's guilt with no proof to back it up. You committed acts that would have been felonious and are attempting to project those acts on anyone else that participates in politics from the conservative side.
Shame on you. If you have any moral compass at all you will come back here and apologize for such an accusation.
Let's see how sincere you really are these days Becky.
Yip Yip
"Interfering with someone's right to vote or partake in legal election activity hold some very high penalties."
Thanks for bringing up a perfect example of how the right does NOT get prosecuted for breaking the law. Have you read Kennedy's piece in Rolling Stone?
I won't apologize for telling the truth. But I'm done arguing with you because you clearly don't want to know it.
Becky,
File a damn lawsuit or charges with the AG's office or the SOS office.
Either do that, or shut the damn hell up.
Becky,
You are done arguing with me because I know enough about the game to call you on your bogus claims.
You said that "the very fact" that Norquist is involved guarantees illegal activity. And I called you on it.
Even with one a radical SoS (Bradbury) and radical State AG's office and a liberal state Supreme Court in Oregon you have... Nothing.
Well except for one person who has admitted to forgery in a plea deal.
Interesting how even with all of your "inside" information there still was not enough to find that any crimes were committed.
So, please back up your Norquist claim. That was a bold one and surely you have more to offer than the black helicopters.
yip yip
Becky said,
"I guess if I didn't meet the man personally and wasn't the person making the arrangements, then I don't know diddly."
Well, that's what I thought.
You've never met Norquist. What you do know is secondhand through your experience with Sizemore and, even then, that experience is about 8 years removed from the present.
There is nothing in the personal experiences you list that suggests you know the first thing about how Norquist currently raises funds or makes donations.
Any reason to believe that it wasn't all Sizemore's idea at the time?
Some extra perk that Sizemore offered to donors to give him a fundraising advantage over others (like McIntire)?
Your description seems to suggest that Sizemore was driving the whole thing- soliciting the donations, gathering checks made out to someone else, forwarding them, and calling in anticipation of money to be returned.
From what you (allegedly) know about Norquist's "M.O.", eight years ago he may have been willing to help Sizemore hide the identity of some local donors.
Hardly a basis to say that everyone he helps currently "must" involve similar arrangements.
One could easily employ that same tactic with you Becky.
What do we know about Becky Miller?
Well we know for a fact (since she confessed) that she forged signatures on initiative petitions for causes she believed in.
From this, an observer could submit that it is part of Becky's "M.O." to lie to advance a political cause.
Sorry for,
You seem to give Becky the benefit of the doubt when it comes to Sizemore. I don't. She is wrong.
You are correct in saying that she is several years removed however you could also ad that she never really had that much access in the first place.
I also notice that Becky and the other union shills are lying about the initiative that is being cirulated. They are still trying to call it TABOR.
It isn't and you'd think that they would have figured it out by now. Unless they are purposely trying to lie to their readers.
yip yip
I'm done because there is no further point in trying to talk to you. I can answer every question you've asked. You can't answer mine. If you want to continue to be flies buzzing around a pile of cr*p, be my guest.
And whoever faked the entry by Patty, you're a child. Par for the course.
Becky,
You never ever tried to answer our questions. You just continue to lob accusations. Drawing some complicated web of conspiracy does not make for illegal activity. Lord knows the John Birch Society has been trying that angle for years and years. It doesn't hold water for them and it won't for the unions either.
You continue to refer to the ballot measure as TABOR. You know that is erroneous. As I said, if you want to maintain some credibility you would drop that.
You make some wild accusations about Norquist because he has at some time in his life met Abrahmoff. Well so has about half of the Democrats in the U.S. Senate, including Harry Reid. Are you going to extend your accusations that far? Of course not. A little consistency would take the wind out of your argument.
The point is Becky that you are making wild accussations about initiatives currently being circulated. I have said that you are wrong.
History bears witness to me being correct. You are the one making the accusations so the burden of proof is naturally higher for you. Even with all the evidence you provided the State against Bill he was exonerated.
You are making even larger claims against other people that have been active in politics for years. Yet it is the unions and the Democrats that have been convicted for election violations and in King County Washington it was Democratic voters that were busted for election violations.
So much so that the top elections official decided to leave town unceremoniously.
Sorry for dumping on you so hard Becky, but you made some pretty vicious claims.
Oh and let's not forget to remind everyone that the most recent claim by "Our Oregon" was smacked down by the Sec. State's office in Oregon. Once again... The facts and history are on our side.
www.rainydayamendment.com
Becky said...
I'm done because there is no further point in trying to talk to you. I can answer every question you've asked. You can't answer mine.
You have only asked one question which Coyote did not answer. Namely, "Have you read Kennedy's piece in Rolling Stone?" That question was asked in the same comment as the one in which you announce that you are "done arguing with him."
You are clearly partisan with an axe to grind. You have a history (to which you confessed) of lying to advance your political cause of the day. In this very thread you are misrepresenting Coyote's willingness to answer your questions. Yet, for some reason you are getting beligerent because we're not all accepting your unsubstantiated claims as gospel truth. Go figure...
Anon348,
Thanks for pointing out the question that I did not answer.
Becky, no I have not read Kennedy's piece in the Rolling Stone. Which Kennedy? The murdering drunk? Or the drunk that just got busted in DC for driving under the influence and is now going back to rehab?
I am amazed that Ted Piccolo would defend anything associated with Grover Norquist, a man who made a ton of money screwing over the Indian tribes with Jack Abramoff. See this NY Times article for more info.
If it's not a TABOR amendment, why are the people paying for the initiative in Oregon calling it that?
Torrid,
I know the people paying for and backing the Rainy Day Amendment in Oregon. They are not calling it TABOR.
Please go beyond an empty claim and cite an example. Just like I said to Becky... Just because you say it is so don't make it so.
Anon655,
Actually Norquist was not working to screw over Indian tribes. Abramoff was working to screw over a few tribes but at the same time he was working for other tribes.
Kinda like the Grand Ronde working with Tim Nashiff.
I know the history involved in the Abramoff and Indian gaming scandal. In fact I've been to one of those "Abramoff Tribes" down in Albequerque.
The "Times" article you site actually has Norquist denying the type of involvement of which you speak. He said he was surprised at Abramoff's records.
That was over a year ago. I think if there were more than just accusations thrown up against the wall we would have heard about it by now.
Abramoff is a bad actor. So is Democratic Senator Harry Reid for working with Abramoff to kill other Indian Tribes.
yip yip
Post a Comment