Angela Keaton, Day 2: LNC gang continues efforts to cloak operations in secrecy

Once again, IPR will be publishing e-mails from embattled LNC rep Angela Keaton, unedited, as they come in:

Day 2/LNC meeting/live blog, 8:24 a.m.

Same disclaimer applies as yesterday. If you want a goddamn transcription, make it yourself.

These are my words and mine alone. –Keaton

—————————————————————————
8:10am Agenda

Carling on Audit
Boring monotone. Explains the audit co purpose. They are happy with …/Wilcock (sp?)

Asked Kraus to negotiate K. Saved 1k. Reviewed by staff.

Starr: What is cost per year? 11k for 2008 plus 2k for midyear review.

Redpath: Any sort of mang report w/ comments, will there be one issued?

Carling: yes. Unlike last audit, “big thumbs up.”

———————————————————————————
Report from Barr/Root Campaign

Carling: Obv media is doing great for Campaign. Barr is getting more and better and root is getting better than our past Pres. Fund Raising is sig better than past campaigns, but not nearly as good as the media coverage. Several people have vol to make calls including Root, Carling. Promised by Shane Cory a list of names. Did not get it. Told by Cory that Carling was not needed since they had “plenty of money.” (Carling quoting Cory.) Claims that Root, Bruce Cohen and others received similar treatment.

Redpath: That is contrary to what Cory said.

Flood: That’s not what Russ (Verney) told me.

Starr: Is there any particular agreement with the Barr/Root campaign and us?

Redpath: There is not. Spoken to Cory several times. Better with me to talk to Shane. There seems to be no interest in such.

Lark: Seemed to remember in Denver such was agreed upon. Need to flesh out. Was this an “F-U”?

Carling: It was polite.

Redparth: if we explore it further, we have to go Ex Sess

Wrights: I want to hear it.

Lark: not subject guests to ExSess again until later

Jingozian: Why is there is no mention of Libertarian party on signs, bump sticks, website, carries more recognition than the name Barr. Link it to something to some clout.

Carling:would have to get back to you.

Redpath: Wants answer to that question ASAP. Asks Carling to call Cory.

Sullentrup: my sign says both Barr and Lib.

Wrights: It is a concern for website but not as important stickers/signs. Everyone knows Obama is a dem. If we are running the campaign to mirror big two…

Starr: Agreement with Wrights. Typically pols will put on signs and website that which get them votes. Will focus on name and party where party will not help.

Jingozian: Now most Americans don’t like two parties, they would find LP a pleasant alt.

STarr: The premise is that they would be more happy with us.

Redpath: Verney wanted to run campaign that would appeal to independents. We can stand to benefit by appealing to independents. 3% to retain ballot status. If we get 3% we would get ballot in many places.

Day 2/LNC meeting/live blog Part 2, 9:09 a.m.

Ruwart: LNC vote for law suit.
First heard of it when Phillies told me about it. Haugh reported it to last term but not new
Should we be voting for entering lawsuits? Always potential for backlash. I would like opp
to discuss any law suit in any case where I am a plaintiff.

Dixon: The co should vote unless it is urget and EC then can vote on it. Aware in Tx that
Obama/McCain lawsuit over missed deadline.

Starr: 2 issues. Question of size. if it is the equiv of small claims, no reason. Budget line item,
do I use cts to change public policy? (Starr’s voice like Carling’s is lower than usual. Can barely hear.)

Lark: Tech speak
Policy manual that the very requirement of budget and spending is part of the Co. LNC should vote.
Anytime LP takes legal action, at least EC.

Dixon: How many lawsuits per year?
Do we need to stream line?

Kraus: report from Hall.

Hall: We pay for some law suits where we are not the plantiff (lp ohio, example)

Dixon: how many?
Hall: 2 suits.

Starr: Should Lark work on resolution for next meeting on law suits?
(THis is quite manipulative–AK)

Jingozian: wait, Wrights is waiting to say something.

Wrights: the issue is not money. My butt is on the line. Trying to help, but there is ancipated suit.
I had to get this info from a member while I sit on the board. What does our name go on?

Redpath: I want to apologize to anyone who did not know and if I contributed to it. I deal with it everyday.
I apologize for any problems that caused. It is controversal for some people but not for me.
There is one ticket for the LP coast to coast. I would do the same if it were Mary Ruwart or Daniel Imperato.

Is there is a move to extend for 5?

Starr: bring it back to next meeting.

———————————————————————————————————————————-
Open LNCÂ list.

Can’t type this b/c it is my issue.

Starr, Karlin and Flood don’t want it.

Dixon wants to know if list can be divided b/t that is ExSess and other discuss.

Starr thinks that people won’t use the list b/c years ago someone used to forward the list.
No one will keep open discussion.

Wrights: we have two lists in NC. Read only one list. Everything on EC list is read only for any
member who wants it. Chair uses other list for confidential.

Karlin: everything should be treated confidential b/c accidents with scroll down lines one too many.

Hawkridge: blogs, members would be friendlier if they knew what was going on. It is a meeting.

Dixon: Does everyone use NC exclusive list because…?

Haugh: I have resentment b/c secret list was were my overthrow as NCED was plotted.

Hinkle: Basic problem. Perception of closeness and not enough information. If there is a perception
by members, we need each LNC member to solve that one on one to let members know what is going on.
Solution in search of a problem. Two lists will not solve.

Starr: Would like to move on to next item of business.

Dixon/Hawkridge objection.

Move to extend.

Lark: Torn. I try to keep everyone informed. been both at large and regional. Too easy to make accidents.
List is really for biz. Not sure how large a problem.

Dixon: Hinkle has it right. Self regulating. Regions can remove non-open members. At Large shoud not be reelected.

Starr: No win. We either don’t disclose or members don’t really understand the issues so you spend all your time justifying.
People just bash you.

Folks, you are not going to get an open list. Your only solution is to stop reelecting the same people to the LNC.
You elected these people. You are responsible.–AK

Flood: someone started meet up list to communicate with regions. These meeting would be much longer if we did not have the ability

Kraus: This would be an absolute burden for staff. You would have to pay to have someone do this. Who would stay in that job for
more than a week?

Wrights: to kraus, you are making something more complicated than it needs to be.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Tom Stevens.

Hawkridge: T.S. Member of Jud. Co. Stevens wants to funnel votes. He has no party loyalty. Was member of BTP. Hawkridge explains Stevens camp history.
Would like to ask him to resign?

(I don’t care about this issue. Some old kook is party hopping to from one fake party to another including this one. It’s just the LP, folks. Just the LP.–AK)

Starr has RR objection. Two types of offenses. One in meeting, one out of meeting.
In order to discipline, you have to give notice, have them show up….this motion out of order.

Debate b/t Wrights and Redpath over whether Carling can speak on the narrow parl issue.

Wrights make heroic stance by demanding that RR quotes come WITH citations.
Someone asks if the LNC even can remove someone from Jud. Co.

Starr suddenly decides that asking someone to resign is a big deal (unless you are me of course. These people are movement bottom feeders.)

Lark says it makes him queasy. Take it up in December.

Wrights: Jud. Co is indy committee which is elected by delegates. We have no ability other than ask (Hall nods head.)

Redpath: Why make a decision when we can punt? (That’s leadership, boys.)

Sullentrup: Send him a letter to find if he is a member of another party.

Postponed. Starr is beginning to run rough shod over Redpath.

End of tape.

Then it got weird…, 9:49 a.m.

I left an executive session. I had no idea this was coming.

Said in ExSession. I’m within my rights to reveal this:

We don’t have a contract b/t the Barr Camp and LNC b/c….Cory asserted to both Carling and Redpath that they were afraid that someone would reveal data. I didn’t know what the hell they were talking about until it was further explained that Cory was afraid that I would misuse “data.”

Why this is ExSession? No idea. To Redpath’s credit, he, Ruwart and several other believed that this was an excuse. That I am a scape goat.

Well, doesn’t that beat all?

The decorum motion, 11:07 a.m.

Starr wrote a “shut Keaton up” motion. It’s not actually going as far as he thought. Wrights and I don’t want any part of it.

Dixon, Hinkle, Fox, Jingozian, Hawkridge, Sink-Burris think it is either a.) overbroad, 2.) already addressed in RR, 3.) other ways of handling this.

Bylaws results, 11:51 a.m.

latham, karlan, moulton, h. scott, redpath, sarwark, oates, starr, bennett, hawkridge and manske

Kafka? Oh for the love of G-d! I’m about to be censured for blogging about the accusations against me, 12:11 p.m.

I’ve been kicked out of the room b/c I blogged about the Cory accusations against me.

Oh, Afghanistan Res passed easily! While I sat in exile along in the hallway, the Admiral took his bags to the airport. “Hang in there,” he smiled.

Lee Wrights spoke to me in the hall, 1:14 p.m.

He asked me to that if the offer is made for me to apologize to do it b/c he needs me.

Shane Cory sent me a text telling me not to step down.

Platform Co Apps due BEFORE NEXT MEETING, 1:21 p.m.

December meeting platform co selection.

Beef up yr apps.

2 thoughts on “Angela Keaton, Day 2: LNC gang continues efforts to cloak operations in secrecy

  1. G.E. Post author

    As pointed out by ElfNinosMom:

    How interesting that Mary Ruwart told Richard Winger she did know about the NH lawsuit – and he used that as a basis for saying LFV had it wrong, and LNC was properly informed – now in LNC meeting says she didn’t know about it until George Phillies told her, which is exactly what George told LFV.

    Mr. Winger said the same thing about IPR.

  2. Denver Delegate

    Regarding Libertarian branding and the Barr campaign, my perception is that Barr is mentioned as the Libertarian presidential nominee — or he mentions it himself, and confidently so — at the outset of almost every broadcast media interview I’ve seen him do.

    I agree with Verney’s strategy to make the campaign more inclusive, and aim to attract independent voters. Aside from a promotion of policy preferences in a generally libertarian direction (see J.D. Tuccille) and potentially Naderizing McCain, future ballot access is a great goal for Barr’s presidential campaign to have.

    And for what it’s worth, the homepage of McCain’s web site carries no reference to the Republican Party right now.

    Nor does the homepage on Obama’s web site mention the Democratic Party.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *