Aaron Starr Revealed to be Primary Source of Funding for Oregon LP’s Lawsuit

Aaron Starr

Wes Wagner has learned the sources of funding for the lawsuit against the Libertarian Party of Oregon’s leadership. Through a search for the Libertarian Party of Oregon on the Oregon Secretary of State’s site, it is revealed that Aaron Starr, who is not a resident of that state, has contributed almost $100,000 to the Libertarian Party of Oregon.

This writer asked why, as chairman of the Libertarian Party of Oregon, Mr. Wagner never had access to the funds. Apparently, Starr paid as an in-kind contribution directly to the Oregon Republican Party general counsel, Tyler Smith, who also served as counsel for their lawsuit. He paid allegedly on behalf of the LPO, which is now LPO v2, the miscellaneous committee run by Reeves and company.

The Reeves group has recently filed, as per instructions from the Secretary of State, as a Political Action Committee. They are using the name “Libertarian Party of Oregon” for their PAC.

History of this dispute has been well chronicled by IPR. The most recent developments can be found here and here.

Aaron Starr was formerly the chairman of the Libertarian Party of California, and also served as the Treasurer of the Libertarian National Committee. He is currently serving on the Audit Committee of the Libertarian National Committee. He also is a contributor to IPR.

Disclaimer: Mr. Starr and I have both been elected within the last month to serve on the Judicial Committee for the California Libertarian Party.

https://secure.sos.state.or.us/orestar/cneSearch.do?cneSearchButtonName=search&cneSearchFilerCommitteeId=16869

156 thoughts on “Aaron Starr Revealed to be Primary Source of Funding for Oregon LP’s Lawsuit

  1. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    I must say that even I was surprised! Aaron continued to give money even after the Secretary of State refused their request to be recognized last month. Wow–

  2. Doug Craig chairman in Georgia

    Man… California Libertarian party could have done some nice things with that kind of money.. .

  3. Wes Wagner

    Mr. Lark was on the ex-comm and voted to recognize the Reeves crew back at the beginning as part of the initial foray into LNC imperialism vs. the LPO.

  4. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    George said: “To his credit, Mr Starr has shared the wealth with other states, too. How do you think Ohio reactivated all its national members?”

    Do tell, please, if you have any links, or proof of this.

  5. Jonny Stryder

    Thanks Jill this is interesting. “In Kind” would that be mostly services, e.g., legal services performed by Mr. Starr? Any idea what that means Jill? Honest question, I’m not sure what it means in this context. A little background on the Oregon LP dispute would also be helpful for those unfamiliar with it.

  6. Wes Wagner

    The campaign finance transactions are listed as in kind because they were paid by Aaron Starr directly to Tyler Smith, never hit the bank account of the “Libertarian Party of Oregon” (the miscellaneous committee) for legal services Tyler Smith provided.

    Tyler Smith is the general counsel for the Oregon Republican Party.

  7. Darryl W. Perry

    “Mr. Lark was on the ex-comm and voted to recognize the Reeves crew back at the beginning as part of the initial foray into LNC imperialism vs. the LPO.”
    Can you say “conflict of interests”?

  8. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Jonny, I understand that the payment went directly to the attorney handling the lawsuit which started in early 2011. The lawsuit sought to determine who the rightful leadership of the Libertarian Party of Oregon was. I did post a couple links in the article, but you also can put “Libertarian Party of Oregon” in the IPR searchbox, and there are more than forty articles telling the story of this dispute.

  9. mvetanen

    Only Mr. Aaron Starr can explain why he has funded the Oregon Republican Party general counsel to file a law suit against the Libertarian Party of Oregon.

    Mr. Starr is contributor and editor for IPR, so I am sure he is well aware of this thread.

    I, as many others, await his response to this article.

  10. B4Liberty

    I think research needs to be done to follow the money another step or two back.

  11. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Be4Liberty:” I think research needs to be done to follow the money another step or two back.”

    I’d be happy to research that, although I don’t know how to. Are you saying that people contributed to Aaron?

  12. Marc Montoni

    Hmmm…

    1) I don’t understand how he can report a donation that the organization does not recognize.

    2) Realistically speaking, if this money was in-kind for the benefit of any organization, it should probably be reportable under the Oregon RP.

    3) Chuck said Virginia accepts donations. We definitely do — but we also require donors who wish to vote at our conventions to actually be residents of and domiciled in Virginia. None of this “voting member in ten states stuff”.

  13. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    However, it only became a PAC earlier in the month. It does seem like there might be legal issues that money was being contributed that the LP Oregon not only didn’t know about or wasn’t able to access.

  14. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    So, Reeves’ group is now a PAC as per their own filing. They are not a political party. The Wagner group is not only listed with the national LP, but also the Oregon Secretary of State as the leadership of the Libertarian Party of Oregon. Doesn’t this kind of mean the issue is settled? How could the credentials committee have any reason to consider that Reeves is the actual chairman, and not Wagner?

  15. Kate O'Brien

    I am the Chair of Elected Libertarian Female Entrepreneurs (a brand new PAC). Mr. Starr can write me a check for $100,000 anytime. I promise to make good use of it

  16. mvetanen

    Jill
    The LNC Credentials Committee has not stated where they get the authority from to determine who the State Affiliate delegates are. They have not published any procedures to how delegates seating can be challenged, nor about the process of any ‘trials’ they seem to feel empowered to hold.

    Yet, all in 2012 they simply all of a sudden decided to hold court and replace the Oregon delegates the first day of credentialing, ignoring the fact that the LNC Judicial Committee already pointed out that only the LNC board full vote can remove a State Affiliate.

    For this reason, I have declared the entire LNC to be a sham and will not contribute or support the LNC in any fashion till:

    1. All of the offending members of the 2012 Cred comm, and those LNC officers who went along with this farce, are removed and forever barred from holding any position in the LNC
    2. A formal apology to Oregon is made, and personal apologies to those who where not seated
    3. Changes in the LNC bylaws that would prevent such abuses again.

  17. Mark Axinn

    Chuck and Kate beat me to it, but New York also welcomes contributions. We do not have a residency requirement for membership in LPNY.

    As a libertarian, I would say that Aaron is free to spend his money however he wishes. I also do not know if all of the allegations herein are true, nor do I care as they are none of my business and I believe in letting others do as they want so long as they are not interfering with my rights.

  18. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Mark, I certainly agree that Mr. Starr has the right to spend his money as he sees fit. As far as this information being true, it came off the Secretary of State’s site. As far as interfering with rights, it has cost some people quite a bit of money for legal fees, which is why I think this was a legitimate bit of information to post.

  19. mvetanen

    The information on the Oregon Secretary of State website about Aaron Starr spending came from Mr. Burke and Mr. Reeves who Aaron Star is supporting.

  20. paulie

    If anyone would like to shoot that kind of money, or a smaller amount, to Alabama LP for ballot access, or to me personally (for ballot access, internet reporting and/or LNC activities) please let me know. Contributions welcome in any amounts, large or small.

  21. B4Liberty

    I question why any one person would spend more money than is necessary to take control of one state party. Why is this money being spent to control or disrupt Oregon?

    How many delegates participate in any given states convention? Typically 100 or less?

    How many new members as delegates does it take to control the vote in any given state? 51 or less?

    What is the cost of buying these membership? $25 to $50 each? For $100,000 enough delegates could be put in place across the country to gain control of every single state party. Those delegates would attend the National Convention and gain control of the LNC.

    Why would all this time and money be put into causing the chaos and discord over control of one state? Aaron is by profession a controller and CPA, does this seem to be responsible spending? Is my math wrong?

    I don’t have the answers but do think there is more to this story.

  22. paulie

    I don’t. It is most likely just chasing good money after bad.

    In fairness, the other side has spent six digits also.

  23. Wes Wagner

    Spent defending a case led by the Republican Party’s general where the plaintiff’s were asking for unilateral permenant control of our party and unspecified damages and that the case be kept open so they could perpetually abuse us.

  24. Mark Vetanen

    B4Liberty, here are some answers

    Oregon has the fusion vote, meaning that minor parties can nominate a major party person as well. Oregon also has an easy ballot access process and the ability to put any legislative law passed by the Governor to the public vote if sufficient signatures are gathered. All of this can be sold to the highest bidder, and being in control of a minor party that traditionally spoils Republican races, this can become lucrative to nominate Republicans on your ticket instead of Libertarians. Oregon Republicans are hurting and have cited Libertarians as why they are losing their races.

    Oregon is assigned 15 delegates this year to the LNC convention. In the past at the LNC hay days, this number was as high as 25 delegates. In 2012, it was only one vote for ‘none of the above’ that was the Catalyst that lead to the complete ousting the the Starr faction on the LNC board.

    If someone wanted to pay for the travel cost and rooms for a state party delegation, i am sure such would be grateful in supporting the vote of their sponsor on the LNC issues and officer selections. Traveling to Ohio from Oregon is not cheap!

    Aaron Starr has his motives and plans, and clearly put them in to motion. I also don’t have answers as to why Aaron is doing this, but he is welcome to come here and explain it to us.

  25. Kate O'Brien

    So we are actually looking at $200,000+ to pay for some ideological difference of opinion. I keep thinking about what kind of exposure that $$$ could buy a serious Libertarian candidate. Makes me ill….

  26. Wes Wagner

    Kate

    Read up on it… it was not based on ideology. It was based on imperialists who wanted to subjugate libertarians with a Republican proxy regime led by Aaron Starr and Richard Burke, use their ballot access for their own purposes, and suppress the rights of Oregon Libertarians from controlling their own party.

    It has nothing to do with where people fall on the Nolan chart 😛

    We could have rolled over and just gave the Republican party control of Oregon and not faced the ire of the LNC Inc. I suppose .. but then we would have had to beg that the other side be merciful and not try to take our homes with their unspecified damages.

  27. Matt Cholko

    I guess the amount of money is a bit surprising. But, I thought we already knew that Starr was a substantial contributor to this cause.

    In any case, it is his money to do with as he pleases. It is also everyone’s right (duty?) to hold it against him, forever.

  28. Wes Wagner

    Matt

    I would personally think it is in the best interests of the survival of the LNC to hold it against all of his associates.

  29. Richard Winger

    First, I commend IPR for breaking this story. Second, Oregon election law does not give the LP its own primary. If there is a Libertarian primary in Oregon, it is run by the party and has nothing to do with government primaries.

    I don’t know which story is more mysterious, this story about Aaron Starr, or the big general news story about how that 16-year old managed to fly in the wheel well from San Jose to Hawaii without dying. They say he must have “hibernated”.

  30. Columbo

    According to the Secretary Of State records, Jeff Weston seems to be primarily funding the Wagner side of the suit, and he alone has spent over $217,000 so far on this suit.

    I do think it’s funny that George Phillies above criticized a donation to the Reeves side because it was from out-of-state, but George’s own PAC, Liberty for America, has twice donated to the Wagner side. I believe that Massachusetts is out-of-state relative to Oregon.

  31. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    LOL, Richard. I wondered at how terrified the kid would have been if he’d tumbled off the plane and hit the ocean. The cold water would certainly have woken him up! i’m sure that would have killed him, but what about the ride down? Wow!

  32. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Columbo, would the Wagner group have spent anything in legal fees if the Reeves group hadn’t filed the lawsuit? Most likely not.

    Also, I don’t think it’s necessarily odd that someone contributedt o another state. It’s the sheer volume of donations made by Mr. Starr that is a bit curious.

  33. Kate O'Brien

    If Mr. Starr would like to salvage what is left of his reputation and credibility, coming onto this site and explaining his reasoning might be a good place to start.

    Just sayin’….

    And yes, for the record, it’s his $$ to spend as he pleases. Can’t help wonder, though, what his thinking process is.

  34. Wes Wagner

    “I do think it’s funny that George Phillies above criticized a donation to the Reeves side because it was from out-of-state, but George’s own PAC, Liberty for America, has twice donated to the Wagner side. I believe that Massachusetts is out-of-state relative to Oregon.”

    Those donations were provided and spend, not on legal fees, but on sending out ballots to Libertarians here in Oregon to maximize the number of candidates we had in the general election as well as increase participation in the party.

  35. Kate O'Brien

    When I first met Aaron (a LOOOOOONNNNG time ago) he was gung-ho obsessed/dedicated to getting Libertarians elected to local office. So was I; it was obvious to me that if we were going to be a major influence we would have to get people elected. The trick is doing so without compromising your principles.

    Now he is making huge hunking piles of money, evidently. Is he spending it on local elections? No; he is spending it on lawyers. Makes me wonder what kind of disconnect is going on in his head.

  36. Wes Wagner

    Correction – it was actually spent on announcement mailings advising Oregonians of their rights to be a libertarian candidate. I misspoke.

  37. Wes Wagner

    Kate

    The dialog about running non-partisan candidates for local office is part of the same dialog that is meant to minimize our participation in partisan politics and reduce our party’s relevance as it related to the major parties.

    It fully fits the course of conduct of Mr. Starr and his apparent willingness to declare alliances with our enemies (the republican party).

  38. Kate O'Brien

    Yes, Concerned Libertarian Citizen; you are right. All the poor little children in fat camps across this great nation who go to bed without cookies because Aaron is enriching lawyers. Shameful.

  39. paulie

    The dialog about running non-partisan candidates for local office is part of the same dialog that is meant to minimize our participation in partisan politics and reduce our party’s relevance as it related to the major parties.

    It can be but is not necessarily. I think we should have plenty of candidates for both kinds of office.

  40. Kate O'Brien

    Years ago, when we were still a couple, he tried to bribe the CA-LP delegation with $15,000 for some reason. They turned him down. After I heard about it I was relieved: I had just gotten my cancer diagnosis and was worried about how I was going to work enough to bring in $$ with the surgery and radiation (me bringing in enough $$ was always a major Issue in our relationship). I was relieved because he obviously had $15,000 to throw around so $$ would not ever be a serious issue again – even after I got better. Or so I thought.

    The point of all that is that you probably could not surprise me with information about what he is spending $$ on.

  41. Wes Wagner

    Paulie

    I agree running libertarian candidates in off election years is a good thing … but actively arguing during even numbered years that libertarians should only run for non-partisan office has am agenda to it that I have seen played out by Starr’s prized Oregon pupil.

  42. paulie

    The “only” part is the part I disagree with. I want lots of nonpartisan candidates AND lots of partisan candidates.

  43. Kate O'Brien

    I think we need to do both. If I were in charge I would strive to see that we had candidates for Prez, and all national/state office running as Libertarians. Mostly educational; would not put a lot of resources into those races. Then! I would strive to run candidates for things like City Council, Special Districts, etc., Those I would put lots of resources into because they are often winnable.

    It’s all economics – allocating limited resources among unlimited wants.

  44. paulie

    Kate, exactly.

    However, no one is solely in charge; the national committee has limited scope, as do state and local organizations.

  45. Kate O'Brien

    Well of course not; we do need to have committees and more than one viewpoint. That’s just the way I would do it if it were up to me

  46. Chuck Moulton

    George Phillies wrote:

    To his credit, Mr Starr has shared the wealth with other states, too. How do you think Ohio reactivated all its national members?

    I see a $10,000 loan from Aaron Starr to the Libertarian Party of Ohio in the 2013 Post-General Report. I don’t know the circumstances of that loan or whether it was what is referred to above. November 2013 was the time period when the LP of Ohio’s membership jumped by 50% (729 to 1065).

    http://www2.sos.state.oh.us/pls/cfqry/f?p=119:48:109158864462260::NO:RP:P48_REPORT_ID,P48_TYPE,P48_LISTTYPE:142944445,31C,can

  47. Wes Wagner

    I spoke with George on the phone … he seems to have tracked down what that money was used for.

  48. Wes Wagner

    As far as those saying Starr is free to do with his money as he pleases … if in turn we allow the LP to be reduced to a plutocracy it serves no purpose. We already have plenty of those to go around.

  49. George Phillies

    Dumping someone from a relationship because they become physically unwell — if I am interpreting your remarks correctly — is a choice for which words fail me. I understand you did not do the dumping.

  50. George Phillies

    Chuck: If you search through, you will find money from the same account going to the LNC to pay for memberships. Now, dollars are fungible, but it appeared to me that those memberships needed to have been paid for in part by that loan.I need to check my math on that. Paying for membership renewals is indeed meritorious, unless of course it is Lee Wrights’ National Party membership being paid for by Mr. Haugh, on which certain people raised objections, but you might want to check: The loan went to the Ohio state, not the Ohio Federal account, where its legality would have been questionable. The LNC then according to the Ohio records would appear to have been sent money from the Ohio state account, rather than the Ohio FEC-filing account, which raises some interesting issues because the Ohio state money is not FEC-compliant, not to mention you may want to trace down through the LNC records to find how the money from Ohio was being recorded. The FEC filings should show it as coming from the source, not from the person whose membership was being renewed, when these were different.

  51. Columbo

    Just one more thing…

    How many more candidates could have been recruited if Jeff Weston were spending his money on that instead of the lawsuit? Then you wouldn’t have needed any outside donations from George Phillies to prop up the organization in the meantime. How is that not supporting the lawsuit? I believe the term is “enabling”.

  52. David Colborne

    Let’s not forget – $300,000 (Aaron’s contributions, plus what the LPO spent to defend themselves) is enough to pay LP Inc.’s expenses for three months. The incessant letters for money and the various fees paid to romantically connected insiders don’t come from nowhere.

  53. George Phillies

    Columbo: Weston and crew are *defendants*. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the notion of litigation, but in law it only takes one to tango, namely the Burke etc crew sued Weston, etc. Weston, Wagner, etc. are spending money to defend themselves, money they might very well have been happy to spend on advancing the party if this suit had not taken place.

    Phillies: Note that LPOhio Bylaws seem to forbid the state party running up large debts namely
    lpo.org/images/pdf/LPO_Bylaws_Amended_08MAR14.pdf
    Bylaw 320.C
    C. The total non – mortgage debt for the Party may not exceed $5,000 at any one time, including interest and past salary obligations.
    but this seems to be a debt for $10,000. Perhaps I am misreading something; filing forms are sometimes misleading.

  54. George Phillies

    Also, I did not prop up the organization. My PAC assisted a successful private primary, which generated a substantial number of new candidates for the LP of Oregon.

  55. George Phillies

    David: Also, $300,000 is on the low side. My sources indicate the total defense costs were significantly larger. Also, in addition to the $100,000 disclosed as being from Starr, there was a substantial disclosed donation from Jim Lark and a larger undisclosed donation in kind from the National Committee.

  56. Steven Wilson

    I remember as an undergrad the first day we started studying profiles of dysfunctional relationships. The first few were of battered women: “Nobody loves me the way he does”. But then it went on into the environments in which they were born. It started to get real interesting when we got to workplace causation.

    No matter what we do to appear “normal”, if given time and the proper environment we can become our hidden agenda.

    Step one: Listen to the water ripple up against the porcelain after the final drops fall.

    Step two: wipe self.

    Step Three: flush Oregon

    LOL, it is too perfect. Americans complain about wasted government spending and we tell them to join the LP.

    The money spent on this lawsuit could’ve funded a US Senate campaign in most states. With that kind of money I could’ve facilitated at least a dozen media buy-ins for Kansas City/St Louis.

    The funniest part is that Starr will get a promotion for this. In Ohio, they will name an award after him. The Starr Allan Barr Trophy goes to…

  57. Kate O'Brien

    >Dumping someone from a relationship because they become physically unwell — if I am interpreting your remarks correctly — is a choice for which words fail me. I understand you did not do the dumping.<

    Actually George, I was the dumper and he was the dumpee. He was stepping out on my during my illness with at least 2 women I knew about (one of whom he hounded off the LNC after she dumped him, IIRC). I was NOT going to grow old with someone capable of treating me that way.

    All ancient history, and FWIW I am WAY past forgiveness and into gratitude. My life has improved mightily since then, in every possible way. Seriously.

    Irritates me to see all that $$ going to lawyers rather than successful Libertarian campaigns, though. Feh.

  58. Andy

    Questions:

    Why does Aaron Starr care so much about the law suit over who controls the LP of Oregon that he donates to the law suit?

    What has the faction that he has donated to their side of the law suit done to grown the Libertarian Party of Oregon?

  59. Andy

    I can think of far more useful ways to spend $100,000 if one is serious about promoting the cause of liberty.

  60. Chuck Moulton

    George Phillies wrote:

    Chuck: If you search through, you will find money from the same account going to the LNC to pay for memberships. Now, dollars are fungible, but it appeared to me that those memberships needed to have been paid for in part by that loan. I need to check my math on that.

    In expenditures I see membership payments on behalf of 393 members made to the LNC.

    http://www2.sos.state.oh.us/pls/cfqry/f?p=119:48:204463486835337::NO:RP:P48_REPORT_ID,P48_TYPE,P48_LISTTYPE:142944445,EXPEND,simple

    In contributions I see 91 contributors.

    http://www2.sos.state.oh.us/pls/cfqry/f?p=119:48:204463486835337::NO:RP:P48_REPORT_ID,P48_TYPE,P48_LISTTYPE:142944445,CONTRIBUTION,simple

    393 memberships x $25 = $9,825.
    Total contributions = $4,222.80.

    http://www2.sos.state.oh.us/pls/cfqry/f?p=119:44:204463486835337::NO::P44_RP_ID,P44_LISTTYPE:142944445,simple

    Something doesn’t add up.

  61. Marc Montoni

    Wait a minute. Here in Virginia we’re busting butt trying to sign up every last person we can, one at a time, but all we really have to do is raise a few thou and just pay for whoever we want to be a member and up our numbers that way?

  62. Wes Wagner

    It is a loan so Starr can have leverage on their delegation. In all likelihood he promised to forgive it if they play ball.

  63. George Phillies

    Look for loans. The money came from someplace, after all, and the loan entry can be found. However, the LNC according to the Ohio records appears to have taken money from a non-Federally-compliant PAC, as opposed to the Ohio Federal PAC.

  64. Mark Axinn

    Jill @6:55pm yesterday:

    Of course this is newsworthy and you are correct to report it on IPR.

    My comment went only to an individual’s right to spend his money as he determines, not to the propriety of your reporting it.

    My apologies if I implied anything improper by an IPR reporter. To the contrary, you guys are the best!

  65. Wes Wagner

    I will re-iterate that while an individual has the right to attempt to spend their money however they please, when the spending of that money is an attempt to devolve the LP into a plutocracy, principled individuals need to recognize that and act accordingly. Otherwise the LP will have no value for people who actually want to pursue a libertarian future.

  66. Mark Axinn

    Kate at 8:30 pm wrote:

    >Is he spending it on local elections? No; he is spending it on lawyers.

    Personally, I like people to spend money on lawyers, but I have a vested interest that profession.

  67. Bob Tiernan

    Kate said: “So we are actually looking at $200,000+ to pay for some ideological difference of opinion”

    .
    Far too many people have been assuming it’s all about ideological differences, and even about plain old personality differences (“You don’t like him; he doesn’t like you.”)

    .
    But it’s not that at all. Good libertarians have been fighting back against this creep since 1992. For the primeexample of what his kind is all about, one need only take a look at his nearly successful attempt in 1996 to get his faction elected to everything at the state convention by coming up with a bogus and extremely dishonest “definition” of membership expiration dates so as to exclude a large number of his opponents whose expiration dates extended to a date a few weeks after the convention. he did this despite 100 percent clear English regarding this in the LPO Constitution and Bylaws. He als hired private secutiy guards to “watch” us at that convention.

    .
    Bob Tiernan

  68. Kate O'Brien

    Private security guard?? Seriously? I find that flattering in a kinky sort of way.

    OTOH if his spending $100k resulting in a quadrupled paid LP membership or something of that magnitude it would be money well spent

  69. Dave Terry

    Wes Wagner wrote: “I will re-iterate that while an individual has the right to attempt to spend their money however they please, (BUT) when the spending of that money is an attempt to devolve the LP into a plutocracy, principled individuals need to recognize that and act accordingly”

    So, individuals have the right to spend their money however the please, EXCEPT when they spend it on something that Mr. Wagner disagrees with.

    “devolve the LP into a plutocracy”???

    LOL! In the political jargon and propaganda of Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany and the Communist International, western democratic states were referred to as plutocracies, with the implication being that a small number of extremely wealthy individuals were controlling the countries and holding them to ransom.

    For the Nazis, the term was often a code word for “the Jews”.

    How many honest libertarians REALLY want a party based on egalitarian mob psychology?

    .

  70. Gene Berkman

    I have stayed out of this, but I have my own problem with Aaron Starr.

    In 2003, Riverside County Libertarian Party began a reorganization which would have allowed Desert Area Libertarians, headed by Susan Marie Weber, to become a separate region, so that they could get the dues kick-back from the state. This had been done before in San Bernardino County, in which the northern part of the county became a separate region of the LPC.

    Aaron Starr, as state chair, said that in order to do this, the Riverside County Libertarian Party would have to be declared inactive, with a new region created also in Western Riverside County, and the country treasury split between the two groups.

    We had built up a county treasury to the point where we could start doing media ads and real campaigns. I opposed the idea of declaring RCLP inactive, but was outvoted. Then the people who outvoted me dropped out, RCLP was declared inactive, and I had to spend months reactivating RCLP.

    Just as we reactivated, the Libertarian Party of California adopted new by-laws in conformance with McCain-Feingold, which prohibited splitting up county organizations, so the whole re-organization that was done according to Mr Starr’s reading of the by-laws became obsolete anyway.

    We have spent most of the treasury supporting campaigns since then, and I am preparing to create an organization separate from the Libertarian Party of California so that this cannot happen to us again.

  71. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    In response to Dave Terry: Does anyone really believe the current Libertarian Party of Oregon would forget the current structure of their successful party, and willingly accept as their leaders a few disgruntled men who cost the party more than $200,000 in legal fees?

  72. Wes Wagner

    Given that we have more candidates than they have members of their club? Let me think about that….

  73. paulie

    Members of club = national LP dues paying members who live in Oregon, or specifically those who have paid dues to the Burke/Reeves faction in the last year?

  74. Wes Wagner

    paulie

    Those who have paid dues to Burke/Reeves or other alleged “life” members they “lost” in order to allegedly meet quorum in the high desert in 2013 .. who magically disappeared just in time so their tiny handful of people present would just barely be a quorum for them.

  75. Bob Tiernan

    Dave Terry: “How many honest libertarians REALLY want a party based on egalitarian mob psychology?”

    .
    Well, well. Look who’s here again. Hey Dave, I think it’s time for you to come out of the hideout, do a perp walk for the record, and then ask Wes what you can do to help the Libertarian Party of Oregon.

    ,
    Bob T

  76. Bob Tiernan

    Kate: “Private security guard?? Seriously? I find that flattering in a kinky sort of way.”

    .
    The Burke Gang never really were able to explain much about who paid for the guards. Not until some of the paper work was looked into. Even then it was like pulling teeth.

    We were told that the security guards were there for “ballot security”, yet they were not near the ballot box at any time. In the beginning they were outside in the lobby telling us how to stand in line. It came out later that one of the options the Burke Gang might have taken (in case the good guys were too unruly) was to declare the convention over due to to too much squabling and to then have the state committee (majority Burke people, – all of them in fact) serve for another year w/o re-election. When Burke’s party secretary went to the podiem to tell this to us, we all laughed. but it was serious just the same.

    Oh, by the way, serving on the state com at that time was Burke buddy Tom Marks, allegedly a fundraising expert. Not long afterwards he was arrested by the Feds and pleaded guilty to embezzling over a hundred grand, and served a year somewhere.

    .
    Bob T

  77. Michael H. Wilson

    Dave Terry do you even remember Burke’s efforts to keep Libertarians off the ballot in the ’90s or the poor way the book were managed? Are you even aware of why this was started?

  78. Wes Wagner

    MHW

    David Terry will back anyone who is willing to tolerate him enough to pretend to be his friend, regardless of what underlying political alliances that person has. Most of David Terry’s political positions are ones Burke has regularly sabotaged … but he is so desperate for anyone to treat him like a human being that he will glom onto anyone who shows him a mote of human consideration (even if it is faked).

    He is willing to do almost anything to not be quite so bitter and lonely, except act like a decent human being.

    Ethical people won’t bring themselves to being disingenuous enough to placate him … so he is sort of predestined to choose poorly when it comes to friends and allies. There is also the issue as to whether he can even bring anything of value to the table … his bitterness and animosity drives good people away – and he can’t even manage his affairs well enough to avoid bouncing a check to the fake organization he claims to hold in such high regard, and the payment of dues so sacrosanct.

    Whereas this proclaimed and accused egalitarian knows that egalitarianism is one of the three pillars of freedom, he also knows that there is no guarantee in equity of outcomes. People must have the liberty to decide to not deal or do business with you.

    I do not keep human pets and see no value in it. Some others in Oregon don’t share my wisdom in this matter.

    https://secure.sos.state.or.us/orestar/gotoPublicTransactionDetail.do?tranRsn=1704970

    Transaction ID : 1704970 Transaction Date : 03/21/2014
    Transaction Type : Other Disbursement Due Date : 04/15/2014 11:59:00 PM
    Transaction Sub Type : Miscellaneous Other Disbursement Filed Date : 04/21/2014 05:02:23 PM
    Payment Method : Electronic Funds Transfer Check :
    Amount : $50.00 Aggregate :
    Interest Rate : Repayment Schedule :
    Description : Bounced Check; Initial Assets Exam Letter Date : 04/22/2014

  79. Dave Terry

    Michael H. Wilson April 23, 2014 at 1:59 am

    Dave Terry do you even remember Burke’s efforts to keep Libertarians off the ballot in the ’90s or the poor way the book were managed? Are you even aware of why this was started?

    1. I was not a member of the LPO until around 2000, so all the information I have is subjective and circumstantial. .
    2. Although, GENERALLY, I would not support a candidate of another party over a Libertarian; I can certainly envision circumstances where and when a strongly libertarian member of another party would make the ‘pragmatically’ better candidate.

    3. I am not certain of your inference regarding “HOW” the ‘book’ were managed. I DO KNOW from personal experience that the majority of claims and accusations against Richard Burke have been based on personal animosity and ancient history.
    4. I am also aware of the fact that on ONE occasion, Burke had apologized for an error in judgement, and not being perfect myself, I am not going to get into your “rock chucking match”

  80. Michael H. Wilson

    Dave I seem to have a memory of you at the 1996 convention. Was that a nightmare of mine? And you may remember a convention in La Grande where the chair, Adam Mayer, got up and said something about no audit being conducted and I, who was on the audit committee, corrected him from the floor and said the books were in such bad shape no one could conduct an audit.

  81. Dave Terry

    Jill Pyeatt April 22, 2014 at 5:33 pm

    “Does anyone really believe the current Libertarian Party of Oregon would forget the current structure of their successful party, and willingly accept as their leaders a few disgruntled men who cost the party more than $200,000 in legal fees?”

    Jill, I’m beginning to wonder if your brain is wired backwards. You start with the conclusion and then judge the evidence accordingly.

    Disgruntled is a meek word for our feeling about Wagner/Vetanen & Co. I know you are familiar with the Oath Keepers and their slogan; “Not on Our Watch”.
    1. Well this theft of the state committee by Wagner occurred on our watch, and we will NOT surrender. A “plebiscite” is NOT an election.
    2. Your argument is as valid as saying that we should not pursue murderers because the COST is too great!
    3. It did NOT cost “the party” a dime. It defies common sense to conclude that those who bankrolled the Wagner Gang, would have donated $200,000 to the LPO.
    4. Contrary to your inference this is NOT a “cult of personality”. I, for one, do not relish a position on the State Committee, except as a last resort.

    BTW, can you DEFINE “the current Libertarian Party of Oregon” without reference to left-wing
    populist/egalitarian rhetoric that would make even Ralph Nader blush?

  82. Wes Wagner

    pleb·i·scite
    ?pleb??s?t/
    noun
    noun: plebiscite; plural noun: plebiscites

    1.
    the direct vote of all the members of an electorate on an important public question such as a change in the constitution.

    You are right… it is more important than an election.

  83. Dave Terry

    Dave I seem to have a memory of you at the 1996 convention. Was that a nightmare of mine?

    Having a Senior Moment Michael?

    According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_of_Oregon#History;
    Adam Mayer did not become chair until 1999. Your buddy Mr. Knight was chair, 1998-1999
    and a guy named Kristopher Barrett, whom I’ve never met was chair in 1996

    Further according to this site; “In 1996 former Chairperson Richard Burke led an attempt to impact the outcome of the race for Oregon’s first congressional district seat by not running a Libertarian candidate after the Libertarian candidate had been credited with throwing the previous race to the Democrat. Proponents of this strategy believed that as the proposed Libertarian nominee had not raised sufficient money or built a sufficient campaign organization to run a significant campaign, the Libertarian platform would be more effectively advanced by the Republican candidate who had spent time building a relationship with the Oregon Libertarian Party. Other Libertarians thought the strategy to be tantamount to a “sell out”, and an intense controversy ensued. The Libertarian candidate, Richard Johnson, narrowly won the nomination.

    THE INCUMBENT DEMOCRAT, Elizabeth Furse, WAS RE-ELECTED THAT FALL!

    And History repeats itself!.

  84. Wes Wagner

    Umm… why does it matter whether a democrat or a republican won? How does that make a difference?

  85. Dave Terry

    Mr. Wagner;
    You are dangerously close to crossing the line between protected speech and provocation.

    I take personal offense at your posting the incorrect document from the S.O.S’s office.

    I had no “returned checks” at any time in 2014. Also the “employer of record” is also incorrect.
    I have never worked for Home Depot in my life.

  86. Wes Wagner

    So, Mr. Terry — who is lying about that financial transaction? The person who had to swear a statement attesting to its accuracy under penalty of law who filed it, or you?

    For right now I see it as a public record that has been attested to by an agent of your organization.

    If you never worked at the home depot, why are your associates filing false statements?

  87. Dave Terry

    WW> Umm… why does it matter whether a democrat or a republican won? How does that make a difference?

    The very fact that you ask that question is CLEAR indication of what an ideological fanatic you are.

  88. Dave Terry

    If you never worked at the home depot, why are your associates filing false statements?

    Not sure. Perhaps it is because, unlike yourself, they are fallible and are subject to error?

  89. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    DT said: “Proponents of this strategy believed that as the proposed Libertarian nominee had not raised sufficient money or built a sufficient campaign organization to run a significant campaign, the Libertarian platform would be more effectively advanced by the Republican candidate who had spent time building a relationship with the Oregon Libertarian Party.””

    Very telling statement. One could surmise that the Republican Party is still cozy with some people in Oregon who call themselves Libertarians.

  90. Kate O'Brien

    Jill – this is ALL my fault.

    If only – when I found those emails that morning between Aaron and Lori (the ones dissing me in such nasty ways) and faxed them to his boss – if only I had removed the fax confirmation sheet that printed out when done.

    If only I had, he would not have found out before going in to work. If he had not found out, his boss would have gotten the faxes. If his boss had gotten the faxes, Aaron could have gotten fired. If he had gotten fired, he would not be able to give $100k+ to anybody.

    So: all my fault. Sorry guys.

  91. George Phillies

    If the statement is wrong about Home Depot, perhaps the filers should be aided in correcting it before it gets dragged into the ongoing legal disputes.

  92. paulie

    MHW

    David Terry will back anyone who is willing to tolerate him enough to pretend to be his friend, regardless of what underlying political alliances that person has. Most of David Terry’s political positions are ones Burke has regularly sabotaged … but he is so desperate for anyone to treat him like a human being that he will glom onto anyone who shows him a mote of human consideration (even if it is faked).

    He is willing to do almost anything to not be quite so bitter and lonely, except act like a decent human being.

    Ethical people won’t bring themselves to being disingenuous enough to placate him … so he is sort of predestined to choose poorly when it comes to friends and allies. There is also the issue as to whether he can even bring anything of value to the table … his bitterness and animosity drives good people away – and he can’t even manage his affairs well enough to avoid bouncing a check to the fake organization he claims to hold in such high regard, and the payment of dues so sacrosanct.

    Whereas this proclaimed and accused egalitarian knows that egalitarianism is one of the three pillars of freedom, he also knows that there is no guarantee in equity of outcomes. People must have the liberty to decide to not deal or do business with you.

    I do not keep human pets and see no value in it. Some others in Oregon don’t share my wisdom in this matter.

    https://secure.sos.state.or.us/orestar/gotoPublicTransactionDetail.do?tranRsn=1704970

    Transaction ID : 1704970 Transaction Date : 03/21/2014
    Transaction Type : Other Disbursement Due Date : 04/15/2014 11:59:00 PM
    Transaction Sub Type : Miscellaneous Other Disbursement Filed Date : 04/21/2014 05:02:23 PM
    Payment Method : Electronic Funds Transfer Check :
    Amount : $50.00 Aggregate :
    Interest Rate : Repayment Schedule :
    Description : Bounced Check; Initial Assets Exam Letter Date : 04/22/2014

    LOL….Sad but true…and perfectly explains the available evidence.

    DT: Ouch, that hurted!

  93. Bob Tiernan

    Dave Terry: “the majority of claims and accusations against Richard Burke have been based on personal animosity and ancient history.”

    .
    That’s what some people claim, but only if they were not there or ignore facts. To cite one example of something Burke did that created animosity on the part of newcomer witnesses to his antics or which reinforced views of those already onto his antics, there was his extremely aggressive effort to de-interpret valid LPO members off the membership list in order to guarantee that the majority of delegates at the 1996 convention would be those who were there to elect his slate. That despicable act was not a mere example of a “personality trait” that some people disliked, or something akin to borrowing your pen and not returning it.

    .
    As for whether or not “ancient history” should be ignored, it’s more like Burke remains the same as opposed to him becoming a decent person which could make us forget the “ancient history”. He’s the same now as he was then. That’s whay he’s still disliked a great deal.

    .
    B. Tiernan

  94. Bob Tiernan

    Dave Terry: [MW:] “Dave I seem to have a memory of you at the 1996 convention. Was that a nightmare of mine?”

    “Having a Senior Moment Michael? According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_of_Oregon#History;
    Adam Mayer did not become chair until 1999. ”

    .
    Hey Dave, go back and re-read the first two sentences of what Michael Wilson wrote. After the first sentence (which you quoted at the top here), he wrote: “And you may remember a convention in La Grande where the chair, Adam Mayer…” Did you see that? “And you may remember a [ A !!! ] convention in La Grande…” Clearly a different convention was being discussed in sentence two.

    .
    Who’s having the senior moment?

    .

    .

  95. Michael H. Wilson

    Dave wake up. I did not quote a date for the la Grande convention. I just said Adam was the chair. You don’t seem to get the idea that most of this is because of support for republicans and poor record keeping by your buddies among other problems.

  96. Bob Tiernan

    Dave Terry: “The Libertarian candidate, Richard Johnson, narrowly won the nomination. THE INCUMBENT DEMOCRAT, Elizabeth Furse, WAS RE-ELECTED THAT FALL! And History repeats itself!.”

    .
    I don’t know why you are confused. According to Burke, if there’s an LP candidate, the Dem wins. True or not, that’s how he approaches these matters, or at least he did back in the 90s and into the next decade. He thought he was threatening each major party by saying that if the Dems didn’t work with us, we would not run a candidate (so the Repub would win), and that if the Repub didn’t work with us, we WOULD run a candiate (so the Dem would win).

    .
    In 1996, at the initial nominating convention held in Wash County, Burke brought in a van load of Repubs who had so recently re-registered Libertarian that a last minute print out of eligible registered L’s was needed from the Elections Division in order to find their names. These people had already voted in their own Repub primary a few weeks earlier. I know because I talked with one of them afterwards and he calmly told me the strategy behind the None Of The Above votes they had just cast for LP nominee. Apparently, Burke had forgotten to tell them to not discuss this with us.

    .
    We, the good people of the LP, scheduled another convention for a 1st District nominating convention and worked on a large get-out-the-vote campaign. The result was that 91 registered Libs from the First District showing up – more than most or all STATE conventions ever had. We also had a number of other LP observers from the area, so the number of people in the room was quite large and exceeded the max number of people legalkly allowed in that room, although the management never noticed or cared.

    .
    Burke made the effort to get NOTA to win again, but in the end Johnson was nominated by a vote margin of approx 54 to 37 or about that. In the end the Dem won, just as the Burke crowd predicted (for whatever reasons they believed). Oh, and at the convention was the Repub nominee himself, invited by Burke.

    .
    Now, Dave, supporting such a strategy on NOTA is one thing, but to organize such a massive effort to obtain it was and is really uncalled for.

    .
    Bob T

  97. Kate O'Brien

    Yes. Sometimes I wonder what would have happened if I had been looking away or letting the cat out at the precise moment Angela’s email popped up? I had a very narrow window of about 5 seconds. Almost like the Goddess was whacking me upside the head, saying “hey!! wake up!!”

    Anyway, when I think about that and how chancey the whole thing was, my blood runs cold.

  98. Dave Terry

    Jill>: “Very telling statement. One could surmise that the Republican Party is still cozy with
    some people in Oregon who call themselves Libertarians.

    Are you unaware of the existence of the Republican Liberty Caucus or the thousands of Ron Paul Republicans?. It ISN’T coziness with
    the GOP, but with individual libertarian Republicans.

  99. Kate O'Brien

    two of my favorite consignment stores have shut their doors recently. Now THERE is something to get upset about and not move on from

  100. Columbo

    George, I understand that you would like to portray your friend Wes Wagner as an innocent little choir boy on his way home from practice with a bouquet of flowers for his mommy when he was ambushed with a lawsuit.

    Even though the bylaws of Oregon said they could only be amended by a convention, Wagner (in a video posted on the internet) admitted that he couldn’t get the vote he needed at convention to change the bylaws in the way he wanted. Instead he and his friends on the state board decided they could re-write new bylaws themselves without any help from those pesky convention delegates. Then Wagner submitted those new bylaws to the Secretary of State and falsely asserted that they had been properly adopted. He canceled the convention, eliminated the Judicial Committee, and is using the Democrat SOS to make himself king for life. So it’s hard to feel sorry for him getting sued.

  101. Columbo

    Just one more thing…

    As often as William Sparkman of Texas is mentioned as a potential funding source in the minutes of Wagner’s group, I think maybe he could be funding their side of the lawsuit. I find it much more plausible that Aaron Starr has $100k than that Jeff Weston has $200k.

  102. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Oh yeah, Columbo, we’ve all seen that video. It’s the one where Dave Terry threatens to assault Mark Ventanen–

  103. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    I have absolutely no problem understanding that Aaron had $100,000. He’s CFO of a company and doesn’t have a house or kids to spend money on. I’m sure he’s got lots of money, Columbo.

  104. Wes Wagner

    Our funding is public record. Sparkman is not involved. Our minutes discuss Sparkman funding candidates – which we have had conversations about, which is important because our State Committee cannot do it directly.

    We also have more candidates for public office than the other side has alleged members of their PAC.

  105. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    Whenever you can’t defend a person’s actions or statements, a cheap common tactic is to change the subject to:

    But he has a RIGHT to say whatever he wants!

    Or…

    But he has a RIGHT to spend his money however he wants!

    Or some such nonsense.

    Nonsense, because no one challenged the person’s RIGHT to say or do something, but rather, what he actually said or did.

    Hell, a person has a RIGHT to spend his money on the American Nazi Party if he so chooses. It would still make him vile. That’s the issue, his vileness. Not whether he has the RIGHT to be vile. Of course he does.

  106. Wes Wagner

    And what should we do with vile people in a society if we don’t want them being vile to us?

  107. Dave Terry

    NON COMPOS MENTIS wrote;
    “Hell, a person has a RIGHT to spend his money on the American Nazi Party if he so chooses. It would still make him vile. That’s the issue, his vileness. Not whether he has the RIGHT to be vile. Of course he does.”

    Clearly this idiot is unable to differentiate between supporting the American Nazi Party and supporting a faction of Libertarians who have been aggressed against by another faction of libertarians. Clearly the ONLY vile person in this dialogue is a party calling itself, ‘Root’s Teeth Are Awesome’.

  108. Bob Tiernan

    Dave Terry: “Clearly this idiot is unable to differentiate between supporting the American Nazi Party and supporting a faction of Libertarians who have been aggressed against by another faction of libertarians.”

    .
    Oh poor Burke faction. You’ve got it wrong, Davey. The Burke faction has been the aggressor for over twenty years, and like many aggressors, it has lost in the end. Are you still in the Bunker? You have three options that were available to the types in an earlier bunker (and on that side at least). Which will you choose? 1) Blow your brains out. 2) Sneak out and go to South America. 3) Join the good side like a rocket scientist would.

    .
    Bob T

  109. Joseph Buchman

    Did Arron never respond here?

    (I’ve been on the road in my RV and away from Internet access (including a few days in the desert northwest of Vegas and am just catching up with both reading and posting here.)

    I do recall asking Aaron about this directly some months ago. As I recall he said that while he had funded the Burke side initially, he was no longer involved.

    Aaron, you know my respect for your auditing skills and my disgust at the lack of transparency on the current LNC regarding Cloud(y) issues, but regarding the lack of transparency here regarding out of state funding of this series of lawsuits, well . . . If Dezi Arnez were alive today, and managing your campaign for Treasurer or any other LNC position, I think he’d say you. “Have some splainin to do!”

    Joe

    See: http://www.quotecounterquote.com/2011/05/lucy-you-got-some-splainin-to-do.html

    “Saying a person or entity “has some ‘splainin’ to do” is a humorous way of suggesting that they have done (or may have done) something stupid, hypocritical, illegal or otherwise embarrassing.”

  110. paulie

    I’m not sure how to search for his last comment by him (a search for Starr also brings up all the comments about him as well). He told me it was a long time ago and that he has not been reading IPR lately.

  111. Andy

    Question for Wes Wagner: Somebody told me that you apparently changed the way Libertarians vote for party officers in Oregon from having a traditional convention vote to having the votes take place via some kind of primary ballot that gets mailed out to every registered Libertarian voter in Oregon. Is this true, and if so, what is the reason for doing this?

  112. paulie

    It’s been explained in many past threads about Oregon. He believes that registered Libertarians are the true constituency and that having decisions made by conventions, dues paying or pledge signing members usurps the registered Libertarians’ natural ownership of the party.

  113. Wes Wagner

    Andy

    Consent of the governed. It is an inalienable right of living creatures that also cannot be morally usurped through bureaucracy.

  114. Andy

    “Wes Wagner April 28, 2014 at 8:37 am
    Andy

    Consent of the governed. It is an inalienable right of living creatures that also cannot be morally usurped through bureaucracy.”

    I’m not saying right, wrong, or indifferent here, but I’ve discussed this with Libertarians in other states who have said that they object to the use of tax payer funded primaries/elections to decide party candidates and officers, and that these things should be decided by dues paying members who take the time to show up at party conventions.

  115. Wes Wagner

    Andy

    Our primary is privately funded by donations. As far as some people having superiority complexes and believing themselves more entitled to govern other people through farcical ceremonies… I leave that to statists to defend.

  116. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Aaron showed up here when I posted some of the audit info. I remember that he replaced one photo that I used for him with another–which surprised me. He formatted the article a little differently, too, which also surprised me. We don’t usually alter each other’s articles, with the exceptions of fixing a typo or a swmall mistake.

  117. Dave Terry

    Wes appears to be caught between a rock and a syllogism.

    IF, “It is an inalienable right of living creatures that —- cannot be morally usurped through bureaucracy.

    And if Democrats, Republicans, Greens, Constitutionalists (et al) are “living creatures” they cannot be excluded from the Libertarian Primary without violating THEIR “inalienable rights”.

    When was it decided that participation in a party primary is an inalienable “right”; negating the inalienable right of freedom of association (by whatever definition determined by the group)

    The question still remains, WHO determines (and HOW) who are the rightful members of the Libertarian Party: members of the organization, OR BUREAUCRACY (Sec’y of State)?
    (see Constitution and By-laws)

  118. Wes Wagner

    It is a voluntary society composed of people who foreswear their allegiance to other parties by changing their registration and whether or not the society in its own self-determined anarchistic way accepts them. Libertarians self-determine who they are … there is no high libertarian court with David Terry sitting as chief magistrate to determine that.

  119. Pingback: LP Convention; delegate fight underway? | Independent Political Report

  120. paulie

    Aaron showed up here when I posted some of the audit info.

    Oh, that’s right. But other than that he has been off IPR for a while, unless he has a sock puppet account I do not know about, and I have not seen anything to suggest that he has ever posted unde any name other than his own.

Leave a Reply

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