Forward this email to a friend
 
IN THIS ISSUE:
  
 
 
 
 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
Click on the link below to donateand tell us what you want your donation used for in the comment section
 
 
 

Definition of incestuous 

1 : constituting or involving incest
2 : guilty of incest
3 : excessively or improperly intimate or exclusive
 
 
 
 
The Dark Money Story that Sooner Tea Party BrokeContinues to Have Legs
Collusion and Campaign Law Evasion Possible?
 
STP first linked House leadership to the dark money in a story that went out into HD 80 voter guide around the 12th of August. We published the first newsletter story on September the 4th, then reported the stampede to re fill their PAC coffers and sell House votes on September 8th, leading the AP writer Sean Murphy to inquire on the links between the dark money and House leadership. We shared the evidence and allegations which we had gathered for a follow up story on the 16th of September, most of the info found its way into the Associated Press story that came out on September 27th.
 
That AP story went national nearly overnight. The shame and embarrassment to House leadership was immense, Jon Echols was the only spokesperson claiming leadership had no responsibility or knowledge, while Charles McCall remained silent. Meanwhile one of the main characters in the scandal, Rep. Chris Kannaday, loudly proclaimed his part in the attacks.
 
Now one could swallow the lie that leadership knew nothing of the dark money attacks and be left with three possibilities:
 
A. House leadership is so inept and impotent that they were unaware of a major plan to oust Republican conservatives.
 
B. House leadership was seen as so impotent that Rep. Chris Kannaday and the donors that paid nearly $750,000.00 had no fear of punishment should the attacks be tracked back to them.
 
C. House leadership had actually blessed and supported the dark money attacks and is now lying about not knowing or being involved.
 
Personally, those that are connected realize that only C is credible, that House leadership was well aware and supportive if not actually involved. The donors that likely funded these attacks wouldn't have gone rogue without assurances that this would please House leadership.
 
However, this is appearing to have created a monster, Rep. Chris Kannaday has grown in power and stature claiming his leadership of the attacks. The donor class dug deep in their pockets, very deep, and they won, they eliminated a half dozen conservatives that were voting against tax increases. Kannaday won over around eight new converts, those candidates that he supported with the attack money targeting their conservative opponents. How significant will those eight supporters be?
 
Generally, a speaker candidate needs 30 House members in order to create a caucus that will dominate. With around 70 Republicans, 30 in one caucus, maybe 16 in the conservative caucus, the remainder being splintered into freshmen class, rural, and far left Republican caucuses, a 30 man caucus is massive.
 
Rep. Kannaday and Jon Echols pretty much put Charles McCall in the speaker chair, coupled with the McCall Prosperity PAC that was used. We wrote about the use of this dark money in the Speaker race back in February of 2016. The Prosperity PAC is run by one Frank Naifeh, filing agents are Carly Farris at JamesMartinCompany.com and Ashley Stuart. The PAC had been around awhile but it was dormant till the third quarter of 2015, about the time that Charles McCall was pushing his way to the Speaker chair. Notice that the one of the biggest contributors was the McCall family with $20,000 in this quarter alone. They gave to many of the same conservatives that were removed in the primary and runoff thanks to the dark money.
 
In the third quarter they shook down a lot of the lobbyists and donor class folks, spending the money on AH Strategies (Found Holland) and Ryan Martinez. You will see the owners of Central Liquor contributing, owned by the Naifeh family, same Naifeh that ran the PAC.
 
The first quarter of 2016, when we wrote the story of McCall's PAC buying votes for Speaker, they had focused on mainly RINO candidates. Second quarter of 2016 they continued milking medical and energy companies for donations and sent it to 18 mostly RINO House members. McCall was elected Speaker in May of this time frame, so a direct connection to purchasing the Speaker chair is evident. Of course Charles McCall wasn't getting any donations, he owned the PAC. The third quarter of 2016 saw the McCall family pump another $20,000 into the PAC, not quite half of what was collected that quarter. They gave to a handful of conservatives, mainly peace gestures, but mostly RINO candidates took the money. Fourth quarter 2016 saw the money spent on 24 candidates and Fount Holland's work. The donors were mostly from the medical field with a lot of small amounts coming from doctors, obviously large donations split up amount many candidates.
 
In 2017 the Prosperity PAC pretty much coasted, gathering in thousands of dollars from energy, doctors, firefighters, and lobbyists while spending a fraction of that on a couple of candidates. It was clear that they were filling their war chest for 2018. One of the expenditures was to Marathon PAC, which will be discussed later. By the second quarter of 2018, the last available filing, the Prosperity PAC seems to have done its work and was winding down with another large payment to the Marathon PAC.
 
Marathon PAC showed up on the Guardian system in 2016, perhaps a carry over from the old Ethics Commission reporting system. It was mostly inactive in 2016 and 2017, the same Carly Farris of James Martin Company was the filing agent, Matt Hinkle and Thomas Tillison Jr. were the officers. Echols and Kannaday along with a couple of other House members were the early donors and most likely the actual owners of the PAC. Money from lawyers poured in, both Kannaday and Echols are lawyers of course as well as the puppet masters over McCall, so this showed a shift of leadership money beginning to flow through Echols and Kannaday's hands after McCall had been elected and needed to distance himself from collecting bribes, uh, campaign donations....Kannaday was milking the attorneys with promises of rolling back the worker comp reforms we are told.
 
By the third quarter attorney money and other industry money was still coming in and expenditures went mostly to Fount Holland's companies.
 
The beginning of 2017 saw Marathon Pac raking in money, tens of thousands of dollars from firefighters, one of which challenged Mike Ritze and defeated him. In third quarter 2017 the firefighters pacs were once again churning tens of thousands of dollars into the Marathon Pac, no doubt saving up to take on Mike Ritze with their firefighter candidate. The fourth quarter saw once again tens of thousands of dollars pouring in from firefighter PACS and attorneys.
 
The first quarter 2018 saw tens of thousands of dollars coming in from doctors and medical companies. The second quarter 2018 showed a $5000.00 donation back to Prosperity PAC(owed by Charles McCall), perhaps that was forwarded on to the same Properity Alliance PAC that initially funded the Conservative Alliance PAC that did the spending with Trebor Worthem and Fount Holland or it could have gone to Ryan Martinez. Rep. Kevin McDugle also received a maxed out contribution. And is it a coincidence that they give McDugle $5000 and then give Prosperity PAC the same amount?
 
 
5/3/2018
MCDUGLE, KEVIN - KEVIN
MCDUGLE FOR OKLAHOMA 2018
ID: 8860
29521 E. 65TH ST. S., BROKEN
ARROW, OK 74014
Contribution to
Candidate
Committee
CONTRIBUTION TO
CANDIDATE COMMITTEE
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
 
 
PROSPERITY PAC
ID: 7604
PO BOX 54595, OKLAHOMA CITY,
OK 73154
Contribution to
PAC
CONTRIBUTION TO PAC
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
 
 
And there is more to this. Remember that the Prosperity PAC was pretty much dormant after gathering a lot of money in 2017 but not spending that much. So it was a surprise when they sent Ryan Martinez $5000.00 in the middle of June, were reimbursed by Marathon PAC the very next day. And Marathon PAC had maxed out with Ryan Martinez in early May. That could well be funneling money to evade campaign finance laws.
 
 
First, Marathon PAC's maxed out donation to Martinez
 
Prosperity PAC's donation to Martinez
Marathon PAC repaying Prosperity PAC for the donation to Martinez one day after Prosperity PAC donated
 
 
Another thing has become very, very, clear. The Charles McCall Speakership is threatened by a combination of the influx of new teacher caucus House members and by Rep. Chris Kannaday. Kannaday is the driving force behind the dark money, he has not only admitted that, he has bragged about it. Kannaday will walk in with eight new members that he helped in defeating the eight conservatives, they will owe Kannaday everything. Kannaday also has the support of donors that made nearly a quarter million dollars to one PAC alone, the Prosperity Alliance PAC, and Kannaday is the public face of that dark money attack. Kannady can easily brush McCall aside along with most of the other top leaders with the eight new members along with Josh West and Kevin McDugle's help.
 
The bottom line, you have hard connections between Marathon PAC, Prosperity PAC, Fount Holland and Trebor Worthem, the principles that have already admitted that they helped the dark money attacks against the conservatives, and Jon Echols, Chris Kannaday, Kevin McDugle, and Charles McCall. Their PACS are intertwined and incestuous. And we saw last week that while Hofmeister might be cleared in that old dark money scandal, the rest of the principles in those charges have not been cleared by OK county D.A. David Prater. Fount Holland might yet find himself in hot water.
 
 
 
 
 
New Sexual Harassment Scandal at the Capitol
Two of the House Leadership Team Might Lose Their Seats
 
Will House Leadership Whitewash Everything?
 
Back in January 2017 Rep. Dan Kirby was thrown under the bus in an effort orchestrated by others including another state rep named Randy Grau that was alleged to have actually had an affair with one of the “victims”. The other case against Kirby was a somewhat consensual relationship. Also dragged in was William Fourkiller, a Democrat, was also accused of making someone uncomfortable, he denied the accusations, and accepted sanctions. Kirby was forced to resign pretty much. Kirby of course was pretty much conservative, House leadership needed someone to throw under the bus and Kirby was their boy.
 
So it is going to be interesting how House leadership treats two of their own leadership team members once two or more sexual harassment cases are filed. Especially with an election coming up and anyone bashing women for coming forward isn't going to endear themselves with half of the voting population. In order to protect the women involved we aren't going to run with the full story but we do need to get people talking about the issue. It seems there is another woman that was also sexually harassed by one of the two perverts and she isn't aware of the other victims.
 
It is said that women feel dirty when a pervert sexually harasses them and are reluctant to come forward due to the stigma. I can see that and understand it, why did the pervert pick on them in particular? One answer is that some men are just not in control of themselves and when the little head starts thinking the big head starts rationalizing and fantasizing and they pick on the easiest targets, especially ones that they think are approachable. . Perhaps this other woman will come forward once she knows she isn't the only one victimized.
 
Last time House leadership tried to bury the scandal including the payout to the woman that filed the complaint. With the lawyer's fees, it was around $75,000 in payouts for that one case.
 
And the Kavanaugh case, well this is night and day. Full details, squeaky clean victims, normal people that will take a risk in stepping forward. Which is why dirt bags like this continue to target women in the workplace, because so many get away with it.
 
Hopefully not this time.
 
Hopefully House Leadership will cut out the cancer to save themselves and what is left of the Republican reputation at the Capitol.
 
 
 
 
 
Bully Candidate Threatening Lawsuit
over Billboard Wins...then Loses
 
 
Sequoyah County has a long history of being ran by a few families with a penchant for violence and thuggery and any dissent was harshly squashed. The local governments and judicial system was horrendously corrupt as one would expect in such an environment. Change began in 2010 with the election of John Bennett, the first state representative ever elected in that district, then a decent man was elected sheriff a few years later.
 
But the ruling families have fought hard to roll back the transparency and those that dared challenged them. In the 2016 House district race the Democratic candidate Tom Stites, one of the oldest sons of one of the ruling families, spent around $300,000 in the election. Hoping to win a job that paid $35,000....
 
This time around the same candidate is running for the same office, squared off against a local pastor. The worst that they have been able to say is that the pastor is a bible thumper and a Yankee.... still, after moving there thirty years ago....
 
Meanwhile, Stites has been embroiled in controversy over embellishments of his military record and veteran status or lack of same actually despite Stites claiming veteran status. To try to get the campaign out of defense mode Stites challenged his Republican opponent to a shooting match, as if that would prove anything, while touting his support by the NRA. Then the NRA endorsed Jim Olsen, the Republican candidate. Below is the press release to that effect:
 
NRA and Oklahoma Second Amendment Association Endorse Candidate Jim Olsen as the Gun Rights Advocate for Oklahoma State Rep, District 2
 
Roland, OK— Both of the preeminent gun rights advocacy organizations in the nation published their findings that Republican Jim Olsen is the gun rights advocate on the November 6 ballot for the open Oklahoma State House District 2 seat. In spite of the recent attempt by Democrat nominee Stites to mask his agenda with an offer of a gun shooting show, the NRA released a big question mark on how Stites would actually vote if he was given the opportunity in the state legislature to uphold or deny our constitutional right. The ‘?’ rating is defined by the NRA on the www.nrapvf.org website: “A rating of ‘?’ often indicates indifference, if not outright hostility, to gun owners' and sportsmen's rights.”
 
Oklahoma Second Amendment Association issued a less than impressive ‘C’ rating to the Democrat nominee Stites. Don Spencer, President of the Oklahoma Second Amendment Association said, “Mr. Stites received a ‘C’ rating from his OK2A Candidate Survey while Mr. Jim Olsen received an ‘A’ and our endorsement. Jim Olsen was an easy endorsement to make. The survey is not based on how many guns a candidate has, or how good a marksman, but on whether they will defend liberty.”
 
 
While Olsen could have shown his own Oklahoma handgun license, guns, and shooting skills in response to the recent comical effort by Mr. Stites, Jim Olsen recognizes that the freedom and liberty to exercise the 2nd Amendment is a serious issue. Olsen instead followed the appropriate action of sharing his beliefs and awaiting leading experts in Constitutional gun rights advocacy to review the qualifications and convictions of the two candidates to determine who would better champion the Constitutional rights of the people to “keep and bear arms.”
 
Jim Olsen is thankful for the thorough review, and the endorsements and top grades awarded to him by both the NRA and OK2A. “I firmly believe the creation of the Second Amendment was clear and I will follow the path the Founders intended: the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. Just as with all constitutional rights, my constituents can be assured that I will champion the Second Amendment in my legislative actions,” Olsen said.
The general election for the open Oklahoma State House District 2 seat will be held on November 6, 2018.
 
Meanwhile, the local county GOP put up a billboard showing Stites with Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, and Obama. Well, they are Democrats and they will support and endorse their only candidate, pretty much what folks would expect. But Stites was enraged and had his lawyer/campaign manager send the following letter to the billboard company:
 
 
They actually had point one right, there was no disclaimer showing who paid for the ad. This was the billboard company's fault as they were well aware of the requirement and their fault for not adding that info.
 
Point 2to was laughable. Stites is a Democrat, the only candidate in the race, the state Democrat Party supports Stites, and the Democrat leaders support the State Democratic Party. If you don't want to be seen as supporting them and them supporting you, run as an Independent or Republican. These are facts, if they are defamatory then they are self induced. Anyway, it is nearly impossible to prove defamation or libel against a public person and politicians are the least protected.
 
Points3 and 4 are outright lies. The statutes quoted refer to “business” use of another's identity, not political. Nearly all campaigns use the opponents likeness in attack ads and no one needs permission. This lawyer is either an idiot or doesn't mind lying.
 
Point 5 is equally ridiculous. Copyright laws include fair use of the copyrighted product including the use of a politician's head shots and other campaign pictures.
 
The billboard company did remove the billboard so they could add the required disclaimer stating who paid for the ad. And Stites celebrated his “victory”.
 
But the bill board is going back up on Monday with the required disclaimer and no doubt that Stites is going to burst another vein.
 
 
 
THE RACE FOR GOVERNOR
PART 2 THE LIBERTARIAN CANDIDATE
THE WATCHMAN
 
Never before has the establishment politicians and their friends had it so good. They control the invitations to debates and the news media. Because of the control they feel it’s unimportant to invite the Libertarian candidate and one Democratic candidate makes jokes about him during a debate. This is tangible proof that we no longer have an unbiased news organization in this country. He and his supporters were just outside.
 
We started by going to his campaign web site here. Like most politicians today, he has failed to state which party he is running for. We went to his issues page and found several issues that most Oklahomans will agree with and some that most Oklahomans will not agree with. We feel that most Oklahomans would agree with his stance on Education, State Budget, Tax Incentives and his stance on Family Law and Child welfare.
 
We feel most Oklahomans would not agree with his stance on Criminal Justice reform and the second Amendment. We feel Oklahomans have had enough soft on crime legislation. We also feel that there are to many restrictions on the second Amendment as it is.
 
We didn’t use his candidate profile from the site as it is kind of weak. We found this article from the OklahomaWatch.org. We’ll quote the article and him with this “No other Libertarian is as experienced and prepared to take on the establishment party candidates. I am ready to take Oklahoma in a new direction towards liberty. “We fail to see how adding restrictions to rights under the second Amendment is leading us in a new direction towards liberty.
 
He aims to appeal to the same anti-establishment voters that helped sweep President Trump into office. It’s a good strategy however he fails to get the financial support necessary to do so. He can thank the Oklahoma State Chamber of Commerce for that.
 
We next found this article on Wikipedia. As the former Chair of the Oklahoma Libertarian Party we expected to find a history of the activity. If you will open the link you will find that he has basically no profile on Wikipedia.
 
We were surprised when we found this this article from Ballotpedia. It covers the race for the nomination for the Office of Governor. We were disappointed, but not surprised, when the gave a percentage of votes earned for the establishment political party’s but not for the Libertarian Party. This is evidence of how much control the establishment parties have over the process.
 
The next article we found was a disappointment. We will give Fox News the credit for being the only establishment news channel to report on Mr. Powell’s victory. It could have gone into more detail but didn’t. It’s a mark of disgrace to the rest of the lame stream media.
 
The next article of interest we found was concerning. All of the candidates acknowledge that things need to change in Oklahoma. None of them, and this was before the primary, recognized the one simple fact that effects Oklahoma’s economy and lack of jobs. That is the simple lack of diversity in the market. That lack of diversity is the major reason that most of our children move out of state after the finish their education.
There is a second factor that keeps the state from diversifying. That factor is the extensive Turnpike system in Oklahoma. It drains the middle class and poor of money coming straight out of their pockets. It also has the most Turnpike miles of any state in the union. Large companies ask themselves if it’s worth the price of doing business in the state because of the Turnpikes.
 
The next article we found was this page on issues. We urge people to open tis link and compare it to his campaign web site issues page we wrote about earlier in this report. There are many vague answers and there are also answers that most Oklahoman’s don’t agree with.
 
We next went to www.votesmart.org to see what information they had on him. We started with the
biography page here. This is where we stopped as well. This is the only information they had available on Mr. Powell.
 
 
 
In closing all we can say is that there is enough information here that people should look into. We will not endorse a candidate, but we do believe that the lame stream media should report on all candidates fairly. The lack of financial means of this candidate should have been better with fair and equal reporting on him.