Category Archives: Caucus System

The man that retired Utah GOP debt: David Bateman Exposes “Buckshot Caucus” Lies

Who is Dave Bateman? What is the Buckshot Caucus?  Why is Bateman being extorted?

Here’s Dave Bateman, CEO of the Year, Entrata, property management software entrepeneur, the man that retired the Utah Republican Party’s debt.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here are some Facebook Live videos you need to watch before tonight’s caucus:

David Bateman responds to Daryl Acumen, CMV and Buckshot Caucus

David Bateman exposes Daryl Acumen and the Buckshot Caucus’ lies and extortion.  #StoptheBS

 

Dave Bateman is the man that retired the $400,000 debt the Utah Republican Party owed in its defense of its First Amendment right to freely associate.

A few have called for Party leaders to quit and to give in, citing so much debt.

But Dave paid it. So why do they continue to complain?

Because along with paying the debt, he is nearly single-handedly saving Utah’s caucus, which the Establishment hoped to destroy. With help from some of the best grassroots conservatives in the field the general public is now becoming aware that something is terribly wrong in high places.

The Establishment and its accomplice – Big Media – lie. They call it “Count My Vote,” but they actually want to take away your voice in the process.

So Dave stepped forward and launched the counter initiative – The Freedom of Association Initiative under the banner of the Keep My Voice campaign.

For more information and to get involved, go to Keep My Voice

Most of all, Dave Bateman is courageous enough to expose the corruption he has encountered in the process. He dropped the first of several bombshells last night.

As a result, he has now become the latest target.

 

From Defending Utah

Establishment v Grassroots face off in today’s caucus. Are you ready?

Before you attend the Caucus Night Tuesday, March 20, 2018, be aware a war is going on between the grassroots and the establishment.  Know what it’s about.   Breitbart picked up on this story the morning of Utah’s caucus.

This battle is between the big government, globalist establishment and the Utah grassroots and it has gotten ugly, just like the establishment that sought to destroy Judge Roy Moore in Alabama.

READ MORE

If you have received an email from Daryl Acumen (real last name is BRADSHAW), be aware he is a PAID contractor for “Count My Vote,” the Establishment initiative seeking to eliminate the caucus system and to go to a direct primary, the system other states use that do not share Utah’s values, such as California and Connecticut.

Acumen’s Facebook and email posts are considered volatile, vile, vicious and vulgar.  I have deliberately stayed away from engaging with his bullying tactics.

Also know that Acumen is lying and twisting the truth.  His latest action is to launch a vicious personal attack on the people that represent the 74% of Republicans that support a caucus system and the man that stepped forward to retire the legal and operational Party debt, Dave Bateman.

Acumen and the pro-CMV “Buckshot Caucus” have recently resorted to extortion.  Utah Senator Todd Weiler has arrogantly admitted to offering $1 million for a woman to fabricate a sexual harassment lie against Bateman.  Heads are going to roll.  Who asked a Utah Judge to open a marriage dissolution case that had been sealed?  And which Judge did it?  That is ILLEGAL!

Who is the “Gang of 51?”

Please watch the video that shows a sampling of these grassroots people he has viciously branded “Gang of 51” and  understand that CMV is trying to dupe you into thinking these are extremists and “bad” characters.

<iframe width=”560″ height=”315″ src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/-P0iauV7yhQ” frameborder=”0″ allow=”autoplay; encrypted-media” allowfullscreen></iframe>

CMV’s goal is to weaken your voice and the voices of your neighbors and friends that become engaged in learning more about the candidates through legislation SB 54 and now the elimination of the caucus altogether.

Senator Curt Bramble and Representative Mike McKell sponsored this unconstitutional legislation that interferes in the party’s business by manipulating how candidates are elected to favor incumbents such as themselves.

The Party has engaged in a lawsuit to remedy this unconstitutional action.  And it will win at the US Supreme Court where Justice Scalia spoke strongly in favor of a political party’s right to freely assemble without legislative intrusion.

READ HERE

Justice Scalia in the U.S. Supreme Court decision on California Democratic Party vs. Jones stated:

“In no area is the political association’s right to exclude more important than in its candidate-selection process. That process often determines the party’s positions on significant public policy issues, and it is the nominee who is the party’s ambassador charged with winning the general electorate over to its views. The First Amendment reserves a special place, and accords a special protection, for that process…because the moment of choosing the party’s nominee is the crucial juncture at which the appeal to common principles may be translated into concerted action, and hence to political power… .”

CMV allows a candidate to bypass the convention of neighborhood-elected delegates and to petition on to the ballot.  It doesn’t matter what delegates may think or want, it throws that decision to voters that may not have had time to study out the issues or the candidates, but merely see a flashy commercial on TV.

The Predictable Results of the Dual Path: Undermine Real Republicans and the Platform

This dual path was tested in a special election with results that the grassroots predicted.  The result was what conservatives predicted.  The winner was the former Democratic Party Vice Chairman John Curtis, who ran as a Republican, did poorly among the delegates that had vetted the candidates.  But because of SB 54, he was able to move forward to a forced primary where he defeated the long-time favorite among delegates and conservatives, Chris Herrod.

Herrod has a strong conservative voting record in the state legislature  anti-illegal immigration champion and author of The Forgotten Immigrant, Chris Herrod.  The Establishment in Utah has the media in its corner because media make money when candidates must spend thousands and millions in a primary election.

Utah’s establishment is strongly pro-amnesty.  The sponsor of SB 54, Senator Curt Bramble, has also sponsored several pro-amnesty bills turning Utah into a sanctuary state.

My family of origin has long been conservative grassroots.  My brother, well known in Provo, has demonstrated this love of America first on all he has done in that community.

This is the battle Utah faces.  Tonight caucus attendees will decide, based on which voices they believe – the voices of the Establishment bought by Big Media, or the voices of the grassroots who support the Republican Party platform and want to hold candidates accountable to it.

I am proud to be on the list he has branded “Gang of 51.”   I am honored to know the respectable people with whom I have worked to keep the caucus system strong.  We have long fought for the Republican Platform of fiscal and social responsibility.  We have long-standing records supporting “America First” ideals, best represented by Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump.

The grassroots favors the caucus because it allows people that don’t have fame or fortune to remove bad incumbents.  Our hero is David Bateman, CEO of Entrata, a software company that provides CRM services for property management.  When the party Chairman Rob Anderson refused to retire the debt, suggesting the best way to retire would be bankruptcy, Bateman stepped up to the plate to rescue the Utah Republican Party and retire its $400,000 legal and operational debt.

Pro-CMV Rob Anderson never publicly thanked Bateman.  Instead he has allowed Acumen to launch vicious personal attacks and lies against Bateman.

 

 

Count My Vote’s Daryl Acumen: The face behind the mask and spam emails you have received

This article appeared in the Utah Standard News.  It’s worth reading before you go to the Utah caucus.  Please share.

Daryl Acumen: The Face Behind the Mask

More About Count My Vote v Keep My Voice – It’s gotten ugly.

The Count My Vote (CMV) initiative seeks to eliminate the caucus system altogether and go to a direct primary.  The grassroots conservatives have responded with their own counter initiative “Keep My Voice” – formally titled The Freedom of Association Initiative.

Acumen has illegally used email lists to spam the inboxes of 51 conservatives with these lies, mass emailing for Count My Vote attacking our character.  In my case, these jammed up my email account that I use to communicate official party business in preparation for the caucus to the extent I was not able to use it any more.

He falsely claims that we have broken the law and will go to jail over a bylaw change that was necessary to fulfill the recommendation of Judge Nuffer, who said the Party had a constitutional case if it defined membership.  The lawsuit is in the 10th Circuit Court and the establishment hoped to end it, until Bateman retired the debt.

There has been no public thanks from the current Party Chairman Rob Anderson.  He is solidly with Count My Vote and wants to end the caucus convention process.

Daryl Acumen, whose last name is actually Bradshaw, has spun this issue wildly out of control and is lying.  He posted and shared a video that was dramatically edited and distributed parts of it publicly when it was an executive session called by the chairman.

One such communication called long time respected conservatives “a-holes” (spelled out).  I sat in a meeting in which he exploded at the committee members, shouting uncontrollably.  I had barely had any communication with him when he attacked me and shouted at me in a private conversation.  We have noted that he has an unstable background and a personal vendetta.  Unlike conservative Republicans, he subscribes to identity politics, now falsely accusing me and others of racism.

He has sought to brand the stalwart, respected conservatives in the Party as “far right extremists” just as the establishment did when Ronald Reagan ran for President.

Chris Herrod is the Ronald Reagan of the 3rd Congressional Race

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865684771/Op-ed-Chris-Herrod-is-the-Ronald-Reagan-in-the-3rd-Congressional-District-Race.html

This opinion editorial was published in Utah’s largest paper, the Deseret News, July 15, 2017.  Editor’s Note:  July 15, 2017 marks the 23rd anniversary of my mother Dorothy Bacon’s passing.  She was a great American and an ardent supporter of Ronald Reagan in California and the principles for which he stood when she moved back to her native state Utah.  

She and my father, Samuel Kenneth Bacon, a urologist, encouraged him to run for public office and helped arrange for his landmark speech delivered to the California Medical Association on the dangers of socialized medicine, known as Medicare/Medicaid.  The day it passed in 1965, he warned, “This is the first day of the end of quality delivery of medicine in America.”  His words were prophetic.  

Today Establishment Republicans are chastising the few remaining faithful Republicans that believe Reagan’s warning.  

I want my party back.  It’s being hijacked by leftists who identify as libertarians and globalists, working both sides of the aisle, while masquerading as Republicans.  A true Republican believes as Reagan did:  “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are:  ‘I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.'”  

Whatever happened to limited government, free enterprise and the principles of state and national sovereignty, the US Constitution and Bill of Rights?  

I’m taking “my” party back and I hope you will join me.  

This piece is dedicated to my courageous parents.  We have personally known the Herrod family, Dr. Niles and Janet Herrod for many years. There could not be a finer family and home in which Chris Herrod was raised. I also wish to thank the Deseret News for publishing this opinion on that special date.     

Forty years ago Ronald Reagan was recruited to defend conservative values as a presidential candidate. According to rank-and-file media and the GOP establishment, Reagan was the candidate to fear, an “extremist,” dangerous to America.

As with Donald Trump today, Reagan seized upon trigger issues: the economy, jobs, the sell-out of America’s workers, within a growing nationalistic environment.

But the time was right. Voters had suffered from high inflation at home and America had been embarrassed abroad. They were ready for Reagan’s traditional Western-civilization message, while the establishment dismissed him as too old and too conservative to win.

Sound familiar? Some “Never Trumpers” are still reeling from Trump’s win and raising their voices in the midterms, where two special elections are being held. One is in Utah’s 3rd Congressional District, replacing Congressman Jason Chaffetz. The other is to replace Sen. Jeff Sessions in Alabama. Evidence shows that Indivisible.org, an organization with ties to liberal-globalist George Soros funding, is on the ground working in both races to defeat the conservative choice.

In Utah, these town hall protesters have posted on Facebook, urging their supporters to gather signatures and switch party affiliation to vote Republican. Their goal is to elect the current Provo mayor — a former registered Democrat.

The candidate with the most Reaganesque message, and the experienced record to prove it, is former Utah Rep. Chris Herrod. According to the liberal mindset, he is the one to be “feared.” While in the Legislature his overall score card, based on a constitutional, fiscally conservative score, was 80 percent.

In 2016, Herrod served as the Ted Cruz state chairman, the candidate who cleared the Utah presidential preference vote by a whopping 51-point lead. However, when Trump was nominated, Herrod became one of his strongest supporters and traveled with a team of speakers to help Trump win Utah with an 18-point lead over Clinton. Sen. Cruz recently endorsed Herrod.

Meanwhile, through 2015, Provo’s mayor continued to support Democratic candidates, including Salt Lake’s liberal mayor Ralph Becker. In 2016, he confessed to writing in a friend’s name instead of voting for the Republican nominee.

While Rep. Herrod built a trusted record voting consistently to lower taxes, the mayor supported raising taxes under a creative label “utility fees,” doubling the revenue, while citizens were unaware.

While Herrod defended America First law enforcement policies for strong and safe borders, the Provo mayor placed weak leaders in local law enforcement. It was actually his own hand-picked police chief who recently resigned over allegations of sexual assault.

Finally, Herrod has voted consistently to support the U.S. Constitution as the sovereign rule of law. Meanwhile, the mayor instituted globalist “sustainable” policies that align with the Paris Accord. Through the mayor’s “Vision 2030” initiative, Provo is now mirroring the very policies President Trump has courageously abandoned because they harm American business and prosperity.

Around July 25, ballots will be mailed. Citizens concerned for their children’s future prosperity should strongly consider voting for the trusted, experienced candidate in this race most aligned with Reagan’s conservative policies: Chris Herrod for Congress.

In 2011, the Deseret News and Salt Lake Tribune editorial boards named Cherilyn Bacon Eagar Wasatch Woman of the Year — Community Service as the first Utah Republican woman to run for the U.S. Senate and for her service raising funds for philanthropic causes.  She serves on the national Phyllis Schlafly Eagles Board of Governors, was elected three times to the Utah Republican Party State Central Committee and was elected as a 2016 Utah presidential elector.

Go to Chris Herrod’s website to donate or get involved:  www.HerrodforCongress.com

 

Caution Utah 3rd Congressional District: The Republican Platform is still worth voting for

The Republican Platform is worth voting for, and the voters deserve a candidate that not only says he believes in it, but has the record to prove it.  If you live in the 3rd Congressional District, you may have received your mail-in ballot already to select your first choice to replace Congressman Jason Chaffetz, who vacated it to take a position at Fox News.

Before you send that ballot in, I hope you will review this research and that it will be useful in helping you make a wise decision.  It is well-cited and as accurate as possible.

In spite of the frustrations toward the two major parties, they are still the two parties through which we can best influence the outcome.  If you have been disappointed that some candidates that call themselves Republican have not been true to their promises after elected, you deserve a candidate that can be trusted.

Many who know Chris Herrod know he is that trusted candidate.  They have watched him while serving in the Republican Party’s highest deliberative body, standing fearlessly against the Establishment and for the people’s right to have a voice in the process.  He has supported legislation to put this country, its workers and families first.  I am among those that have watched him and supported him.  I can describe him with two adjectives:  passionate and courageous.

Unfortunately, one candidate running against Herrod has a record showing he does not believe in Republican principles.  He is the former Provo Mayor.  After reviewing this information, please ask yourself:  Do the people of Utah’s 3rd Congressional District who believe in Republican principles deserve this kind or representation in Washington DC?  

This sums it up.

Please help us take our party and platform back.  Vote for a Republican who has walked the walk for its principles.  Chris Herrod.  Donate and get involved now!  www.HerrodforCongress.com 

19 reasons why John Curtis should not be running as a Republican and why he should not get your vote:

Affiliation with the Democratic Party

Backed by Far-Leftist Groups

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

Covering Up a Sex Assault after a Questionable Hiring

Economic Development Failures

Illegal/Unethical Use of City Resources

Intimidation Tactics

iProvo

Parking: Convention Center and Downtown

Parking: Neighborhoods

Property Taxes

Proposition One

RAP Tax

Spending Increases

Tax Increases

Transparency

Utah Transit Authority (UTA)

Utility Fee Increases

Zoning Enforcement

1. Affiliation with the Democratic Party

John Curtis was Unaffiliated for a long time, then he registered Democrat in 1998: http://imgur.com/a/K6dUV

John Curtis ran for state senate against Curt Bramble in 2000. Here was his website that year: http://imgur.com/a/RIpOa

John Curtis lost in a landslide to Bramble, but he stayed active in the Democratic Party and was elected Utah County Democratic Party Chairman for one term in 2002: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/975560/Utah-County-Democrats-pick-a-chief.html

In 2007, Jeff Alexander resigned his seat in the legislature. John Curtis went in to the county clerk and switched his affiliation to Republican. He ran against several other candidates, and the Republican delegates gave him a one-vote victory over Chris Herrod, but at that time the state party chair got to make the final choice, and Chairwoman Enid Greene chose Chris Herrod: http://archive.sltrib.com/story.php?ref=/news/ci_8375983

Curtis then ran for Mayor in 2009, but of course that’s a non-partisan race. He won, and then won reelection in 2013.

Nevertheless, Curtis continues to keep close ties to Utah Democrats. He donated to far-left liberal Ralph Becker’s reelection campaign in 2015: http://imgur.com/a/SddvD

According to Aimee Winder Newton, Curtis also donated to the campaign on her Democratic opponent, Dan Snarr, in 2014. However, I do not have access to an original source to back up that claim (though it is highly likely to be true because Snarr is Curtis’s brother-in-law).

2. Backed by Far-Leftist Groups

John Curtis is backed by several far-left groups and individuals. These people are encouraging Democrats to register as Republicans in order to vote in the Republican primary for John Curtis. Here is a small sampling of how these liberal groups are campaigning for John Curtis: http://imgur.com/a/3R8Wn

3. Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

John Curtis is the biggest proponent there is of the controversial $150 million Bus Rapid Transit project. This video explains some of the problems with the BRT project: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qFIZNHW-fg

He once said, “We want bus rapid transit, we want it to move forward.” Source: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865598005/Provo-City-Council-pushes-to-advance-bus-rapid-transit.html

Even though citizens successfully collected the required number of signatures for a referendum on BRT, Curtis blocked the proposal from going onto the ballot: http://www.sltrib.com/home/3991954-155/provo-orem-petitioners-push-forward-on

Even the Salt Lake Tribune, which seemingly supports BRT, said he should let the project be put on the ballot: http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/3978974-155/let-them-drive

Ten BRT facts:

  1. The Provo-Orem Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system is a $150 million transit project that will replace UTA’s already existing 830 bus route.
  2. This particular 10.5-mile long route was chosen because it is the only one that qualifies for federal funding, and without those funds the project will not move forward. Even proponents of the project agree that the proposed route was not chosen because it was the best route. Rather, the proposed route was chosen because it qualifies for federal funds.
  3. Funding for the Provo-Orem BRT construction project will come from several different sources. President Obama and UTA have proposed that $75 million come from the federal government, $65 million from Utah County, and $10 million from the cities of Provo and Orem.
  4. The Provo-Orem BRT project will cost approximately $14.3 million per mile to build.
  5. The Provo-Orem BRT road construction project will require the tearing out of two (and in some cases more) lanes of traffic so that bus-only lanes (called “dedicated lanes”) and loading stations can be constructed down the middle of the roads along the BRT route. This construction will occur on major thoroughfares throughout Orem and Provo, including University Parkway, University Avenue, and Provo’s 900 East.
  6. No left turns will be permitted along the Provo-Orem BRT route except at certain traffic lights.
  7. Rather than resolve traffic problems, the Provo-Orem BRT project will create additional traffic problems. Traffic along the construction route will result in more congestion, greater frustration for motorists, longer travel times, and more pollution.
  8. Lanes for car, truck, and bus traffic will be much narrower in areas where dedicated Provo-Orem BRT lanes are installed. Some lanes will be eliminated. Skinnier lanes will also make for more difficult transit for emergency and other larger vehicles.
  9. The Provo-Orem BRT project threatens to divert critical funding from other much-needed road construction and maintenance projects throughout Utah County. (John Curtis’s solution: just raise taxes! That’s why he supported Proposition One.)
  10. The buses running along UTA’s already existing 830 route, which will be replaced by the Provo-Orem BRT system, are running at only a tiny fraction of their capacity: an average of 3,600 daily riders. UTA claims that number will jump to 12,900 riders per day once BRT is built. It is difficult to validate UTA’s claim that ridership will increase simply by adding more buses, exclusive bus-only lanes, and spending $150 million to do so. There is no justification for UTA’s claim that “If you build it, they will come”—especially in light of the low ridership numbers that currently exist along the route.

4. Covering Up a Sex Assault after a Questionable Hiring

Utah’s media has covered this story rather extensively, but there’s a line (bolded below) from this KSL article that juxtaposes the statement Curtis made when the story first broke with differing information that came out a little while later. Here is the article: https://www.ksl.com/?sid=44476085&nid=148

Newly released police records shed light on sexual assault allegations against Provo’s former police chief that forced him to resign in March.

John King said he had consensual sex four times with a volunteer at his department, according to Unified police documents released Tuesday.

The woman reporting a series of assaults by King said otherwise in interviews with investigators. …

… “(The woman) walked into the Utah County Attorney’s Office and disclosed she was raped by the chief of police in Provo,” a Unified police report dated Feb. 9 states.

The woman said she told Provo Mayor John Curtis “brief details” about what happened.

Curtis asked King to step down in March. The mayor and King at the time said the chief was leaving because of family issues and did not mention the sexual misconduct allegations. Later that week, news of the allegations surfaced.

Curtis said King’s reputation was damaged but no policies or laws had been broken. He said he and King agreed it was in the best interest of the city that King resign.

It is quite obvious that Curtis tried to cover up the sex assault allegation when he originally announced King’s resignation. Why did Curtis not just come clean at that time? Even if the allegations against King were false, Curtis should have known that the information would come out through police reports, so why lie initially about the reason for the resignation? Curtis should have either said nothing when King resigned or told the truth rather than make up a false reason for King’s resignation.

Shortly after King’s resignation, the media discovered that King had recently been investigated for sexual assault. Curtis then held a press conference, and it’s pretty funny to watch the media basically call him out for lying initially about why King had resigned. The press conference is available here: http://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/mayor-says-former-police-chief-resigned-due-to-totality-of/article_524de990-f8cd-58b6-9935-054cfedec595.html

King never should have been hired to begin with. After Provo Police Chief Richard Gregory resigned in 2013, Mayor Curtis did an extensive search. He took over six months to find a new Chief of Police, and had over sixty applicants. Source: http://www.heraldextra.com/provo-names-new-police-chief/article_483109c0-51ef-11e3-a0e8-0019bb2963f4.html

Out of those applicants, Mayor Curtis selected John King, who had a questionable employment history. King worked 25 years in Montgomery County MD, rising to the position of Asst. Chief and there seem to have been no problems there. In 2002 he was promoted to Asst. Chief. Then in 2007 he retired from the county, and took the job of police chief in Gaithersburg MD. King was investigated for claiming a disability pension from Montgomery County, but the investigation was resolved and it was determined he hadn’t broken any laws. Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/08/AR2009030801777.html

King was Chief of Police in Gaithersburg for two-and-a-half years, but In January 2010 the town council met in private to discuss a “personnel matter,” after which they immediately brought in an interim police chief and two days later announced Chief King was leaving “to pursue other opportunities in the private sector.” Source: http://towncourier.com/2010/G3/pdf/TCGThree0110Web.pdf

Then he seems to have been out of work until Dec 2011 when he was hired as Training Director in the Baltimore PD. But he only lasted six months and then he was apparently asked to resign, even being “escorted from his office.” King’s public statement was that the acting Police Commissioner “wants to go in a different direction.” The police spokesman said only that King’s departure was a “personnel matter.”

Sources: http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-06-27/news/bal-city-police-training-director-resigns-amid-misconduct-complaints-20120627_1_overtime-slips-king-commanders and http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2012/06/27/head-of-baltimore-police-training-division-resigns/

Despite King’s less than desirable history, in Jan 2014, he was hired to be Provo police chief by John Curtis.

5. Economic Development Failures

A quote from a recent newspaper article mentioning the current Administration’s abject failure to bring new retail to Provo to broaden the tax base (that’s on Mayor Curtis’ watch):

As part of the presentation there was open discussion about the retail gap in the city and how much sales tax revenue the city is losing in various categories. The numbers are surprising.

An exported taxes report shows Provo is losing $24 million a year in restaurant sales tax, $27 million in pharmaceuticals, $16 million to home centers, $32 million in hardware sales, and the greatest net loss in a year is $53 million in groceries.

Curtis said the administration is willing to shift some of its focus away from places like downtown to answer the residents’ call for retail.

“Be careful what you ask for,” he said. “We hear you. We’ll look at incentives, but you will need to be patient, be engaged and you must shop in Provo.”

Source: http://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/central/provo/provo-mayor-talks-retail-with-residents-at-town-hall-meeting/article_2c780522-d569-5ca4-a9b2-bc313417f9e9.html

6. Illegal/Unethical Use of City Resources

EXAMPLE ONE:

John Curtis’s top political appointee is Corey Norman, who holds the title of “Provo Deputy Mayor.” In 2016, Norman was fined $250 for violating a state law that prohibits “using the email of a public entity to advocate for or against a ballot proposition.” Source: http://www.sltrib.com/news/3960425-155/provo-orem-officials-fined-for-illegally

Here’s the exact wording of the law:

Utah Code 20A-11-1203 “…a public entity may not make an expenditure from public funds for political purposes or to influence a ballot proposition…” (violation results in a Class B misdemeanor)

Utah Code 20A-11-1205 “…a person may not send an email using the email of a public entity: (a) for a political purpose; (b) to advocate for or against a ballot proposition…”

Curtis refused to reprimand Corey Norman for breaking this law. In fact, he responded by threatening to sue Utah County Clerk-Auditor Bryan Thompson for imposing the law. (Norman has also stated that he sent out the email under the direction of Curtis.)

EXAMPLE TWO:

This anecdote comes from a longtime Provo resident:

Mayor Curtis is very very good at some things. One is marketing – his PR and media budget is massive, and he “sells” not just Provo City, but himself.

A city employee tells me that when the Mayor came on board, there were three people in Public Relations. He let one go as part of the 2008 cost saving measures made necessary by the Recession. But since then he has hired 8-10 more people. They do a great job of filming videos, doing contests, giving away ice cream and tee shirts, making a splash on social media. Provology. The Rooftop Concerts. No question they are good at what they do, and John Curtis is too. He’s a great ambassador for John Curtis.

EXAMPLE THREE:

Provo City holds a monthly concert during warm weather months called “The Rooftop Concert Series,” which is funded by the city. On June 2, 2017, John Curtis showed up and hijacked the concert by going on stage and having his supporters go through the audience to gather signatures for his congressional campaign. Perhaps this was not illegal (or perhaps it is), but it definitely raises eyebrows and is an ethical use of city funds.

7. Intimidation Tactics

John Curtis’s Provo City employees used intimidation tactics to prevent BRT petitioners from gathering signatures in public areas. Source: http://www.sltrib.com/home/3932939-155/rolly-memo-to-signature-gatherers-beware

Here is an anecdote sent to me by a Provo citizen and activist:

Connected with the BRT saga were two well-publicized instances of Mayor Curtis getting squarely in the way of the rights of the people – his own constituents. This is an obvious concern for anyone who wants to feel their federal elected official is going to actually represent them instead of yanking away their rights.

The first time I heard of someone being removed it was Sharon Anderson, a petition organizer. She called me to tell me she had been ordered to leave the Rec Center by an employee. In her account, “…about 8:30 a young man came out and stood nearby as I was speaking with one of the citizens.  When we were through talking, he came over and said I would have to leave because no soliciting was allowed on city property which he said included the whole block.  I asked him ‘What about free speech?’ and he repeated soliciting was not allowed.  I said I wasn’t selling anything, but he still said I would have to leave…”

The second instance was when Mayor Curtis instructed the Police Dept. to remove people who were collecting signatures on the referendum petition from two places: the grounds of the Rec Center and the grounds of the County Building.

Soon after an 80-year-old petition circulator named Philip Hinckley told me he had been at the County Building, and two city policemen came out of the building and told him he couldn’t stand so near the door. It was a hot day and Philip asked them if he could just stay under the building overhang for the shade, many feet from the door. They responded he would have to stand in the sun, about 20 feet from the door. He complied, but the sun started to bother him and he went home before long.

At that point I spoke to Bryan Thompson, County Clerk-Auditor and Bill Lee, County Commissioner, and they both verified that signature gatherers could be on public property. So the city policemen left our people alone after that, on county property. But the battle on city property at the Rec center heated up, and Philip Hinckley, in addition to four other people at various times, were escorted off the property by between two and four officers, several times.

This got the attention of the Tribune, the ACLU, and Libertas. Sources: https://www.facebook.com/libertasutah/videos/1199233813443607/?fallback=1 and http://www.sltrib.com/news/3960425-155/provo-orem-officials-fined-for-illegally

8. iProvo

iProvo was “a financially distressed fiber Internet service in Provo.” In 2013, it was “sold to Google — for a whole dollar. The city, meanwhile, will have to pay millions to close the deal and to pay off bonds used to build the network in the first place.” Source: https://venturebeat.com/2013/04/24/iprovo-sad/

In 2011, John Curtis raised utilities to pay for the iProvo bond: http://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/central/provo/provo-s-utility-rate-increase-fee-set/article_45ae703b-1480-5923-89c5-683397046899.html

9. Parking: Convention Center and Downtown

John Curtis put Provo City at significant liability by breaking the city’s 2009 contract with Utah County to provide parking in exchange for the county building its convention center in downtown Provo. Utah County is suing Provo for at least $4 million in damages: http://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/utah-county-sues-provo-for-millions-over-convention-center-parking/article_194fad5e-bc40-56b3-b409-ec9dc6a46ad6.html

From the Herald article above:

The county, the city and the redevelopment agency entered an interlocal agreement in 2009 outlining the responsibilities of each entity for building the convention center, which has been operational since 2012.

That agreement stated Provo and the Provo Redevelopment Agency will “Provide, at their expense, all parking spaces, parking facilities, parking lots, parking structures, and related real property, easements and appurtenances, as required to both meet Provo City’s requirements and to adequately serve Phase One of the Convention Center … at such locations and in such a manner as approved by Utah County.”

According to the complaint, neither Provo nor the redevelopment agency have kept up that part of the agreement.

The Utah Valley Convention Center is a huge tourism draw for downtown Provo. However, the Convention Center is losing a ton of business over the lack of parking, which in turn hurts Provo downtown businesses.

Here’s another article that provides more context on the parking issue: http://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/central/provo/utah-county-and-provo-spar-over-parking-for-the-utah/article_640cb46c-2ca4-52dc-8b7c-9256a2175974.html

10. Parking: Neighborhoods

Provo has a parking crisis in certain neighborhoods in the city because Planning & Development for years pushed higher density and lower parking ratios, assuming that people would magically stop using cars. They didn’t. That’s on Mayor Curtis’ watch. Source: http://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/central/provo/provo-in-the-slow-lane-on-parking-problems/article_c93ebe61-87ed-5988-b57b-7bbb7e603a82.html

11. Property Taxes

Curtis raised property taxes by 2.28% in 2015, and he proposed raising them by another 3% in 2016: http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=40077694

12. Proposition One

Proposition One was a controversial 2015 ballot proposal to increase sales taxes permanently for roads and UTA: 60% of the money would have gone to cities and counties for roads, and 40% would have gone to UTA as a blank check for UTA to use however it wanted.

John Curtis didn’t just support Proposition One; he actually wrote the pro-Proposition One argument: https://vote.utah.gov/vote/profile/viewPDF.html?id=251250502

Proposition One failed in Utah County by a total of 59.18% against, and only 40.82% in favor: http://www.utahcounty.gov/dept/clerkaud/Elections/documents/SProp1Canvass.pdf

13. RAP Tax

John Curtis campaigned in favor of Provo City’s RAP tax, which was placed on the ballot in 2015. Source: http://www.provo.org/Home/ShowDocument?id=6045

He spent $2,600 promoting the RAP tax: http://imgur.com/a/t9MmY

The RAP tax will cost Provo residents $1.2 million annually.

14. Spending Increases

Larry Walters, a member of the Provo City Council’s Budget Advisory Committee, is running for Provo City Mayor. He wrote this on his 2017 campaign website:

Recent spending trends cannot be maintained. … [S]ince 2008, the per person cost of Provo City government has increased at twice the rate of inflation. We are now spending more per person than at any point in the past 15 years, after adjusting for inflation. We cannot support this rate of spending growth into the future.

15. Tax Increases

This graphic outlines Curtis’s love affair with raising taxes: http://imgur.com/a/ftx5D

16. Transparency

John Curtis doesn’t post his campaign financial information on Provo City’s website: http://www.sltrib.com/news/5332737-155/gehrke-for-all-the-hoopla-signature

17. Utah Transit Authority (UTA)

John Curtis maintains a close relationship with the corrupt Utah Transit Authority (UTA). He pushed for the appointment of Sherrie Hall Everett to UTA’s Board of Trustees. Ms. Everett is perhaps UTA’s biggest apologist and defender, even in the midst of all of UTA’s well-documented corruption.

Sherrie went on a tirade recently against Brent Taylor, the one reformer on UTA’s Board:

http://fox13now.com/2017/05/02/uta-trustee-brent-taylor-reacts-to-vice-chair-everett-facebook-post/

http://www.standard.net/Government/2017/05/03/North-Ogden-mayor-calls-for-UTA-board-leadership-to-step-down.html

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865679032/UTA-trustee-calls-for-chairman-vice-chairwoman-to-step-down-over-personal-attack-on-Facebook.html

http://www.sltrib.com/home/5240810-155/attacked-online-new-uta-board-member

18. Utility Fee Increases

John Curtis loves to hide tax increases through utility fee hikes. It is difficult to track all of the utility fee increases that he has imposed over the years. Here is what Senator Howard Stephenson said about this practice in an email to state delegates on June 14, 2017: “Provo Mayor John Curtis has a history of promoting new taxes, fees, and bond obligations.  That is a non-starter for me. He perfected the art of hiding tax increases in utility bill fees by tacking on fees unrelated to the cost of the utility.  With that practice, he has opened a Pandora’s box that the legislature will now have to close before other cities duplicate it.”

According to Provo City, “Transfers from Enterprise utility funds provide a transfer of 11% of utility sales to the General Fund each fiscal year.” In other words, Provo is billing Provo residents for utilities costs that don’t actually exist, and then the city takes that extra revenue and puts it into its general fund, which can be used to pay for all kinds of other expenses that have nothing to do with utilities. Source: http://www.provo.org/Home/ShowDocument?id=5764

19. Zoning Enforcement

Zoning compliance is poor, because John Curtis said at the beginning of his first term he wouldn’t aggressively enforce zoning violations. As a result, some neighborhoods (Provost South, for instance) have passed the tipping point, are now at 80% rentals, and are no longer healthy viable neighborhoods. The Provo City Council made zoning compliance their No. 1 priority for two years in a row. But the Curtis Administration dragged their feet because of a power struggle about the budget. That’s on Mayor Curtis’ watch. Source: http://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/central/provo/provo-municipal-council-city-administration-disagree-on-who-rules-the/article_5a95e01f-f20b-5873-98eb-ba326135f598.html

Summary of CMV – SB54

On Saturday, September 27, 2016, the Utah State Central Committee is meeting.  A discussion regarding the ongoing legal challenge to defend a constitutional-representative form of elections versus the legislature’s unconstitutional interference with the First Amendment rights of a private corporation to assemble, establish its rules and set membership qualifications  is scheduled.  This summary is intended especially for its new members and those that have not been involved in the research and deliberations among Party leadership since 2013.

Original legal brief from DC Lobbyists Caplin and Drysdale, a DC firm that represented the Democratic National Committee and established Stephen Colbert’s SuperPAC for the purpose of mocking Republican candidates including Mitt Romney.   Caplin & Drysdale is part of a national movement called “Count My Vote” to eliminate caucuses in all 50 states and to move this nation further away from the framer’s original intent to keep the power separated and guarded against consolidation.

This document outlining the supposed unconstitutionality of a caucus was emailed to members of the SCC the afternoon before its quarterly meeting and only a handful of members had been able to review it before the meeting.  I was among them and I stood and spoke specifically to my findings.

I did some research on the authors of this document and learned their roles in the lobbyist firm found in this document.

This brief also clearly outlines what the legislature then put into a bill, SB 54 and, with the governor’s signature, was adopted into law.

It is a conflict of interest to give the decision-making power to the very people that will benefit from weakening and eventually destroying the caucus, the incumbent, the candidate with the name ID and access to lobbyist money.

I then researched the CMV donor records and took a screen shot of initial donors.  They represent Utah’s best and brightest and most successful (and respectable) “Establishment.” Typically they are doing a favor for a friend (e.g.  “I’ll give to your cause if you’ll give to mine.”) without really understanding what’s at stake.

One donor includes the husband of the newly elected national committeewoman.  Her brother was also elected.  Throughout his tenure, he presented the case urging the SCC to be conciliatory and to react to the demands of CMV.  The Party voted to support a lawsuit, and now we have elected by acclamation two people that have actively opposed this position.

Layne Beck, an SCC member from Cache County, secured an attorney, Christ Troupis (yes, that’s the correct spelling, pronounced Chris with a t.) and my PAC, American Leadership Fund, paid for his travel expenses to deliver a speech to the SCC about the constitutional case for keeping the caucus. He received a standing ovation to a cheering crowd.

A core group of SCC members, of which I have been a part, vigilantly researched and led the movement to stand for the constitutional principles that are being eroded on every front, every policy and every issue.  Fred Cox researched the statistics surrounding the threshold levels and discovered that the 60% threshold was the balance that sent equal candidates to a Primary and a nomination at the convention.

When Enid Mickelson made a push for a higher threshold, I created this flyer to make the point of “fairness.”

Slide1

After we won, the SB 54 challenge began and the law passed.  Funds were raised for its defense.  Many long and hard hours were devoted to the preservation of the constitutional caucus and hard-earned funds from each of the counties.  One of our recently deceased party workers, Rick Votaw, was extremely generous personally.

We served on committees to improve the caucus and we continued to combat the very media outlets that benefit from a Primary and the large media buys necessary to win those elections.

The legislative sponsors insisted that SB 54 was a “compromise” but we knew, and it can be verified by reviewing the original Caplin-Drysdale document, that SB 54 and CMV delivered the same outcome.  I produced this flyer that was distributed in several counties and to the delegate email list.  This flyer includes some of the subject headings of blog posts I researched and distributed to SCC members and delegates over the course of this long process:

SB54=CMV

 

The State Central Committee now faces some important decisions.

  1. Does the Utah Republican Party continue to preserve the constitutional process or does it relinquish its right to determine its membership as a private corporation?  Will Utah go the way of other states, such as Virginia, that have weakened the caucus to the degree that the political parties are mere “endorsement” bodies and lack any real strength?  As such, those states have lost the edge and the majorities have moved to the Democrats.
  2. Does the party demand that legal counsel’s E&O insurance cover the legal expenses that the party would have been awarded had the deadlines been met as restitution for what the judge determined was worth denying the legal fees?
  3. Where do each of the SCC members and the national committee man and woman and executive committee members stand on preserving the caucus?  We need to know.  It is appropriate that we ask some serious questions:  What happened with the national committeeman and woman elections?  I understand that the previous committee people told the state party chairman that they were running again.  Then within minutes of the filing deadline, he received a phone call from them saying they would not be running again, and then within minutes of that call, he received a call that two others had filed.  I supported both of these people when they ran for office.  But we need to know why this happened.  We also need to know whether they support CMV.  They are brother and sister and the record shows that the sister’s husband gave $25,000 in opposition to the Party.
  4. Finally, in this contentious election season, it is critically important for those who serve in elected Republican positions from Chairman, Executive Committee and State Central Committee, to publicly state whether they support the Republican nominee for President.  We need all hands on deck to prevent the alternative from being elected.

If you have any questions, I will be at the meeting Saturday, August 27, 2016 and will be happy to answer your questions.

Blessings,

Cherilyn Bacon Eagar

PS – In principle, this contentious election season and the warring factions of a two party system are the result of elected officials and citizens that held self-interest and special interest above the Constitution.  They abandoned the original document.  They went against George Washington’s warning and plea NOT to create two parties (as England had) and after the Adams administration, they began the process of creating a two party system.  To quote a Republican candidate:  “It IS rigged.”  It is rigged against the people in that the 17th, 16th and 12th Amendments have created a democracy in the election process rather than maintained the republic.

Where are all those candidates that professed to be “constitutionalists?”  Why are they not standing for the checks and balances and separation of powers both vertically and horizontally that the framers created?

I was elected Presidential Elector, one of six for Utah.  It is a farce.  The original electoral college was destroyed in the Aaron Burr-Thomas Jefferson election.  If the original electoral college were functioning today, we would not be sitting in this body spending money and grooming candidates in how to pay-to-play in this system.  We would not have candidates that can’t even pay their mortgages or sell their homes for what they paid for them that serve as Senators and then leave office as multi-millionaires.

Instead, if the original electoral college were in place today, there would be NO parties.  The people would not elect a president.

The states would elect Presidential Electors equal to the number of the state’s congressional delegation (Utah would have six).  There would be 535 electors that would gather to NOMINATE people that are principled and qualified to lead.  Each state’s delegation would vote for TWO names to send to the US Senate for tallying.

The US Senate would then send the TOP FIVE candidates to the U.S. House.  Each state would cast its vote by delegation and would get 1 vote.  The top vote-getter would be elected President and the second place candidate would be Vice President.

The US Senate would not be elected by popular vote.  It would be elected by the representatives the people in the state had elected – the state legislature.

The only body that would be elected by the people was the U.S. House of Representatives, the “people’s house.”

Among the most egregious perversions along with the 17th Amendment during the Democratic Wilson administration was the decision to give government the power and authority to steal personal property, rather than to ask other foreign interests to provide revenue.  With the 16th Amendment, the people gave Congress a blank check to dig its own grave in debt and bloated spending.  The solution is NOT to further amend and pervert the Constitution.  It is to seriously examine that original document and to find the wisdom already in it and to RESTORE it.

The founders feared and deplored democracy.  They recognized from history that it always had a contentious and volatile ending.  Do we not see that this is the path we are pursuing?

The only level of deliberation among citizens in which a democracy worked was at the very closest level to the people.  Democracy worked only among small numbers of people.  THAT was the neighborhood caucus.  That system itself has been perverted because those that elevated their own interests above Liberty, the Constitution and the Republic sought to overthrow it as soon as it was ratified.

Is a nation too big to fail?  I think it is just the opposite.  Its bigness, its consolidation of power, is its failure.

Did you know that the population of Utah now exceeds the population of all 13 states at the time the union was formed?  Utah now has over 3 million people residing within its state borders.  And Utah is one of the smaller states in the union.

In 1789 the population of the 13 states was estimated to be around 2.5 million.  The founders and framers believed THAT was too big for democracy.  What have we done?  Here we are fighting with each other and with other friends and neighbors in a two-party system that now has a populace so angry and frustrated, that if we aren’t careful, mass persuasion may assume mob rule and yield to anarchy for resolution.

If the members of this party, of any party – especially the Constitution Party – want to save this Republic, they need only look at the original document and its brilliant bicameral form of government and system of elections that separated out the special and self-interest to prevent consolidation of power, as the solution.  All else is a distraction.

Our goal over the next four years should be to educate the public on these principles and to dissolve the parties and to plug up the gaping holes in this broken and sinking ship before it’s too late.

 

Candidate Stings – The Gay Pride Parade, Overstock and Paul Mero

In 2010, a mysterious “temple” mailer was received shortly before the convention.  It appeared to be a mailer from the Mike Lee campaign, depicting him in front of the Salt Lake Temple and appealing to voters based on his religion.  It backfired.  The campaign was vigilant and researched the source:  Tim Stewart (Congressman Chris Stewart’s brother), who had worked for Senator Bob Bennett and is now the managing partner for his Washington DC Lobbyist firm.  He received a slap on the hand of a about $1400 in fines.

Every election, consultants get the compulsion to do whatever it takes to win because their next job hinges upon it.  At times politics tends to bring out the most evil in an otherwise very good person.  This typically plays out in the final days of a campaign when tensions are high.  The bombshell will drop and the targeted campaign goes into override to respond.

WATCH OUT FOR SUSPICIOUS 11TH HOUR HIT PIECES
In general, if you receive a damaging piece of literature about a candidate right before or at the convention, it may not have a proper disclaimer on it. It might say something highly sensational. Be careful. It is most likely a bogus piece of literature intended to frame another candidate.

What do you do?

  1. Report it and ignore it or…
  2. Talk to the candidate directly and don’t listen to hearsay. Here’s an example – the rumors going around this week about a gubernatorial candidate.

You may be hearing about or have received an email and a mailed letter from the former Executive Director of Sutherland Institute, Paul Mero.  His message is that gubernatorial candidate Jonathan Johnson’s company supported the gay rights parade and that he is really a liberal in disguise.  Frankly, Paul is not the one to talk about this. He called all of us “nativists” and “racists” for defending our borders and opposing his amnesty bill that got its hearing with the Obama Administration. It morphed into the President’s executive order.

Here are the facts that Mr. Mero did not explain correctly, after having trying to kill our project in the first place that he is now using.

Two years ago, two film maker friends Jeff Chamberlain, Robert Starling and I went to the gay pride festival and parade to film footage of it.  We asked other pro-family organizations that advocate at the capitol to help with this project that we would use to show people the pornographic images and actions taking place along the route and at the event.

Only two organizations got involved – both anti-pornography groups.  The others, encouraged by Sutherland Institute and Paul Mero, did not want to participate.  In fact, I received a text telling me that if we did such a thing, we would be setting the movement back a decade.

We went forward with it in spite of the criticism, and it had a significant impact on cutting back on the lewdness of the event the next year.

Yes, we did expose the fact that ZIONS BANK was in the parade. And OVERSTOCK was as well.

We met with ZIONS Bank and they were so upset they threatened to sue me. My attorney assured me I had done nothing that warranted a lawsuit.

Here is the video – just click on it and it will play in Vimeo.  WARNING – OFFENSIVE MATERIAL.

The Rest of the Story About Overstock

As for Overstock, yes, I was deeply concerned.  And so our radio editorial board invited Jonathan Johnson to meet with us and we asked him directly.  He explained that Overstock is a publicly traded company with a board of directors and shareholders.  It was not his decision to make.  It was Patrick Bryne’s decision.  Jonathan was troubled and met with his family to decide whether he should stay with the company or leave.

He stayed.

In today’s business environment, the larger corporations are presented with a 53-page survey to determine if they are LGBT-friendly.  If they don’t fill it out, they will be blacklisted.  If they do, and if the answers are not reported to the Human Rights’ Campaign’s liking, they will be censured.  If he left, where would Jonathan go to make a lateral move in this environment?

Get a glimpse of this massive survey right here.

The presence of Overstock in the gay pride parade raised a lot of questions about who Jonathan Johnson was in my own mind.

 

But after getting the facts, it is not a truthful statement to say that Jonathan Johnson supports gay marriage or gay rights.

There are few that worked as hard as I to protect Utah’s Marriage law.  It was a decade-long challenge.  I understand Jonathan’s position.

I don’t agree with everything that Jonathan stands for, just as I don’t agree with all that Gary Herbert stands for.

We need a governor that will not simply sit back and say, as Governor Herbert did: “Well, it’s the law now.”

We need leaders that will take the initiative to just say “no” to the key issues, and stand up to the unconstitutional federal courts and regulations coming at us from Washington DC.

So the message for the convention Saturday is this:  STAY CALM.  If in doubt, don’t listen to the person sitting next to you.  Go find the candidate and ask directly.

And if you see Paul Mero, ask HIM to do the same.

Who’s Who on the Utah GOP Establishment Ballot

On Saturday, April 23, 2016 Utah State Delegates will assemble and make decisions on multi-county state legislative races as well as to elect the Republican nominee for Governor, Treasurer, federal races and to elect by acclamation others unopposed.

Foremost on everyone’s mind is who will be the national delegates that will represent Utah in Cleveland at the national convention in July to nominate the candidate for President.

This campaign season has drawn attention to the problem of the “Establishment” and its influence in the selection process.  In an attempt to education national delegates and citizens who are wondering what happens and what they can do, Phyllis Schlafly wrote a book that vividly describes how King making works at these conventions.  In A Choice Not An Echo, she reviews the history of these back room deals.  It is MUST reading!

So does Utah have an establishment?  And what does it mean?  Great questions!  The Establishment has been around a long time.  Here’s what Thomas Jefferson said:

I join in your reprobation of our merchants, priests and lawyers for their adherence to England & monarchy in preference to their own country and it’s constitution. but merchants have no country. the mere spot they stand on does not constitute so strong an attachment as that from which they draw their gains. in every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. he is always in alliance with the Despot abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. it is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them: and to effect this they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man, into mystery & jargon unintelligible to all mankind & therefore the safer engine for their purposes. with the lawyers it is a new thing. they have in the mother country been generally the firmest supporters of the free principles of their constitution. but there too they have changed. 

Some things never change.  Delegates have been asking me who the Establishment is in Utah.  I wrote a post in 2015 and identified them. They are the same group that has funded and has tried to destroy Utah’s caucus system.

The very discussion about the RNC rules and how the Romney team stipulated that you had to have eight states (in order to keep Ron Paul out), now those rules don’t fit their plans to bring in a third candidate, dark horse.

Now they are trying to say, “Well, that doesn’t mean you have to get those eight state prior to the convention, you just have to get it AT the convention?”

I don’t care WHO you support.  This is what the Establishment does.  This is a deception.  I have been in this party for a long time.  My mission has always been to expose who these elites are.  And so here it is:

[Disclaimer:  I know and have worked with a few of these people.  They each have value and are good people and have strengths I admire.  But we must put that aside when it comes to policy setting, votes that will be cast and legislative representation.]

COUNT MY VOTE ESTABLISHMENT

These are the donors that have sought to destroy our republican form of government.  Please read this blog post because I list the names and how much they have donated.  You may be shocked.  Some of them are running for national delegate.  If you see any of these names DO NOT VOTE FOR THEM.  Included on this DNV (Do Not Vote) list are these names and their family members:

  • Rich MeKeown
  • Mike Leavitt
  • Kirk Jowers
  • LaVarr Webb
  • Orrin Hatch
  • Thomas Wright
  • Ann Wright Lampropoulos

CMV CANDIDATES

DNV – Do not vote for the following candidates because they are receiving PAC donations from the CMV PAC through Mike Leavitt, Rich McKeown (Leavitt Group), Gail Miller.  Here is the screen shot:

CMV Candidates

TODD WEILER

CMV is concerned that Weiler’s challenger, Heather Gardner, will be elected because she has run an effective campaign to support the caucus.  Senator Weiler was censured in a State Central Committee for lying about the facts of the lawsuit in a series of Tweets.

Here are some screen shots of his distasteful Tweets to me, mocking me for raising funds for Marriage between a man and a woman as he helped LGBT constituents to undermine that institution.  It was not easy raising enough money to file the amicus briefs in the 4th, 10th Circuits and at the U.S. Supreme Court.

I also also discovered that he and Ken Ivory deliberately tried to stop the nullification of the ACA (ObamaCare) by watering it down to a Prohibition of Medicaid Expansion.  Then Senator Weiler tried to unsuccessfully undermine that substitute bill.

Weiler - Marriage 4

Weiler-Marriage 2

Weiler-Marriage 2

CURT BRAMBLE

He was the sponsor of the CMV bill – SB 54, falsely called a “compromise.”  It was no compromise.  It was CMV.  See my post.

BRIAN SHIOZAWA

Senator Shiozawa is an example of a very kind man (a church leader) that got elected while no one was looking.  His score is worse than his Democratic colleagues.


SB 54-CMV MEMBERS OF THE UTAH LEGISLATURE

Here is the list of State Senators that supported SB 54, which is the same as CMV and the original proposal that DC lobbyists (including Kirk Jowers) who have supported the Democratic National Committee and who set up and managed Stephen Colbert’s SuperPAC to mock Republican candidates

Here is the list of the State Representatives that supported SB 54.

WHICH MEMBERS OF THE UTAH LEGISLATURE ARE GETTING PAC MONEY FROM CMV?

This is your DNV (Do Not Vote) list for State Legislators that are accepting funds from the CMV elite (this is a SCREEN SHOT!)

CMV Candidates

Todd Weiler was censured during a recent State Central Committee for Tweeting false information about the lawsuit, which damaged the case.  He has a history on Twitter that has shown me he is not for Marriage between a man or a woman and is only a small portion of the abusive and mocking tweets he has sent out about me during a very difficult year of raising $100,000 to defend Marriage in the Courts.

Here is proof:

ELECTION OF A NEW NATIONAL COMMITTEEMAN AND WOMAN:  A CMV COUP?

At approximately 4:55 PM on the filing deadline day for National Committeeman and woman, two establishment candidates filed. Those of us who are involved in the Party were told that the current Committeeman and woman, Bruce Hough and Enid Mickelson, were running again.  In fact, even Party leadership were told just recently that they were not stepping down.

Without announcement, they both decided not to run and suddenly Thomas Wright and Ann Marie Lampropoulos,  brother and sister (wife of Fred Lampropoulos of Merit Medical) stepped forward.

Because the Wrights (which would be a question of nepotism in the first place) are running unopposed, the party rules stipulate that they will be elected by acclamation.  Why is this of any concern?

If you review my previous post about the Establishment and CMV=SB 54, you will notice that Merit Medical (the Lampropoulos’ company) donated $25,000 to destroy the caucus and to oppose the party’s position on the law suit – that CMV and SB 54 are unconstitutional.

The Party is in the Court on this matter.  It is a serious issue of a First Amendment right to freely assemble and to define membership, rather than open it up to unaffiliated and render the caucus and convention a mere endorsement with little reason for any candidate to go through the process and be motivated to get to know us, the grassroots.

It is plausible to believe that there was coordination between the two candidates and the current Committeeman/woman.

I know from a previous poll I took of Republicans that Fred Lampropoulos, candidate Ann Marie’s husband, favors a fully OPEN PRIMARY.  I also know that Enid Mickelson favors the 80% threshold, which would render the convention purposeless.

The RNC is Establishment-controlled.  All the in-fighting going on over rules is a great concern.  Both Bruce and Enid supported the rule change that created a favorable situation for Mitt Romney to control the delegates.  Now, that same group is trying to manipulate the rule Romney wanted to keep the Ron Paul delegates out, by saying “Oh the candidate doesn’t need to carry 8 states into the convention.  They can do that DURING the convention.”  Seriously?  Then WHY do we need all these Primaries?  Why not just show up at the convention and influence the delegates there?

To have two people succeed these two new candidates that are the heirs apparent to the current Establishment Committeeman/woman that have actively worked, with their money and in the case of Thomas Wright, who fully supported SB 54, is objectionable.

Not only do the members of the RNC help raise money for the Party, they also set the rules for the national convention and they have a lot of power to manipulate those rules and who becomes the next president.

We don’t need any more games played at the RNC, which is Establishment-controlled.  

This matter will be handled in a follow-up State Central Committee meeting to resolve.

[Ultimately, this problem is happening because we have allowed people to be elected that have departed from the U.S. Constitution and have perverted it with some amendments that have altered its original intent, which is why I am running for Presidential Elector.  Read more about this topic in this post.]

CAUTION
Although the Establishment is gathered around Ted Cruz right now, remember where they started:  JEB BUSH.  Then MARCO RUBIO. Then KASICH.  They will pull out all stops to get their Establishment goal and their elitist pick.  That candidate profile does not respect the U.S. Constitution, states rights, and our borders.  It does not regard the moral issues as winning and seeks to silence them.  The Establishment, as in Thomas Jefferson’s words, has been selling out this nation to global interests for decades.  We must return to the principles of the U.S. Constitution.

CRUZ OFFICIAL SLATE ESTABLISHMENT

I have consistently stated that ALL the candidates have Establishment consultants and figures seeded in their campaigns.  For this, I’ve been on everyone’s most-disliked list.  But I’m not here to be popular.  I’m here to tell the truth on my radio show The Liberty Lineup on AM 630 KTKK 10-Noon Mountain time daily and also online or by smart phone app k talk radio.

So when the Utah Official Cruz slate came out, there they were.  In fact, so alarming was it that two other slates emerged – a Leadership Slate and a Non-Establishment slate.  The first is the Cruz campaign team.  The second is not only members of the campaign team, but the grassroots that have worked hard to preserve the caucus and who also want to protect the platform – another role of a national delegate.

The Official Cruz slate Establishment include:

  • Spencer Stokes
  • Spencer Cox
  • Gary Herbert
  • Jeanette Herbert
  • Casey Voeks
  • David Clark
  • Wayne Niederhauser
  • Richard Snelgrove
  • Marco Diaz
  • Clair Ellis

It’s not a good idea to send people who will be “double-dipping” in their power.  National Delegates should be grassroots and not elected officials.  I will make ONE exception, and that is Mike Lee because, full disclosure, I do support Ted Cruz and without Mike’s endorsement, Ted would not be in the U.S. Senate.  I don’t agree with all their votes, but they are the best we have in DC.  So here are the elected officials that should step aside and allow grassroots to be elected as national delegates:

  • Family members of elected officials
  • Mia Love
  • Rob Bishop
  • Bill Lee

Here is the Non-Establishment slate.  I’m so honored to have been invited to join this great group of Americans!

Front - TrusTED flyer v 4Back - TrusTED flyer v 4Cherilyn for Natl Delegate flyer

 

Utah GOP Convention Proposals

Good morning Utah state delegates! Today’s convention should be a smooth one. With regard to the proposals, in general they have been vetting thoroughly by the State Central Committee. Your representatives there are working hard for our First Amendment right to assemble, select our nominees, define who our members can be and what we believe in.

There are only a handful that oppose this First Amendment right. Unfortunately enough of our representatives in the state legislature voted against this right to pass SB 54, which is falsely identified as a “compromise.” It is not. It is identical to the original legal brief that the DC lobbyist firm Caplin and Drysdale submitted two years ago, which ignited and launched the Count My Vote initiative.

Follow what the speakers say and vote for the proposals that will strengthen our law suit. Please support this law suit with your vote and your financial support.

Republicans Stand Firm in Support of Private Property Despite Media Distortion

On May 30, 2015, the Utah Republican State Central Committee met to be briefed in executive session by legal counsel.  It was a productive meeting and never have I seen a committee work together with such a unity of purpose.  All but a handful support the defense of the caucus to preserve the constitutional right of a private corporation to define itself, its membership, its platform and its nominees.

The Utah media, which stands to lose millions if the caucus remains in tact, has worked overtime to keep its mantra going:  “insiders” (that’s you and me, the grassroots) want to keep you from participating.  And…we “insiders” are in a Civil War.  Really?   What lies and hogwash.

On June 9, 2015, the Deseret News published an opinion that confirms how invested they are in the “buy my vote” campaign of the CMV DC lobbyists and the elite.  “War over Count My Vote needs to end.”  So we are in a war, they tell us.

Obviously a lawsuit isn’t the same as a Valentine card and a box of chocolates, but we are doing the business that needs to be done to define who we are.  Furthermore, Judge Nuffer told us what we must do:  we must ask the Court to defend our Constitutional right to decide who is qualified to be a member.

Now, if that’s a war, so be it.  We certainly did not start it.  And now we are working to do exactly what the Deseret News suggests:  to end it.  We are on the precise path to ending the war CMV brought to us.  I’m reminded of a famous quote, the origin of which is disputed, but the point remains amid the dispute.  Viet Nam protestors in the 1960s used it in a film title.  Some have wrongly attributed it to the Marxist turned disenchanted East German, Bertolt Brecht.  Others show that Carl Sandburg penned a version in his epic poem “The People, Yes” in 1936: “Sometime they’ll give a war and nobody will come.”

Brecht, Sandburg or whoever, here’s a version by an unknown poet which yields the most appropriate rendition for this moment in time.

“What if they gave a war and nobody came?
Why, then, the war would come to you!
He who stays home when the fight begins
And lets another fight for his cause
Should take care:
He who does not take part
In the battle will share in the defeat.
Even avoiding battle will not avoid battle.
Since not to fight for your own cause
Really means
Fighting on behalf of your enemy’s cause.”

I compliment Republican Dana Dickson for soundly reprimanding the Deseret News for its continual misrepresentation of this “war” and the perpetuation of misinformation and fiction as fact.  He wrote:

“If it was any other organization in the entire state of Utah (besides the UTGOP) fighting for a critical aspect of its freedom to assemble (which is what is going on here) the Desnews editorial board would be front-and-center cheerleading for them. However, since the UTGOP enjoys a special “freedomless” place in the hearts of media moguls in Utah the public is told that the UTGOP is somehow controversial when it uses the legal system to defend itself.

“Look everyone, the point of continuing the lawsuit is to get the courts to overturn the SB-54 QPP code that has non-Republicans selecting Republican candidates in primaries. Other state political parties have won this battle. Is it “unfortunate” or unreasonable for the UTGOP to want the same thing? Of course not.

“Bad on the Desnews editorial board for deliberately misleading the public on this issue, for beating up the UTGOP as it defends its freedom to assemble and select its candidates, and for calling out UTGOP Chairman Evans as the guy driving this whole thing (recent surveys show the party is behind him). They know better.”

Shortly after I read that outrageous opinion editorial, I called the Deseret News and left a message that we’d like to meet with the opinion editor.  No response.  Not surprising.  How many times has the Deseret News done this and how many times more before we lose our trust in the information this paper publishes?