Friday, March 04, 2016

Shelving this blog.

I've been a Watcher and a Teller for a long time now.  It's been an interesting ride these 11 years... a lot has happened.

This was my first post done on 14 February, 2005
The Inaugural Entry of Clark County Politics! 
I'm completely new to "blogging," but I've been around the scene here in Clark County, Washington, for quite some time. 
I've noticed at least one other intrepid Clark County-ite has set up his own site, albeit with a decidedly leftist "bent," so I intend to, perhaps, offer a counter view when it's appropriate.
I believe in free speech and I am unafraid of your ideas. That said, comments containing profanity or personal insult will be removed immediately.
When you post, please back up your observations to the extent possible, while you avoid generalizations.
Thanks for stopping by!
Since then, over a million page views have taken place (My current status shows 849,000... but the counter didn't even get turned on until 5 years after I started)  I've done my best to expose dishonesty, corruption, hypocrisy and the truth of the axiom that power corrupts absolutely.

Now, due to circumstances beyond my control, it has resulted in my decision... and my decision alone... to shelve the posting of this blog... and end my presence on Facebook... for the foreseeable future.

There are no coincidences in politics.  There's no coincidence here, either.

But at the end of the day, I'm really no different than anyone else politically involved, save for one tiny element:

This blog.

Many out there reading this think many of or close to the same things I do.  As part of my desire to have a therapeutic (for me) outlet/data base of quotes, histories, videos, I decided to write my thoughts and perspectives down.  That way, I wouldn't have to carry those around with me. And unlike most, I write those things down and make them available to the general public to read.

After awhile, I decided to post those thoughts so that others of a mind to do so might read them, given that I come from a place of political involvement that few have attained... so they may get a glimpse of the political reality as I see it confronting us at various levels and various times.

For those who've followed my meager effort over the years, I'm sorry that I have to end this effort this way for the foreseeable future.  But sometimes, things happen that cannot be planned for from unanticipated directions .

I continue to fear what I believe may happen in state and local government... how much more expensive it has become and will become for us in the future... how easily promises are cast aside for whatever the reason by those we elect... and how unimportant we, The People, actually are to those who would govern us...

Sometimes, the people you’d take a bullet for turn out to be the ones behind the guns.

Aimed at you.

Sadly, those are the lessons I've learned which have impacted me the most.  And considering the direction, I'm struck by the irony of the nexus of this decision.

I have hope that someone else will become the Watcher and the Teller. 

Someone who will not play favorites... who will not be swayed by and party identification a candidate or incumbent may chose... and then ignore... and who will not be driven by emotions but instead, by reality.

Someone who could care less what the letter after someone's name actually is.

Others are stepping up and I wish them well.

As I walk away from the political realm in it's entirety for now, I wish all of you who carry on the best. I've done all I can do with what I've had to work with.  The rest is up to you... but I now must leave this scene.

At some point, I may be able to return.

But it won't be any time soon.

Thursday, March 03, 2016

The parallels between the local CCRINO Establishment and the national RNC Establishment.

As regular readers know, the local CCRINO Establishment would much rather have a democrat like Marc Boldt win an election and join with the other two Stooges than to allow conservatives to run the joint... or any other Republican that doesn't meet their RINO test.

Well, I certainly can appreciate that, much like I appreciate the damage Boldt and the other Stooges, Julie Olson/Chuck Green and Jeanne Stewart/Craig Pridemore have done since their election... voting as if they had formerly joined the democrat party.

Grabbed from Chuckie Greens campaign site.
The DC Establishment reaction to Trump makes it easy for me to oppose fake Republicans: after all, Trump doesn't pass their litmus test; RINOs like Rubio, and here locally, Rivers, Vick, Boger, Bowman, Boldt, Olson, Stewart, McDaniels, Vance, Bryant, Wilson, Noelck, Crain (Who, after all, went so far as to endorse a democrat candidate against fellow RINO Julie Olson) and Harris?  They all fail to pass mine.

Others are sure to be added to the list, because as we've seen at both the national AND the local level, party loyalty gets flipped like a switch whenever RINOs want to flip it.

So, today, the Establishment sent up the wrong guy, at the wrong place and at the wrong time to blow holes in Trump.  Yet we STILL do not see any Senators endorsing Cruz, meaning these clowns want to jam Rubio down our throats.

Well, Rubio caved on his integrity AND illegal aliens over a year ago... and he lost any chance at ever becoming president as a result.

Should Trump be president?  I have no idea.  But the more scum like Mitt get out there and try to tell us what to do, the more likely I am TO support Trump.

Clearly, the Establishment at the national level is as despicable as the out-of-power local Establishment variety.  And the harder they push to keep their seats of ease, the more likely I am to do the exact opposite.

And the more the Establishment at ANY level engages in this rank hypocrisy, the more I will oppose them.
The RNC on Mitt Romney's left

The more the Establishment at ANY level lies, exaggerates, cheats or engages in the mainstream democrat tactics and strategies... against their fellow Republicans... the more I will call them out.

I didn't watch Mitt's speech.  Why should I?  As an Establishment mouthpiece with their hands up his back like Jeff Dunham with his hand up Achmed's back, I already knew what that milquetoast was going to say.

Here's the reality:  Every single candidate running for president has had the same opportunity.

Trump is winning because he took the lead in talking about stuff the others wouldn't touch with a 100 foot pole.

Illegal aliens, importing muslim terrorists, how much we got screwed in the deal with Iran, just to name a few.

And instead of doing the smart political thing to neutralize Trump and his positions, mainly, co-opting them, what did they do?

They did the same thing the local CCRINOs are doing: they did (and are doing) the democrat's dirty work for them.

Many ironies of political life become apparent when closely watching what each side does to the other... and to themselves.

The democrats are, essentially, standing on the sidelines, watching the CCRINOs carry their water like Gunga Din.  They remain spotless while the CCRINOs do it all for them.

They watch and remain squeaky clean as the CCRINOs splatter Republicans with all the mud they can throw.  They watch as those in the CCRINO cabal either betray their constituency like Ann "Gas Tax" Rivers betrayed us all with her gas tax/tab fee machinations ("Yeah, well, it was a 'business decision.'  And as long as it's a 'business decision,' I can lie to my constituents all I want.") by doing what the democrats wanted her to do... and the democrats DID want her to betray us, regardless of her fake motivation... which in this case, meant hanging a $1600 or so bill around the necks of every man, woman and child in this county... of which, we'll actually see, perhaps, $80 or so worth of work for each man, woman and child in Clark County... the rest going to King County; and then, of course, lying about it by claiming that had she NOT voted "yes," the bill for this county would have been $7 BILLION...  (NOTE: this video needs to be viewed in any Browser NOT Firefox because of software issues.)

... or go insane attacking those who do not pass their litmus test of what a RINO SHOULD be.

Which is why every conservative running this cycle is under attack here locally.

So today, the biggest loser in the history of presidential politics since Walter Mondale, comes out and blasts Trump.  (Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory...)

That, of course, is his... and their... privilege.  You can rest assured that most of the CCRINO contingent shares their joy of this political buzzard circling a carcass... except, of course, for one thing:

Trump is far from dead.

But with scum like the Establishment, if he woke up dead with a heart attack tomorrow, none of that would surprise me.  Because the Establishment types would MUCH rather lose to a democrat than see someone they can't control win an elective office.

Right, Marc?

The parallels, then, are obvious.  And they reek accordingly.

More RINOs I won't support this November.

Here's their idiotic take on supporting Trump:  (According to the Seattle Times)

And here's the thing: this would be my position if they'd said that about ANY GOP candidate.)

Chris Vance:  First, I wasn't going to support him anyway, come to think of it.  The State GOP was a disaster on his watch, even worse than it is now, so he'd surely bring that skill set to the table if by some ultra-miracle he managed to win.

Here's Vance's cowardice and short-sightedness on Trump:
"It’d be better if we had a nominee who could unite the party and bring everyone together. Maybe that’ll still happen, but today it doesn’t appear to be,” said Chris Vance, the Republican challenger running against Democratic U.S. Sen. Patty Murray. 
Vance took to social media earlier in the week to denounce as “unacceptable” Trump’s refusal during an interview to repudiate former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke. Trump later disavowed Duke on Twitter.
In a Facebook post in December, Vance had said Republicans would need to unite behind their presidential nominee “whoever that is.” But on Tuesday, Vance declined to say whether he’d be able to support Trump.
“The day he is officially the Republican nominee, then I will answer that question,” he said. 
But Vance said he doesn't see himself aligning with any of the remaining GOP candidates — Trump or others. “I think a lot of Republicans are going to run as free agents this year,” he said.
Gutless crone.

Bill Bryant:  And Bill Bryant isn't any better.
Bill Bryant, the Republican candidate challenging Gov. Jay Inslee, repeated earlier statements that “if Trump believes what he says, he is not fit to be president.” 
Both Bryant and Vance declined to say whether they’d vote for Trump if he winds up as their party’s nominee in November. 
“I don’t like to cross hypothetical bridges,” Bryant said.
Sen. Joe Fain, best known for voting against the repeal of the "naked men in the women's showers" rule as the GOP Senate allowed it to remain in place, called Trump a "fascist."

Wednesday, March 02, 2016

Keeping the Trump victories last night in perspective and the Establishment losing their minds.

I occasionally remind people that the Pavlovian political response to candidates here in Washington State, of supporting a candidate, only to see that guy (or woman) vaporize, and then moving on to the next candidate, only to see them enter the political Twilight Zone as well, only to move onto the next... and so forth... is a non-starter for me.

This cycle, I have refused to support any candidate.


Because here in the great state of Washington, we have no say.

Like many of the young and politically naive, my youngest (22) is enchanted by Bernie Sanders.

That's a purely emotional response for the most part: the reality is she no more knows his positions in depth, nor has she studied the consequences of his polices, any more than she can levitate.

Like many on the left, she forwarded another video attack against Trump last night, her sense of outrage having been properly pricked, apparently, by what was on the video, which I did not watch... because, well, it would make no difference.

And I told her as much:
Kj Hinton    Kj Hinton You do understand we have zero say in any of this, right?
I was taken to task by another poster who, not understanding my perspective, wrote this:
Bryan GoldmanBryan Goldman Yeah, because years of keeping our head in the sand has the world moving swiftly in the right direction...?

Your pessimistic comment has some truth to it, but it's merely opinion based. Recent history in other countries begs to differ. Revolution can take many different shapes and sizes..
LikeReply17 hrs
To which I replied:
Kj HintonKj Hinton It's not opinion and it's not conspiracy theory. It's the calendar.

We will not have a primary here in Washington State until next May.


This will be long decided before May. Hillary will be the democrat nominee, since she's scammed all the super-delegates. Sanders will get crushed tonite for the most part like he did in South Carolina, more or less. I mean, who's got the huge lead both votes and in the delegate count... including super delegates?

Trump will likely be the GOP nominee if current trends continue.

Thus, our vote in the primary, where the nominees will have long since been decided...



LikeReply16 hrsEdited
And that's the thing, you see.

I'm not going to exorcised over a candidate/nominee when I have no say over that candidate/nominee.

What's the point?  Why set myself up for emotional turmoil if my candidate loses... since my vote won't matter?

And now, what I see, are people... and the Establishment... losing their fricking minds over Trump.

I saw this once before in the run up to a presidential election in 1980: the guy's name was Reagan.

It's kinda like watching "The Revenant" after having seen "Man in the Wilderness," which was the basis for this version.

No, I'm not comparing the two men.  But I CAN compare the two campaigns against those men.

They bear more similarities than differences.

The Establishment wants their guy... a guy they can control.

I have zero faith in the Establishment, after all, look at what they've done since the people have given them control of Congress...


So, when you see stories about how the Establishment or their candidates are scheming to find ways to deny a candidate a nomination... be aware of their guiding principles: this isn't about whether the candidate would be worth a damn if he wins: this is about the perception that if the wrong guy wins, they won't be able to control him.

Now, the Establishment is lining up behind Rubio.  Yet, Rubio, even today, is running commercials where the claim is made that he, Rubio, "beat the Establishment."

Odd, that.

Cruz, on the other hand, seems to have a "dislike" factor going for him.  The Sessions endorsement of Trump hurt him... because it begs the question: if no other Senator will support Cruz...

Trump is a total lose cannon.  He promises the moon plus $2 to the base.  But can he deliver?

I would love to see the dead wood clogging the GOP flow get flushed away.  And frankly, I don't care how that happens.  And that dead wood finds themselves in a precarious position if Trump wins this... their best efforts notwithstanding.

So, they act.  Not out of any altruistic basis... not for the good of the country.  Oh, no.  Since when has that variety of politics existed?

No, they are acting on what's known as their own "enlightened self-interests."  Their actions are in no way driven by what's best for us: instead, they're driven by what's best for them.

And their clumsy, moronic PUBLIC efforts show that Reince Priebus, Republican National Committee Chair, shouldn't be allowed to run an elevator, let alone a national political party if THIS is the best he can do.

I saw early on what was likely to happen if the GOP didn't recognize the "danger" by an insurgent candidate with an insurgent campaign.  But they were so fat, dumb and stupid that they refused to believe it.

I wonder if they believe it now?

The national Establishment is something of a wide spectrum view of the insanity the local Establishment is engaging in around here as they go about attempting to regain control over the party apparatus. Challenging conservative incumbents, betraying constituents, ignoring their duty to their districts... fearful of being called a "pansy."

Oddly, the local party seems to be in that pre-sting paralysis stage of the tarantula wasp crawling around the spider's abdomen and the spider knows it and where they see danger, but are apparently content to allow it to run it's course... since they have failed to act against these same people doing their best to throw them out.

And when you're talking about a tarantula wasp. the outcome is rarely good for the tarantula.

I find the out-of-power Establishment's death throes, if that's what they are, to be rather entertaining myself.  Time, of course, will tell.

Tuesday, March 01, 2016

Giving some credit where due: the Columbian Rivers article has been edited.

Day before yesterday, the Columbian did a story that briefly discussed Sen. Ann “Gas Tax” Rivers' PDC fraud, wherein she deliberately over reported the amount of money deposited into her campaign account by approximately $175,000.

That's not how they presented it, of course, but that's how I see it.

The article is somewhat misleading in that initially it stated: “Big drop in amount of money listed prompts conservative blogger to raise questions,”  while also stating "Rivers filed a handful of amended reports last week that ratcheted back the campaign contribution amount after Kelly Hinton, the blogger, filed a complaint."

The first issue in the article was the order in which the number was reversed; that is, it was my complaint, that I generated, which resulted in $175,000 being removed from the accounting of Rivers campaign account.  My complaint against Rivers was in no way driven by the reduction of the number; it was in fact the reason the number was reduced… Since I filed the complaint in early October.

I emailed the reporter, Lauren Dake, explained the situation to her, and she had the sub-headline removed.

With somewhat more difficulty, I was able to show to her satisfaction… Along with further consultation with the PDC… That the reduction in the number from $255,000 to initially $80,000 and now currently just under $71,000 had nothing to do with any action on the part of Rivers, and nothing to do with the amended reports that were mentioned.

Ultimately, had the newspaper or Dake emailed me to ask me about the situation, I could’ve provided the background information that would have enabled them to avoid making these mistakes which serve to have an impact on the issue of fault and the issue of why Rivers allowed this mistake to fester in her campaign account for over a year.

Rest assured, that had the shoe been on the other foot; had the PDC been under-reporting the amount of money that Rivers actually had in her account, you can bet that it wouldn't have taken her a year to act to correct that shortfall.

Meanwhile, the story has been edited further; and while further explanation has not been provided as to what actually took place, at least the offending passages have been removed.

I appreciate the effort that Lauren Dake went through to ultimately make the article much more accurate.

That has been done with this article. While filling in the blanks by changing the article to reflect, more accurately, that the action on Rivers' part was deliberate, long-lasting, and done to achieve a desired aim would have been preferable; on the whole I am not unhappy with this outcome.

To a certain extent, both the PDC and the newspaper have been played by Sen. Rivers. Hopefully, in the future, they will take a much closer look at what she says and how she says it in response to their questions concerning her campaign conduct.

But I cannot blame them in particular, considering how astounding her political conduct since the beginning of last calendar year is actually been.

I never expected, and in fact would’ve bet my life, that nothing like this would’ve ever happened at the behest of Sen. Rivers.

Had she any integrity, she would resign effective immediately over this issue.

That she has failed to take any responsibility for the situation and failed to resign goes to the basic lack of character that must have resulted from something horrific that I can only begin to guess at.

I am quick to condemn the local newspaper for their inaccuracies, no matter the cause or the motive. Likewise I must give credit where due when an honest effort is made to correct the more glaring inaccuracies.

When asked, the newspaper actually did ultimately do what I requested they do to clarify the story and for that, as bizarre as it may sound, I actually think them.

Well, *I* didn't: "Media Blew It."

Trump's inevitability.

(DISCLAIMER: I am not supporting anyone this cycle because, as a resident of this state, I will have no say in this outcome.  This observation is not to be construed as an endorsement.  It is an analysis, nothing more.)

For months, I've been warning, if "warning" is the right word, that the Establishment had only one way available to contain Trump and to neutralize him.

And that was to take his issues away from him and make them the issues of the GOP.

A long time ago (If the year 2000 was a long time ago) Tim Eyman came up with his first initiative, the $30 tab fee/vote on all tax and fee increases, aka I-695.

That is of note here, because naturally, the tax and spend left was dramatically opposed to that effort.
"The world will end as we know it if this passes."

Columbian editorial attacking the effort.
That, of course, is a rhetorical summary of their positions at the time... as that is a rhetorical summary of their positions on just about any tax or fee cutting measure either taken by the county; such as on Councilor David Madore's efforts to cut fees and property taxes here locally and, of course, at the state level where Eyman's latest initiative that would force the legislature to either run a referendum or suffer a 1% cut from the sales tax collected for the state.

The reason this is of note was even now, some 16 years later, I remember KVI host John Carlson's statement concerning the paralysis of the leftist response to this initiative's then record signature collection: the choices available to government were to "... land the plane with the wheels up... or fly it directly into the ground."

You see, state government COULD have offered an alternative to I-695 that may have accomplished the same thing, or close to it, and either implemented such an alternative over time, say a reduction over 5 years in the tab fees, or, they could allow what ultimately happened:  The implementation all at once, as the Legislature took that aspect of the initiative out of the "unconstitutional" can the state supreme court had slammed it into and put it into law as if the court had allowed it into being.

In short, they choose to fly the plane directly into the ground.

Well, the same thing applied... and applies... to Trump.

The GOP Establishment had the opportunity early on to take his positions away from him... by embracing them since now, clearly, those positions represent that of the base.

Instead, they run away from them in horror.  And now, the remaining major candidates, Rubio and Cruz, are, effectively, right where Trump wants them: forced into discussing well, the size of Trump's penis, as Rubio did yesterday.

Nationally, the latest poll has Trump at 49%, with Rubio at 16 and Cruz at 15.

The Establishment has failed to understand and failed to recognize what Trump represents to the base.  They appear mystified as to how anyone could be so stupid that they'd support a Trump.

So, they played the role of the ostrich and buried their collective head in the sand.

And this... is the result... of that.

Monday, February 29, 2016

Dissecting the Columbian/Rivers PDC article and the Rivers Truth Test.

(NOTE: I emailed Lauren Dake who wrote the article and informed her that the phrase, “Big drop in amount of money listed prompts conservative blogger to raise questions.” was factually incorrect.  In fact, it was backwards.

The Columbian removed that part of the article headline.

She also replied by telling me that
The story has the right chronologically though: Rivers filed a handful of amended reports last week that ratcheted back the campaign contribution amount after Kelly Hinton, the blogger, filed a complaint.
I sent her the last amended C4 that Rivers filed which did nothing to change her total and still showed the $255,000 figure, and informed her that the reduction was unilaterally instituted by the PDC.

Dake responded by telling me that
The PDC told me after your complaint, they chatted with her and worked with her to correct the numbers. She filed the amended reports after working with the PDC. 
My answer to her:
And I appreciate that.  The form, however, speaks for itself and none of the amended forms “ratcheted back” anything.
Further, it was only AFTER those forms were filed that the number was reduced… a week+ later.  The forms were filed on the 17th, the number was reduced on the 25th.

I repeat: The amended forms made zero difference in the number Rivers was using and the PDC acted unilaterally to reduce it. You may want to chat with Evelyn Lopez, PDC Exec Dir to find out if I’m telling you the truth.  But her email trail to me is pretty specific.
As of this writing, Dake hasn't responded to my last email.)

As you might expect, in reporting the PDC fraud of Senator Ann "Gas Tax" Rivers, there are some major factual inaccuracies that could have been avoided had they emailed me to ask.

First, my efforts caused the "big drop in money."  Had I not complained about it, that $255,000 figure would STILL be up there.

Second, Rivers "explanation" is a complete lie:
The La Center Republican senator said there was a simple explanation: “For three years, my PDC (public disclosure commission) reports have been perfect, and then my preparer retired and gave her clients to another preparer who didn’t adequately do the job. I’ve retained a new preparer who has been working closely with the PDC for nearly six months to get everything squared away.”
Third, the reality is that the action on the part of the Public Disclosure Commission to cut Rivers' amount was unilateral.  That is, it has nothing to do with any effort by Rivers to get ANYTHING "squared away."

Fourth, the reality is that Rivers' husband, Fred, is her treasurer.

Fifth, the reality is Rivers has known that the number is fake for at least a year, long before her "new preparer" came on board.  The reality is Rivers made no effort to correct the number when she has known for a year that the number has been wrong.  The reality is Rivers herself is ultimately responsible.

Sixth, and the main reality, is that it wouldn't take six months to "get everything squared away."  It shouldn't take 6 hours.  Unless, of course, you're not cooperating with the PDC.

I don't believe it took 6 months to develop the plan to invade Normandy.

This, then, is a "mistake," and Rivers did nothing about it ON HER OWN, because, well, hell... we all know she has a major problem reading the King's English and she had no IDEA her PDC number was overstated by a paltry, insignificant amount like, say, 68%.

The Columbian, being the Columbian, talked to everyone concerned about this except for me, of course.  Had they bothered to email me, I could have made sure they got the facts straight instead of this sanitized version that doesn't quite tell the truth.  Their deliberate failure to talk to me is why, up until a few minutes ago, I had no idea they'd written anything.

And the Rivers Truth Test?

Easy as pie:

Just reverse the situation.

Does anyone reading this believe... for one minute... had Rivers actually raised $255,000 but the PDC was only showing $80,000, that she wouldn't have torn the PDC office walls down to get it fixed?

Of course she would have.

And you can bet it wouldn't have taken "six months to get everything squared away."

But overstating her total by 68%?  Nothing to see here... move along.

Clearly, then, this is yet another case of once you start with a lie, every lie after that gets progressively easier.

As for what Rivers has said... what else COULD she say?

Anything else would be an acknowledgement of fault.  And you can bet that Rivers will take zero responsibility for any of this.  Never mind that in just about any other financial dealing, overstating your numbers by 68% would be, well, criminal.

After all, she doesn't want to be known as a "pansy" for doing the right thing.

The final reality is clear: everyone makes mistakes.  But a mistake like this that goes on for over a year... that stopped being a mistake months ago.

Had Rivers, knowing the number was fake, reached out to the PDC and asked them for their help to address this, it would have been resolved several months ago and we'd have nothing to talk about.

But she, personally, did nothing.  And that makes this fraud, mistake or no.

We've seen this kind of thing before.  How many stories have we heard where banks have made errors and you see bank statements that may dramatically and falsely inflate your account?

And what happens if you spend that money?

You go to jail.

Here, she (and SHE is responsible, so it is "she," Sen. Rivers herself) allowed a $175,000 error to remain unaddressed in her PDC account for over a year until the PDC acted on their own to address it since she, apparently, wouldn't do so.

And that is precisely no one's fault but her own.

I eagerly await the effort by the CCRINOs and leftists to attack me for reporting it... instead of going to the sources of this fraud who has been dealing with PDC's directly for at least 7 years... the "honorable" Senator from the 18th District herself.

So... I'm hearing a deafening silence from most electeds about Rivers' PDC fraud.... no condemnation from others in politics...

Odd, that.  Why is everyone so quiet about this fraud?

When I began to hammer on her for lying to get elected, some in office around here locally unloaded on me.

Five local political creatures, including 3 in office, 1 formerly in office and 1, a political, downtown mafia boot-licker, did their very best to get me fired.

One of them took me on publicly on another blog.

But now... all of those so eager to come to her defense on the issue of lying to get elected are all remaining, strangely, quiet.

Well, here's the facts: Sen. Ann Rivers has fraudulently claimed around $175,000 more in her Public Disclosure Commission accounting than she has in her account.

She has done so for a year.

The PDC has been in touch with her for FIVE months and was finally forced to take action unilaterally because Rivers didn't do enough to resolve the disparity.

Further, of course, Rivers KNEW the number she was showing was a fraud.

She knows how much money is in her campaign account. She knows the number she was showing in public was vastly inflated.

For a year.

And all of that begs the question: why did she lie?

I can speculate, of course: It was to shield her from running against anyone this November.  She knows she's in trouble with the base in her district over her gas tax betrayal because her excuses make zero sense.

But can anyone here even begin to imagine the coverage we'd be seeing in the democratian if, say, David Madore had lied on HIS PDC's by such a huge amount?

Gotta wonder: why is Lefty Lou Brancaccio covering for Rivers?

Besides the obvious, I mean.

Meanwhile, I've heard and seen nothing from her buddy Brent Boger.  Nothing from her buddy Phil Johnson (Thank you for raping the county to pay for OUR roads, ma'am, much appreciated!) nothing from Shane "I'm running to beat up Liz Pike" Bowman, nothing from Steve "I never speak for the people" Stuart, nothing from Marc "I can't answer by text unless I'm driving" Boldt.  Nothing from Sean Guard, who once told me in response to Rivers' gas tax/tab fee betrayal "That's how business is done."

Why do you suppose that is?

A chasm of silence.  A black hole, if you will.

I don't see anyone coming to her defense.  Nor do I see any of them condemning her fraud.

And I have to wonder: why is that?

Why was ONE lie... to get elected... OK on the part of these people... while THIS lie... a huge, reeking, gaping maw in what little integrity she might have is, apparently, NOT OK?

You see, to me, they're exactly, precisely, the same thing.

The first lie was to get elected.

The second lie was ALSO to get and stay elected.

What's the difference?

Saturday, February 27, 2016

Why Ann "Gas Tax" Rivers should resign.

Well, I can think of 175,000 reasons off the top of my head.

That's the approximate amount of dollars falsely reported by Sen. Rivers in order to reduce to eliminate any possibility of any competition against her in the upcoming election.

Politics is a filthy business.  It's the social sewer of life, and this past two years have convinced me that actions like those by Rivers, Brent Boger, Carolyn Crain and her CCRINO outfit, Shane Bowman and Phil Johnson are cause enough for me to call it a career... which I have done.

People like these make up the effluent of this sewage system.  But the worst of the lot of them is my former business partner, my former colleague... and my former friend, Ann "Gas Tax" Rivers.

To summarize; for over a year, Rivers mislead the entire state as to the amount of money she had collected for her campaign; knowingly and deliberately defrauding those who review Public Disclosure forms as a part of their calculus on whether or not a campaign against her could be viable... showing a number that had it been true, would make most believe she was practically unstoppable... since, in the aggregate, her fake number exceeded even that of Senate Majority Leader Mark Schoesler by some $36,000 if memory serves.

How her number exploded between a C-4 she reported of Feb 5th last year which showed around $7000 to the number that showed up on her NEXT C-4, filed 5 days later... to an amount of $182,000 or so... is anyone's guess.

What is UNDENIABLE is that she KNOWINGLY left that number up there... festering in its inaccuracy... for over a year.

Over the last 14 months or so, the Ann Rivers I knew... the woman of the people... the bright, shining star... the prototype of the pol who was going to be "different" became the very thing she claimed she despised.  It's like she's being blackmailed... like somebody's got something on her.

Along the way, she blatantly and obviously violated a black-letter pledge to the voters of this district, a pledge to oppose gas tax and tab fee increases, falsely claiming that "the voters have spoken and she has listened."

She explained her betrayal at the Battle Ground Town Hall Meeting on January 9th this way.

Here, she doesn't regret having broken her promises, she regrets having made them in the first place.

(NOTE: THE FOLLOWING THREE VIDEOS USE QUICKTIME WHICH WILL NOT PLAY ON FIREFOX.  Please use your Opera, Chrome or Internet Explorer/Edge Browsers to view them.)

Here, she comes up with a bizarre, FANTASTIC lie that had she not voted for the gas tax, instead of Clark County getting hung out to dry for $700 million, we would have been nailed for $7 BILLION.

Utter nonsense, of course: even without her vote, the massive gas tax increase would have passed.

Even if it hadn't passed, there would have been no tax increase anywhere else to make up for it... and the $7 billion figure is an outright lie.

And this beauty, where Sen. Rivers equates keeping her word to her constituents with being a "pansy."

These videos generally and the last one particularly are reeking with irony:

Rivers actually asks:

"Any of you in this room that I've made a deal with?  Raise your hand if I've broken it."

I immediately raised my hand, but she didn't count it.

That voice saying, "... you made a deal with the voters," is mine.

You see, a campaign pledge IS a "deal."

You say, "I am going to oppose a gas tax and tab fee increases."  You hold out your hand.

The voter believes you, holds out their hand and shakes yours: deal concluded.

So, the reality is she indirectly acknowledges that she "broke" her deal with every voter in this district.

Now, for those who believe I hacked this up as some sort of way to leave out the "good" parts, here's the ENTIRE video so you can view it yourself.

And many thanks to Brent Boger who believed he was surreptitiously videoing this whole thing as if, were he more open about it, I would have changed one... damned... thing.

Without Brent's cooperation, I would not have had these arrows in my quiver.  In the end, it was like I was paying him to shoot it.  And I really do appreciate it... which may not be the result he was after.  (Lew Waters posted it on YouTube)

Rivers admits she knew the gas tax was going to pass.  She lies about the projects: after all, 5 out of 6 Republicans in the Legislature from Clark County voted "no," including her two House seatmates, Rep. Pike and Rep. Vick... and yet, their "no" votes notwithstanding, the projects are still here.

That means that the few, piddling projects we got would have taken place ANYWAY.

Instead of voting "yes" on this betrayal, Rivers COULD have amended the package to have a referendum clause in it, but did not do so.  And that made this even weirder: she claims on one hand that "three town hall meetings" only had ONE person complain about the gas tax vote she was going to take, and THEN, admitted that her entire household voted against the gas tax increase in the advisory vote held last November... as did, it turns out, roughly 75% of the 18th District.

If so few people in her mind opposed this fiscal rape, then why did she acknowledge the reality that her own household voted against it?

And by the way, least anyone believe I ambushed her with this question, let me share this email I sent to her a few days (On January 7) before this town hall meeting:
When you, Sen. Rivers, ran for this office, you pledged that you would not support a gas tax or tab fee increase... which you then did do.  You claimed that it was 'changing circumstances' that led to your decision.
That was utter nonsense, of course.  A pledge is a pledge under ALL circumstances.  Every conceivable circumstance.  And your excuses for voting that way fail to meet the straight face test when you had other options available, such as amending out the emergency clause out or voting "no" because there was no referendum clause included.  As a result, you hung a $500 million debt on Clark County for which we will receive absolutely nothing of measurable substance.

We get $200 million in projects, including an absolutely unneeded and unnecessary rebuild of one of the few well-designed freeway intersections in the Vancouver area at Mill Plain and I-5 that takes half of that amount, while your district gets next to nothing, comparatively speaking, in return for you... effectively, ignoring your promise to us.

I get that you made a deal with others up there in return for your yes vote.

But you made promises to us to even get elected... and those, I believe, should come first. 

So now, the question remains: how are we to believe anything you tell us here?  Do we take everything your say with a grain of salt... a hidden, unmentioned, "changing circumstances" clause in every promise"

Your response, unedited, will be presented in my blog, Clark County Politics.

K.J. Hinton
- Cell
- Fax
Well, she never substantively responded to my question... so the video, wherein she hangs herself repeatedly, is the response.

I have since also emailed her to ask her to clarify that irresponsible lie about $7 billion we, as a county, would have been on the hook for if she had voted "no," EVEN THOUGH THE GAS TAX HAD THE VOTES TO PASS ANYWAY, which she admits and acknowledges.

To date, she has refused to respond.  After all, I'm nothing but a constituent.

Sadly, I have no doubt that, like she said in the video, she "held true to her principles."

It's just that her principles clearly include both telling falsehoods to get elected and the ability to throw us constituents under the bus by doing both the exact opposite of what she promised as WELL as doing it while knowing we were steadfastly opposed to her actions (the response "of the 300" at her town hall meetings notwithstanding)... And we now know that if 3000 of us had shown up in opposition to her betrayal it would have made absolutely zero difference in her vote.

But lying to provide cover for your betrayal?  Seriously?  Is that also one of her "principles?"

After all, she says, "it was a business decision" and, of course, "business decisions" won't be swayed by the mere will of the people who oppose their "Senator's" agenda.

Clearly, then, we no longer need legislators who represent.  What we need are accountants who make "business decisions."

And this betrayal of her constituents is just the harbinger of things to come: she reiterated in the videos that if she had to make the decision to lie to us again, she would do it.

Between her confirmed fraudulent reporting on the PDC and her admitted and obvious betrayal of her constituents, Rivers should resign and do so effective immediately.

There's no amount of lipstick she could slather on that pig that would change it from being a pig.

The timeline for Sen. Ann "Gas Tax" Rivers PDC fraud.

The Leftist/C3G2/CCRINO take on free speech (3.5 minute video) and the Second Amendment (2.5 minute video)