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.

1 comment: