Wow. Whoda thunk the democratian would ever write this?

Given the demonstrated history of the local cancer on our community, where hatred of the perspective of the county's voter population on any particular issue on the agenda that doesn't match completely with theirs, I was stunned to read, first the headline... and then the article itself.

Essentially, aside from the hatred most of the lamestream media for Tim Eyman and the requisite gratuitous shots at him, the rag acknowledged the reality of the 2/3rds tax issue: we have voted for it on 6 different occasions and as such, it's time for the legislature to put this constitutional issue to a vote.

The rag beating the hell out of Eyman comes to no surprise: he wants to cut our taxes that go to the burgeoning programs the rag so favors... what was so surprising was this acknowledgement of the right of the people to have a say.

In the past, the local version of the Völkischer Beobachter (Nazi Party National Observer newspaper) has trashed most efforts where the will of the people is sought; when the outcome is in doubt viz their agenda, putting questions to the people is the anethma to them.

Is it because the rag lives on a B&O tax cut?  Is it because they have finally felt the sting of the taxes we all have to pay?

Who knows.  But it's like cutting the grass and finding a diamond in the back yard.

In Our View: Allow Vote on Two-Thirds

Legislature must let voters decide on changing requirements for tax increases

Published: May 29, 2016, 6:01 AM
 

The ruling did not come as a surprise. Even Tim Eyman, the creator of Initiative 1366, had acknowledged that it might not pass muster in the courts, so Thursday’s unanimous state Supreme Court decision voiding the measure was predictable.

But while the courts once again have overturned a two-thirds majority requirement for raising taxes, it is time for the Legislature to follow the will of the people. Six times voters have expressed support for a higher threshold on tax matters, and six times that support has been knocked down by either lawmakers or the courts. While strong arguments can be made for or against requiring a two-thirds vote in the Legislature when it comes to taxes, such a requirement clearly is desired by the public.

Initiative 1366 presented a new twist on the issue. Rather than using a ballot measure to try and amend the state constitution, an approach that has been overturned in the past, Eyman devised a novel tactic. Lawmakers were given one of two options: Place a constitutional amendment on the ballot that could entrench the two-thirds requirement; or see the state’s sales tax rate drop by 1 percentage point. A total of 51.5 percent of statewide voters (57 percent in Clark County) agreed with that approach, painting the Legislature into a corner.

The item was largely ignored during this year’s legislative session as the issue played out in the courts. Thursday, justices said the measure violated the state constitution’s requirement that initiatives be limited to a single subject. “Based on the plain language of the initiative, we hold that I-1366 requires the Legislature to choose between two operative provisions,” read the opinion, authored by Chief Justice Barbara Madsen. “This does not constitute valid contingent legislation.” Three justices, in a concurrent opinion, also wrote that the initiative violated the constitution by essentially proposing an amendment by initiative, which is not allowed in Washington.

On a side note, it would take some time to figure out how much money the state has spent over the years in court fights relating to Eyman’s ballot initiatives. At least four times, he has promoted measures passed by voters only to be ruled unconstitutional after winding their way through the courts — odd behavior for somebody who rails against taxes and government spending. He has failed enough times to learn something — one would think.

Meanwhile, the Legislature next year should take action. The Washington Policy Center, in anticipation of Thursday’s ruling, commissioned a statewide poll by Elway Research and asked voters what they would like lawmakers to do if I-1366 is tossed out by the courts. According to the organization, 65 percent of respondents said they want lawmakers to send voters a constitutional amendment allowing them to weigh in on a two-thirds requirement.

Raising the threshold from the current level — 25 of 49 votes in the Senate, and 50 of 98 votes in the House of Representatives — could hamper government’s ability to address issues, react to emergencies, and provide needed services. It also would place an inordinate amount of influence in the hands of a small minority of legislators. But, as six previous votes indicate, the public is clamoring for the opportunity to enact those restrictions — and ultimate power must rest with the people.

Lawmakers should not view the latest Supreme Court decision as a reprieve from a lose-lose situation, but rather as a call to heed the public. They should place a constitutional amendment before voters.

Memorial Day

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X75sVw0xH2c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XoRQTERQdI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OI-_wAX1tV8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9r_b01VFIJw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77v_Xzbn66Y

In my view: democratian fails the journalism test: Greg, step away from the bong before you post on pot.

We were all hosed by the lies used to pass I-502, the pot legalization initiative a few years back.

Actually, I do agree with the title of the nonsense written today: 

In Our View: Legislature Fails Pot Test

Because they certainly have, just not quite the way Jayne portrays it.

The campaign was a campaign of lies and fantasy from the very beginning.  Regular readers are well aware of the false numbers and promises made, since I've repeatedly brought them up. The rag got hosed on the scam, because they're incapable of critical thinking:

The number of $582 million in promised yearly tax revenue was a fantasy...

The lie concerning pot revenue used by the

I-502 campaign and bought by the democratian, 

directly from the pro-pot campaign website.

To actually hit such a number would require Washington State's 7.2 million people to buy enough pot to generate $81 for every man and woman and child living in this state... or $291 or so worth of pot.  Each.  Every man... woman... child and infant.

The rag continues to trumpet bogus and unrealistic numbers, saying today, for example, that "Predictably, the journey to legalized marijuana in Washington has been accompanied by a few bumps in the road. Introducing an industry that produces more than $300 million in annual revenue is bound to create some unforeseen problems." 

First of all, the rag has never admitted they got hosed with the $582 million number... or that, in endorsing this idiocy, they hosed us.  But in all the times the Daily Izvestia has screwed us, they've never admitted they've been wrong, so this isn't surprising.

But a number THAT big?

Wow.  Who knew?

So, I went and committed the cardinal sin of actually looking up the latest revenue numbers, and stunningly enough, this is what I got:The number, ladies and gentlemen, through last July, was not, of course, $582 million. In fact, the number was just over 10% of the promised amount: $62 million to the state... and additionally, $8 million locally.

Washington's racked up more than $250 million in marijuana sales in the past year — roughly $62 million of which constitute marijuana excise taxes. That's beyond the state's original forecast of $36 million. And when state and local sales and other taxes are included, the total payday for the state and local governments tops $70 million.

So... what happened to that $582 million figure? And when the rag writes this garbage:

So, yes, there are some kinks still to be worked out as the state deals with legalized marijuana. But there also have been some clear benefits. Projections are that tax revenue from marijuana sales will top $1 billion by the end of 2018; the revenue demonstrates how legalization has diminished the marijuana black market; the legal system does not have to spend time and money catching and prosecuting citizens for marijuana possession; and, as the Times wrote editorially, “recreational users’ wink-and-a-nod exploitation of the medical-marijuana system is gone.”

I have to ask: was Greg high when he wrote this babble?

We will be hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars short of a "billion" dollars in tax revenue by the end of 2018.

To achieve such a number would require each of us down to our newborns to have purchased almost $4.4 billion worth of pot, including the 37% tax.

Because of the tax and overhead, blackmarket sales CONTINUE apace: the reality is that if someone can but a product for 40% less (Conservatively, considering the tax and the overhead of a retail establishment) they will do so and there will be sellers to provide it, sales where there are no tax incomes figures available... since there isn't any.

And the idea that somehow, "the legal system does not have to spend time and money catching and prosecuting citizens for marijuana possession;" is more democratian revisionism:  Or have they forgotten this recent beauty:

Easter egg hunt in Clark County disrupted by drug bust, police say

Originally published March 27, 2016 at 3:40 pm Updated March 28, 2016 at 7:35 am

A disturbance at a neighborhood Easter egg hunt led police to a nearby home, where they recovered drugs and $108,000 in cash.

Share story

By The Associated Press

The Seattle Times

A disturbance during an Easter egg hunt Saturday evening in Salmon Creek, north of Vancouver, led to the discovery of a large-scale unlicensed pot operation, according to the Clark County Sheriff’s Office.

At about 6 p.m., police were dispatched to a report that the neighborhood Easter egg hunt had been interrupted by a man screaming that his roommates were going to shoot him, according to a story published in the Vancouver Columbian.

Police arrived in the area and learned that the disturbance was related to a marijuana distribution operation headquartered in a nearby home, police said.

Three men, two aged 24 and one 27, were arrested on drug charges. Two of the men had warrants for their arrests from Missouri, police said.

“It is believed that deliveries were occurring across the United States” from that pot operation, the news release said.

Detectives with the Clark Vancouver Regional Drug Task Force obtained a search warrant for the home and four vehicles, and they found 45 pounds of processed marijuana and $108,000 in cash, police said.

The pot was seized, along with five vehicles.

THAT is a "diminished market?"

Clearly the democratian gang is as clueless about the pot scene as they are the CRC/Loot Rail scam.

Locally, of course, tax revenue will be hammered by Oregon pot retailers who sell their product currently with a 25% tax that is scheduled to be reduced to 17 to 20%.

I get that the rag stuck their crank out to get this idiocy passed.  I also get that they would rather cut off said crank with dignity than admit they screwed up.

But this editorial column today was pure fantasy, much like their column endorsing I-502 and the I-502 campaign itself.

So, Gas Tax Rivers finally has her campaign page up... and what does it say? Nothing.

I get it.

Gas Tax lied about a HUUUGE issue to get elected last time; specifically this:

A screen capture from River's 2012 Campaign website.

So, I fully understand why her web site effectively contains absolutely nothing of substance; no promises... no pledges... nothing.

And why is that?

So she can't be held accountable for her promises.  So she can't be asked: "Why did you lie to us?"

Or, "How can we believe anything you say?"

See, if you don't say anything, you can't be held liable for lying.

And that's just one of the may reasons I have to wonder: Is Rivers getting blackmailed?

She used to be a woman of her word.  Now, she doesn't have any words to be a woman of.

 A web site full of glittering generalities where she promises nothing of substance because that means she won't have to deliver anything of substance.

But then, when she was running in 2012, how did this promise work out?

Simple: we got hung with a $700 million dollar bill in this county... and that's around $1600 for every man, woman and child, all because Rivers lied to get elected.

She did nothing to keep her word.  She did nothing to protect us.  She did nothing to allow us to have any voice.  And when asked about it, what did she do?

She even lied about that, falsely claiming that if she hadn't screwed us with her yes vote costing us $700 million... her promised "no" vote would have cost us "$7 BILLION."

That was a lie, of course.  The Transportation scam passed with 27 votes.

Had she voted "no" as she promised she would... it STILL would have passed with 26 votes.  We'd still be paying the $700 million or so, to be sure... but our senator wouldn't be a verifiable liar.

Is it any wonder her website is so worthless, and no one reading it has any idea what she plans to do if she's reelected...  except, of course, to screw us again?

When is the next time she's going to lie?  What is she going to get for screwing her district, a district that voted 75% or so "no" on the gas tax advisory vote?

And if since she's going to lie to us again... and fail to represent the will of the people of THIS district... why should she be elected at all?

Remember that each and every time you put gas in your car.  Senator Ann "Gas Tax" Rivers is a major portion of why you're paying roughly $2.40 more for 20 gallons of gasoline... so we can finance King County's transportation issues.

In large part, because our senator is a liar... like most other politicians.  And that's a shame.  She could have been somebody... and now, she's just another two-faced RINO.

What would Senator Hinton do? (Democratian interrogatories.)

In Our View: Questions for Candidates

From McCleary to bridge to restrooms, primer on issues for those seeking office

Published: May 25, 2016, 6:01 AM

3

 

The lineup is official, which means the game is about to start.
Friday was the deadline for candidates to file for this year’s election, kicking off the campaign season. Three legislative districts — the 17th, 18th, and 49th — rest entirely within Clark County, meaning that a total of three state senators and six members of the House represent the vast majority of residents.

Odds are that several of the candidates seeking those offices will knock on your door between now and the Aug. 2 primary, and voters should be prepared to engage with them. With that in mind, here is a primer on the issues for quizzing candidates and holding them accountable:

• Education funding.
In the 2012 McCleary v. Washington decision, the state Supreme Court ruled that the Legislature has not lived up to what the state constitution says is its “paramount duty”: Funding basic public education. Since then, lawmakers have increased spending on K-12 education by $4.8 billion, but prior to the 2016 legislative session the court chastised them for not doing enough. The justices held the Legislature in contempt and issued a fine of $100,000 a day.

This year, lawmakers responded by passing a plan to plan for education spending, kicking the issue down the road another year. Do candidates believe a property-tax increase is necessary for funding basic education? 

No.

Would this allow local districts to reduce their reliance upon local levies funded by property taxes? 

Not necessary.

Should the state pass a capital-gains tax to help fund schools?

No.

Has the Supreme Court overstepped its bounds in dictating increased funding and,

Absolutely.  The Court has zero authority over the Legislature.  The end.

if so, how should lawmakers respond?

They should ignore the Supreme Court and refuse to pay a dime in fines.

They should cut the number of Justices to 5 by killing their funding.You wanna do that, it's up to you.  

But WE do not have to accommodate YOUR choices or decisions.

• Climate change.
Gov. Jay Inslee has said he wants to be the nation’s “greenest governor” and has put forth several policy ideas that largely have been ignored by the Legislature. Last year, lawmakers inserted into a transportation package a provision that forced the governor to choose between low-carbon fuel standards and the much-needed transportation funding. Candidates must be ready to answer these questions:  Should state government take climate change seriously?

No.

And what should the Legislature do about it?

Nothing.  It's not a state issue.

• The Interstate 5 Bridge.
In 2013, the state Senate scuttled a Columbia River Crossing plan that had been a decade in the making and would have replaced the century-old bridge. Some local representatives — and many local residents — opposed the plan because it included an extension of Portland’s light-rail system into Clark County. So, where do we go from here?

We build an additional bridge to the west of I-5 to the Hillsboro area. 

And we build a bridge to the east of I-205 so that we've got 4 bridges crossing the river. 

We make sure that none of those bridges are light rail ready or capable. 

THEN, we look at replacing the I-5 Bridge... but not until the other bridges are completed.

Candidates must be ready to weigh in on the future of the Interstate 5 Bridge;

We consider replacing it AFTER the other bridges are built.

the future of light rail in Vancouver;

There IS no future for light rail in Vancouver.

and how to engage Oregon officials to forge a compromise that is beneficial for both states.

We force them to build these bridges through federal means.  They can be involved... or it can be rammed down their throats like they tried to ram loot rail down OUR throats.

• Bathroom politics.
Proponents are collecting signatures to try and place Initiative 1515 on the ballot, regarding the use of bathrooms by transgender people — an issue that has made news across the country this year. What do candidates believe is an appropriate response on this topic?

You go to the can with what you were born with.  And you can take a shower with those who have the same equipment you were born with.

Life is tough.  It's tougher when you're stupid, and mutilating yourself is stupid. 

Boger of the CCRINOs breaks it down, provides the "do not vote for list."

I suppose the RINOs had to label the division they've caused somehow.

Brent Boger, who has been a major player in shattering local party unity and flaying this county with his hideous political choices, has laid most of it out with a FB post... self-serving pap, to be sure, but his use of the phrase "Madore Candidate" and "Non-Madore Candidate" is yet another example of that very divisiveness.

The obvious ploy here is the interchangeability of the hated "Madore" label and the "conservative" label because, clearly, in the local RINO world, one cannot BE an actual conservative and run for office WITHOUT the support of, and agreement of Madore.  Boger and his ilk believe, wrongfully as it turns out, that Madore is cancer in every square foot of this county.

Nonsense.  But labeling is an important part of the political realm.  As is mislabeling when the meme requires it.

For the rest of us, it boils down somewhat more traditionally and simply:

"Conservative" and "RINO."

Madore's support (or lack thereof) isn't even a data point in my consideration of a candidate.  If a candidate is conservative, I am likely to support them.  Boger's idea that Madore's support equates to some sort of reason to oppose a candidate is the same reason, then, when a leftist sends a check to a democrat like Boldt or a RINO like Rivers, they should ALSO be opposed.

Right?

Nope.  Of course not.  Situational ethics are the hallmark of the RINO.

Here's how Brent sees it:

17th District, State Rep Position 1:
Non-Madore Candidate: Jerry Oliver
Madore Candidate: Vicki Caldwell Kraft

17th District, State Rep Position 2:
Non-Madore Candidate: Paul Harris
Madore Candidate: Richard Colwell

18th District, State Rep Position Position 2:
Non-Madore Candidate: Shane Bowman
Madore Candidate: Liz Pike

49th District, State Rep Position 2:
Non-Madore Candidate: Carolyn Crain
Madore Candidate: Wade McLaren

County Council District 3:
Non-Madore Candidate: John Blom
Madore Candidate: David Madore

County Council District 4:
Non-Madore Candidate: Jennifer McDaniel
Madore Candidate: Eileen Qutub Quiring

Of some interest is his failure to describe 17th District Senate candidate Lynda Wilson.  Odd, that, but since she's of the RINO ilk, not terribly surprising.

Further, he failed to mention Gas Tax Rivers' or Brandon Vick's persuasion.  Vick is between the Rock and the Hard place.  He joined in opposing Rivers' gas tax and tab fee betrayal to the people of this district and this county.  Rivers on the other hand, has morphed into the very worst politics has to offer: the RINO special-interest stereotypical fake Republican.


Those who unfortunately escaped a GOP challenge are the aforementioned Ann "Gas Tax" Rivers, Brandon "6 Committee" Vick and Lynda "Nowhere to be found" Wilson.

I will be doing what I can to make sure that none of the "Non-Madore" candidates (RINOs) or any of the 3 unchallenged GOP candidates.... particularly Gas Tax, win a damned thing.

Boger, of course, makes excuses for Gas Tax, refusing to admit the truth of the situation: campaign pledges are not negotiable, changeable or refutable by the candidate that uses them.

For if Boger's take is correct.... 

People in politics have the right to change their minds. When they do, it is not lying as some suggest. Who is to say that you were right in the past and wrong now? You know more now than you did in the past--unless you forget.

Then no campaign pledge or promise is worth the paper its printed on and nothing any candidate of any stripe says can be or should be believed.

Boger takes this position, of course, because he could hardly be able to support his buddies and friends who lie like they breathe were he to take the honorable route.

How could he support Rivers or his own creation, Scott Weber, if he were to hold them accountable for their actions, their pledges to do certain things as a condition of their election (Rivers to oppose the gas tax/tab fee increases; Weber to work to get rid of his position as an elected official if he were elected) if he were to hold them accountable?

As a RINO, it's easy for people to lie when the reason serves a purpose they like.

Likewise, as a RINO, when it's personal friends involved, its even easier to overlook their lies no matter how much the people get screwed... much like Rivers screwed us with a $700 million burden... without asking us.

As an attorney, RINOs never forget that words have true meaning... in the language of Justice Thomas in Carcieri v. Salazar:

When the language is "plain and unambiguous," the statute must be applied according to its terms.

These pledges amount to a political contract with the voters.  The terms were both plain and unambiguous:

From Rivers' former campaign web site:

 There are three lies from this excerpt of her campaign website:

1.  "I will not support an increase in the gas tax."

2.  "I will not support increases in tab fees."

3.  "The people have spoken and I have listened."

From Scott Weber's own words:

Quoted from Lew Water's Blog

Quite apparently, Weber really likes the idea of his 6 figure pay check since he's never made any discernible effort to implement his plan, making it nothing but an election year ploy.

I remember getting the call from Boger about Weber and the plan to have him run against Sherry Parker on the basis of eliminating that position as an elective office.

I remember telling Boger: "You know, that sounds like a GREAT idea... as long as he follows through on it after the election."

Well, here we are some half-million or more taxpayer dollars into Weber's pocket later.... and nothing.

The language used by both of these politicians is both plain and unambiguous.  Yet, Boger would have us all believe that those words are meaningless when uttered by anyone running for office as long as they use the excuse of "I didn't know then what I know now."

And what, exactly, did Rivers, who had been involved in local politics for the better part of a decade when she was elected to the House in 2010 and then elected to the Senate in 2012 suddenly "learn" that she didn't already "know?"

Except that any lie to get elected is perfectly OK, for example?

The many faces of Tim "The Liar" Leavitt.

Who can possibly forget this guy, and his fake opposition to tolls on the CRC that I warned everyone about months before he was elected mayor of the Vancouver Soviet?

What is the difference between the lies of Leavitt and the lies of Rivers and the lies of Weber?

Leavitt's lies only cost the taxpayers $200 million.  Rivers' lies will cost us 3.5 times that much and no one seems upset about that.

This type of reasoning is literally a blank check excuse for those we elect to ignore their word, given to the voter as a condition of that election in the first place.

Yet, if you're a RINO, none of those lies matter.  Past voting records are to be overlooked in the RINO world.  We are to suspend our disbelief in favor of supporting a "Friend of Brent."

From the "We hate conservatives, overlook Boldt's RINO record as commissioner" letter:

While we don’t individually endorse all of his votes during that very long period of his service, and some of them concern several of us, we value Boldt’s character, collegial temperament, ability to listen as well as to lead, and maturity in addressing different points of view. Furthermore, his perspective as a farmer, truck driver, and small-business leader is essential on our council.

In short, translated that garbage means "Hey, we know his voting record sucks, but we don't care that he voted like Steve Stewart had his hand up his back, we hate conservatives; he hasn't been one for a decade or more, so vote for Boldt anyway."  (This mischaracterization of Boldt notwithstanding; his tenure to date has been an utter and complete disaster.)

One need look no farther than Brent's hatred of David Madore and his subsequent support of a non-Republican leftist as county chair... and the tax increase that Brent now bears a portion of responsibility for that resulted...

Or the fact that those he would "pardon" for lying to us are his own personal friends... or in the case of Boldt, an opponent of a hated conservative...

Or that it's all too typical for RINO's to make excuses like this...

To see the motivation here.

It's the exact, same reason we have a RINO Senate at the state and federal level (GOP senators at the state level voting with the democrats killed the pervert bathroom bill, for example, not to mention ramming the $15 billion transportation/gas tax/tab fee scam down our throats without asking us... unlike the neo-communist government of the city of Portland, who just last week had a gas tax vote...) and the federal House level... (RINO Ryan has been a great Speaker, hasn't he?) doing Obama's bidding, our fake, cardboard cut out of a congresswoman notwithstanding.  

 If, in fact, Boger is right.... then anything any politician ever says or promises to get elected is worthless... a waste of time and ASCII.  We should just skip campaigns altogether, announce on one week... and hold the election the next since nothing any of them says or does means anything.

Except, apparently, to me.

Democrats whining about Sanders supporters at the Nevada Dem Convention: sounds like irony.

Soon to be former US Senator Babs Boxer (D-CA) came unhinged over the conduct of Sanders supporters at the Nevada Democrat Convention this past Saturday:

Dems' new fear: Sanders revolt could upend Democratic convention 

By Manu Raju, Senior Political Reporter

(CNN)Sen. Barbara Boxer, a veteran of Democratic politics, says she never saw anything quite like this before. 

Loud cursing, shouting, obscene gestures and vile insults, including crude comments about the female anatomy. It was all on display over the weekend as supporters of Bernie Sanders turned the Nevada State Democratic Convention into chaos. 

"I was not able to stop these people for doing what they did," Boxer, a Hillary Clinton supporter, told CNN. "Apparently they've done it before. .... This group of about 100 were very vocal, and I can't describe it -- disrespectful doesn't even explain it, it was worse than that."

READ: Changing super delegate rules would still leave Sanders behind

Boxer is hardly the lone Clinton supporter to experience such harassment on the campaign trail. Several top Democrats told CNN publicly and privately that the energy and enthusiasm of Sanders supporters has at times descended into incendiary attacks that threaten to tear apart efforts to unite Democrats against Donald Trump. Several female senators told CNN the attacks have been misogynistic.

Why would the woman would lie like this?  Well, that's anyone's guess.  She's never seen it before? Seriously?

You see, this sort of thing happens frequently.

Let a conservative, for example, speak on a college campus.

Or, in many instances, watch the protesting scum around a Donald Trump rally.

So when Babs lies about never having seen "anything quite like this before," remind her that her silence in the face of this sort of thing when aimed at the right side of the political spectrum made it perfectly acceptable for a huge segment of her side of the aisle to engage in this against those THEY perceive to be "the enemy."

The left had their chance to reign these clowns in when the right was the target.  And what did we get?

Cricket chirps.

Where were the demands from these fringe-leftist whack jobs for civility when those riots happened?

Will they be this upset when these same people or their surrogates show up in Cleveland for the GOP Convention?

Of course not.

Now the shoe is on the other foot.  And the monster which scum like Boxer helped to create... is now turning on it's former master.

Each and every time a leftist whines about what the Sanders crowd is doing... they should plant themselves in front of a mirror and ask themselves: what could WE... or *I*... have done to prevent this?

Plenty.  For example, they could have condemned this sort of thing when ANYONE did it against ANYONE.

But because it wasn't them... or their buddies?

Silence.

And that's their "Inconvenient Truth."

I hope Sanders' people go nuts.  Perhaps it's time for the Tree of Liberty to be sprinkled with the blood of patriots.

Gays in the military?

No, thanks.

Trusted News, Intel and Journalism From Military Veterans Login

Band of Brothers: Sex crimes and cover-up in the 101st Airborne Division

By Jack Murphy 05.17.2016#Featured EmailShareTweet

Private Brandon Queen was advised to carry a knife with him at all times by his team leader, knowing that their squad leader favored young, pre-pubescent-looking soldiers. “Once the sun goes down, who knows where Santoro is and where Queen is. Something could happen in the corner of the FOB,” his team leader told SOFREP.

At Forward Operating Base (FOB) Kushamond in Paktika Province, Afghanistan, a rogue soldier stalked the men of 1^st Platoon, Charlie Company, 1^st Battalion, 506^th Infantry Regiment, a part of the 101^st Airborne Division.

Staff Sergeant Johnny Santoro was a predator, Queen was told, and he had to take precautions. “Everybody knew he was gay and everyone was scared of him. Basically, he used intimidation and rank [to get what he wanted],” Queen said. After dealing with months of groping, stalking, and harassment, Santoro attempted to forcibly pull down Queen’s pants to perform oral sex on him. Queen removed himself from the situation, and multiple members of the platoon heard Queen running away at a high rate of speed in the dead of night.

John Santoro was asked to comment on this article but declined to respond.

Sergeant Joe Barnes

In the unit famously known as the Band of Brothers and renowned for their military actions waged against the Nazis during World War II, Sergeant Santoro perpetrated a string of sexual assaults in a cultivated environment of fear and manipulation. Those assaults were both ignored and then covered up by the 1/506th chain of command. Several members of the platoon compared their unit’s handling of Sergeant Santoro to how the Catholic Church has attempted to cover for pedophile priests.

“Right when I got there I started hearing rumors about this squad leader who they think is gay and very forceful on certain people,” Sergeant Joe Barnes said of meeting up with his platoon in Afghanistan. “I started hearing from other lower enlisted guys that they would get drunk with this guy and then he would offer to suck their dick. Like, you don’t have to do anything, I’ll just suck you off.”

First Platoon arrived at FOB Kushamond in August of 2010. Out on the flat plains of Paktika, the infantrymen walked right into a nightmare, receiving very accurate mortar fire and rocket attacks on their base. Each time they left the wire in their Humvees, they came under attack by the Taliban. Firefights were nearly a daily occurrence, as were IED strikes, as the area of operations was packed with Taliban, al-Qaeda, and Haqqani-network fighters.

Prior to their year-long deployment to Paktika Province, the men of 1^st Platoon knew all about Santoro. The rest of the battalion knew that something was wrong as well, including the battalion commander and command sergeant major. Private Queen was so new to the unit that he was probably the only one left in the dark.

Arriving in the platoon less than a month before deployment, Queen recalled that, “When I first got there, Santoro was talking about other boys, calling them deployment bitches. All the other sergeants just sat there and laughed.” Santoro had also only recently arrived at 1^st Platoon, having been fired from his job as a member of LTC David Womack’s personal security detachment (PSD).

When Santoro suddenly showed up in 1^st Platoon, one of the team leaders asked his friends on Womack’s PSD what had happened. Santoro was “pressing a private first class under the lieutenant colonel and sergeant major to have a sexual affair, making sexually suggestive comments. The kid felt uncomfortable and complained, so they made the switch.” There were also rumors going around about Santoro having sexually assaulted soldiers in previous deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan.

“The way they made it seem was that he was being selected as a quality leader to take these positions and train these soldiers, which was not what was happening,” Sergeant First Class Matt Mason said. “He was not being selected, he was being fired, relieved of his duty, and sent to another place to attempt to rehabilitate him.” Mason became the platoon sergeant halfway through the following deployment. “Sergeant Santoro, before he came to the platoon, was doing some other type of funny stuff with other soldiers, but no one looked into it,” remarked Jonah Jones, a private in the platoon.

Santoro appeared to take a special interest in Brandon Queen from the first day he was assigned to 1^st Platoon. Arriving at FOB Kushamond in August, 1^st Platoon was known to be troubled by the battalion staff. They were also right smack in the middle of one of the heaviest enemy infestations in all of Afghanistan. The infantrymen found themselves under constant Taliban attack. Most patrols took place in armored Humvees, but they soon lost count of how many of their vehicles were rendered inoperable by IEDs. In addition to heavy combat, the platoon was dealing with numerous internal issues. One private was found convulsing in his hootch after getting high by inhaling Dust-Off refrigerant-based propellant cleaner. A sergeant slapped around a private in the platoon after he discovered him stealing a care package sent to him from his child back home.

Then, one night, their platoon sergeant slipped away into the darkness and abandoned his men. The intensity of the combat that 1^st Platoon was in was too much for him, so he boarded a helicopter and flew to the battalion headquarters, where he rode out the rest of the deployment behind a desk. The morale of his former platoon was devastated. In an infantry platoon, a lieutenant acts as the platoon leader, but the platoon sergeant is the senior enlisted soldier who actually runs the platoon. For the Red Currahees, losing their platoon sergeant to cowardice was like a knife through their hearts.

As the senior squad leader, Sergeant Santoro became acting platoon sergeant until a replacement could be found. With the platoon sergeant gone, and Matt Jones, their platoon leader, unable or unwilling to intervene, Santoro continued to manipulate, coerce, and abuse his teammates. The staff sergeant was an intimidating figure, standing around six foot three and weighing in at about 250 pounds. “He was built like John Cena,” Barnes recalled.

In the beginning of the deployment, Santoro’s squad consisted of the bigger guys in the platoon, since weapons squad is responsible for lugging around and firing heavy machine guns. As weapons squad leader, Santoro was able to maneuver people around and dictate the allocation of personnel in the platoon, getting the youngest and smallest privates placed in his squad.

Soldiers assigned to 1/506 Infantry patrol Paktika Province in 2010.

Santoro also shrewdly assigned soldiers who he was not sexually interested in to conduct tower guard together on the perimeter, leaving him unimpeded to prey on young privates in the platoon. Jonah Jones realized in retrospect that he was assigned tower guard at certain times because Santoro “didn’t like black guys at all,” Jones said, and this allowed Santoro to take advantage of his fellow teammates. In a bizarre power game, Santoro would also not allow Queen to talk to his then-wife on the phone. Santoro wanted to control his teammates, and he did. Those who stepped out of line were “smoked,” meaning that he corrected them by having the privates do physical exercises until they were exhausted.

“There were a few moments with other privates where he got drunk with them and solicited them. When they said no, he smoked the shit out of them for days,” Barnes told SOFREP. Barnes was also a sergeant, but was outranked by one pay grade because Santoro was a staff sergeant. As an NCO, Barnes still felt the need to ask why the privates were being smoked. “Mind your business, Sergeant Barnes,” Santoro replied.

Although sexual assault in the military has been a widely reported problem in recent years, it is often assumed, implied, or stated outright that all of these assaults consist of male soldiers perpetrating violence against female soldiers. Official DOD statistics tell a different tale. From 2006 to 2014, the numbers of male soldiers reporting sexual assault has steadily increased, with 1,073 male soldiers reporting in 2014. Contrast this with the number of female soldiers reporting sexual assaults in 2014, which was 3,671.

Furthermore, male soldiers face an additional stigma when they are sexually assaulted, as society largely believes that this issue is nonexistent. Male soldiers face allegations that they are homosexuals when they report sexual assault, or worse, are told that they should have fought back. Few, if any, female soldiers would be chastised in a similar manner after reporting sexual violence to their chain of command. The Department of Defense’s reporting estimates reflect this reality. In 2014, it is estimated that 43 percent of all female soldiers who were sexually assaulted reported the incident. In the same year, it is estimated that only 10 percent of male soldiers who were sexually assaulted reported the crime.

When Sergeant First Class Matt Mason arrived at Kushamond to become the new platoon sergeant, he found a situation that resembled “Lord of the Flies.” “It was a soup sandwich. Morale was almost nonexistent, guys were doing canned air duster, inhaling that stuff. That was the first incident I ran into,” Mason said. One of his first acts was to take formal action against some of the problem children, by UCMJing them, kicking them out of the platoon, and discharging the one huffing canned air from the Army.

Sergeant First Class Matt Mason

The entire platoon was physically corrected several times as well. Mason had the private who had been huffing zipped up inside of a body bag, then the rest of the platoon had to carry him while running laps around the base. “I took them back old school,” Mason said. “They didn’t like it, and neither did the commander. Sorry, but that was the army I was raised in.” Mason had known Santoro since he was a young specialist, when he first arrived at Fort Campbell in 2004. Although he knew that Santoro was homosexual, he was unaware of how dire the situation was.

Mason began to get an inkling of what was going on in his platoon because weapons squad members would serve as the driver and gunner on his Humvee. By spending time with them out on combat operations, the platoon sergeant got to know his men a little better, and they often asked him if they could change positions and move out of Santoro’s squad. At first, Mason thought it was just because Santoro was a stern and harsh leader, and that his men were being too soft, but as time went on, he realized that something was amiss.

There was “a lot of hands-on playing around, horseplay, and they did not feel comfortable with it at all. You could tell by the emotions on their faces and body language. I had to try to have him [Santoro] removed several times through the first sergeant, and he talked to the battalion command sergeant major who said that will never happen,” Mason told SOFREP. First Sergeant Cavataio was known to be on good terms with Santoro.

Despite what Cavataio was telling Mason, it seemed that Command Sergeant Major Judd had not received the message about Santoro. “Supposedly the battalion CSM shut it down. I did my part talking to the first sergeant,” Mason said. “I talked to the CSM every time I went through the battalion hub, which was three or four different times for UCMJ, as well as for my leave. I would always sit in there and talk to him [Judd] for a few hours, because I knew him from working in the battalion for a year.”

“He would have mentioned it to me if it was brought up to him. It was one of those things where I don’t want to step out of line and ask if it was ever brought to him. Then I would have a head-butting match with the first sergeant,” Mason continued. Without actual proof of Santoro abusing his authority, or a witness coming forward, Mason felt that there was not much more he could do.

Meanwhile, Santoro continued his pattern of sexual abuse against his fellow soldiers. “He would try to get me away from everybody so he could talk to me personally,” Queen said. Santoro would follow him to the bathroom and creep around as well. Queen also claimed that Santoro attempted to drug him at one point, saying, “He went to the platoon doctor and got something. Later, he tried it with liquor.”

During mid-tour leave, Santoro went back to the United States and traveled to Las Vegas, where he allegedly paid to fly an underage boy from West Virginia out to see him. Santoro “had his way with him,” according to Mason. The chain of command knew about it, but no action was taken.

Back in Afghanistan, Santoro continued his reign of terror. “I had to go my whole deployment trying to avoid this guy and make him happy so that he would leave me alone,” Queen recalled. “He would kick my door in, come in my room, and grab me. He would just randomly do it like he was playing around and feel up on me.” But this behavior was repeated with others in the platoon as well. “More to me, because I was like his thing or something.”

John Santoro

Other members of the platoon described how Santoro was known to coerce privates into sitting on his lap so that they could “cuddle” with one another. Another eyewitness said that he saw Santoro nibbling on a soldier’s ear after hearing rumors about such behavior for some time.

Many of the platoon members that SOFREP spoke to believed that Santoro was kept around as long as he was because they were on a hot deployment and receiving daily contact with the enemy. In an already troubled platoon, the last thing many felt they needed was to lose their senior squad leader. “One thing I can say about him: I know he was one of the best sergeants I ever had as far as making sure that we did our job,” Jones said. At that time, Jones did not know about the sexual assaults and felt that “Santoro knew his job; he was the weapons squad leader and we definitely needed him.”

“We were getting so much contact from rockets into our base, and going outside the wire in so much contact that it didn’t make sense to tell on him because he was so good outside the wire,” Barnes said. Then, one day, “We started wrestling once after work and he forcefully jammed his fingers in my ass,” Barnes recalled. Fighting his way out of the attack, Barnes yelled at Santoro over the episode.

“Did you just see what happened?” Barnes asked a soldier who had witnessed the event.

“I think I saw what I just saw,” he replied.

Afterwards, the two infantrymen went to their hootch to talk about what had just happened.

“What do I do?” Barnes asked.

“I don’t know, Sergeant,” his teammate replied.

It wasn’t until Santoro tried to force Queen into oral sex that the chain of command took any action. Queen went to talk to his platoon sergeant about the incident. “He had tears in his eyes,” Mason said. “He is a small guy—very small frame. It was basically that he was afraid for one, to be in that building with Santoro. And that he was tired of living in fear, I guess, is the best way to put it, of being groped on a daily basis. Because there was nothing he could do about it and he was scared to death.”

“After I told Sergeant Mason, [I learned] he had already heard and knew about everything, so he moved me to another squad. He had his eye out for me,” Queen said of the encounter.

“As soon as I found that out, I was like, that is it. He was moved out of the hootch [with Santoro]. I went directly to the first sergeant,” Mason said, who then took the issue to First Sergeant Cavataio, telling him, “We need to go to the commander, now, with this.” Together, they went and talked to the company commander, Andrew Hill. Hill initiated a commander’s inquiry into what was going on in 1^st Platoon while they were still in Afghanistan, still three or four weeks away from being redeployed back to Fort Campbell. Amazingly, no immediate action was taken, and Santoro was not removed from the platoon.

When asked why Santoro was not yanked out of the platoon and at least moved to the battalion staff, Mason was at a loss as well. “I don’t have a good answer for that. It still puzzles me now,” Mason said in an interview with SOFREP. “At that point, there were still guys who were being actively assaulted, sexually. It was rough times. I don’t know why they didn’t move him.”

First Platoon, C/co, 1st Battalion, 506th Infantry Regiment

One of the first questions that many 101^st soldiers asked when they heard about the sexual assaults on FOB Kushamond is why the soldiers did not fight back against Santoro. Part of it was because of his imposing stature; some of it had to do with a quick turnover in the chain of command, with incompetent leaders; and some of it had to do with it being covered up way above the platoon level.

Nonetheless, one soldier in the platoon nearly killed Santoro during the deployment.

“We were sitting there cleaning our guns, and he pointed a loaded gun at Santoro,” Queen said, referring to a soldier who everyone SOFREP interviewed believes was sexually assaulted by Santoro far worse than anything previously mentioned in this article. He will be referred to as Moore, a false name to protect his identity. SOFREP reached out to him, but he did not respond to our requests.

“Santoro did not even care,” Queen said. Santoro “thought it was a joke and all a game.” Moore was so aggravated and broken down that he demanded that Santoro stop sexually assaulting him. Santoro laughed it off and Moore backed down.

First Platoon returned from Afghanistan to their home base, Fort Campbell, Kentucky, with the status quo intact, although Santoro was soon moved to the battalion staff. The commander’s inquiry had been a sham at best. It concluded with a recommendation that charges not be pressed against Sergeant Santoro.

However, things began to unravel for the 1/506^th soon after they arrived at Fort Campbell. While assigned to be a runner for staff duty one night, Queen was asked by the sergeant on duty if the rumors about Santoro were true. Queen told him about everything that had happened on their deployment, and the sergeant hit the roof, taking the issue right up the chain of command.
Meanwhile, Sergeant Barnes felt sold out and betrayed by the Army. He had been trying to talk to his command about Santoro, but to no avail.

Lt. Col. Womack

Getting called into the battalion commander’s office, Barnes said, “I got silenced. They did everything they could to silence me. I got brought into a room with the battalion commander and brigade commander and command sergeant major. They asked me, ‘Sergeant Barnes, what can we do to make this all go away?’” SOFREP reached out to Judd and Womack for comment on this article, but they did not respond.

Making things even worse, Santoro continued his track record of manipulating personnel assignments. Knowing that Barnes was talking to people in the company about the assaults, he had Barnes moved. “Santoro was the one who initiated this stuff. When I got put in the ammo NCO position, I was sitting across from him every other week in a brigade-level meeting,” Barnes said angrily. “Since I was ammo NCO, I got to sit across the desk from him every other week. Nobody cared, nobody gave a fuck.” How Santoro, a mere staff sergeant, had such incredible clout within the battalion is a mystery, one that deserves further scrutiny.

Mason knew Lt. Col. Womack and CSM Judd well from his many years at the 101^st, and did not believe that they were involved in whitewashing the case. However, “I think, because of the amount of exposure that our platoon was already getting, it seemed like everything that was negative that happened was being brought to light that had happened in the past, was happening because of the lack of leadership on the NCO side. As it is slowly coming to light, everyone is worried about that instead of how well they are actually performing.” Mason specifically felt that First Sergeant Cavataio did not want to air any more dirty laundry. “I think there was a bit of a cover-up there,” Mason said.

Moore, the private who had suffered the brunt of Santoro’s sexual assaults, was discharged from the Army just a week after the platoon returned home. Such a rapid out-processing from the Army is almost unprecedented, and how it was accomplished has never been properly explained. It is hard to imagine his paperwork being processed so quickly without direction coming down from the battalion staff.

The unit “started burying things,” Mason said. “The command didn’t want another scandal. Had the news gotten ahold of it, you are talking a massive story at the time. Multiple soldiers being sexually assaulted overseas by their own leader? Come on.” The platoon sergeant also alluded to a past scandal in the 101^st Airborne division at Fort Cambell, the 1999 murder of a gay soldier named Barry Winchell, killed by a fellow soldier named Calvin Glover largely because of Winchell’s sexuality. “Fort Campbell has a history of issues being covered up, as I’m sure other posts do, but Fort Campbell is notorious for it,” Mason said. “I think it all started back with the gay gentlemen who was killed in the barracks.”

But Sergeant First Class Mason was having problems of his own and had to step down from his platoon. “My mental status just degraded severely [after that deployment],” Mason said. While shopping at Walmart one day, he had a full-blown psychological breakdown. “I’m a wreck, people at work are wondering what is going on. On top of that, I had PTSD since 2003, which had gotten worse with each deployment after.” As platoon sergeant, he was also grappling with the guilt of what had happened to the men in his platoon at the hands of Santoro.

Meanwhile, command of the company transitioned from Captain Andrew Hill to Captain Kyle Packard. On the day of the change-of-command ceremony, Sergeant Barnes showed up outside of Packard’s office in tears, begging him for help. Forced to work alongside his attacker at work, Barnes had few friends or allies in his unit. “They really don’t give a fuck about us,” Barnes said of his chain of command. “They care about their image. I verbatim remember hearing, ‘do you really want to tarnish the Band of Brothers image?’” he recalled. He was told not to go public with the Santoro attacks because it might hurt his unit’s reputation.

Packard “was the saving grace in this story,” Barnes said. “He even said that those over him were trying to shut it all down. He fought tooth and nail not to let any of this slide, even though it wasn’t on his watch.” Between Queen telling the staff duty sergeant about the sexual assaults and Barnes talking to Captain Packard, a formal investigation was finally started. Packard took the issue to Lt. Col. Womack, who agreed to initiate a CID investigation. Womack and Command Sergeant Major Judd both left the unit soon after. The battalion commander and sergeant major “promised that they would do anything to make things better, then left and no one ever saw them again,” Barnes commented.

With Sergeant Mason stepping down and a CID investigation underway, 1^st Platoon was effectively disbanded as it had been constituted previously, and its personnel spread out across the battalion. A no-contact order was issued to Santoro for him to stay clear of the alleged victims in the case, but he was not to be deterred.

Battalion Executive Officer (XO) Matt Weber did not have any qualms with Barnes up until the CID investigation began. “Then, the entire shop turned against me,” Barnes said. Meanwhile, Santoro was stalking Barnes, driving in circles around his block and parking outside for prolonged periods of time. He also sent text messages to both Queen and Barnes. He would send Barnes inappropriate jokes saying that he wanted to bounce his head off the headboard of a bed. “He would be okay when he was sober,” Queen said, “but whenever he got drunk, it would aggravate his lovey-dovey stuff. ‘I’m gay, let’s go do something,’” was the sort of thing he would drunk-text Queen and other soldiers. “He would get drunk and ask us to come over. After he found out everything that was going on, the messages had continued. He said that he would get us all back and he would never forget.”

“They put a no-contact on Santoro to us,” Queen continued. “At first he did not follow it, but stopped when he felt the heat from CID.” As the CID investigation ground on, it took a toll on the men of 1^st Platoon. “I did see Joe [Barnes] around regularly while he was at battalion, and he was still doing good work, but you could also tell there was a new vacantness to his eyes,” a soldier in the company told SOFREP. Mason said that, “I saw Queen months later, and the poor guy was just a wreck, an emotional, physical wreck.” Mason’s situation did not improve, either. The company commander put him on suicide watch because he was so worried about him. There had already been a rash of suicides in the unit at that time.

The court martial finally began nearly a year later. The charges against Santoro included a half dozen counts of sexual misconduct, abuse of rank, and drinking overseas while deployed. Victims were called to testify, but according to one officer stationed at the unit, it was difficult for CID to find witnesses who were psychologically sound to offer testimony because of the amount of trauma they had endured. It was an amount of trauma that could not be easily explained simply by groping or touching.

When the victims were called to the stand, the defense made it out as if they were homosexuals who had led Santoro on, according to several victims interviewed by SOFREP. They also tried to play the sexual assaults off as typical military horseplay. “What if I was gay and led this on? That was their defense,” Barnes said. “Well, probably Sergeant Barnes was gay and he let this happen,” he said mockingly of the defense. In infantry units, impromptu wrestling or combative matches between soldiers are common, but of course do not involve any sexual touching. This distinction was difficult to explain in a court of law.

The defense had text messages between Santoro and Barnes from eight months before the trial which were used as evidence. “They pulled up text messages where I said to the guy, yeah, why don’t you come over to my housewarming party, and they used that as evidence to say I was gay and inviting him over for gay activities.”

Many of the crimes committed by Santoro were omitted from the trial entirely. “They tried to play it off like it was just a joke, all funny, all games,” Queen remembered. “Santoro was sentenced to one year in prison,” Queen said, which was “too lenient when six to seven people are testifying to sexual assault and using your rank to manipulate people.”

“If I sexually assaulted six different females, there is no way I would get a slap on the wrist and a year in prison,” Barnes commented. The reason for the light sentence was largely because the trial did not include any charges regarding oral sex, sodomy, or other forced penetration, just groping and fondling. In the end, Santoro did not even serve the full year, as he became eligible for early release.

For Santoro’s victims, the events and attacks that transpired on FOB Kushamond continued to haunt them long after they separated from the military. “I really loved what I did in the Army. I was really proud of what I did in Barge Matal,” Barnes said. “I got back and everything collapsed on me when this happened, and I was never able to recover from it.”

Perhaps what haunted the enlisted men the most was that they didn’t do more to stop it. Feelings of guilt became overwhelming. “I feel the burden for the lower enlisted guys. I should have done something. I deal with that burden every day,” Barnes said as he reflected on the 2010 deployment to Paktika Province. Private Jonah Jones had similar feelings, saying, “It doesn’t just affect those who he’d done it to, but to those who were around, because those guys were like my little brothers. We went to war and it was a hard deployment, and I just can’t believe it happened.”

Sergeant Mason continues to be plagued by guilt as well. “It still haunts me because I feel, what else could I have done? Should I have jumped that command and gone to a higher level? What could I have done differently?” he asks.

More than just the sexual assaults at FOB Kushamond, the issue as to how a staff sergeant like Santoro had such clout in the battalion remains a mystery. How was he able to so easily avoid judicial action for so long? Lt. Col. Womack had no issue in recommending that two privates in 1^st Platoon be discharged, one for stealing mail and the other for huffing canned air, but Santoro skated by.

Cultivating a pervasive climate that allowed him to continue to sexually assault soldiers, Santoro deftly manipulated people, groomed victims, and avoided accountability for years.

Even his promotion to staff sergeant was highly irregular. “I don’t know what he did to become an E6, but it was dirty and there was no [promotion] board, and it was not supposed to happen,” Mason told SOFREP. “I have no idea who signed off on his paperwork. He was told several times that he was not supposed to be wearing that rank. On his ERB [enlisted record brief] he had a date of rank, so what could I do?”

Mason claims that Command Sergeant Major Judd strongly disliked Santoro, and yet no actions were taken until the command was left without any option but to get CID involved. After the investigation kicked off, Judd and Womack both out-processed from the unit. Someone was clearly looking out for Sergeant Santoro, but who that someone was remains a mystery, as does what kind of leverage Santoro may have had over them. A skillful manipulator, Santoro knew exactly how to play the system, both formally and informally.

On May 1^st, 2016, while SOFREP continued the investigation into the FOB Kushamond sexual assaults, Joe Barnes passed away at the age of 27. He is survived by his son, whom he loved dearly.

In the end, Barnes fell as another casualty of war, but one that never should have been. He was betrayed by the Army that he loved. Few reached out to help their teammate when he really needed them in the aftermath of his 2010 deployment. How many other of Santoro’s victims are suffering from the same guilt that Barnes was stricken with is impossible to say.

“There is truth that lives and truth that dies,” goes the lyrics to an old Leonard Cohen song. Despite betrayal, deceit, deception, shame, guilt, and a highly dysfunctional system in the 101^st Airborne Division, Joe Barnes remained true to himself and his unit, determined to make sure that the truth did not die.

The Department of Defense Public Affairs office was contacted for comment on this story, but did not respond in time to be included in this publication.

The little finger story.

They operate on your right little finger 4 times:

1. The first to reattach a ligament to a bone, sewing a button on the outside of your finger and running sutures through the ligament, through the bone, through the skin to your Seahawk colored button on the outside of your finger.

A different doctor decides to remove your sutures 3 weeks early. Ligament only partially attaches to the bone.

Ligament begins to shrink. Little finger begins to tilt outward, eventually achieving a 30 degree angle from perpendicular on your writing hand. Any time you use a pen it feels like someone is unjamming an icepick into that part of your hand.

First knuckle on the finger is destroyed as a result.

2. See original surgeon. Freak him out because I request finger be amputated. Promises corrective surgery within 60 days. (This was on October what... 24th of 2014 or so)

Meanwhile, VA implements the utterly worthless "Veteran's Choice."

Except they don't tell you. And as a consequence, they take your name off the VA surgical schedule.

You wait 50 days but don't hear anything. Meanwhile, finger gets worse... hand starting to look like it belongs to ET and is becoming practically useless.

"Veteran's Choice" refuses to do anything because they claim they can't get my records. Takes them two months to get the records. I already have a referral for hand surgery, but once "VC" reviews the records, they start sending me authorizations.

They send me authorizations... 3 of them for a primary care doctor (Which I do not need) and THEN, once I get them to figure out what I DO need (hand surgery), they send me 3 authorizations for carpel tunnel surgery, which I DON'T need.

THEN, when I finally get them to understand that I need a hand surgeon, they refer me to one, who, (not their fault, obviously) just happened to get diagnosed with two different stage 4 cancers.

So, I contact the VA and ask them if I'm still on the schedule. (They had to put me back on it outside the 30 day window to game the system to get me on Veteran's Choice, again.)

They told me I was, for another 7 weeks... appropriately enough, April 15.

I tell them the hell with it: I've had enough of screwing around with VC and just keep me on the schedule so they can do it.

VC was unhappy with me, but tough shit.

3. We are now 5.5 months after seeing the surgeon who referred me.

He removes destroyed knuckle, wires "Middle phalanx" to "proximal phalanx" and pins everything together using titanium pins (Bone, apparently, won't grow around titanium.)

Things go along OK for two weeks or so, then one of the pins fell out of my finger.

(Meanwhile, I still can't use my hand for anything.)

Spend 8 hours in VA emergency room. Doctor says there's nothing he can do for me (He's an ER Doc, not a hand doc) and sets me up for two weeks exam.

MEANWHILE,the wire used to wire me together starts trying to come out of the skin at one of the suture sites.

Doctor finally sees me, tells me that where the wire is coming out is, in reality, a cyst. Schedules me for a month later to have cyst removed. Tells me I no longer need pin, removes the other pin.

It becomes clear it's wire, and not a cyst. I try to tell them it's wire because I can push it back in.

They don't believe me. Tell me it's a cyst.

Go to have cyst removed... doctor cuts out something, looks in and says, "I'll be damned. There's that wire."

I told him I'd tried to tell them... he says, well, I guess we'll take it out...

He sends somebody out and, I swear to God, they come back with a regular pair of needle nose wire cutters and a pair of what looks like Ace Hardware pliers.

This guy goes to work on my finger, pulling wire out and cutting it... sounds like when I rewired the dash on my 69 camaro.

Finally tells me, "OK, we got it all out."

4. Except, of course, he didn't.

And when he cut the last piece out that he DID remove, he left a needly type point on the wire still in my finger.
Which also tries to come out after about 3 weeks.

I go back in, show the doctors where the wire is literally poking through the skin from the inside, and they schedule me for my 4th surgery to get the remaining wire out. 
Which they finally do... some 3 years after this all started and some low 6 figure cost to the taxpayers, and around a $1000 cost to me for all of it.

A little too long to fit on the bingo card, though.

Finger will never bend, but at least it's straight, if covered with scar tissue.

A democrat filing in the 18th has screwed up the RINO/Bowman plan. Or has it?

From the bizarro zone:

A democrat has filed in the 1-8 to run against Liz Pike.  The dem, Kathy Gillespie, is the prototypical, stereotypical fringe-leftist... almost a sitcom but oh-so-typical of the downtown fringe-left Jimmy Moeller types so favored by the local democrats.

Top-tip to the leftists: the 18th District is among THE most conservative, anti-big-government, anti-tax, pro-life districts in the state.

Insisting on running the female version of Jimmy Moeller just means another loss.

But the female version of Jim Moeller is all they've got TO run... because anyone to the right of Mao will not get any party support.

Just look at the nut jobs they've been running over the past several years.

Now, as the regular reader knows, Sen. Ann "Gas Tax" Rivers is in full-on hate mode against Rep., Liz Pike.

Pike, a conservative Representative in the same district, opposed much of Rivers' RINO agenda, which included a $700 million bill for the taxpayers of Clark County for the gas tax she had pledged to oppose as a condition of her election, as well as becoming a complete lackey for the pot industry that lied itself into existence by falsely claiming that passing the pot initiative would result in $582 million per year in tax revenue to the state... a figure that has yet to exceed what... $70 million?

So, in a fit of pique, was does Rivers do?

She goes out and recruits Shane Bowman to run against Liz Pike in the upcoming election.

Bowman, in a stunning political bit of idiocy, claims that he should have the job because he SUPPORTED screwing the entire county for $700 million on the gas tax/tab fee jack, a strong-armed robbery that Pike opposed loudly and publicly... thus Rivers' anger.

Rivers has never denied recruiting Bowman; Bowman has acknowledged to some that Rivers recruited him to run against Pike, and the simple solution for Rivers to PROVE she didn't recruit him would be for her to disavow Bowman's candidacy, endorse Pike and hold a fund raiser or two for her... things that will never happen since, after all, Rivers made all of this possible.

That said, even though Bowman's chances were slim... it appears they may have just gotten slimmer... given that, in the state advisory vote on the gas tax increase that Bowman so strongly endorsed ramming down our throats without a vote (a vote that even the leftists in Portland get) the 18th District was a 75% "no" vote... and Pike's reputation as a conservative, government expansion-fighting representative of the people (the exact opposite of Rivers and Bowman) would have made it a spirited fight to be sure... but one that Bowman would likely have lost since the only issue he's got is his rabid support for increasing everyone's taxes... without asking them via vote, first.

The announcement of a WEA lackey siphons off any hope Bowman had of getting the far-left, conservative-hating vote that he was counting on to take out Pike.

This, then, becomes something of a microcosm of the county chair vote: a fake Republican (Boldt) announces as a fake Republican as he gradually moves towards running as a "No Party Preference" to draw the RINO conservative-hater vote... a plan that would have been wildly successful if only the democrats hadn't scraped the bottom of the barrel at the last second in getting a democrat, Dalesandro, to file at the last moment.

Yes, Boldt got 39% of the suckers to vote for him... meaning that 61% of us oppose him... and his tenure has been a disaster of legendary proportions with tax increases, spending sprees and acting as if the will of the people was a waste of his time... much like, for example, he acted during his last tenure as a county commissioner.

Even then, he barely beat out Dalesandro.

So now, the great plan of the RINOs to get rid of another conservative has gone up in smoke.

Or has it?

Will Bowman follow suit in an effort to "Boldt" the election?  Will he suddenly run as a fake Republican?

Will it matter if he does?