Mediaboss Marketing

Save Yamhill County organizers say commissioner's goal was to misdirect voters days before ballots were mailed

Less than a week before ballots began arriving in mailboxes across the county, attorneys for Commissioner Lindsay Berschauer demanded that the organization seeking her recall, Save Yamhill County, retract statements made on the petitions circulated over the past several months. The embattled commissioner's attorneys threatened legal action if the statements were not retracted.

"On the recall petition filed Nov. 18 during subsequent circulation of that petition, and likely in other subsequent communications, you have made numerous allegations about Commissioner Berschauer without providing factual support," attorney Steve Elzinga of the Portland firm Sherman Sherman Johnnie & Hoyt wrote on Feb. 25.

It appears the threat of legal action was without teeth.

"Despite her promise in her March 4 Facebook Live video to bring a lawsuit against Save Yamhill County, chief petitioner Phil Fovre and myself, we have heard nothing further from either the commissioner or her attorney, and don't expect that she will follow through with her threat," Lynette Shaw, the co-petitioner on the recall effort, said in an email. Berschauer defeated Shaw in a 2020 race for Position 2 on the commission.

Shaw dismissed the threatened lawsuit as a political ploy to distract voters from the real issue: Berschauer's fitness for office.

"Instead of answering the concerns of her constituents or talking with the community about what troubled them enough to call for her resignation, the commissioner has, from the very first day the recall was filed, followed a strategy of casting doubt on the recall effort with lies and mischaracterizations and, even more disturbing, making repeated personal attacks on her constituents who have supported her recall. The threatened lawsuit is just more of the same," Shaw said.

Berschauer countered that her intent in threatening a lawsuit was to maintain the integrity of county governance.

"My purposes in pursuing legal action against this fraudulent recall effort are not only to protect taxpayers from having to pay for these unwarranted and unlawful pursuits in the future (this is costing county taxpayers $80,000), but to also reinforce that recalls should be reserved for egregious and unlawful behavior, not differences of opinion over public policy decisions," she said in an email. "I have also incurred considerable costs in having to defend myself against this unlawful recall attempt, therefore economic damages would be pursued as well."

Berschauer further argued that the wording on the petition, circulated during the first of the year and garnering more than 7,000 signatures, differed significantly from the petition circulated in November that was disqualified by the county on a technical error. She said her team had concerns about the statement on the first petition, but its disqualification rendered it unnecessary to retain an attorney to question its legality.

"When Mr. Fovre filed the second petition, we were shocked to see that his statement changed considerably," Berschauer said. "The language and accusations were markedly different from 'round one.'"

At that point Berschauer hired an attorney, who suggested that the statements were fundamentally false and could be proven as such.

"The statute says that the individual must have known at the time that their statements were false," said Berschauer, who owned and operated a political consulting firm prior to being elected. "We believe, given that Mr. Fovre had spent months on this effort, that he and Save Yamhill County knew the statements provided in the recall petition were false."

Shaw explained that the wording on the petition, technically called a "recall statement," was approved by County Clerk Brian Van Bergen, which allowed SYC to begin circulating the petition and collect signatures.

"That approval happened for this recall on Nov. 18," Shaw said. "The petition is a public document and has been accessible to Commissioner Berschauer and her legal counsel since Nov. 18. We never heard anything from the commissioner or her counsel about the wording on our statement until well after our signatures were submitted for certification and ballots were soon to be delivered to voters."

Shaw said Berschauer's goal was misdirection, plain and simple.

"We believe the commissioner's threat of a lawsuit was intended to harass and intimidate our recall effort," Shaw said. "It's a political strategy she has used with us before: threaten and claim violations of some sort, but never follow through because the damage is done with the threat and misleading messaging that she stands up around it. It's a hardball political tactic, and it has no place here in local politics, especially when used against members of the community."

Shaw responded to Berschauer's threat of legal action with a promise: "If a suit is ever filed, it will most definitely be met with an anti-SLAPP motion. It's highly doubtful she'll take it further, because she understands that this is a classic SLAPP suit, denying us our First Amendment rights, and it's not winnable."

SLAPP is an acronym for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation and is intended to silence critics by forcing them to mount a costly legal defense. Anti-SLAPP laws were adopted in Oregon and many other states more than a decade ago to protect individuals and organizations from litigation while protecting their First Amendment rights.

Berschauer argued that SYC's actions violated state statute that make it illegal to complete and file a recall petition with reckless disregard and that it contains false statement of material fact related to the public officer subject to the recall.

"We also believe that their actions won't qualify for anti-SLAPP protections given the statute's clear language."

You count on us to stay informed and we depend on you to fund our efforts.Quality local journalism takes time and money. Please support us to protect the future of community journalism.

Read the original post:
Berschauer threat of legal action not carried through - Portland Tribune

Jalil Muntaqim, a former Black Panther and Black Liberation Army member convicted of killing two police officers in the 1970s, has been invited to speak at SUNY Brockport. (Jalil Muntaqim / Facebook.com)

by Sabrina Conza

SUNY Brockport faces significant backlash over plans to host a discussion with Jalil Muntaqim, previously known as Anthony Bottom, a former Black Panther and Black Liberation Army member, who was convicted of killing two police officers in the 1970s.

Muntaqim is slated to speak at the university April 6 about his stint as a Black Panther and his time serving nearly 50 years as a political prisoner according to the event description. After facing criticism on Twitter, SUNY Brockport President Heidi Macpherson released a statement, reading, in part:

We do not support the violence exhibited in Mr. Muntaqims previous crimes, and his presence on campus does not imply endorsement of his views or past actions. However, we believe in freedom of speech. SUNY Brockport has routinely held speaking events involving controversial speakers from various background[s] and viewpoints, and will continue to do so. These conversations are uncomfortable. They are meant to be. Theyre about gaining a new perspective.

The university has upheld its First Amendment obligations by refusing to cancel the event, and in doing so affirms the importance of free expression on campus.

This is the correct approach. Universities, especially public institutions like SUNY Brockport, may not disinvite a speaker based on backlash even if that speaker was convicted of murdering police officers 51 years ago. However, there are some who would prohibit the university from allowing the event to proceed.

For example, New York Sen. Thomas OMara tweeted at the university, urging it to cancel Muntaqims talk.

Members of the public, including elected officials, can speak out against controversial speakers like Muntaqim, but calling for cancellation of an invited speakers event advocates unlawful censorship which, if carried out, would violate the universitys First Amendment obligations.

Another New York senator, Minority Leader Rob Ortt, wrote to SUNY Brockport criticizing its invitation of Muntaqim, taking issue with the characterization of Muntaqim as a political prisoner and urging it to consider those who have family members in law enforcement. He asked that the university rescind Muntaqims invitation to speak on campus.

New York gubernatorial candidate, Rep. Lee Zeldin, also weighed in, calling SUNY Brockports decision to provide Jalil Muntaqim with a taxpayer funded platform disgraceful and urging the institution to disinvite Muntaqim.

And Josh Jensen, a New York assemblyman, said the university should disinvite Muntaqim, criticizing his appearance as wholly inappropriate.

Even amidst pressure from elected officials to disinvite Muntaqim, SUNY Brockport must stand firm in its decision to allow the speaking appearance to continue as planned. It is the universitys responsibility to place its First Amendment obligations above the calls of detractors, regardless of the level of controversy or the volume of calls for censorship.

Public institutions like SUNY Brockport may not disinvite a speaker based on backlash.

And although not the case in this situation, legislators must be careful not to suggest that they wield government authority against institutions that fail to accede to their demands of censorship. Legislators, administrators, and the public must instead take a more speech approach to this situation by expressing their own views about Muntaqim and SUNY Brockport. This option is the correct alternative, as it will lead to more individuals taking advantage of instead of violating the First Amendment.

As we continue to watch the situation unfold, we look forward to SUNY Brockport allowing the event to continue as planned.

Original post:
SUNY Brockport must not heed calls to disinvite former Black Panther, convicted murderer - Foundation for Individual Rights in Education

On March 18, 2022, Fortune Brands Home & Security, Inc. entered into a Second Amendment and Incremental Agreement (the “Amendment”) to the 364-day unsecured term loan credit agreement dated as of November 29, 2021 among the Company, the lenders party thereto and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative agent (as amended by the First Amendment and Incremental Agreement dated as of March 1, 2022, the “Existing Credit Agreement”; the Existing Credit Agreement as amended by the Amendment, the “Credit Agreement”). Under the Amendment and the Credit Agreement, subject to the satisfaction or waiver of certain conditions, the Company will be able to borrow an incremental term loan in the aggregate principal amount of $500,000,000. Except for the incremental amount which the Company may borrow, the terms and conditions contained in the Credit Agreement were not changed as a result of the Amendment. See the Company’s Current Reports on Form 8-k filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 1, 2022 and December 2, 2021 for a description of these terms. The proceeds of borrowings under the Credit Agreement may be used for general corporate purposes, including working capital, capital expenditures, permitted acquisitions and other lawful corporate purposes.

Excerpt from:
Fortune Brands Home & Security, Inc. Enter into Second Amendment and Incremental Agreement to the 364-Day Unsecured Term Loan Credit Agreement -...

Fourteen months into the Biden administration, its become clear Democrats are not the so-called progressives they claim to be. More accurately, the Democratic Party ought to be called the regressives, given that on virtually every metric that matters to most Americans, the left is dragging our country backward not forward.

Under Democrat control of government, our nation has regressed with U.S. energy independence achieved during the prior administration. When Donald Trump was in the Oval Office in 2020, the U.S. was a net exporter of petroleum, and imports were the lowest since 1991. This year, according to the Energy Information Administration, We expect net crude oil imports to increase, making the United States a net importer of petroleum in 2022.

Translation: Weve gone from being the largest exporter of oil under Trump to unnecessarily dependent on Iran and other despotic regimes that use millions of dollars in U.S. blood money to fund its terror proxies and other nefarious acts under President Joe Biden.

The regressives, in cahoots with the climate cabal here in the States, nixed the Keystone XL pipeline and hamstrung the U.S. fossil fuel industry with excessive regulations, bans on new drilling on federal lands and other assaults on the U.S. energy sector to purportedly protect the environment while buying dirty oil from murderous foreign dictators who dont give a hoot about climate change.

World peace has regressed from relative global stability under Trump, who led the destruction of the Islamic States caliphate in Iraq and brokered the historic peace deal between Israel and the Middle East known as the Abraham Accords, to a foreign policy dumpster fire under the dangerously incompetent current administration.

Russia has waged war against Ukraine in the most consequential European invasion since World War II and is committing genocide and war crimes before our eyes. Now add the massive humanitarian crisis underway as millions of Ukrainians have been forced to flee their homes to places unknown while Vice President Kamala Harris giggled her way through a recent joint press conference with Polish President Andrzej Duda in Warsaw, unable to answer a simple question regarding how many Ukrainian refugees the United States is willing to accept.

But thats just the tip of the iceberg. Were also witnessing an alarming new power alliance emerge between China and Russia on Sleepy Joes watch, with Taiwan squarely in Chinas sights.

Gas prices that were affordable under Trumps sensible energy policies have skyrocketed to an average of almost $4.50 per gallon nationwide the highest in American history. Inflation is at a 40-year high, and supply chain bottlenecks are ongoing, hampering the U.S. economy. Want a new car, fridge or microwave? Good luck. Youll wait weeks, if not months, to get it at inflated prices.

Race relations havent progressed either; theyve regressed.

America was once a predominantly colorblind society. No more. Regressives now insist we view everything through the prism of race. Forget judging others based on the content of ones character, like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. taught us in 1963 during his soul-stirring I Have a Dream speech at our nations capital. Thanks to the regressives, were now being told to check our white privilege while innocent children are being indoctrinated with critical race theory in our public school system.

But thats not all. America has regressed combatting the war on drugs. China and Mexican cartels are manufacturing deadly fentanyl thats flowing across our nations porous southern border, poisoning and killing our citizens. The fentanyl overdose of several West Point cadets last week is just the latest tragic example. Illegal immigration has surged. Same with rising crime thats spreading like wildfire, including smash-and-grabs at grocery stores, shopping malls and convenience stores near you.

Our right to free speech is evaporating before our eyes thanks to a toxic stew of cancel culture, Big Tech censorship and ever-growing internet surveillance.

And lets not forget the personal liberties lost during the COVID-19 pandemic with the Biden administrations authoritarian vaccine mandates. Americans that chose not to get vaccinated have been fired from their jobs, discharged from serving in the U.S. military, kicked off college campuses, barred from playing sports and denied entry to restaurants, among other harsh penalties, despite the inconvenient truth the vaccines dont stop transmission of the virus.

And we must not overlook the damage done to Americas schoolkids by the Democratic Party, which, instead of doing whats in our childrens best interest during the pandemic, opted to take marching orders from far-left teachers unions instead. Thanks to excessively prolonged remote learning and other extreme COVID-19 restrictions that lasted over two years, Americas children have suffered significant learning and developmental setbacks, regressing academically, emotionally and psychologically from New York to Los Angeles.

Hardly progressive, wouldnt you say?

Adriana Cohen is a nationally syndicated columnist with Creators Syndicate. To find out more about Adriana Cohen and read her past columns, please visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at http://www.creators.com.

The rest is here:
Democrat policies aren't progressive; they're regressive - Towanda Daily Review

When voters arrived at their polling place on March 1 in Azle, Texas, a small city outside of Fort Worth, they saw a framed, printed sign with standard voting instructions: no phones, printed materials allowed. Taped to it was another handwritten sign that read: Sorry No Democrat voting (not staffed).

More than 170 election workers in the county dropped out at the last minute, Tarrant County Democratic Party Chair Allison Campolo told The Intercept. The party did not know how many voters had been stopped from voting at the countys Azle location that day. Across the state, Campolo said, both parties had trouble finding election workers on primary day. But Tarrant County experienced an extreme number of last minute drop offs of available election judges.

According to the Texas Tribune, more than a dozen polling locations in Tarrant County were closed for several hours due to staffing shortages among election judges. Texas is one of several states also including Missouri, Maryland, and Colorado to employ election judges to open and run poll locations, manage poll workers, and settle disputes. Other states call these officials poll workers or election clerks, but in Texas, where election judges have been used for decades, theyre partisan, and during primary elections, they are appointed by the chair of the county political party holding the primary. Numerous states had issues with recruiting poll workers at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, and the number of jurisdictions that reported difficulty in finding enough poll workers increased by5 percent between the 2016 and 2018 elections. But the number of sudden dropouts in Tarrant County this month was unusual, according to Campolo.

Many of the difficulties with recruiting and retaining election workers for this months primary stemmed from Texass new voting law, known as S.B. 1, Parker County Democratic Party Chair Kay Parr told The Intercept. At least 19 states passed restrictive voting measures in the year after the 2020 election, which Republican officials continue to falsely claim was stolen, but S.B. 1 is one of the nations most restrictive. Enacted by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott late last year, the law bans drive-thru voting, implements new ID requirements for mail voting, ends 24-hour voting, and expands the power of poll watchers. It also puts election officials at risk of committing a felony while carrying out their job duties.

S.B. 1 prohibits officials from soliciting or distributing mail ballot applications to people who havent requested them, meaning that answering questions about filling out a mail ballot or helping voters submit them could now be considered crimes punishable by up to two years in jail and $10,000 in fines. In the eyes of the election judges, Parr said, the law threatens legal liability for human error.

Beyond that, with the elimination of mask mandates in most of the United States including Texas working the polls can be hazardous for the temporary staffers, many of whom are elderly or retired, amid the ongoing pandemic. They are often required to work for more than14 hours onelection days, a taxing shift for any worker. The new law only compounds the difficulty, adding considerable risk to a job that requires long hours, entails tedious duties, and pays minimum wage.

Azle sits on the county line between Tarrant and Parker counties, and both counties have their own rules for designating election officials from either party to assist voters. Parker didnt have issues on primary day, Parr said, but several voters who werent able to vote in Tarrant came to the Azle poll site, about a five-minute drive away, on the Parker County side to try to cast their ballots.

Joe Grizzard, an alternate Democratic election judge at the Parker County polling location in Azle, said he had seen a posting prior to primary day saying that the Tarrant County elections office still needed poll workers. And he was worried about the impact the new law would have on election workers.

The county elections office knew they had problems and they were trying to fix them but they didnt fix them in time, said Grizzard, who has been an election judge for five years. I still have concerns for legal liability for telling someone something wrong or helping someone do something that Im not authorized to do because of the change in the laws.

Other aspects of the new Texas law made it harder to vote even before primary day. Last month, Texas election officials reported that thousands of mail ballots across the state were rejected at unprecedented rates because many people did not include the correct ID number on their envelope, as required by the new law. The number had to match the one they used on their voter registration, whether that was a drivers license number or a partial Social Security number. Harris County, the most populous in the state, rejected 35 percent of ballots received by the mail ballot deadline, Reuters reported, compared to a rejection rate between5 and 10 percent in recent years. Applications for mail ballots were also rejected at similar rates due to missing or incorrect ID numbers.

The Department of Justice sued Texas over S.B. 1 in November, arguing that the law would disenfranchise some eligible mail voters based on paperwork errors or omissions immaterial to their qualifications to vote. The case is expected to conclude before the general election, but the timeline is still in flux. In December, Harris County Elections Administrator Isabel Longoria and Cathy Morgan, a volunteer deputy registrar, filed a complaint in federal court against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. Both women represented by the Harris County Attorneys Office, outside counsel, and the Brennan Center argued that the provision that criminalizes helping someone vote by mail criminalizes constitutionally protected speech.

Several weeks before the primary, an appeals court stayed an injunction against the portion of S.B. 1 that criminalizes solicitation of mail ballots. The matter is still pending in the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Unless courts reinstate the injunction, the problems are likely to persist through the runoff and the general election in November, said Andrew Garber, a fellow with the Brennan Centers voting rights and elections program. Were going to continue to see mail ballots rejected at high rates because its confusing, he told The Intercept. People are going to continue to be confused, fill out the wrong form, miss information on the form that could be resolved if the qualified election officials were able to print out public notices and preemptively help people do that.

Texass law was designed to create this exact disenfranchising outcome, Garber said, and similar problems are likely to arise in at least 18 other states including Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and Iowa that joined Texas in passing restrictive new voting laws. It makes the process of voting harder so that the end result is fewer people can vote.

The shortage of poll workers has certainly been made worse in Texas by some of the laws that have been passed, according to Parr. Our poll workers have fear of being sued now because of all of the national attention that voting got with the last election and the lies about the voter fraud. Its harder for us to get poll workers. And that, combined with the lies and Covid, its made it much more difficult for us to get the experienced judges that we need for our poll sites for both parties.

Here is the original post:
Texas Voting Restrictions Take Their Toll: Sorry No Democrat Voting - The Intercept