Last updated on October 27, 2024
Our sources on the Libertarian National Committee tell us what transpired in the executive session part of the LNC meeting a few days ago. Our sources were present in the secret meeting and heard directly what was said. The meeting discussed removing Caryn Ann Harlos as National Secretary.
Our sources report that National Chair McArdle pressed heavily for suspending Harlos because Harlos has filed a derivative suit against the LNC. McArdle is said to have claimed that by removing Harlos from the LNC, Harlos would lose the legal standing Harlos would need to continue the suit.
We have other information on what happened at this and other secret LNC meetings. We gather that, in large part, opinions expressed in these meetings are the same as those heard by the Libertarian public, though sometimes expressed more frankly, but that nothing terribly new is usually revealed.
Our legal sources advise us that the McArdle claim is wrong. Harlos’s standing will not be affected by her suspension. Also, Harlos will now claim to the courts that her suspension was retaliatory, which we gather would be evidence supporting Harlos’s suit. Full details will undoubtedly be revealed — though perhaps not be publicly revealed — when each member of the LNC is deposed during the expected forthcoming trials.
Good for you George pulling the rock off these rats. They are unclever plants in the LP meant to destroy it. The Libertarians who overtook the MAGAS(Make America Colonial Again) and booed Trump at the Convention are the left he threatens war on if elected. Therefore are not all Socialists Conservatives? Where do Marxist and other Socialist regimes end up in: The sewer called Fascism.
So is Hall the Attorney of the LNC, or is he the attorney of the special select committee (all LNC members except Harlos) that was the group that met in executive session. The two groups do not have the same interests, so he cannot be both.
You are of course, absolutely right. In my initial comment about council, I just naturally assumed that since it was an internal case with members of the LNC on both sides, the attorney hired by the LNC as their general council could not be involved. This group would have to hire their own attorney And pay for it… How? If one member of the LNC is suing other members of the LNC, I am not sure that the LNC can pay for an attorney for either side legally.
I would think that both sides would have to pay out of their own pockets, and try to recover attorney cost as part of the settlement.
This is very murky water.
Stewart counsel was there too but should not be involved in alleged removal when he represents entire LNC including me. In my opinion that’s malpractice and he took confidential whistleblower email I sent him and gave it to Angela who I was blowing whistle on. The LP is getting screwed.
Yeah…not good. And of course, all of this could actually add support to any cases against the LNC.
And with this thing about the CIA, it adds support to my theory that the chair of the LNC is mentally unstable.
Executive session is rarely used properly. There are valid reasons for it, but debating removal of an officer when the public already knows about it is not one of them.
If they were in there receiving legal advice from paid council, then that would be valid. But a chair giving legal opinions is not. Is she an attorney? Is she their attorney? Does she even understand what legal standing is? I doubt the answer to any of these questions is yes.
The person who leaked the information was absolutely justified.
Their attorney, Hall, was invited to attend the committee meeting. Start at 1:14:00. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lPoDw2CE_8