We continue to repost the documents on the LNC as released in 2023 by Miquel Duque and Anna Johnson Duque.
SO WHAT’S HAPPENING NOW [That’s mid-2023]AND WHAT’S THE DEAL WITH ANGELA?
- Angela is consistently averse to dissent or even good-faith constructive criticism and has a pattern of shutting people out when they challenge her, a trait she shares with Michael Heise. In January of 2023, here’s what then Region 1 Alternate Kathy Yeniscavich said about Angela (she was trying to nominate Miguel for Vice Chair; he declined):
- “As the attacks and challenges increase [Angela] is turning more and more inward to rely on the caucus and what she sees as reliable. I talked to her about the VC and floated your name (sorry not sorry.) She wants Andrew. As we discussed it became obvious. You are both hard workers and you have an edge because you are more experienced in several areas, including running a meeting, but he is easy for her because he doesn’t disagree or challenge her. I think the VC should be someone who challenges internally but then supports even if the decision doesn’t go their way. Which is exactly what you do. I am concerned that this signals she is moving even further toward being unchallenged in the viewpoint of the incestuous caucus relationship … I think she is blinded by this iceberg that is on the horizon and could take down the entire ship.”
- Kathy has now for some reason turned on Lainie as well and adopted Nekhaila’s narrative.
- Because Angela does not have a strategy beyond “keep doing what the LP has always done, but better,” and lacks the courage to overhaul the organization, get Caryn Ann out of power, stop the EPCC overreach, or fix the fatal tech issues, the party has been unable to thrive. Even with the best efforts of the exec director. What person could deliver under this kind of dysfunction?
- What changed in the past two months and why are things suddenly different?
- This is crucial: The relationship between Angela and Lainie broke down about two months ago, about the time when Angela perceived that she had lost the confidence of the board. In her words to Anna, “I watched people flip in real time, a lot of my good will was ruined in [the May meeting], and they dont have faith in my leadership anymore.” After this, Angela began shifting blame for a host of issues onto the executive director, reporting to the LNC every little thing her employee was purportedly doing wrong, and reversing what she said in support of Lainie for months, rather than addressing the root issues of her own leadership. Who will be next?
- Angela recently re-hired Luke Troxell suddenly and without warning after he was let go by the executive director, when Angela and multiple board members were acknowledging his poor performance. Another 180 degree flip in the past two months. We have no proof but suspect Angela was pressured by Michael Heise and the Texas MC to re-hire him.
- Angela’s decision to hire her own spouse under these conditions seems like she is out of touch with reality. She informed the full LNC only after he had already been hired for a 3-month period. She apparently privately got the “nod of approval” from the Treasurer, and the EPCC (inexplicably). In her private announcements to the LNC and the public list about Austin’s hiring, she did not even mention her relationship with him. The LNC conflict of interest form was updated without an announcement of this addition.
- This is crucial too: When Miguel even tries to hint to his Region 1 chairs what’s going on, someone reveals their discussion to Angela and Caryn Ann who then pounce to try to shut him up. Even if what he’s saying isn’t an actual legal risk issue, just something that was said in the LNC private list.
- Now Caryn Ann, Steven Nekhaila, and others are calling for Miguel to resign, and privately discussing censuring him, for sharing just a hint of this information with YOU, the Region 1 chairs and members. They are saying he’s putting the organization at legal risk, that he should leave to heal the dysfunction on the board, and threatening him with censure.
- Finally, and most importantly: All of this is only ever spoken about on the confidential list, not open to the public.
- Miguel and Anna have offered criticism privately to Angela: first encouragingly, then more firmly, then more harshly when she continuously fails to listen.
Angela’s responses:
- “Instead of helping you’re giving me shit. I won’t come to you anymore, forget it”
- “I dont need your concern trolling or accusing me of being erratic … It’s incredibly condescending and disingenuous. I’ll be fine without you sending me that, or sending me CLC takes. Go join them if you like”
- “Don’t send me any more messages like this or I’ll block you”
- Angela’s responses to public criticism: “Behave professionally or tender your resignation. If you have a grievance with me personally, you can address it personally and professionally, like an adult.”
- Angela and the LNC and Michael Heise want to punish and silence the people who are dissenting and criticizing instead of taking a good hard look at themselves. On top of all their failures, this is one of the most alarming. They care more about their own image and public perception than they do about delivering on the promises their loyal supporters and volunteers hired them to fulfill. They have now resorted to flat-out dishonesty and backstabbing their former friends.
But outside the bubble of political activism, who will ever hear it?
Let’s go with the assumption that the current chair and her cabal will attempt to remain in power in 2026. They still have enough time to bring in enough new recruits, teaching them, of course, that all the stuff they hear is false and made up by those opposed to what they consider to be “real“ libertarianism.
They will use the classic Trump playbook of gaslighting their own people.
And don’t forget that their chief opposition includes Ms. Harlos. No matter what she says about ethics, she has a very bad reputation in many parts of the party. So they can point to their opposition and say look at her! She says we did wrong! She was thrown out of office! Impeached twice!
And whether she deserved it or not the first time, the second, both or neither, those are facts.
So they have plenty of ammunition to use to convince new people to support them.
No Stewart the facts are that the first “removal” was voided by the convention. So there is no first. And despite all the rumours of a “bad reputation,” it simply does not exist in on the ground. All active people have enemies but my support base is far greater, and it is precisely because of ethics. And because when I have fallen short, I own it. Sorry you drank the koolaid on that, but I live it. There is a reason why in past member appeals I have gotten the required signatures in less than two days…. four times now over the course of several years?
I don’t drink Kool-Aid. Too much sugar.
You missed my point. It doesn’t matter what happened, they will likely gaslight enough new recruits to keep going one more cycle. To win one more convention.
And as far as reputation, I have talked to a number of people. None of them are in mises. Some feel that you were going around the country to conventions and interfering in their states. One of your recent predecessors had a reputation for doing the same. They felt that you got involved in things that you should not have. Again, this is thirdhand, but reputation is reputation earned or not.
And interfering can be interpreted different ways by different people. Some would say you were interfering in Colorado. Others would say you were doing your job. I don’t recall ever interacting with you in your capacity as national secretary. In the case of what happened in Colorado this past summer, I would agree with those who say you were doing your job.
But the point I was trying to make is that you are one of the most visible opponents of the national chair at this point in time, and you have not been without controversy. They will try to use that to their advantage.
I don’t do things for advantage but principle. No matter the cost. But if we are going to talk about the unfortunate reality of advantage, I’ll just say I’m on the ground. I’m not one bit concerned on that front. As a supporter (and even some “enemies”) says “real knows real.” I stick up for those being wronged. The wrongdoers always see that as “meddling.” Good. Now have I always been right? No. But I own when I’m wrong. Because that’s real.
This is like a real life soap opera.
It’s a sh*t show. And it all starts with Angela.
She is incompetent, has demonstrated poor judgment, and lacks the leadership qualities needed to chair LNC/LP.
Under her leadership both membership and revenue have declined drastically. So much so, she needed to fundraise with a Democrat turned MAGA Trump supporter. RFK is not a libertarian, but became a lifetime member of LP at convention in 2025 to benefit himself. RFK is a chameleon.
Angela now says he is the Libertarian promised in the cabinet.
What a joke.
No libertarian was promised in the cabinet unless the libertarians conominated Trump, which they did not. As I understand it, that would have violated both their own bylaws, which would have required him to be a member and forbid backing a member of another party, as well as laws in most states which don’t allow fusion candidates.
The lifetime membership claim is also questionable. I have seen those who were there say Kennedy paid for a one year membership. A search of the FEC database reportedly revealed that he has not contributed over $200 to Libertarians in any year, which he would have if he was a life member. The party’s own listing of it’s life members also does not include him, although it’s possible it was not updated recently enough. If he is a life member, it must be of a state party.
Agree.
Trump is transactional.
He promised a Libertarian in the cabinet *IF* the Libertarian Party supported him. That didn’t happen, as the majority of Libertarians understand Trump is an authoritarian, not a libertarian.
However, Angela has made some comments post election regarding RFK being the Libertarian promised and insinuating she is behind it.
lol.
She is delusional.