Press "Enter" to skip to content

Bost Moves for Committee to Investigate McArdle

This is the first step in a process that could remove McArdle

Travis L. Bost: I move that this Board adopt the following resolution:

Resolved, that a committee comprised of Meredith Hays, Paul Darr, Bill Redpath, Andrew Chadderdon, and Steven Nekhaila be appointed by the Libertarian National Committee to investigate allegations of misconduct by our Chair, Angela McArdle, which, if true, cast doubt on her fitness to continue in office, and that the Committee be instructed, if it concludes that the allegations are well-founded, to report resolutions covering its recommendations.”

The co-sponsors were
Keith Thompson, on behalf of Paul Darr.
Adrian Malagon, on behalf of Meredith Hays.
Adam Haman
Travis Bost

19 Comments

  1. Knish Knish January 24, 2025

    Where are these motions being posted? I don’t seem them on the list they made up to hide the discussion. Are they doing things in secret again or did they make yet another list?

    • Dr. Chuck Moulton Dr. Chuck Moulton January 24, 2025

      They are doing things in secret because they realized the JC won’t stop them from repeatedly violating the bylaws.

  2. Dr. Chuck Moulton Dr. Chuck Moulton January 24, 2025

    Nekhaila seems to want to be chair and is a possible (perhaps likely?) replacement if McArdle is removed. For that reason, in my opinion it is a conflict of interest for him to serve on the investigatory committee.

    • Andy Andy January 24, 2025

      Good point, but couldn’t any of them want to be Chair?

      Maybe if it comes down to needing to elect a new Chair nobody currently on the LNC should be able to run for it.

    • J. M. Jacobs J. M. Jacobs January 24, 2025

      It isn’t.

      1. There is no indication that Nekhaila is seeking the post.

      2. At best, the IC can make a recommendation that the LNC can ignore. This is true even if the IC recommends against charges.

  3. ATBAFT ATBAFT January 24, 2025

    I think it time for Mr. Redpath, or anyone, to move to sell the Arlington, VA headquarters and refund the initial donations to whomever wants them back. Surplus funds, if any, should first go to paying existing debt before using them for any new projects, payroll, or other LNC expenses.

    • George Phillies George Phillies Post author | January 24, 2025

      The proposal runs into serious problems with campaign finance law.

      • ATBAFT ATBAFT January 24, 2025

        Political organizations can’t refund donations to specific donors? Tell you what, each donor can enter into a “consulting” contract to produce, say, a five year strategy paper. Surely political committees can hire consultants?

        • Andy Andy January 24, 2025

          There is no reason to refund the donations to the office building to donors. They donated to an office and their donation got used for that until the office became obsolete. Now that it is obsolete it is time to move on and either liquidate the asset and put the funds toward a more useful party function or to at least rent the office out and try to get some revenue out of it

          If the party paid for a computer or a printer and it becomes obsolute should the party have to keep it forever or return the funds to the donors which paid for the computer or printer if the party sells them? I say no.

          I am aware of campaign finance laws. Robert Kraus posted something awhile ago about how and wjy the party should sell the office or rent it out. Note that he worked remote from Florida during his last couple of years or so as an LNC staffer and he waa still able to get his work done without being in the office.

          • ATBAFT ATBAFT January 25, 2025

            Andy, there are legal obligations and moral obligations.
            Maybe there is no legal obligation to offer refunds to the folks who contributed specifically to the HQ bldg. to honor David Nolan, but there is a moral obligation if the LP decides it no longer needs a building.
            Yes, if I donated specifically for a computer system and the Party decided it no longer needed a computer system, and then sold said computer system, the Party should at least offer the donors the chance to recover their donation.

  4. Damian Damian January 24, 2025

    It is about time. Bost is to be commended. Once again Harlos sniffed out corruption and tried to warn everyone and got knifed in back. The rest is better late than never.

    • Joseph Joseph January 24, 2025

      Some of us sniffed it out years ago.

      No other board in the USA would allow the chair to hire her live in boyfriend and father to her child, without getting permission from the board, or at the very least, advising the board.
      She told them after the fact.
      Angela was funneling membership dues right into her own pocket.

      Mark was the only one who saw this for what it was.
      Nepotism and corruption.

      If the board would have stopped her then, they wouldn’t be in this place today.

      • Damian Damian January 24, 2025

        Fair point.

  5. Chase Crum Chase Crum January 24, 2025

    At what point will we all just stop, step back, and acknowledge this horrific nationally visible embarrassment AND DO SOMETHING? We don’t need a Jerry Springer investigation. We don’t need a Red Wedding. We just need decent people to acknowledge what we are looking at, and vote for something better. WHEN are people going to actually DO something about what we all already see and know?

  6. George Phillies George Phillies Post author | January 24, 2025

    There are several obvious possibilities here:

    1) Bost has counted noses and knows he has the votes.
    2) Malagon has counted noses, and is contemplating being the new National Chair.
    3) Mises is throwing babushka to the wolves. Counts twice if there is an ongoing legal investigation.
    4) Malagon and McArdle do not like each other.
    5) One side or the other wants to smoke out the other’s diehard loyalists.

    • J. M. Jacobs J. M. Jacobs January 24, 2025

      Considering he now has 11 votes for this IC, Bost does have the votes.

      • Knish? Knish? January 26, 2025

        Where do you see the vote count?

  7. Daniel Lutz Daniel Lutz January 24, 2025

    I find it odd malagon co-sponsored. Either he thought he could get on and steer the committee in a direction he wanted or he smells the blood in the water and is trying to get out of the lawsuit blast radius.

  8. Joseph Joseph January 24, 2025

    Malagon co-sponsored this resolution?
    Something doesn’t add up here.
    Just saying.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *