From https://jakeporter.substack.com/p/mcardle-cover-up-continues, a reader-supported substack. Supporters are urged to go there and subscribe.
Porter and
Chadderdon
wrote:
”While some LNC members eventually became aware of the prior relationship between Allman and McArdle and Padgett, the relationship was not disclosed prior to the hire. It is recommended that the policy manual expand the definition of conflicted relationship to include friends so that the LNC can determine if preferential treatment is being given to friends of the hiring authority.” (SIC Page 82)
Insufficient Oversight (Page 8 vs. Page 90): The report criticizes McArdle for bypassing oversight (Page 8) yet recommends stronger LNC oversight (Page 90). The Executive Director is held in high regard by all LNC members I am aware of and rightly so in my opinion. The Executive Director approved most (10 of 14) Freedom Calls payments (Page 9), undermining the report’s claims that these transactions were “grossly inefficient” and “outside industry norms” (Page 2)….
McArdle was acting as Executive Director when she executed the contract. The fact that she approved four of the payments is an issue. Just because the board didn’t do their job and staff may have not done their job, doesn’t make what McArdle did right.
Punitive Measures (Pages 90, 93–94): Proposing a cease-and-desist letter and resolutions barring McArdle from future roles or contracts (Pages 90, 94) are excessive and poorly founded, given the report’s unsubstantiated claims and McArdle’s recent public statements expressing intent to avoid hostilities and work cooperatively with the party outside leadership…..
McArdle’s avoiding hostilities include the following:
And saying things about former LNC member’s personal lives that I won’t even repeat here.
Based on this, Chadderdon wants the LNC to “acknowledge the efforts of the Special Investigatory Committee, rescind the adoption of the flawed SIC Report, and cancel the punitive measures adopted with it, including the litigation resolution and restrictions on McArdle, to prioritize constructive fundraising and party building.”
It isn’t the SIC report that it flawed. The flaw is the Chadderdon report and his flagrant attempts to cover up McArdle’s wrongdoing. By removing the litigation resolution, it is obvious that Mr. Chadderdon doesn’t believe she should have to pay back any of the money.
Both subsidized parties felt threatened by insurgents even more devoted to acquisitive coercion than themselves. The Socialists and Prohibitionists brandished short platforms averaging 2% of the vote each and WON by adding the 16th and 18th Amendments. They understood that as tugboats nudging the larger looter parties they GOT the victories they were after. Pretending the entrenched parties are going to stand by and let libertarians debate in the House is dishonest. But using them against each other gives our 2-3% of the vote 25x the clout because we operate on the 1-5% difference between them to get laws repealed. Restoring the original 2500-word platform is an idea worth backing.
Dropping out for concessions is a losing strategy, in my opinion. The sociopaths and psychopaths in power can’t be trusted.
It is also not a good way to inspire people to join thr party if candidates for high profiles offices are going to drop out and endorse major party candidates who do not really believe in the libertarian philosophy and who at best will throw us a few breadcrumbs.