Anderson Flips Again

By Ed Wallace, Publisher of Utah Standard News, 12/15/2017, 8 a.m.

Preamble to SCC Members

You have heard and received a lot of misleading and false information recently about the State Central Committee (SCC) meeting this coming Saturday, including a call that it is not happening and an email from the Chair lying that it is illegal. The call came from Peter Simonson and only those SCC members who were thought to be on the fence got called. Click here for an extensive parliamentarian opinion , backed up with facts, by Kirby Glad that explains things differently from the one you’ve been presented. Another email that you moight find interesting is utgop-coup-happening-now

A simple truth is that Anderson, in his release yesterday of his timeline report on the Bateman issue, neglected to include a very important part; the email sent out by Layne Beck to all SCC members and party officers announcing that he asked the Secretary to send the call. The rules of the party state the secretary sends out notices of meetings. She did her job.

Anderson commented that the meeting notice sent out by Secretary Lisa Shepherd  was “unprecedented”.  The sentiment among the 51 SCC members who asked for a meeting is that “the “precedence” is that the elected Secretary is doing the job to which she was elected – contrary to the observed actions of the Chair”.

The simple truth is that the Republican Party is on the verge of bankruptcy and this meeting is about the party’s obligations and agreements regarding extinguishing the SB54 legal debt as well as other financial matters. Thanks to the incredible generosity of Dave Bateman, a true friend and Patriot, the party has an opportunity to have all existing debt and future expenses, relating to the Count My Vote lawsuit, paid. Another simple truth is that forces in party leadership positions are doing everything they can to insure that does not happen.

Another simple truth is that the Chair has not listed the upcoming caucus on any agenda now present, and the adoption of 2018 Caucus Rules and Delegate Allocation needed to happen two weeks ago in order to insure that there even is a caucus in March, 2018. Another simple fact is that the leaders of the Utah Republican Party are responsible for CMV and are now crying to end the suit, knowing that they could very well lose. Why have they done this? Two words – power and money. If the Republican Party has to go down in order for “The Empire” to maintain control, then so be it. There are casualties in every war.

As a duly elected SCC representative, this should be of paramount concern to you. Your voice, and the voices of your neighbors, are in great danger of being silenced. Freedom is not free. This is a time when we all have to stand together or that liberty will be stripped away. That doesn’t happen overnight. This diabolical plot has been active for years.

This article will shed some light on what is happening today. The dots are there for you to connect. The facts are available with a little research. You can add 2 + 2, and you have the gift of discernment. Now is the time to use it. One’s judgment is no better than the information it is based upon. A person may still judge wrongly when presented the truth, but they had the opportunity to be right. If one is given no news or distorted, incomplete information, filled with deliberate propaganda and falsehoods, then their whole reasoning process is corrupted or completely destroyed.

If you were not able to attend the past 2 SCC meetings, and even if you did attend them, this article will offer a perspective that will assist in understanding what is a stake, and how the opposing forces to liberty win. This meeting is rightfully called in accordance with the Utah Republican Party Constitution Article IV. You asked for, and were elected to your position as a SCC member. The meeting this Saturday is your call to serve.

As to the Chair, he can not un-call a  meeting that 51 people legally called. The meeting will address the other financial and caucus issues, in addition to overseeing the arrangement with Dave Bateman.

Republican SCC Members Assume Leadership Role & Call Special Meeting

In a stunning reversal, Rob Anderson, Utah GOP Chairman, flipped on his decision from 2 days ago to proceed with his agreement with donor Dave Bateman. Bateman had offered to pay all past and future expenses relating to the party’s continuing support for the caucus system and their opposition to the SB54 “Count My Vote” lawsuit, currently awaiting decision from the 10th Circuit Court of Appeal in Denver. That legal debt, $360,000, has brought the party close to bankruptcy and the future costs could run as high as $500,000.

SB54, passed in 2014, allows candidates with deep pockets to bypass the traditional nominating caucus system by gathering signatures and forcing a primary. In the recent special election to replace Jason Chaffetz, Chris Herrod was the GOP nominee at that convention, but was forced into a primary by John Curtis, who went the signature route. The UTGOP had to run Curtis as a Republican even though he was not the nominee.

Most members of the GOP State Central Committee (SCC) were shocked to learn of Anderson’s duplicity, especially after having voted overwhelmingly (90%) at the last SCC meeting to continue with the lawsuit in defiance of Anderson’s maneuvering to end it. At that meeting, a committee was tasked with overseeing the lawsuit but Anderson doesn’t see the committee as having any decision-making authority. He thinks it exists only to provide advice and counsel and has described his relationship with the committee as “acrimonious”. One source involved in the negotiations described Anderson’s attitude as “bizarre… because the committee has no motive other than to do the job the SCC tasked it to do. This shows that the Chair clearly does not have the same goals as the committee, or the SCC.”

In increasing numbers, SCC members are beginning to feel that they were deceived by a chairman they believed they elected to protect the Caucus System, defend the lawsuit, and pay off the legal fees owed by the Party. One SCC member stated “I suspected he would do something scathing like this. I didn’t think he had the guts to do it after his excuse about not being able to afford it was diminished.”

Another stated “He has ZERO authority to negotiate anything regarding the lawsuit or legal debt. In fact, Rob has ZERO authority to be involved in ANY of it. That authority was taken away from him by the SCC. The committee was simply being polite by giving him the opportunity to agree to the proposal.”

“Rob has threatened to file bankruptcy and “reorganize” the party. What exactly do you think that means? Seems to me that Rob is working hard to offend as many people in the SCC as possible. He knows that 90% voted to have a committee to address the debt and allow him to get other things done (like planning for the caucus). Did he follow the 90%? No he did not. Has he planned for the caucus? He has not. I’m enjoying how rank and file Republicans came up with solutions when “leadership” just wanted to give up! Rob is clearly attempting to destroy the Utah Republican Party and then have it reinvigorated under CMV control. His attempts to do so must be exposed to the SCC and defeated. How many times has Rob Anderson said he supports the Caucus, and paying off debt, and then says the opposite? How many times can he say he voted for it before he voted against it, and maintain any credibility?”

Rob Anderson on the Caucus System – “I’m not the Count My Vote candidate!”

Another said “His campaign promises were a lie. We were warned before he was elected that this was his intention. His associations with other people who want the same thing reinforced my knowledge. He is and has been the Count My Vote candidate. He’s the chair and he’s demonstrated that he will do anything to get what he wants.” Those associations include Governor Gary Herbert, who some have accused of being the reason that donor contributions have dried up because of the Governor’s urging.

Bateman stated: “Anderson didn’t say he would drop the lawsuit, but insisted that he still maintain the right to act contrary to the voice of the legal-defense committee and drop the lawsuit at any time, even with guaranteed funding. Upon acquiring debt from existing Party counsel, and agreeing never to collect on it (besides receiving potential reimbursements from the State if the suit is successful), Rob insisted the Party could sue me for any malfeasance committed by Party counsel, over which I have zero control.”

Most caucus delegates and SCC members see CMV as a direct attack on the Utah Republican Party and see the lawsuit as saving the rights of the party to organize as the party chooses and not by the forced dictates of government. There is evidence that the destruction of the Republican party is planned and has been in the works for a long time.

(Note: The “official” Utah Republican Party does not own “Republican Party of Utah.” Taylor Morgan, CEO of Count My Vote owns it. Morgan purchased “Republican Party of Utah” with the State Commerce Department on March 3, 2015. Searching that page for this registration, we find: Entity Details: REPUBLICAN PARTY OF UTAH – Utah Business Search – Utah.gov Status: Active as of 03/03/2015.)

If CMV passes, Utah’s media outlets will make a killing on primary campaign advertising. One political consultant stated “So much of this [CMV] has always been about lining the pockets of the consultant class. As a former (and sometimes current) member of the political consulting class, I can tell you that primaries are money makers for “campaign professionals”, and that mostly means media/ad buys.

Anderson’s apologists are attempting to defend his actions by trying to slander Bateman. Alan Wessman stated “Wealthy person throws his money around in an attempt to dictate the actions of the party, while claiming it’s to help combat the influence of money on the political system. Anderson is right to reject large offers with strings attached.” John Mulholland said “How is this not using big money to buy political influence? This seems very hypocritical from what a lot of lawsuit supporters have said.”

The “strings” are in Bateman’s facebook post. He wants Anderson to honor the agreement to continue the externally funded SB54 lawsuit and empower the CDC to do their job. Basically, he is trying to make sure his money is used to preserve the rights of Republicans in Utah and not squandered away. Bateman was offered a seat on the CDC and turned it down.

One engaged party member said “Were any of said strings contrary to the Constitution and bylaws of the party? No. Did Mr. Anderson continue behaviors cited by the ethics committee of the Davis County GOP? Yes. Should he be removed for threatening a party member with litigation? Absolutely!

Most SCC members see Bateman as helping the party to get back on solid financial ground. Once that happens, the party can start focusing again on getting republicans elected. They see Bateman’s donation as aiding the will of the party. Bateman commented “I’m trying to fund the actions of the party, not alter or dictate them. The SCC chose to sue to overturn SB54 long before I ever showed up.” One party member, Kevin Braddy, said Dave, I’m sorry for the way in which your generous offer has been treated. I’m confident that the governing body of the party will do the right thing and treat your offer with the deep respect and gratitude that it rightly deserves.”

Anderson is also complaining about the special SCC meeting called for this Saturday. He says that the GOP attorney, who hasn’t been confirmed yet, has the opinion that the meeting is outside of GOP Bylaws. The founding documents of the party make the SCC the governing body and policy making body of the party. Twice, under different SCC members, the party has voted to continue the lawsuit if no party funds are used.

Anderson commented that the meeting notice sent out by Secretary Lisa Shepherd  was “unprecedented”.  The sentiment among the 51 SCC members who asked for a meeting is that “the “precedence” is that the elected Secretary is doing the job to which she was elected – contrary to the observed actions of the Chair.

The Duties of the Secretary state that the Secretary is the Secretary for the EC, the SCC, etc., and is tasked with Noticing meetings of the same, and taking minutes of the same. There is nothing in GOP documents that says only the chair or vice chair can be the chair of an SCC meeting or that one or both of them must be present. In the case of an absent chair, party documents say that the vice-chair takes over. The party documents don’t clarify what to do if both are absent, so they then refer to Robert’s which states that the secretary would run an election for a chair pro tem to run the meeting.”

“Nothing mean or bad was on the agenda. We simply want to extinguish the debt, in a way acceptable to the generous donor, to find out our delegate allocations, ratify some caucus rules, and set up a fundraising committee to help the party move forward. Not sure why anyone who supports the party would be opposed to any of that.” said one member.

Another SCC member explained it this way: “Members of the committee had a verbal contract with Bateman. The Chair intervened after they had an agreement. The Chair changed the agreement and made it a point of the contract that the donor would be held legally liable, as a litigant in any legal proceedings. It is just unacceptable to make a donor a litigant.”

Anderson sent out a timeline (click here) Thursday that went in great detail about the progress of Bateman’s offer. However, he did leave out one major detail: The email sent out by Layne Beck to all SCC members and party officers. In the email, Beck annouced that he asked the Secretary to send the call. The rules of the party state that the secretary must abide by party rules and send out notices of legally called meetings. She did her job.

The SCC can confirm a “policy” as the governing body of the party, which could be that the Chair (or Vice Chair if the Chair fails to act) shall sign and execute (named specific) agreement by this-and-such day.” Failure to do could be written into such a resolution as to say “Failure by the Chair to sign and execute shall be considered to have resigned his position. Failure by the Vice Chair to sign and execute shall be considered to have resigned her position.”

According to a parliamentarian, for the following reasons, Anderson has no legal standing in regards to how the debt is extinguished.

1 – The committee was formed by the SCC and is under the purview of the SCC, not the chair.

2 –  As a result only the committee can negotiate on behalf of the SCC and the party on this matter. If the Chair is involved at any level it is as a courtesy. Anything else is obstruction of official party business by the chair.

3 – Any agreement between the Committee and Mr. Bateman would require that a report with any recommendations be submitted to the SCC by the Committee for review and possible action.

4 – The SCC would then vote to either accept or reject any motions or recommendations of the committee. All the chair can do is speak in favor of, or as opposed to the motion. If the motion passed and the chair failed to act upon the direction of the SCC, he again would be guilty of obstruction of official party business.

Another SCC organizer said: “Just for the record, I couldn’t care less about the happiness level of Rob. He is a thug and a liar who has no business being Chair of the UTGOP. He got where he is through deception, cover-up and the help of enemies of our caucus system. He is no different than the Clinton’s who have hidden past discretions by threatening others, all for political gain. He is in a position way over his head. Anyone who worries about what he thinks, or who thinks we should let up the pressure on him is just as foolish as thinking the Clinton’s deserve another chance. We are fighting for the soul of the Utah Republican Party against a devious underhanded enemy. Remember, he’s a puppet. With his rejection, without a reasonable counter, of Dave Bateman’s party debt payoff deal, Anderson has revealed himself as a corrupt liberal CMV puppet who can never be trusted to do the right thing!””

Anderson’s Statement About Bateman’s Offer and Declaration that Saturday’s Meeting is Cancelled

“It is our extreme pleasure to announce that Chairman Anderson has been in communication with David Bateman, and Layne Beck, Chair of the CDC. All three parties are hopeful there will be an inked and executed contract tomorrow that will absolve the Party of all past legal debt and fund the legal challenge going forward. More details to follow. ***Please note: should this contract be signed, as hoped, the Special SCC Meeting will NOT be held. Instead, a celebratory event will be planned in its place. All SCC members are encouraged to attend. Same time and location. Standby for more information. Thank you to all involved in this process. What a tremendous gift to the UTGOP this Christmas Season.”

Dave Bateman’s statement: 12/14/17, about 1 a.m.

“When I read that GOP Chairman Rob Anderson was planning to drop the SB54 lawsuit due to funding problems, I stepped forward and offered to pay all the ongoing legal expenses to defend Freedom of Association, as well as a healthy political climate in Utah. I subsequently learned the party was drowning in $400,000 of debt, so I offered to eliminate it. I heard the party was struggling to find donors, so I offered to personally help Rob Anderson fund-raise; I have found several significant donors who said they would step forward.

The only significant items I asked in return was for Chairman Anderson to simply honor the directive already largely provided by the SCC: (1) don’t drop the lawsuit if it’s funded externally, and (2) empower [don’t impede or overrule] the committee tasked to oversee the lawsuit. At the last minute, to my complete surprise, Rob Andersen has rejected my offer. In fact, he proposed that after I write this huge check and pledge to cover future expenses, he can unilaterally drop the lawsuit, and then sue me personally for any errors made by Party counsel throughout the SB54 litigation.

I took Chairman Anderson at his word that rescission of the SB54 lawsuit was truly caused by funding problems. I spent countless hours acting in good faith with the SCC’s honorable, legal-defense committee to work out a no-brainer solution, but I was deceived by the Chairman. I now know that Rob Anderson’s desire to drop the lawsuit has nothing to do with the GOP’s burgeoning debt. Rather, his actions lend immense credibility to those who suspect he’s colluding with Count My Vote to bankrupt the Party, undermine the Caucus System, and silence the SCC.

My offer remains open, and I am hopeful that the State Central Committee will find a way to accept it and protect all State Political Parties’ ability to determine their own leadership-nominating methodologies.”

Steal our Stuff!
Utah Standard News is deeply committed to restoring government oversight through non-partisan journalism. In order to provide top-quality news coverage and investigative work to your readers, our work is free for print
by clicking on the ‘Republish/Reprint‘ button at the top right of this article.

Media Requests or Partnership Inquiries
We have a growing nationwide network. If you’re interested in learning more about our work or receiving regular content from our reporters please contact our Director of Communication and Media Outreach at ed@utahstandardnews.com.

Disclaimer:
The author of each article published on this web site owns his or her own words. The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by the various authors and forum participants on this site do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of Utah Standard News or official policies of the USN and may actually reflect positions that USN actively opposes.

The articles from our ‘Friends’ are under copyright and are published with permission. Any republishing of these articles is STRICTLY PROHIBITED without written consent from the original Publisher.