Tuesday, May 20, 2014

A strange silence from NOM - Oregon and the IRS

In his dissent in United States v. Windsor Justice Alito questions whether those who oppose same-sex marriage will be cast “in the role of bigots or superstitious fools.”

NOM Crying Towel
Ordinarily National Organization for Marriage promptly responds with outrage after every marriage decision that doesn't go their way. Presumably these bulletins are crafted by CRC Public Relations (of Swift Boat fame). Oregon became a marriage equality state at 3:05 yesterday afternoon. Perhaps they needed to refill their indignity tank.

With mounting losses for NOM and the bishops (are they the same thing?) national marriage equality becomes more inevitable which should make it harder for NOM to raise funds. In addition, as more states recognize same-sex marriage it becomes increasingly moronic to suggest that we will suffer toad rain or some other calamity as a result.

NOM's day was further saddened when they learned that they could be liable for a $50,000+ fine for campaign finance disclosure misconduct in Maine. NOM claims that they will fight it but how many fires can they try to extinguish at the same time. These people were never well trained proficient managers to begin with. I am skeptical of their time management skills. In their report, the head of the ethics board wrote “The staff view NOM’s failure to register and file financial reports as a significant violation of law.” Tsk Tsk Tsk. In addition to the fine NOM will be required, at long last, to disclose their donor list which will provide endless blog fodder.

Meanwhile NOM is fighting an expensive battle with the United States regarding their litigation against the IRS. A third party, Andrew Meisel, is alleged to have received and re-transmitted the confidential donor schedule. Emails to and from HRC make it abundantly clear that HRC did not participate. Meisel contacted them and asked if they would be interested. Meisel has been removed from the witness list due to Fifth Amendment concerns (Meisel could not be compelled to incriminate himself).

The idea that the schedule was provided to HRC because its CEO at the time, Joe Solmonese, was an Obama re-election co-chair have been dispatched to the to the bucket marked "preposterous." Apparently confident, the government moved on April 28 for summary judgment which means that the undisputed facts support a legal conclusion in its favor. By statute, the government claims that NOM is entitled to recompense of $1,000 for an inadvertent disclosure. NOM opposes the expedited process. This case is really quite simple. The Service provided a copy of a confidential schedule to someone posing as an authorized recipient. What he did with it thereafter is entirely irrelevant. Deposing people like Fred Karger while compelling document disclosure from him did nothing but increase the legal fees.

NOM wants to muddy the waters with some kind of conspiracy theory about being the target of the administration's mythical oppression of right-wing groups. NOM seems to forget that such nonsense might fly in WND or on Fox but not in a court of law.

This matter is in the Eastern District of Virginia because NOM claimed residency by virtue of their agent, Brian Brown's assistant (possibly Maggie Gallagher's brother-in-law), who lives in VA. The objective was probably a speedier resolution because, on average, cases in the DC federal court take twice as long to move through the calendar. Be careful what you wish for.

Sadly, Mr. Meisel is likely facing criminal prosecution and for what? While some people made a big deal of it, the document provided little information of any value to the equality campaign. The fact that a small donation came from a Romney PAC was of very little consequence.

What is especially interesting about all of this is that NOM is presumably paying considerable legal fees to its chairman, John Eastman — clearly a conflict of interest. NOM's big donors might be Catholic extremists but that doesn't mean that they are stupid, at least not all of the time. They are, quite possibly, asking the same questions about a potential impropriety. Did Eastman get a chairmanship or a client?

Oh, as long as I am wandering through events in crazy-town, last night we heard from gay or straight or bi or ex-bi or ex-straight NOM shill, Robert Oscar Lopez. Lopez wrote 2,317  words of pseudo-intellectual bullshit on Witherspoon's blog to complain that he was treated unfairly on a college campus. He seems to be comparing himself to Condi Rice. He complains of being characterized as “a flaming queer who writes dirty novels about gay sex.” Sounds about right to me. I would add “self-loathing” to the quoted phrase. Ugh!
Enhanced by Zemanta

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.