Grants Pass Is As Politically Corrupt As Chicago?
#1
I’m a good citizen, work hard, own a house and property and pay my taxes. Why then, did FBI Special Agents visit my private shop Tuesday?

It was retribution, pure and simple — an attempt to intimidate me because I use my 1st Amendment right to free speech by writing letters to the local newspaper, illuminating the morally bankrupt local government.

Special Agent Jeffery Gray from the Medford, Ore., FBI office explained that the official reason for the visit was that the FBI received a tip that I had threatened Grants Pass city councilors. If they feel threatened, it’s because they know I may write the truth about their actions. They are threatened by the 1st Amendment.

I was elected to the City Council. But after seeing the corruption, I couldn’t stomach it and resigned.

To alert the public, anything I’ve said or written about Grants Pass city government officials since has been out in the open, in the public domain — usually in published letters to the local newspaper or letters to the official City Hall email.

Back in 2006 or 2007, I did go beyond that when I reported the Grants Pass city government to the Secretary of State for violating State laws. They routinely held their annual Grants Pass City Council planning session far outside city limits at a luxury lodge. That made it nearly impossible for local citizens to attend to listen or participate. State government officials immediately recognized the illegality and forced Grants Pass to cease and desist.

In 2010, the Grants Pass city manager, assistant manager and police chief were found guilty of violating State election laws for illegally influencing a public vote on a safety levy tax increase. When the three went to Salem to appeal, I wrote a letter to the City Council protesting the use of my tax dollars toward their defense. I documented a pattern of behavior that made me feel they weren’t worth defending.

Shortly thereafter, I received an email from Police Chief Joe Henner insisting that I: “cease and desist” speaking about him or the “next communication will be from my (his) lawyer.” I forwarded his benign threat to the Secretary of State.

When former Mayor Mike Murphy appointed city councilors in a secret backroom deal with no public input or media observers, I paid for a full-page newspaper ad exposing his brazen flaunt of the democratic process.

Last year, when a former strip club DJ, Mark Gatlin, allegedly turned Christian and ran for City Council, I dug onto my own pocket again and paid for a citywide postcard mailing warning voters of his background.

In several open letters published in local newspapers, I have been critical of the lack of real work and huge overcompensation that the city’s firefighters’ union has managed to extract from the citizens under the complicit eye of Henner.

Upon the recent announcement of Henner’s planned retirement, I wrote a letter criticizing his management style and lack of scruples.

On Tuesday, someone connected to the Grants Pass city government sent the FBI to rattle my cage. I don’t rattle. I grew up in Chicago, and the corruption and moral decay in Grants Pass government and politics is nothing I haven’t seen before.

The author Bob Anderson is a former member of the Grants Pass City Council.
Reply
#2
Good for Bob.
A full audit is in order.
Reply
#3
Rather shocking if true.
Reply
#4
So when some freaking nut kills a bunch of people everyone cries THERE WERE RED FLAGS FOR ALL TO SEE!.
But when Law enforcement gets proactive and follows up on a tip that someone threatened another I'm supposed to believe it's retribution and intimidation?
Reply
#5
(12-21-2013, 09:54 AM)PonderThis Wrote: Rather shocking if true.

It's shocking that the FBI followed up on a tip that someone was threatened?

It's shocking that they went to TALK to this guy?Rolling Eyes
Reply
#6
(12-21-2013, 02:45 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-21-2013, 09:54 AM)PonderThis Wrote: Rather shocking if true.

It's shocking that the FBI followed up on a tip that someone was threatened?

It's shocking that they went to TALK to this guy?Rolling Eyes

Let's try that again.

Rather shocking IF TRUE.

In other words, IF the claim is true, it's rather shocking that someone connected to the Grants Pass city council contacted the FBI.

It's not necessarily shocking that the FBI would investigate claims of a threat issues against local government when reported by someone with the right connections.

Time for your reading comprehension checkup.
Reply
#7
(12-21-2013, 02:51 PM)csrowan Wrote:
(12-21-2013, 02:45 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-21-2013, 09:54 AM)PonderThis Wrote: Rather shocking if true.

It's shocking that the FBI followed up on a tip that someone was threatened?

It's shocking that they went to TALK to this guy?Rolling Eyes

Let's try that again.

Rather shocking IF TRUE.

In other words, IF the claim is true, it's rather shocking that someone connected to the Grants Pass city council contacted the FBI.

It's not necessarily shocking that the FBI would investigate claims of a threat issues against local government when reported by someone with the right connections.

Time for your reading comprehension checkup.

I asked two questions Rowie. That's what the question marks mean dummieLaughing. But it's real good of you to fill in the blanks and say what YOU ASSUME Ponder was saying. Does he speak for you also? When is the engagement?

I don't see anything "shocking" even your pathetic need to denigrate me like your lil boyfriend club member pondie isn't shocking.
Reply
#8
[/quote]

LaughingLaughingLaughingLaughing

'Jes Leonard.
Reply
#9
(12-21-2013, 03:01 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-21-2013, 02:51 PM)csrowan Wrote:
(12-21-2013, 02:45 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-21-2013, 09:54 AM)PonderThis Wrote: Rather shocking if true.

It's shocking that the FBI followed up on a tip that someone was threatened?

It's shocking that they went to TALK to this guy?Rolling Eyes

Let's try that again.

Rather shocking IF TRUE.

In other words, IF the claim is true, it's rather shocking that someone connected to the Grants Pass city council contacted the FBI.

It's not necessarily shocking that the FBI would investigate claims of a threat issues against local government when reported by someone with the right connections.

Time for your reading comprehension checkup.

I asked two questions Rowie. That's what the question marks mean dummieLaughing. But it's real good of you to fill in the blanks and say what YOU ASSUME Ponder was saying. Does he speak for you also? When is the engagement?

I don't see anything "shocking" even your pathetic need to denigrate me like your lil boyfriend club member pondie isn't shocking.

Let's try this one more time.


Article claim: "Why then, did FBI Special Agents visit my private shop Tuesday? It was retribution, pure and simple — an attempt to intimidate me because I use my 1st Amendment right to free speech by writing letters to the local newspaper, illuminating the morally bankrupt local government. Special Agent Jeffery Gray from the Medford, Ore., FBI office explained that the official reason for the visit was that the FBI received a tip that I had threatened Grants Pass city councilors. If they feel threatened, it’s because they know I may write the truth about their actions. They are threatened by the 1st Amendment."

Ponder Claim: "Rather shocking if true."

TV: "It's shocking that the FBI followed up on a tip that someone was threatened? It's shocking that they went to TALK to this guy?"


Nope, not shocking at all. What's shocking is that you STILL have crappy reading comprehension skills after having your ass handed to you over it time and time again. You'd think you'd have gone in for remedial lessons by now.
Reply
#10
(12-21-2013, 02:44 PM)tvguy Wrote: So when some freaking nut kills a bunch of people everyone cries THERE WERE RED FLAGS FOR ALL TO SEE!.
But when Law enforcement gets proactive and follows up on a tip that someone threatened another I'm supposed to believe it's retribution and intimidation?

I guess my red flag goes up, why a federal agency and not local or State?

If the threat was levied against a city or county official, the FBI steps in?
Reply
#11
(12-21-2013, 03:31 PM)Prospector Wrote:
(12-21-2013, 02:44 PM)tvguy Wrote: So when some freaking nut kills a bunch of people everyone cries THERE WERE RED FLAGS FOR ALL TO SEE!.
But when Law enforcement gets proactive and follows up on a tip that someone threatened another I'm supposed to believe it's retribution and intimidation?

I guess my red flag goes up, why a federal agency and not local or State?

If the threat was levied against a city or county official, the FBI steps in?

It might have been reported as a 'terrorist threat' or a 'bomb threat'. The FBI would be an investigating party or Homeland security.
Reply
#12
(12-21-2013, 02:45 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-21-2013, 09:54 AM)PonderThis Wrote: Rather shocking if true.

It's shocking that the FBI followed up on a tip that someone was threatened?

It's shocking that they went to TALK to this guy?Rolling Eyes

Rather shocking that the mere act of writing letters to the editor can be construed by some as to be so very very dangerous that it entails bringing in the FBI to talk to them.

By those standards, it seems like every one of us could be due for an FBI visit. I nominate you for the first one.

P.S. I will not be very nice to them when they come visiting. And, I do have a history of telling federal agents to come back when they have a warrant. Once they actually did it.
Reply
#13
(12-21-2013, 05:43 PM)PonderThis Wrote:
(12-21-2013, 02:45 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-21-2013, 09:54 AM)PonderThis Wrote: Rather shocking if true.

It's shocking that the FBI followed up on a tip that someone was threatened?

It's shocking that they went to TALK to this guy?Rolling Eyes

Rather shocking that the mere act of writing letters to the editor can be construed by some as to be so very very dangerous that it entails bringing in the FBI to talk to them.

According to the OP it was all about a letter to the editor. Do you normally make decisions from hearing one side of the story?

Even Bob Anderson admitted the FBI received a tip that he had threatened Grants Pass city councilors

Quote:By those standards, it seems like every one of us could be due for an FBI visit. I nominate you for the first one.

If I ever say something that indicates I'm a danger to someone else I'll expect a visit.
If they think it's possible then I have no problem if they want to talk to me about it. I noticed that Anderson didn't tell them to leave or tell them he had the right to remain silent.
Seems to me he has little to complain about. If he's innocent and didn't want to talk with them then why complain when he did?





Quote:P.S. I will not be very nice to them when they come visiting. And, I do have a history of telling federal agents to come back when they have a warrant. Once they actually did it.

Wow you're such a studRolling Eyes
Reply
#14
(12-21-2013, 03:31 PM)Prospector Wrote:
(12-21-2013, 02:44 PM)tvguy Wrote: So when some freaking nut kills a bunch of people everyone cries THERE WERE RED FLAGS FOR ALL TO SEE!.
But when Law enforcement gets proactive and follows up on a tip that someone threatened another I'm supposed to believe it's retribution and intimidation?

I guess my red flag goes up, why a federal agency and not local or State?

If the threat was levied against a city or county official, the FBI steps in?

The FBI does have a Behavioral Analysis Unit. Their task is to prevent mass shootings in any setting. They receive tips from businesses, churches, campus security and local police. Last year they had 150 cases. Of those cases, none resulted in violence. Maybe local police asked the FBI to investigate this guy. We've only gotten one side of the story...
Reply
#15
Ya I watched 60 minutes too. I doubt this agent (name was given) is part of the unit. But it's a great hypothetical question.
Reply
#16
(12-22-2013, 08:58 AM)Prospector Wrote: Ya I watched 60 minutes too. I doubt this agent (name was given) is part of the unit. But it's a great hypothetical question.

No I didn't watch 60 minutes... I happen to know someone who works for this unit.
Reply
#17
(12-22-2013, 08:20 AM)Lucy Wrote: The FBI does have a Behavioral Analysis Unit. Their task is to prevent mass shootings in any setting. They receive tips from businesses, churches, campus security and local police. Last year they had 150 cases. Of those cases, none resulted in violence. Maybe local police asked the FBI to investigate this guy. We've only gotten one side of the story...


Good point. And perhaps IF we knew the other side of the story, we would be in better place to assume judgment.
Since the OP doesn't tell us where this alleged correspondence was found, how do we know it is even real or is anything more than some zealots short story ramblings?? Further, this OP has a hisotry of plagiarizing others writings, so we really can't rely on the accuracy of the alleged correspondence to begin with.

Lot's of assumption seem be have been made in terms of the validity of any of the content of this thread, beginning with the original post.

It's all kind of like assuming one got their information from 60 Minutes. Assuming just doesn't work out too well many times.
Wink
Reply
#18
Lots of assumptions?

The only thing said was "rather shocking if true". No one has assumed it was true.
Reply
#19
Good chance to get a dig in at Leonard though, and me too.
Reply
#20
And they're off.................!!
The forum paranoids race to see who can get most defensive first, in regards to a general statement about assumptions!
CSrowan wins by 120 seconds!!!
Way to pump it up, CSR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh, ye of low self esteem are quick to jump to self defensive assumptions.
LaughingLaughingLaughing
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)