Folks, there is a line between gossip and information. In recent revelations about candidate Stolley, that line may very well have been crossed.
Put another way, when we observe human behavior, and a person knows that he is being observed, doesn’t he change behavior just because he knows he is being watched? What happens when the observer is affecting the results they claim to be simply observing. When an observer becomes a participant and not just an observer, do they forfeit the right to claim to simply be observing?
Really, I’m not trying to confuse things. The observer in this batch of revelations has shown themselves to be a participant in the events which they are reporting. Does this participation invalidate their claims of being an objective observer? In this case, said person admits that they reported Stolley to the FBI over his mishandling of the child porn case mentioned in this post and a previous one.
Anyway, here’s the latest via our good friends at Facebook.
Community members are questioning Travis Stolley’s suitability for Boundary County Sheriff, citing concerns about his adherence to law enforcement protocols and ability to fulfill the duties of the office.
Allegations from 2019 suggest Officer Travis Stolley did not follow prescribed procedures in handling a case involving child pornography on an iPod.
* See documents in my comments below (must be on Boundary County Watchman comments not a shared post)
Following the 2020 Dr. Drake murder, questions arose about Stolley’s adherence to local, state, or federal procedural protocols regarding the use of gloves.
* Please see video attached for reference.
Further concerns arising from Stolley’s historical financial record, including a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy filing in 2014. Copies of this Bankruptcy Court filing is available on request.
These concerns seem relevant to any informed decision by the voters in selection of candidates for Sheriff and might bear on fitness for the duties of this elected office.
The above prompted a response by Stolley posted on Facebook.
I will start by saying this, Adrienne Norris is correct about the bankruptcy my family went through. As part of my interview process with the BFPD this was disclosed and discussed with Chief Bob Boone in 2014. He trusted me to overcome this experience and I have always been grateful to him for giving me the opportunity to serve our community.
It was one of the most humbling situations I have ever gone through. I knew going into this process these kinds of issues would be brought up, considered and discussed. I’m okay with you making decisions based on fact and totality of the circumstances. We are all a sum of our life experiences and this is part of my life story.
iPod/CSEM issue.
More important to me than anything else is the privacy of the individual(s) actually involved with this case. Their privacy needs protected as much as possible. I will not disclose specific details which may disclose personal information.
Can you imagine what it’s like to have someone bring up a mistake or bad choice you made when you were young over and over again?
I’ve spoken with the victims family and they want this to be left alone and have asked people to respect their privacy. Instead they were directly attacked by a select few on another social media site.
I know for a fact the victims family doesn’t think anything wrong or improper happened with the investigation. So why do people that don’t know or have the facts of the case keep trying to be a victim when they aren’t actually involved?
Victim blaming is one of the worst things I can imagine doing to someone. Bringing this up over and over keeps pressing an issue without any regard for the real victim in this situation, a young child.
I have explained to Adrienne Norris in person the truth of this, as I will do now. She chooses to either not believe me or not care about the facts and listens to someone who has an obvious bias.
Here are the facts
There 100% was not a crime committed. I did not confiscate any device because based on the information and facts provided to me at the time, there wasn’t a case to investigate. I had the device in my possession long enough to hand it to a parent of the juvenile. The content of the device was reviewed and no criminal activity was found.
Again based on the lack of evidence of a crime this was referred to the parent to handle. The parent handled the issue as any of us who are parents of teenagers in today’s society would, by being the parent.
If there had been evidence any explicit content had been shared at all, an investigation would have occurred. But that was not the case. The parent removed any content of their child on the iPod and left with the device.
Addressing the next part of Adrienne’s post in reference to Brian Drake’s murder case.
This was potentially an active threat scenario were it was a real possibility we could have located someone who had just taken the life of another person by use of a firearm.
We responded to a shots fired call, we located a deceased male and cleared the entire office building looking for a potential shooter/murder suspect.
We thought this person could be inside and possibly hiding behind any one of those doors or cabinets. Once we cleared the scene of any potential active threats a perimeter was set and investigators called.
The video referenced shows parts of us clearing the initial scene after we entered the building a short time after discovering the body. This building was a tactical nightmare to clear.
For info on the Brian Drake murder, see the following:
Oh, for those of you keeping score, this is not the only unsolved case in the area. Last summer a guy supposedly drove north of town, took a walk into the forest, and ended himself. Despite an intensive search, his body was never found. All evidence of suicide is circumstantial.
Stolley’s Facebook post ends on a less than positive note.
The reality is what happens in real life policing isn’t always like the movies. It’s fluid and often chaotic but we can learn from each experience and focus on professional training to improve. As Sheriff that will be a priority!
I’ve said this before and I’ll end by saying it again.
I’m not a perfect person or candidate. I do however care about the integrity of investigations and the wellbeing of our community.
In the above, Stolley seems to admit that not everything was done by the book but they had good intentions so that is what counts.
Conclusion
Folks, Stolley is a nice guy to talk with and he’d be welcome to a BBQ at my house (if I had a BBQ which I don’t) but I don’t think he’s ready for the big chair in the Sheriff’s Office. Youth and inexperience seem to be handicaps for Stolley that he has yet to overcome.
For readers in the once golden state, politics here seems more like running for high school student body president than a real office making important decisions. Such are things in a very small community.
In contrast to the sheriff’s race, lurking on the edges of campaigns for state legislative offices are characters that remind me of our good friends the Just-Us-Brothers. I will have more on these characters in an upcoming post.
Years ago, there was a song, “When I say ‘no’ I mean ‘maybe’, or maybe I mean ‘yes’.” While this might be good enough for former Republican Dominic Foppoli, it is not true of California’s Democrat controlled legislature. You see, in California you can’t find any Democrat NO votes. They literally don’t exist. I know they say YES to most spending and crazy social spending ideas, but literally everything? Are Democrats really in such lockstep that they never have a difference of opinion?
From 2017 to 2024, a group called CalMatters looked at one million votes cast by current legislators. These include all votes on the floor and in committee for the 2,000 or so bills introduced per session by the 120 members of both houses.
Using our new Digital Democracy database, CalMatters examined more than 1 million votes cast by current legislators since 2017 and found Democrats vote “no” on average less than 1% of the time.
Did you get that? Democrats introduced over 2,600 bills and only passed 1,046. That means only 40 percent of bills were approved by the legislature last year, but Democrats only voted NO on one percent of everything. How can this be? For those unaware, California Democrats have over two thirds of both houses of the legislature since 2019. This means that they have the numbers necessary to pass anything and easily override the governor’s veto if they wish.
Why? It’s not something they want to talk about. Democrats have had super-majorities in both legislative chambers since 2019, so most votes involve bills from their political colleagues. But the legislative leaders and lawmakers contacted by CalMatters declined repeated requests to explain a pattern that might appear like a rubber stamp for deals made out of public view. And it seems to be sanctioned by leaders.
“There’s only two fucking buttons on your desk: There’s a green button, and there’s a red button,” then-Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon told the California Labor Federation last year in remarks reported by Politico. “Ninety-nine percent of the time, the green button is the labor button. Ninety-nine percent of the time, the green button means you’re doing the right thing, and the red button means that you’re an asshole.”
Rendon’s office declined to comment or make him available for an interview.
Instead of voting “no,” the data, video and transcripts in CalMatters’ Digital Democracy project reveals that legislators will often decline to cast a vote. Lawmakers widely use the tactic as a courtesy to avoid irking fellow legislators who’d get upset if they vote “no” on their bills, but it’s a controversial practice that critics say allows them to avoid accountability.
“There are a lot of people who abstain and who years later will claim, ‘Oh, I was in the bathroom,’ or ‘I was gone,’ or ‘I was in a meeting,’” said Mike Gatto, a former Democratic Assemblymember from Los Angeles. “It provides them an excuse after the fact to claim that they were not there. I always thought that was cowardly, the opposite of courageous.”
Last year, at least 15 bills died due to lack of votes instead of lawmakers actually voting “no” to kill them.
The most notorious example was when a bill to increase penalties for child sex trafficking died in the Assembly Public Safety Committee because Democrats did not vote. After widespread condemnation, Gov. Gavin Newsom got involved, prompting some committee Democrats to apologize and re-vote on the measure that Newsom later signed.
At least three fentanyl-related bills also died last year due to Democrats refusing to vote on them, infuriating Regina Chavez, who advocated for the legislation. Her 15-year-old daughter, Jewels Marie Wolf, died from the drug in 2022.
“I personally am insulted, because I think everything should be on the record when you hold a state title,” she said. “That is what they signed up for to represent us.”
Chavez along with a group of mothers of youth who died from fentanyl learned about the prevalence of non-votes by exploring the Digital Democracy database.
In a glaring example they found, a bill had 22 bipartisan cosponsors and would likely pass if it reached the Senate floor, but it died in the Senate Public Safety Committee when the four Democrats — Nancy Skinner, Steven Bradford, Aisha Wahab and Scott Wiener — declined to vote by staying silent during the roll call. None of them responded to interview requests.
If you keep reading the article you will find that Democrats will punish other Democrats that vote NO on a bill. In their eyes, it’s better to remain silent than to remove all doubt.
Oh wait. This sounds just like Jim Woodward’s campaign against Scott Herndon. Saying NO to stupid ideas or spending is the cardinal sin for fake Republicans like Woodward. I plan to have more on Woodward’s supporters in a future article.
Lastly, thanks to California Political Review for bring this subject to my attention.
I can’t take credit for this idea but it might be time to say that the wheels have fallen off the Newsom Presidential train.
Whether Newsom is still alive these days — at least in a political sense — is a matter of debate. Heck, we half expect to see his mug on the back of a milk carton. And yet it seems only yesterday that the self-important Newsom was the subject of the political world’s most poorly kept secret: that he was being positioned to swoop in and replace his party’s deeply unpopular and embarrassingly incompetent 81-year-old president, Joe Biden.
Gavin Newsom isn’t dead just yet. But the combination of his own policy failures and the terrier-like stubbornness of Joe (and Jill) Biden is making it increasingly likely that the one-time heir apparent will be remembered by history as the error apparent.
Most of us like a David versus Goliath story, but when does David morph into Don Quixote?
There is comedy in the story of David and Goliath, but David ends it in short order. I’m thinking of the part when King Saul loans David his armor.
38 And Saul armed David with his armour, and he put an helmet of brass upon his head; also he armed him with a coat of mail.
39 And David girded his sword upon his armour, and he assayed to go; for he had not proved it. And David said unto Saul, I cannot go with these; for I have not proved them. And David put them off him.
I Samuel 17: 38 – 39
Saul, the King, tells David to wear his armor. David obeys and puts it on. After doing so, it’s clear to David, Saul, and everyone else that it doesn’t fit correctly and will be a hindrance and not a help in his upcoming fight with Goliath. Saul’s royal armor looks ridiculous on David. Instead, David decides to use his shepherd outfit, his everyday clothing, to battle Goliath.
Also, please note that David is only reluctantly approved to fight Goliath after presenting his credentials as a warrior and nobody else in the regular army stepping forward.
32 And David said to Saul, Let no man’s heart fail because of him; thy servant will go and fight with this Philistine.
33 And Saul said to David, Thou art not able to go against this Philistine to fight with him: for thou art but a youth, and he a man of war from his youth.
34 And David said unto Saul, Thy servant kept his father’s sheep, and there came a lion, and a bear, and took a lamb out of the flock:
35 And I went out after him, and smote him, and delivered it out of his mouth: and when he arose against me, I caught him by his beard, and smote him, and slew him.
36 Thy servant slew both the lion and the bear: and this uncircumcised Philistine shall be as one of them, seeing he hath defied the armies of the living God.
37 David said moreover, The LORD that delivered me out of the paw of the lion, and out of the paw of the bear, he will deliver me out of the hand of this Philistine. And Saul said unto David, Go, and the LORD be with thee.
I Samuel 17: 32 – 37
Prior to battling Goliath, David had experience, a proven track record, and volunteered when nobody else was willing to fight. Also, he was defending God’s honor and was already anointed as the future King of Israel. Also, the fight with Goliath would be a fair one, at least until it was over. It would be a “Mano-a-Mano” fight.
Now suppose David’s only combat experience was playing Call of Duty in his mom’s basement for the last five years. David’s favorite style of play was a sniper and he had never fired a gun in his life. David talks a good game and claims he could take Goliath with a paintball gun while blindfolded. Do you really think the modern David would last more than one sword strike by Goliath?
Somewhere between the Biblical account and the modern one, we’ve moved from bravery to mockery. Don Quixote fought imaginary enemies not real ones that could kill him.
Lastly, is a more modern take of a Don Quixote-like tale, Field of Dreams. The premise is if you build a baseball field in the middle of nowhere, “they” will come. There is no rational explanation for this, just a blind leap of faith.
What is a political campaign with an idea, strong opposition, and zero funding? This campaign, like Field of Dreams, is to get “it” on the ballot and we will win because “they” will vote for it. Proponents believe in such a campaign even though it has never worked before, but they reason that our cause is so just, it simply must win.
Ok, now I will tell you that the campaign is in California and the topic of said ballot measure is overturning the State’s policy on transgender youth.
The windmill alarm is going off. I agree with the idea but if you think the rainbow mafia is going to roll over and let this happen then you are in windmill land. Oh, you are anyway because gay people in California get electrical power from windmills and drive Teslas.
Here’s the news story from the LA Times.
Supporters of a proposed November ballot initiative wanted the all-important title of their measure to reflect their beliefs, a name like “Protect Kids of California Act.” But Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta saw things differently when his office chose the name signature gatherers must use: “Restricts Rights of Transgender Youth.”
Among its provisions, the initiative in question — which has not yet qualified for the ballot — could require schools to notify parents if a child changed gender identification unofficially or in schools records, such as a roll sheet.
With a May 28 deadline to submit signatures — and 25% of the way to the goal —initiative backers must use the state’s description, which they say is hindering their effort. They have sued the state, claiming the initiative was “branded with a misleading, false, and prejudicial title” A hearing is set for April 19.
My first thought on seeing this headline is that Karen England or someone of her ilk is running another fundraising scam on the backs of parents that care about this issue. Like the seven or so recall efforts against Governor Gavin Newsom, this will end not only in failure but in encouraging the transgender agenda to go even further to the Left as no meaningful opposition exists in California.
Second, there is no meaningful amount of money behind this effort. Unless a few billionaire types willing to be cancelled on the same level as Donald Trump get involved, this measure will go nowhere. It used to cost about 3 million dollars to qualify a ballot initiative in California. In the last few years, Democrats have erected further barriers to getting something on the ballot and I suspect it costs even more now. An actual ballot measure campaign would cost north of 30 million to have any chance of getting this passed. Sorry, but in my mind, no amount of money could push this measure over the finish line.
Third, most churches will not involve themselves in this issue. They did nothing when these laws were being passed so why would they act now? I know the allegedly conservative church that I attended in California (which was the largest congregation in the nation in their particular denomination) never did anything on this issue, or abortion, or marriage (since Prop 8), or euthanasia. On paper they were prolife and in favor of traditional marriage, but nothing was ever said from the pulpit that would offend anyone’s sensibilities on these issues. They never once challenged the congregation to stand up for any moral issue in California. In fact, I know a family that had a kid in the congregation go trans and neither the kid nor his parents ever met with the pastor about it and the kid was never put up on charges. The pastor sat on the sidelines; apparently glad he didn’t have to get involved in that mess.
I wish that such a ballot measure would get passed in California but there’s not a snowball’s chance that it might happen. Oh, and even if it did pass, it would be invalidated by some Liberal hack judge before noon on the day after the election. Then the proponents would need another four or five million to litigate it. If the US Supreme Court upheld the law, then the Democrat legislature would have to enact legislation to put the ballot measure into legal force. This will never happen.
Such an effort is tilting at windmills. The hearts of the people in California are too hard and too evil for such an effort to succeed. Ditto for the Christians living there. The vast majority of churches in California won’t support any limitations to the transgender agenda. They believe our society is supposed to get worse. If it gets bad enough, then Jesus will Rapture them away. For them to oppose evil is to defer “the end times.” They will allow any evil to happen as long as they believe it will hasten “the end times.” The rest of the churches just pray in vain that they will be left alone. Such congregations just want to run out the clock as most of the gray-haired folks hope to go to their reward before such evil affects them personally.
Folks, I do find it ironic that Facebook, run by evil tech brats in Silicon Valley, is the chosen means of communication in a part of the country supposedly inhabited by nothing but militias, Nazis, Christian Nationalists, people wanting to “live off the grid,” and a host of other boogeymen. Especially as Zuckerberg, is Jewish, and is known to use his software to data mine people via tracking cookies and other devices. Facebook tracks users all over the Internet to monetize their clicking habits.
Anyway, this week, Dave Schuman released a letter on Facebook explaining why he resigned (or retired) as a deputy sheriff. He also went on to explain that he is still running for sheriff. I wish to look at this letter just a bit. Dave’s letter raises more questions than it answers. Is he paranoid or is somebody out to get him, or at least derail his run for sheriff? I’ll let you decide.
After I declared my candidacy, and after a law enforcement career spanning decades with this Sheriff’s Office, I was suddenly subjected to a personnel action initiated, in the view of many, for purely political reasons, and designed to defeat my candidacy.
I am prohibited from disclosing all the facts surrounding this action, but have noticed that through social and other media, a good deal of speculation has taken place about this action, and I want to make some things clear to make sure the voters are not misled.
1. I recently retired after a long Peace Officer career in this county with a clean record and no discipline. I retired because I have been eligible … Speculation and concerns about the timing and the reason for my “personnel action”, is that it was motivated and furthered by political considerations.
If I hadn’t retired, … I might have been prevented from speaking out on vital public matters, … By choosing not to retire to uphold my First Amendment freedoms, I couldn’t ensure my ability to honestly convey information throughout my campaign; my effectiveness would have been severely limited.
There is no other reason for my retirement at this time …
It’s a political game. I don’t play games. I intend to show through my ability to speak freely about the real issues facing this Sheriff’s Office, that the people of this county can’t be fooled by “personnel actions” into voting against their best interests, and I sincerely believe my candidacy is in their best interests.
Dave Schuman
2. Speculation circulating in social … has largely been based on inadequate information. I’m running and retiring because it needs to be done to ensure the truth about these matters come out, and I can’t do that as an employee of the Sheriff’s Office.
I’m fully prepared to demonstrate and prove that the “personnel action” that caused public attention was primarily politically motivated. At present, I am unable to divulge all the evidence, which may lead to unfounded speculation, however, I can inform you that the allegations are baseless.
Individuals knowledgeable about the pertinent issues and unjustly support these assertions, will be pursued through legal recourse. Rest assured, truth and justice will prevail, and you may learn a lot about who leads this county.
3. I didn’t serve others in law enforcement … only to become ‘UNQUALIFIED’ to serve as Sheriff.
Due to the First Amendment rights, I now enjoy as a retiree and political candidate … I intend to prove it to the people of Boundary County …
This type of political attack hurts families and friends. It has hurt my family a great deal and is not what our County is all about.
Entities within this county are leading us inadequately in certain crucial aspects. Our focus should be on safeguarding our families, friends, and neighbors, rather than engaging in cunning political tactics aimed solely at concealing undisclosed matters related to the performance of these entities’ responsibilities.
I say, there should be transparency in all areas of government, other than ongoing investigations. I intend to conduct my campaign that way, which will encompass discussions surrounding this “personnel action” that have sparked significant attention in the current Sheriff election.
So, Dave says he is under attack from local people who behind the scenes are running the county and trying to ruin him. This boosts the narrative that Travis Stolley is being pushed by the good ‘ole boy network to be the next sheriff because they can control him.
But who is or are the good ‘ole boys?
I’ve only lived here for a year. In other parts of Idaho, I’d speculate that the people running the county were in the LDS church but that is not the case here. There is a strong Mennonite Community here and they represent a large segment of the older families in the community. There is also a local Indian tribe that owns a casino and other assets. They also recently purchased the local newspaper. I know they have money but, in my opinion, they don’t flaunt it to the degree that they could. They seem to be trying to avoid bad publicity and work behind the scenes.
Travis Stolley
The other factor, not in Dave’s letter, is the fact that in the last few years, a large influx of people from other states has moved into this area. I would say most are from California, then Oregon and Washington, although folks from other states have moved here too. For example, our electrician is from Hawaii. The old and established families are being displaced by this influx of new people and things here are changing in ways they certainly don’t like. For example, the price of housing here has about tripled since Covid.
The other possibility is that there isn’t a good ‘ole boy system at all. Maybe it’s a myth or supposition made by outsiders. Given that there are definitely cliques here, I think it likely that there are factions. Going to the right church certainly opens doors when seeking employment here. I hear lots of such stories from the contractors that we are hiring to do our house.
Travis Stolley
After drafting this post, I spoke to someone in the community that I respect, and I was assured that the good ‘ole boy club in the area is the real deal and a vicious bunch to deal with if you get on their bad side. After experiencing their wrath, this person was shocked at the things they were willing to fabricate to harm one’s livelihood and reputation. This person also agreed that Travis Stolley is the establishment favorite for county sheriff.
It appears that Dave Schuman is impeding the will of local powerbrokers and has been tossed under the campaign bus as a result.
The biggest news of the past few days is the Dave Schuman has retired as a deputy sheriff. This has been directly linked to the state investigation which was being conducted into some aspect of his official conduct. I have not heard that he has suspended his campaign or dropped out of the race. Dave’s retirement has been gleefully reported several times on local Facebook pages.
Dave Schuman
Concurrent with Dave’s retirement, Travis Stolley has released a happy family man ad. OK, technically, it’s an endorsement letter on Stolley’s behalf authored by a friend.
Jon VanGesen is conducting many “meet and greet” events in various parts of the county. It has been Jon’s practice during the campaign to release a weekly calendar of events showing his availability and opportunities to interact with the public.
Most recent calendar from VanGesen
My last comment is that unlike my former state of residence, there does not seem to be any government generated paperwork related to the election process. No sample ballots, no info on polling places, no arguments on ballot propositions, etc. I’ll keep you updated if I hear more on this aspect of elections. I was warned by a friend in Nampa (north of Boise) that there is a lack of voter information prior to elections.
Image a world where Rand Paul is running against Mitt Romney. Paul defeated Romney in the last election and Romney is out for blood in the rematch. Sorry, but for folks that live out of Idaho, that’s about the closest comparison that I can come up with to describe the State Senate race here.
The Rand Paul-like character in the race is Scott Herndon. Herndon is a real conservative. He is everything Tom McClintock is not. Herndon’s deeds match his words, and he is a leader; two things McClintock has never been. Herndon will vote against any bill if there is pork or hidden spending increases in it. Unlike Congress, he will only vote to approve money when he agrees where all of it will be spent. If a bill has extra stuff in it, Herndon will not support it. Oh, and unlike other folks in office, Herndon reads every bill and can tell you what he likes or doesn’t in each one.
Scott Herndon
In Idaho, the Legislature is a part-time one, and the legislative session is about 90-days. Things move at a very fast pace. A bill might be introduced on Monday and be heard in committee on Wednesday. It’s a furious pace in a short time. Anything being fast tracked is probably in need of additional scrutiny. I liken it to juggling chainsaws.
Jim Woodward
The Mitt Romney type character up here is Jim Woodward. Jim is a RINO. He thinks Idaho’s abortion restrictions are a problem and seems to want abortion as a form of birth control like it was under Roe v Wade. He voted to support DEI (Diversity, Inclusion, Equity) in academia and business. He pretends to want limited government and lower taxes, but the thrust of his campaign is hitting Herndon both for not spending enough money and Herndon’s reluctance to expand the scope and reach of government.
Were he in California, Woodward would be a proud moderate but in Idaho, he is a chameleon masquerading as a conservative. In a meeting of conservatives, you can sense that Woodward is choking on his own bile just being in the same room as them. But it’s what he must endure to win.
Woodward is supported by a coalition of Democrats, liberal Republicans, and others. One thing they have in common is that they really hate Christians. They have a website that attacks Herndon mercilessly for his faith and values. Started in 2022, this site is North Idaho Republicans.
A week ago, their poorly maintained website had several pages with text that was gibberish (plug text intended to be replaced by actual content). Thankfully, they at least finally took them down. Their Facebook page is their real portal and has more current content.
Here’s some gems from their website.
Conservatives want Dystopian Future
A March 5th post begins with praise for California’s Child Protective Services. Yes, really! Remember, this is a website claiming to be a group of conservative Republicans and they start out praising California (mistake number one) for a government system that is broken (mistake number two).
On the whole, the post seems to lack continuity and substance. In fact, the author has to invent facts out of thin air. Her (I can tell whoever wrote this is female and liberal by the content) entire article is speculation and thus wholly untrue. It is an attack on Herndon and Christians and what harm she thinks they might do in the future. It’s really a classic strawman argument used as a vehicle to trash conservatives. Here are a few parts:
… their Christian Nationalist agenda and make good on their promises to abolish anything they view as an affront to domininist ideologies.
Herndon and his Abolish Abortion arsonist allies …
… a combination of fear porn and forcing some bizarre pseudo-christian version of Sharia Law down people’s throats.
Another thing the North Idaho group dislikes is the Republican effort in the state to say that you must be registered as a Republican for one year before voting in a Republican election. This allegedly conservative group wants Democrats to be able to change registration to select who wins on the Republican ticket. If you oppose any version of “Operation Chaos” or any other means of non-republican involvement in Republican Primary elections, then in their eyes, you are evil.
Yep, just like other groups I can think of, Woodward and his ilk invoke Ronald Reagan as their role model but somehow not Reagan’s beliefs. They only invoke Reagan to claim that others in the GOP must work for what they want. Bipartisanship is always a one-way street. Funny how that happens.
These guys have open hostility to Christianity. Christians started the Republican Party to oppose slavery.
If the North Idaho Republican group wants people in elected office, that claim to be Christian but don’t let it affect their politics, then they should be voting for Joe Biden or Nancy Pelosi. Heck, they’re in the wrong political party. No wonder they’re so uncomfortable as Republicans.
Fake Racism Incident
Note: below I have underlined a few places in quotations for emphasis.
A few weeks ago, the North Idaho Republicans also opened their pie-holes about racism in Coeur d’Alene, but the truth is that the incident—in which they blamed people that they lump in with Scott Herndon—never happened. Zero evidence.
Now, almost two weeks since the incident occurred, there remains no evidence to support these claims.
However, this didn’t stop the false narrative from making national news.
According to Stewart’s Task-Force [Tony Stewart of the Kootenai County Task Force on Human Relations], the University of Utah Women’s Basketball team “encountered a truck displaying a Confederate flag as the driver began spewing appalling racial slurs at them, including the “N” word.”
According to the Kootenai Co human rights task force, the players were going to dinner when they were followed by a driver yelling the N word at them.
The truck that allegedly accosted the players while they were on their way to a restaurant supposedly waited around for TWO HOURS for the team to eat dinner, and then harassed the team again on their way back to the Coeur d’Alene resort. The team was only staying in Coeur d’Alene because the NCAA “dropped the ball” and forgot to reserve the team a hotel 45 minutes away in Spokane.
The allegations of this “Racist Incident” were first made public by Utah Women’s Basketball Coach Lynn Roberts, shortly after her team lost a game against Gonzaga at the NCAA March Madness Tournament.
Please note this steaming pile disguised as a press release.
Recent events in downtown Coeur d’Alene, involving the totally unacceptable verbal harassment of female athletes from the University of Utah and the University of California-Irvine, underscore the importance of the need to commit to uphold moral values and true freedom.
NIR firmly disavows these flashbacks of 1920’s Klan-like and 1990’s Aryan Nations-like activities, underscoring that genuine freedom cannot coexist with bigotry, harassment, and intimidation. Unfortunately, once again the destructive influence of some within the local Republican community is having truly negative effects on our community.
Please note in the above that this republican group is saying that they know for a fact that a fellow Republican, who simply must be from the camp they oppose, is responsible for this incident—although, it never happened. Also, if you don’t agree with them then you must be a Nazi.
Not done making asses of themselves, the author of the release then inserts a quote from himself.
Former Idaho Lt. Governor Jack Riggs voiced his concern, stating, “The empowerment of racism within our ranks threatens the very essence of our community and the integrity of the Republican Party.
Again, the guy with the rebel flag must be a Republican, but not one of ours.
Seems like this might be the classic strawman argument in action.
Oh, the gift that keeps give, this Riggs guy is a real nutjob:
“As Republicans, we must do more than merely point to ‘platform statements’ on racism; we must act decisively to root it out where it exists within our organization,” Riggs added. “This means holding our party leaders accountable and ensuring that their actions reflect the values we profess to hold. There is simply no place for racism anywhere.”
In this paragraph, he now blames the Republican leadership of Idaho Republicans for the incident. This tells you that he’s not part of said leadership, but he deserves to be our master.
I will have more on the website of the North Idaho Republicans shortly.
Woodward and Abortion
These North Idaho whiners aren’t really Republicans. They don’t like abortion restrictions and think we need more DEI, transgender books for elementary school kids, and rainbow stuff.
Their boy, Jim Woodward got a plug of sorts from the UK Guardian newspaper. Apparently, he regrets his previous stand as a prolife Republican and wishes to moderate his positions. The following was written by a freelance writer in Montana, about the uphill struggle to undo the prolife laws in Idaho and once again make abortion lethal through all nine months of pregnancy. Towards the end of this advocacy piece, you will find these paragraphs:
Then another guest arrives: Jim Woodward, a Sandpoint Republican who served in the Idaho state senate from 2019-2022. He voted yes on all anti-abortion bills, but lost his seat in the 2022 election to Scott Herndon, a far-right abortion abolitionist who believes abortion should be treated as homicide and punished with jail time or even the death penalty. In the 2023 session, Herndon tried to remove Idaho’s rape and incest exception and called rape “an opportunity to have the child … if the rape actually occurred”. (Herndon declined to be interviewed for this story.)
Woodward is running to retake the seat this year. He says he and many other anti-abortion legislators didn’t foresee the ramifications of the bills they voted for. Part of his platform, which promises to reclaim his community from extremism, is to somewhat ease legislative language that doesn’t take the mother’s future health into account and calls for felony convictions for physicians. He didn’t hesitate to accept [Jen Jackson] Quintano’s invitation to the viewing party. “We should be able to talk about all of these things, and do it in a nice way,” he says. Two days later, he shares stories from the Nightline episode with attendees at a campaign meet and greet.
For those of you that don’t pay attention to legal issues, taking the mother’s health into consideration, as Woodward states above, is how we got almost 50 years of abortion being legal for all nine months of the pregnancy and the main form of birth control in the United States. Clearly Woodward wants to go back to Roe v Wade (and Doe v Bolton) as the law of the land.
Please note that Woodward was willing to vote prolife as long as he knew that only the Supreme Court had the power to overturn Roe. He was defeated by Herndon just a month before Roe was struck down. Now that voting prolife has real world implications, he wants to relax the restrictions that he once voted for. Conclusion, he only voted that way because he was expected to do so to get elected. It was never how he truly felt about the evil of abortion.
Black Lists and Black-balling
As I was poking around the North Idaho Republican website, I clicked on a curious button (Visit NIRPAC.ORG) and was transported to the alt world of their banned and blacklisted enemies list.
On one part of their main website, they quote Ronald Reagan saying he could work with someone that agrees with him 80 percent of the time. I guess if you really believe and agree with Reagan on abortion then the offer to work with you doesn’t apply. Oh, for those that don’t know, while in office, Reagan wrote a book condemning abortion. He is the only US President to write a book on the subject and did so while in office.
On the web page that you jump to for NIR PAC, you will see a button with the curious name of Non-Republican Sites.
There is this curious sentence followed by a list of blacklisted groups and websites.
But North Idaho Republicans ALSO chooses to NOT be associated with the following Non-Republican Network sites.
The list is composed of conservative groups composed mostly of Republicans. Some of the URLs in their list are broken.
About: I am a Christian, conservative woman who was ‘forced’ to be a stay at home mom when my job required masks, and when my kids’ school ‘forced’ masks on their students to be able to step on campus. My kids are now homeschooled, btw. As the wife of a small business owner, I saw exactly how our liberties could be taken away when we weren’t paying attention, and 2020 helped me understand my red line, my morals, my history, and it made me become even more Conservative than I’ve ever been before. The craziness of 2020 is why I decided to stand up and let my voice be heard. I am the Vice President of the Northwest Property Owners Alliance, a proud member of the Kootenai County Republican Women Federation, Republican party, the Society for Professional Journalism, Candlelight Christian Fellowship in Coeur d’Alene…
Mission: The North Idaho Freedom Fighters (NIFF) believe in our God-given right to pursue lives of fulfillment, purpose, and happiness. As sons and daughters of the United States Constitution, we will fight to defend our rights and liberties from the evils of tyranny and oppression. Dedicated to preserving America’s freedoms, we will unify and strengthen our community until our republic is once again returned to the citizens of these United States of America.
About: Redoubt News is a news and opinion online publication featuring the Christian conservative culture around, and important to, the American Redoubt. The goal of Redoubt News is to inform and educate citizens on important news stories from a perspective of individual liberty.
Mission: IFF’s mission is to defeat Marxism and socialism by building a culture of liberty around America’s founding principles so that Idahoans can prosper.
About: Idaho Freedom Action (IFA) is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization dedicated to preserving freedom in the Gem State. Through direct action, IFA supports policies that strengthen free markets, individual liberty and state sovereignty and opposes those that would bring Idaho down a path of socialism.
We love our state, and while we welcome anyone who wants to make a positive contribution to our Idaho communities, we’re not interested in radically transforming what or who we are to become more like the places our new residents are leaving behind. That’s why we are mobilized to fight the big policy battles facing Idaho, from reckless tax-and-spend proposals to the hostile woke takeover of education.
Idaho Freedom Action is the state’s premier free market advocacy organization. Armed with the scholarly products of Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF), IFA is fighting every single day to hold accountable politicians who seek to change Idaho in ways that forsake our heritage and undermine our ideals.
About: The John Birch Society is a non-partisan civics and education organization. We are concerned Americans from many races, religious beliefs, and national origins. Since we were founded on December 9, 1958, we have been men and women of good character, humane conscience, and religious ideals who have worked together to safeguard the Constitution.
About: We will continue to take up property and privacy concerns in defense of property owners in the Northwest (Idaho, Washington, Oregon, and Montana.) We strive to keep property owners appraised of local and regional issues affecting them.
Mission: Our mission at Health Freedom Idaho is to promote and protect the inherent right of every individual, parent, and guardian in Idaho to choose their own path towards health and wellness. We advocate for access to healing and healthcare treatments, information, and services of their choice, while defending the rights of practitioners to practice. Through the development of state statutes and rules, we honor the unalienable human right to self-determination in all aspects of health. We empower citizens by providing education and advocacy on the laws and factors impacting their right to access healthcare.
About: We promote and support our local patriot community. The PEN supports Veterans, active military, law enforcement, first responders and all American Patriots in business. We live and work in the Inland Northwest and we are committed to providing our Patriot community with this valuable service. The Patriot Economic Network was born out of our need to find local goods and services while at the same time supporting fellow Patriots in business.
About: Citizens Alliance of Idaho was started by a group of Idaho citizens who wanted to see some type of positive change in Idaho politics. In wanting to be a voice of reason in a hyperpolarized environment, the best natural starting point was to focus on the only two documents that every Idahoan has agreed to live by: The Idaho State Constitution and the U.S. Constitution. These are the only two documents that provide the rules for how legislators agree to govern along with the expectations of the citizens they represent. We couldn’t think of a more fair and civic-minded roadmap.
Summation
So, there you have it, all the people that North Idaho Republicans refuses to work with. If you believe in following the Constitution, want accountable government, property rights, religious or health freedom, following the Christian faith, or opposing Marxism, you’re not welcome. Funny but last I checked, Ronald Reagan believed and supported all these things too.
I might have more on these guys as circumstances develop.
On April 1, 2024, Travis Stolley responded to the attacks made on him via a series of Facebook posts. Stolley said in the post that if you wanna know the truth, meet me at Mugsy’s on April 18th between 6 and 8 PM. “Meet the Candidate. Ask Questions. Drink Beer.”
Here’s my take on this.
Travis Stolley from his Campaign Facebook page
First, this post was put on Facebook on April Fool’s Day. Is it real?
Assuming that it is, this is too little, too late in my opinion. Travis will wait to respond until April 18th and then only privately. By that time, the story will have been circulating for about a month on the Internet with no rebuttal. This was done publicly, and the response should also be publicly, not privately to a bunch of folks that were not involved.
The post from Stolley reads in part:
I will not go into any more specifics of the incident being talked about on social media other than to say this.
I tried to respect the privacy of those involved when initially asked about this incident last fall and I will continue to do so now.
I am far from a perfect person or candidate, but I will always do what I believe is the right thing. I know I did the right thing in this situation given the facts and information available at the time.
Translation: I have no comment. I did the right thing.
Conclusion: what you read online is true, but I deny that I violated the law or procedure by what I did while in uniform. Oh, and if I had to do it over, I’d do the same thing.
This type of non-answer sounds suspiciously like something you might get told to say by a sympathetic lawyer wanting you to deflect without self-incrimination.
The other thing you should know is that his date at Mugsy’s (a local restaurant and watering hole) is that it directly conflicts with the candidate forum at the same date and time. This forum is for all state constitutional offices up for grabs on the May 21st Primary ballot. The most hotly contested of these races is state Senate.
Oh, my wife has been checking up on the candidates in her travels through the area. The story she gets is that Stolley is the favorite of some of the local power brokers. Stolley’s family apparently goes way back in the community. He is the choice of the good ole boys in the county. My wife was told that due to his family connections with the area that Stolley is the odds-on favorite to win with virtually no experience. The good ole boys want Stolley because they think they can control him. This belief works out like this: due to his inexperience he will need to heavily depend on their aid to be an effective sheriff.
(Note for California readers: good ole boys, and most everyone else here, have facial hair, drive four wheel drive pickups, and wear Carhartt clothing, baseball caps, and open carry pistols.)
Oh, Dave Schuman got a positive plug. My wife was told that Dave will answer the phone if you call him for help and is an asset to the community. Schuman is described as a genuinely nice guy.
My sense that both represent the status quo and “do no harm” seems to be holding up.
In gatherings where I have met the candidates, all three seem like decent folks. I would be happy to have any one of them over for a BBQ meal—if I had a barbecue. Nevertheless, I have decided to support Jon VanGesen.
Hi. Just a brief update on the race. Two bombs were thrown over the last week. The two candidates claiming the mantle of “I’m from here, vote for me” are both mortally wounded. Jon VanGesen looks saintly compared to the homeboys from Bonners Ferry.
Travis Stolley was hit with a report that he covered up a child pornography case in a local school. Two minors that were 13 years old at the time were involved plus one adult male from out of state. If I understand the story correctly, one of these girls was sending photos of the other girl’s private parts to a person believed to be an adult male live elsewhere. Stolley filed no police report and made the evidence disappear. This was last year. FYI Stolley is no longer in law enforcement but wants to be sheriff. Recently, someone with insider knowledge of this incident began publicizing it on Facebook. As a result, someone else calling themselves the Boundary County Watchman, went public with the full story.
If the seriousness of the charges is your metric, this is grounds to disqualify the man for being in law enforcement.
Bomb #2 was a hit amidship on Dave Schuman. The Bonners Ferry Herald ran a story on the sheriff’s debate on March 28.
In it was this little nugget:
Schuman confirmed with the Herald he is on administrative leave pending an Idaho Police Investigation regarding police standards.
Last Thursday, a local group, The Panhandle Republican Women, hosted a debate featuring all three candidates for county sheriff. The event was held at the Bonners Ferry High School gym. It was literally a standing room only event. Interest in the contest is high and this event might be the only time all three participate in such a forum. In my travels over the last several months, I have had occasions to listen to all three men give public presentations.
In Idaho, the sheriff is a partisan office. (The current sheriff is retiring.) In our county no Democrats filed to run. Thus, the winner is the Republican with the most votes. There is no fifty percent plus one vote requirement here. Whoever wins on May 21st is the new sheriff.
For those of you outside of north Idaho, let me paint a brief description of each guy.
I will do this in the same order as the debate began, namely, alphabetically.
Dave Schuman
Dave Schuman. I can best describe Dave as reminiscent of Boss Hogg. Dave is your stereotypical career deputy (just shy of 30 years on the force) in small town America. A friend said they pictured his leadership style as sitting in his office, with his feet on the desk while scarfing down a couple of donuts. He is the favorite of many old-timers here. He stands for the status quo. His motto seems to be “do no harm.”
Travis Stolley
Travis Stolley. Travis is a young fellow that grew up in the area. He spent time in the Marines and then joined the sheriff’s department. I like him and think he might make a good sheriff, just not this time.
Jon VanGesen
Jon VanGesen. Jon has the most experience of any of the candidates, but I think many view him as an outsider. He retired from a sheriff’s department in Washington state and then started working as a sheriff’ deputy for neighboring Bonner County. Jon lives in the southern part of the county near Naples. If elected, Jon wants to move the department forward and into being more proactive and professional. He wants to build a new jail and find ways to increase deputy’s pay. He represents change and modernization.
We arrived at the debate right at the 6 PM start time and parked far from the entrance of the gym. Once we entered the building, we milled around for a few minutes before deciding to look for seats on the far side of the place. Amazingly, not only did we find seats but the guy next to us turned out to be the pastor of the local church where we worship.
As the debate started, I took photos of each guy. It was then that I noticed that each podium was different in size, shape, and color. Then I noticed that Schuman had a solid base on his podium, Stolley has legs on his podium, and VanGesen had wheels on his. After noticing this, I naturally wondered which one Buffalo Guy would choose to steal.
2024 Bonners County Sheriff debate
The debate was informative, cordial, and well run. Thankfully, there were no audio mishaps. The four microphones held up fine, which is not always the case when using wireless devices. The moderators tried to rotate the questions, so each candidate had opportunities to be the first to answer questions. At the end, each guy was given two questions specifically targeted at them.
Here are my notes as to each question. (I list only what I felt was the meat of each question).
1 This question was about the difference in line officer vs administrator.
2 If something like Covid happens again, would you obey the mandate or obey the Constitution?
3 How have you saved money or brought it into the department?
4 If elected, what would be your management style?
5 Child safety and protection
6 Are drugs a problem in the county?
7 What is your experience in grants and grant writing?
8 Second Amendment topic, if ordered, would you be willing to go door-to-door and confiscate weapons?
9 Ruby Ridge—what would you have done?
10 What is your experience working with other agencies?
11 Do we need a new jail? If so, remodel or replace? How would you fund it?
12 What would you do if Biden or his minions dumped a bus of illegals in our town?
13 Mental health issues, what can you do?
14 Concerns a case known as “baby Cyrus”. It involves police removing a child from his home. This was recently part of a court case. (Note: This question was VanGesen’s worst and most mediocre answer of the night.)
15 Concerned a shutdown order and would they obey it?
Individual questions
Schuman
1 Asked about advancement. His reply was that’s why I’m running.
2 Citizen involvement
Stolley
You only have 8 years of law enforcement experience, why should we vote for you?
How does being raised here make you a better sheriff?
VanGesen
1 You’re from the big city, how does that experience help you here?
2 As a deputy in Washington state, why was there a suit against you for excessive force. Answer, suit was not brought until 3 years after the alleged event, and it strangely coincided with rise of BLM riots in the Seattle area. No wrongdoing found by investigators, no merit. The insurance company wanted it to go away and wrote a check—this happened after I retired.
Differences
In my mind, VanGesen won almost every question. I think he scored the best on the Ruby Ridge question. He quoted Sarah Weaver and got to the heart of the issue.
Schuman said that the previous sheriff used to take all new deputies to walk the property and talk about what happened. This was one of his most detailed answers all night.
Stolley was lost on this one, which is somewhat understandable since he wasn’t on the planet when it happened.
On the mandate vs Constitution question, Stolley and VanGesen said they would go with the Constitution, Schuman stumbled a little bit on this and finally stated he took an oath to uphold the Constitution and then dismissed the idea that Constitutional conflict could happen.
On grants, VanGesen nailed it, and the others were clearly lost trying to come up with an answer.
On the new jail, Schuman commented that when he was hired in the late 1990’s it was in disrepair and hasn’t gotten any better. He did not seem to have any detailed knowledge of the new jail proposal.
I have a few other thoughts on the debate. All questions were submitted in advance by the public with the possible exception of the individual ones at the end. I know that public speaking is not everyone’s best skill. Also, I concede that there is a bit of a beauty contest aspect to such a spectacle, but on the other hand, any election is a bit like that or a job interview if you will.
Conclusion
We entered the debate unsure of who to support and left with a VanGesen yard sign. On our way out of the gym, we saw our pastor, walking out the door with the middle podium tucked under his arm. I didn’t see that one coming.
