Shelly Mandell and Elaine Lafferty: Delegates at the last national NOW conference - An inside view

In the last three posts about NOW we explored the colorful and profitable relations of Shelly Mandell and Elaine Lafferty to the McCain-Palin campaign and SarahPAC (see all posts HERE). We also learned that the "Democrats" Mandell and Lafferty were very vocal in their support for Sarah Palin.

Furthermore, we discovered that during the last national conference of NOW, which took part in Indiana from June 19-21, 2009, the "pro-Palin feminists" gained the majority - reportedly with a very slim margin of only eight votes!

Meanwhile, we have received more background information regarding what happened at the last national NOW conference.

Palingates has obtained the complete set of so-called "On-Site Credentials" for the last annual NOW conference in Indiana 2009. With these documents and other background conversations, it's possible for us to understand how the system worked - and we were also able to establish with these documents without any doubt that both Shelly Mandell and Elaine Lafferty were delegates at the last annual NOW conference in June 2009.

At this point in time, Elaine Lafferty had already received more than $ 53,000 from the McCain/Palin campaign and had written several pro-Palin articles. In addition, Elaine Lafferty had received more than $ 12,000 from SarahPAC, the checks of which had been sent to Shelly Mandell's home address.

This is the screenshot of the form for Shelly Mandell:

This is the form for Elaine Lafferty:

Shelly Mandell received her designation to become a delegate from Bonita Edmon, President of Oakland County Chapter, and Elaine Lafferty received it from Caroline Nelson, President of the Long Island Chapter.

The system works in general as follows: Each local Chapter President of NOW can give a so-called "on-site credential" to members of her choice. A specific number of delegates is allocated to each Chapter. This system seems to be open for manipulation, because what you need is to get the Chapter President "on your side" - and then the Chapter President needs to nominate the "right" delegates.

However, we have been told that the way the nominees are chosen varies from case to case. Some chapters of NOW elect their delegates in advance during their local conferences which precede the national conference. Other Chapter Presidents are in contrast given a "free hand" in giving out the credentials.

What is also needed is to be able to fill all the delegate spaces which are allocated to each Chapter - and this seems to have been one of the problems last year for the "anti-Palin delegates". A feminist blog wrote about the results in detail and reported:

"The Sarah Palin supporters swung this election. The election was certainly close enough - less than 10 votes separated the two slates. Then again, if Latifa's supporters had been able to bring just a handful of additional supporters, we'd have an entirely different picture to discuss. The Palin people out organized us, plain and simple.

(...)

The 2009 election report is as follows:

* 404 total ballots
* 72 ballots not used (meaning ballots printed but not used)
* 1 ballot voided
* 203 votes needed to elect slate
* 198 for NOW is the Times slate
* 206 for Feminist Leadership NOW slate"

Therefore, it seems to me that there could have been 72 more delegates, because these ballots were printed and not used. However, I cannot confirm myself whether these numbers are 100% accurate. Still, it is my understanding from the information given on this blog that many more delegates could have participated in the vote.

Through conversations via long-distance phone calls, we were able to establish more details about what happened at the national NOW conference in 2009.

First of all, there was a dispute whether Shelly Mandell had the power to give credentials to her L.A. delegates. Why is that? Originally, Shelly came to the conference as the President of the L.A. Chapter. For this Chapter, she had the astonishing number of 29 delegates at her disposal, due to the large size of the LA Chapter.

However, there was an open protest on the conference floor regarding whether Shelly Mandell had the right to represent the LA Chapter - because her term as a President had already expired on January 1, 2008, and no new elections had been called yet, contrary to the by-laws of NOW.

The conference then decided in an open vote that Shelly Mandell didn't have the right to give out the credentials to her delegates - and as a consequence, the 29 delegates from LA couldn't represent LA any more, but had to be "disbursed" to other Chapters. That's why Shelly finally got her "on-site credential" from Oakland County, Michigan. Naturally, this unusual system easily opens the way for manipulations.

The conflict regarding Shelly Mandell's Presidency continues. Formally, she is not the President of the LA Chapter any more. Technically, however, as we were told, she still has the Chapter under her control.

That is because no new elections for the LA Chapter have been called - despite having the Presidency vacant since January 1, 2008! This is interesting, because Terry O'Neill, the national NOW President, has already been formerly instructed after a successful "grievance procedure" in January 2010 to call new elections in LA. However, up until today, Terry O'Neill has made no move to call elections in LA, which means that LA will have no delegates for the upcoming national NOW convention in July 2010 -and it's now too late for her to do so. This most likely means that 29 delegates will be missing. Delegates, which could have very well have been anti-Palin delegates!

We have also been told that the "money trail" to Shelly Mandell and Elaine Lafferty which Palingates revealed is particularly relevant for many NOW members. That is because in the past, Shelly Mandell has persistently denied to have any "formal" connection to Sarah Palin. The fact that two large checks from SarahPAC were sent to Shelly's home address was an eye-opener for many NOW members.

During the last national NOW conference, a big issue was the question whether pro-life members should be allowed to play a role within NOW which is traditionally a pro-choice organization. A good example of the opinion of a pro-choice feminist can be found in the blog I cited above:

One of the grievances I heard about was how to address the inclusion of pro-life feminists in NOW. *big ass sigh* If pro-life feminists want to be in NOW, I welcome them. Yes, I welcome them. I welcome them and say, "Join NOW. Join us in our fight to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Join us in pushing for single-payer health insurance so that women don't worry that even if they wanted to be a mom, they couldn't afford to take their baby to well-baby appointments or the immunizations. Join us in winning paid family leave so women can recover from birth and bond with their newborns. Join us crafting a system where college students can be moms and students with affordable infant care on campus. Join us on making choice a real choice. You don't have to escort at clinics, you just need to help us make everything else better."

However, there are signs that these "pro-life feminists" (meaning: anti-abortion feminists...) are not as "altruistic" as they should be, but that they are in reality trying to move NOW forcefully in their direction, which is "strictly anti-abortion".

+++

In addition, we were alerted to another organization which deserves closer scrutiny. It's "The New Agenda", which was founded in August 2008. The New Agenda is "a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home."

In this organization, we meet a number of familar faces:

1) One of the co-founders was Elaine Lafferty. We were told this directly, but the proof can also be found in a press release from December 2008 in which Elaine Lafferty is explicitly mentioned as a co-founder:

“Recent polls show that a majority of American women are disappointed about how women fared in the election. Gov. Paterson has an opportunity to marry hope and history in New York by appointing a qualified woman to carry on Hillary Clinton’s legacy,” said Elaine Lafferty, co-founder The New Agenda.

2) The President of the "New Agenda" is Amy Siskind - who likes to publish pro-Palin/anti-Obama articles.

3) On the current homepage of the New Agenda we meet another familar face: Obama-basher and Sarah Palin supporter Lynn Forester de Rothschild:

4) In the "Benefit Committee" for this event we find Lynette Long - who also was a delegate at the last national NOW convention and was, as we were told, "in the same camp" as Shelly Mandell and Elaine Lafferty.

5) There are more NOW-connections. It was widely reported in the media in 2008 that Linda Klinge, at the time the Vice President of NOW Oregon, campaigned for Sarah Palin - together with Shelly Mandell, Lynn Forester de Rothschild and Elaine Lafferty.

Well, Linda Klinge is not an official of NOW in Oregon any more - and we have been told that the Chapter of NOW Oregon even was dissolved under Klinge's leadership, still waiting to be resurrected up until today. But Linda Klinge found a comfortable new position. She is now the Treasurer of the "New Agenda".

It does seem that the "pro-Palin feminists" are not passive - and surely they are waiting to strike at the next given opportunity.

+++

BONUS:

Here are some these new right-wing feminists, who were publicly regarded as "Democrats", on stage with Sarah Palin. This clip is also a good example what their general line of argumentation is - if you are against Sarah Palin, you are AGAINST WOMEN. Simple, isn't it?

.
(h/t ilovepoodles)

Shelly Mandell - Did she or did she not receive the $ 12,368 from SarahPAC? - UPDATE! Elaine Lafferty reappears!

+++Please note that Palingates published several posts about this topic which compliment each other! Read them HERE+++

Last Tuesday, we published the post "Current NOW President, Terry O’Neill, Bought and Paid For By SarahPAC? - PART I". In this post we reported that Shelly Mandell, former President of the L.A. chapter of NOW, received consulting fees in total amounting to $ 12,368 from SarahPAC.

This post (and the follow up: "The Elaine Lafferty Files") received a lot of attention. We were in contact afterwards with a number current and former officials of NOW who were enraged by this story.

Our report was picked up by Alaska Dispatch and also by Phil Munger from Progressive Alaska. Phil also cross posted his article under his pen name "Edward Teller" on the "Seminal Firedoglake blog". However, there was a problem with this post on Firedoglake. It was pulled.

EDIT: Phil Munger just explained in the comments that Firedoglake was faced with the accusation of defamation and therefore was forced to pull the post within 24 hours! This is outrageous, and we fully understand the reasons of Firedoglake to pull the post!

The original post could be found here. I managed to make a screenshot of the cached version yesterday, which today is also not accessible any more (click to enlarge - it's just the first part of Phil's post on Firedoglake):

Phil Munger yesterday explained the situation after the removal of his post on Firedoglake to the readers on his blog "Progressive Alaska", where the post is still online and said:

"Update - Friday 12:30 p.m: I have been informed that "the post on Palingates you reference makes a claim that SarahPAC paid Mandell, a claim that cannot be proven."

I take that to mean that Ms. Mandell is claiming the information published at Palingates and which is linked to and quoted here, is inaccurate. Progressive Alaska is not vouching for the accuracy of the information published at Palingates on this. Should the Palingates authors or Ms. Mandell wish to further clarify this issue, you are welcome to a guest post at Progressive Alaska."

So - somebody apparently complained to Firedoglake that our claim "cannot be proven"?

In order to set the record straight, I today faxed the following letter to Shelly Mandell's law firm

(there was no email address on her law firm website):

"Dear Shelly,

my name is Patrick from the blog Palingates (http://palingates.blogspot.com). As you will certainly be aware, we reported on Tuesday, April 6, 2010 that you received an amount of $12,368 of consulting fees from SarahPAC (http://palingates.blogspot.com/2010/04/current-now-president-terry-oneill.html).

In addition, we reported that you received travel expenses of $ 2356.80 from the McCain campaign, which seem very generous, taken the fact into account that Sarah Palin's rallies in Carson and Henderson, where you appeared, were in fact quite close to your home.

Regarding our reporting on the consulting fees:

We deduced our statement that you were the recipient of the $ 12,368 from the fact that the mysterious company "Glebe Inc" which received the money from SarahPAC is located at your address, according to the records of SarahPAC: 3906 Tilden Avenue, Culver City, CA 90232.

The building at this address is not a commercial building, but a small private residential home - your home. We proved in our post that you own the building, and that you made a donation to Hillary Clinton from this address as well. We also looked up the building on Google street view, which fully confirmed the available written information.

Therefore we strongly believe that our reporting conforms with high standards of journalism and that there is solid "prima facie" evidence that you are the owner of "Glebe Inc" - especially taken the fact into account that you also campaigned for Sarah Palin.

However, we would be very happy to hear your version of the events and to publish it. Although NOBODY has contacted Palingates so far and asked us to correct our story, we assume from the behavior of the Firedoglake blog that there is apparently a disagreement about the validity of our claims (see Phil Munger's remarks after his blog post was pulled on Firedoglake: http://progressivealaska.blogspot.com/2010/04/saradise-found-chapter-31-palins-pac.html).

Therefore we would be glad if you could tell us who the owner of "Glebe Inc" is, why this business is located at your private address and what the services were that SarahPAC paid for - supported by the appropriate written documentation.

We are more than happy to set the record straight and await your detailed response. We have published the content of this letter on Palingates.

Your Sincerely,

Patrick

Please answer via email: patrickpalingates@gmail.com"

+++

We are now eagerly waiting for Shelly's answer.

I sent the fax online via three different providers and received confirmations that the fax was sent successfully from all three of them.

I also would like to add that we were unable so far to find any records for a "Glebe Inc" in Culver City, CA.

With the official CA Business search I can only find a "GLEBE DEVELOPMENT CORP." in San Diego which I don't believe has anything to do with the "Glebe Inc" in Culver City.

Shelly Mandell campaigning for Sarah Palin:

+++

UPDATE (by Patrick):

There we have our first update! No, we haven't received an answer from Shelly Mandell yet, but thanks to our great reader aview999, we now come very, very close to the final solution of the puzzle!

From the newly found records, it now appears that the mysterious "Glebe Inc" which had Shelly Mandell's private address as a mailing address in the SarahPAC records is actually run by Elaine Lafferty! It appears to be her company "Glebe Financial Inc", which is registered in Las Vegas, Nevada!

Our reader aview999 had the brilliant idea to search in Nevada's company records, and here we are:

This new find ties in nicely with the fact that, as we already reported, Elaine Lafferty made a donation to Hillary Clinton on August 11, 2008 while also using Shelly Mandell's address:

Therefore, the picture becomes much clearer now.

The "Democrat" Elaine Lafferty received not only $ 53,270 consulting fees from the McCain campaign and the McCain-Palin campaign, as is part of the public record, but she apparently also received $ 12,368 consulting fees directly from SarahPAC, using "Glebe Financials Inc" which is registered in Nevada.

So why did Elaine Lafferty use her real name and an address in New York for the payments from the McCain campaign and the McCain-Palin campaigns, but used her company name "Glebe Financial Inc" (without the word "Financial" in the SarahPAC records) and Shelly Mandell's address for the payments from SarahPAC?

This is a question only Elaine Lafferty herself could answer. It's your turn now, Elaine! ;-)

+++

UPDATE 2 (by Patrick):

Here is an overview about what Elaine Lafferty received from the McCain campaign, the McCain-Palin campaign and SarahPAC:

A.

Using her real name and the address „332 Bleeker Str, #H-83, 10014 New York“:

September 30, 2008:
Amount: $ 25,000
From: McCain-Palin 2008 Inc
Reason: GOTV Consulting

+++

October 27, 2008: Elaine Lafferty publishes the article "Sarah Palin's a Brainiac" in the Daily Beast.

+++

October 31, 2008:
Amount: $ 25,070
From: McCain-Palin 2008 Inc

+++

December 4, 2008:
Amount: $ 2,976.73
From: John McCain 2008 Inc
Reason: Travel
Reason: Communications Consulting

+++

December 10, 2008:
Amount: $ 3,200
From: McCain-Palin 2008 Inc
Reason: GOTV Consulting

+++

B.

Using the address PO Box 16118, 22215 Arlington, VA:

December 10, 2008:
Amount: $ 472
From: McCain-Palin 2008 Inc
Reason: Travel

+++

C.

Using her company „Glebe Financial Inc“ and Shelly Mandell’s address „3906 Tilden Ave., 90232 Culver City, CA:

March 3, 2009:
Amount: $6,325
From: SarahPAC
Reason: Consulting press and expenses

+++

March 6, 2009: Elaine Lafferty publishes the article "Palin's Smart Move" in the Daily Beast.

+++

April 19, 2009:
Amount: $ 6,043
From: SarahPAC
Reason: Consulting press and expenses

+++

May 28, 2009: Elaine Lafferty publishes the article "Is Sotomayor Getting Palin-ed" in the Daily Beast.

+++

Apart from that, we can be certain that the "Democrat" Elaine Lafferty also got paid by the "Daily Beast" for her ultimate puff-piece "Sarah Palin's a Brainiac"...



...as well as for her other articles in the Daily Beast and for her TV appearances (for example with Greta Van Susteren):

+++

Meanwhile, Elaine Lafferty and Shelly Mandell are still mentioned in Wikipedia in the section "Democratic and liberal support for John McCain in 2008".

I wonder how much some of the other people mentioned in this section got paid - it seems that John McCain paid well! After all, Elaine Lafferty received much more than Sarah Palin's hairdresser and her make-up artist, and that's something!

+++

UPDATE 3 (by Patrick):

It should be noted that on March 6, 2009, just three days after Elaine Lafferty's company "Glebe Financial Inc" received the payment of $ 6,325 from SarahPAC for "consulting press and expenses", Elaine Lafferty managed to smuggle another Palin puff-piece into the Daily Beast, again cleverly posing as a feminist who reluctantly is drawn to Sarah Palin, addressing her "sister feminists". The article is called "Palin's Smart Move":


Elaine wrote:

"So, of course Sarah Palin is not pro-choice. But she is now, as governor of Alaska, what she was before the presidential campaign: a pragmatic conservative politician who largely governs from the center. She is opposed to abortion, but it does not inform every decision she makes. Done with playing the good soldier for McCain’s right wing on the campaign trail, she is back to being who she is.

Here is the question then: Why do we demonize or worship certain charismatic female politicians, projecting either our most unrealistic hopes on them or our worst fears? Palin got caught in this, and the McCain campaign was clueless even as they watched it happen. This “love her or hate her” business isn’t good for women. It sidelines them as the now-familiar “polarizing figures.” If Hillary Clinton hadn’t had to focus so much on simply not being “polarizing” while she was trying to get her message out, she might be president today.

Gov. Sarah Palin appointed Morgan Christen to the Alaska Supreme Court because she believed Christen was the best person for the job. Feminists should be happy. Next month, Palin will probably do something we don’t like. Either way, she isn’t our nightmare any more than she is our dream come true."

+++

Well, Elaine - your reluctant appreciation surely paid well!

In future, you won't fool nobody any more.

(h/t "Say NO to Palin in Politics")

+++

UPDATE 4 (by Patrick):

We have another great find, thanks to our reader "so_many_unanswered_questions". In an article at the feminist blog "Girl w/ pen" in which Elaine Lafferty's support for Sarah Palin was discussed, Elaine Lafferty left a fascinating comment on October 28, 2008, one day after the publication of her "Brainiac" article in the Daily Beast.

These are the relevant comments:

Bob Lamm Says:
October 28th, 2008 at 11:36 am
I’ve just read Elaine Lafferty’s defense of Sarah Palin. Your readers should know that in this column Lafferty tells readers that she has been working as a consultant to the McCain campaign “since shortly after Palin’s nomination.” So I believe it’s fair to ask: isn’t defending Sarah Palin what Elaine Lafferty is being paid for? How do we separate Elaine Lafferty, the Democrat and feminist, from Elaine Lafferty, the paid staff member for John McCain AND Sarah Palin?

Kristen Says:
October 28th, 2008 at 11:40 am
Bob, you’re absolutely right–it should be pointed out that Elaine Lafferty is not just an observer, she’s on the team. Thanks for noting this important point.

Elaine Lafferty Says:
October 28th, 2008 at 11:46 am
It’s easy to seperate, Bob. I would not represent anything or voice an opinion I believed to be untrue no matter who was paying me, nor how much. (Does the fact that you get paid for a magazine article or op-ed mean you only have that opinion for the money? Of course not.) Simple transparency and integrity required that disclosure.

Screenshot:

Let's recap - Elaine Lafferty says:

"Simple transparency and integrity required that disclosure."

Well, Elaine - why didn't you disclose to the readers of the Daily Beast in your article on March 6, 2009 that you were paid the nice sum of $ 6,325 just three days before by SarahPAC? Instead your involvement with SarahPAC was hidden behind the name of a corporation.

This had nothing to do with being paid by a magazine for an article.

That's not transparency and integrity - it's classic deception, combined with grifting. Sarah Palin style, actually.

+++

UPDATE 5 (by Patrick):

With stunning determination, or should I say in fulfilling her obligations after having received the second payment by SarahPAC about a month earlier, Elaine Lafferty lamented the persecution of Sarah Palin once again in the Daily Beast (apparently her favorite publication). In the clever piece "Is Sotomayor Getting Palin-ed?" from May 28, 2009, Elaine argues that Sarah Palin and Sonia Sotomayor are both being criticized for the same reason - just because they are women.

Excerpt:

"When Palin hit the national stage last year, she paid the price demanded by the intelligentsia; regardless of her politics and with no evidence that she’d ever set foot in any Cambridge anywhere, both the left and the elitists of the right concluded she was simply a ditz. The more Palin spoke of her life experience as the mother of a Down syndrome baby or as a small-town mayor, the dumber she was. The political culture that had previously demanded candidates know the price of a quart of milk ridiculed one who really knew the price of Pampers. Oh, her inexperience in the things that mattered! If she’d had chunky ankles and an even more unfortunate fashion sense, she might have been Maggie Thatcher. A man, she might have been Ronald Reagan."

(h/t MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel)

+++

In addition, it is also noteworthy that Lynn Forester de Rothschild, another woman and "Democrat" who openly supported Sarah Palin together with Shelly Mandell and Elaine Lafferty in 2008, also wrote in the Daily Beast. On October 13, 2008 she published the article "A Democrat In Defense of Sarah Palin" and boldly stated:

"Second, the attack on Palin's qualifications is sexist, a bias abetted by the media."

In February 2010, however, Rothschild showed her true colors. In another article in the Daily Beast called "I Told You So" the "Democrat" Rothschild claimed:

"The failures of the Obama presidency were clearly telegraphed by the Obama candidacy. I hate to say it, but I told you so."

She then goes on to say something like Obama being an evil left-wing politician: "His cynical use of centrist language as a tool to get elected does not change the fact of his true objectives for America." Add a few betchas, palm teleprompters and Trigs, and it could have been from Sarah's script which Sarah dutifully learned by heart and which she now presents to every audience at any given opportunity, whether they like it or not.

+++

UPDATE 6 (by Patrick):

I would like to state for the record that I sent the fax mentioned in this post to Shelly Mandell's law firm yesterday via three different online providers and received a confirmation of delivery from all three of them.

We also finally got hold of Shelly Mandell's and Elaine Lafferty's email addresses, and I sent an email to Shelly Mandell yesterday and to Elaine Lafferty today, saying that Palingates would be very happy to publish their own accounts regarding the issues that are being discussed here.

So far, nobody has answered us.

I also received the information from the editors of Alaska Dispatch that up until now nobody contacted them and asked them to retract their story about the NOW controversy.

Accordingly, Palingates has never been contacted by ANYBODY asking us to retract this story - or to retract any other story we have published in the past. In fact, Palingates never ever has been contacted by ANY lawyer or anybody else who was unhappy with the facts of a story that we had published. The reason is that the reporting on Palingates is factual and accurate.

We were only contacted by the Vice-President of Harper Collins once who complained that we had posted screenshots from "Going Rogue" before the book had been published.

Special thanks to Phil Munger for defending us in the comments of his post on Progressive Alaska.

+++

READ THE FOLLOW-UP: Shelly Mandell and Elaine Lafferty: Delegates at the last national NOW conference - An inside view

.

Current NOW President, Terry O’Neill, Bought and Paid For By SarahPAC? - PART I - UPDATE

Guest post by micmac

Please also read:

Part 2: The Lafferty Files

Part 3: Who received the money from SarahPAC?

Part 4: Shelly Mandell and Elaine Lafferty: Delegates at the last national NOW conference - An inside view

Nearly 50 years of women’s empowerment within the political process have passed since Betty Friedan wrote the acronym N O W on a lunch napkin, to the moment when Sarah Palin scribbled crib notes on her palm for a post-election speech after losing a shot at the Vice Presidency of the United States. In 1966 a woman at the same lunch table as Friedan threw down a $5 bill as a challenge, and a beginning, to the creation of the National Organization for Women, dedicated to “the full partnership” of women with men “in the mainstream of society, now” including but not limited to employment, civil and reproductive rights.

When the National Organization for Women held a recent plenary election in June 2009, there was grumbling afoot that President-elect Terry O’Neill had won, in part, by undue influence brought to bear by “Sarah Palin’s people.” For some dyed in the wool feminists, had a Sharpie been at hand, Friedan’s historic lunch napkin would have enjoyed the same fate as “McCain” written on Sarah Palin’s Hawaiian beach hat.

At first glance, any serious connection between Sarah Palin and NOW seems inconceivable, almost laughable, a skit straight out of SNL ... but as go many things Palin, that which appears insensible often turns out to be true.

This particular NOW election had run hot, a struggle between the Old Guard – viscerally bitter Clinton PUMAS like O’Neill, angry that NOW had helped elect Obama over Hillary – and the New Guard, candidate Latifa Lyles, a young, African American supporter of Barack Obama, as was also true of outgoing President Kim Gandy. The Old Guard accused the New Guard of being “dishonest Obama-enabling hacks” (whew!) and the New Guard accused the Old Guard of taking over the convention, and handing out inflammatory pamphlets containing sensitive NOW financial information embarrassing to Gandy and Lyles, thus throwing the election in O’Neill’s favor.

NG: “The Sarah Palin supporters swung this election... the Palin people out organized us, plain and simple.”

OG: “Actually, some of the people were Palin supporters: pro-choice NOW feminists who decided last year to support Palin, despite their differences over reproductive rights... The financials that were circulated at the conference revealed what (Gandy) didn’t want anyone to know.”

But just WHO were these “Palin People”?

One name came up repeatedly, like a field of potatoes turned by the plow:

Shelly Mandell

Shelly Mandell, past LA President of NOW, a Clinton PUMA who had, quite shockingly to some, campaigned for and publicly endorsed Sarah Palin for VP in Carson, CA and Henderson, NV in October 2008. Much was made of this by both Left and Right Wing media and bloggers during the election, proclaiming that NOW leadership was supporting Palin and abandoning Obama.

In regard to the June 2009 NOW election, Shelly Mandell appeared as the ringleader of this embittered Old Guard, intent on wresting power from the “Obama hacks” and putting the Good Old Girls back in the driver’s seat. Our federal election ended in November 4, 2008. But not so, apparently, the virulent hatred that certain NOW PUMAS held for the “Usurper” who had stolen the throne from Hillary. It was alive and dangerous and apparently keen to have at least one election go in its favor.

But hatred strong enough for PUMA Mandell to hire herself out to Conservative, Pro-Life SarahPAC, for real cash money, to help swing this election to an anti-Obama NOW President?

Mandell, and the Old Guard, have denied such a connection.

But what would Mandell’s supporters and detractors make of this:

The SarahPAC financial disclosure for 2009 reveals two curious entries, payments made in the specific amounts of $6325 and $6043 to a certain “Glebe Inc.” located in Culver City, CA in March and April 2009, just one month prior to the NOW election, described as “Press-Consulting.” There is no related entry for a “Glebe Inc.” to be found anywhere on the Web or in state corporation files.

However, the street address for Glebe Inc, 3906 Tilden Ave, Culver City, is Shelly Mandell’s address, the same address she used when she made a $500 campaign contribution to Hillary Clinton in March 2008.

But not the same address from which Mandell accepted a $2356.80 payment from the McCain Campaign on 12-02-2008, shown on the campaign year end amended financial disclosure. That check, earmarked “Travel” was sent directly to the same address for all “regular” McCain campaign staff: PO Box 16118, Arlington, VA.

BTW, as regards “Travel,” the distance between Carson, CA and downtown Los Angeles is a 20 minute car ride. The distance between Henderson, NV and LA is 230 miles. Hardly justifies $2356.80 unless you throw in a whole lotta $.80 PayDay bars consumed “on the road” as it were. But hey, maybe these PUMA contractors pad the bill, just like they do over at the Department of Defense.

Shelly’s “surprising” support of Sarah Palin was not unusual. There are many Hillary PUMAS out there still gnashing their teeth at Obama; who conflate the “raw deal” Clinton got from the media during the campaign that “gave” Obama the nomination with similarly perceived treatment of Palin. They are all over the pro-Palin websites, even today. It makes sense in a “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” kind of way, and is as righteous as any other political position. That’s how it works in this grand country of ours.

But there is only one PUMA who was paid $12,368 directly from SarahPAC, and who shortly thereafter, by all accounts, expended great effort to defeat the pro-Obama NOW presidential candidate by publishing and distributing damaging insider NOW information to which she was privy, exhorting her PUMA “fellas” to vote against The Pro-Obama Gal.

Only ONE who, in her own words, took a “personal” political stand, a seemingly courageous one, by publicly supporting Palin and making rousing speeches for her in CA and NV as a self-described private person, an independent thinking Democrat, who was simply voting her conscience. Who picked up a nice little check afterwards from the McCain campaign for being so conscientious.

No, hold the press, there are TWO.

It would seem that, in this case, behind every Conscientious Objector stands... a BFF.

Elaine Lafferty. Past editor of Ms. and MORE magazines, Paid PUMA Purveyor of Pro-Palin Phraseology for the McCain campaign (communications director), Old Guard NOW buddy of Mandell since the ‘80s and present good buddy of Greta Van Susteren.

Lafferty also made a $500 contribution to Hillary Clinton in March 2008 from the 3906 Tilden Avenue, Culver City, CA address. And she joined Mandell in actively campaigning for Palin during the federal election. And she wrote controversial and rousing “journalistic” articles in Palin’s defense during the election.

Stay tuned, and it shall be revealed just how busy these three little bees (Mandell, Lafferty and Van Susteren) have been, making honey-money for Sarah Palin’s hive, down at The Glebe. It will put that $5 dollar challenge back in 1966 to shame.

In fact, that $5 dollar challenge will have parlayed out to $50,000... and Change.

+++

UPDATE (by Patrick):

There are several things I would like to add. First of all, we have already received a very positive response to this post, and it's apparent that the MSM will eventually pick this explosive story up.

I am a big fan of documenting the details, and therefore I would like to show exactly where the connections can be found:

The details of the payments to "Glebe Inc." can be found on pages 248 and 254 of THIS document - which is SarahPAC's amended mid-year report, published on September 23, 2009.

All the published reports and documents by SarahPAC can be accessed on THIS page.

Screenshots:

+++

The donation by Shelly Mandell for Hillary Clinton can be found HERE.

Screenshot:

+++

Information about the records regarding the property 3906 Tilden Avenue, Culver City, CA 90232 can for example be found HERE.

Screenshots:

+++

Furthermore, in order to give full credit, I would like to mention that our valued friend from Alaska, Barb Dwyer, spotted the connection between Glebe Inc. and Shelly Mandell already two months ago and commented about it on Palingates.

+++

Please have also a look at this highly informative article by Megan Carpentier on Jezebel about Elaine Lafferty and her support for Sarah Palin.

More updates will follow!

+++

UPDATE 2 (by Patrick):

Have you seen what Elaine Lafferty wrote about Sarah Palin in the "Daily Beast" back in October 2008? Wow...I guess somebody is in love. Excerpts:

"Now by “smart,” I don't refer to a person who is wily or calculating or nimble in the way of certain talented athletes who we admire but suspect don't really have serious brains in their skulls. I mean, instead, a mind that is thoughtful, curious, with a discernable pattern of associative thinking and insight. Palin asks questions, and probes linkages and logic that bring to mind a quirky law professor I once had. Palin is more than a “quick study”; I'd heard rumors around the campaign of her photographic memory and, frankly, I watched it in action. She sees. She processes. She questions, and only then, she acts. What is often called her “confidence” is actually a rarity in national politics: I saw a woman who knows exactly who she is.

For all those old enough to remember Senator Sam Ervin, the brilliant strict constitutional constructionist and chairman of the Senate Watergate Committee whose patois included “I'm just a country lawyer"...Yup, Palin is that smart.

So no simple task then, this speech on women's rights. For the sin of being a Christian personally opposed to abortion, Palin is being pilloried by the inside-the-Beltway Democrat feminist establishment. (Yes, she is anti-abortion. And yes, instead of buying organic New Zealand lamb at Whole Foods, she joins other Alaskans in hunting for food. That's it. She is not a right-wing nut, and all the rest of the Internet drivel—the book banning at the Library, the rape kits decision—is nonsense. I digress.) Palin's role in this campaign was to energize “the Republican base,” which she has inarguably done. She also was expected to reach out to Hillary Clinton “moderates.” (Right. Only a woman would get both those jobs in either party.) Look, I am obviously personally pro-choice, and I disagree with McCain and Palin on that and a few other issues. But like many other Democrats, including Lynn Rothschild, I'm tired of the Democratic Party taking women for granted. I also happen to believe Sarah Palin supports women's rights, deeply and passionately."

What else do we know about Elaine Lafferty?

She donated $ 500 to Hillary Clinton on August 11, 2008 - and for the donation, she used Shelly Mandell's address "3906 Tilden Ave, Culver City":

Why the heck did she use this address for the donation? So far, I have absolutely no idea.

There are more interesting facts:

She and and Fox News anchor Greta Van Susteren, the famous scientologist, are real chums!

Not only did she co-author a book together with Greta Van Susteren, but they also own a restaurant together, the Old Mill Inn, a 144-seat seaside restaurant in Mattituck!

It's a small world.

+++

UPDATE 3 (by Patrick):

With permission we would like to publish a letter that Patty Bellasalma, President of NOW in California, today sent to our reader "krbmjb05" who wrote to Patty about this post by Palingates:

"Thank you for sending this to me, although I had already seen the piece, which accurately describes what has been happening over the last year or so. You can rest assured that I have been and will continue to stay true to the cause. I immediately responded to Shelly Mandell when she endorsed Sarah Palin by releasing a public statement and then proceeded to file an internal grievance against her. I just recently wrote in opposition to Terry O'Neil's statements regarding the healthcare bill and will continue to fight both publically and internally against any abandonment of NOW's core values.

I am heartened by the number of members and non-members who support progressive feminist principles and are equally offended by the events described in the blog piece. Please have as many people email me with their views on this matter, California NOW is having it's state conference and board meeting this weekend and I would very much want to energize what remains of our leadership to continue the fight for the soul of this organization.

For Equality,
Patty Bellasalma"

We are honored by this response, and we also learned that next weekend California NOW will have their annual membership meeting / state conference, where these issues undoubtedly will be discussed.

Patty Bellasalma was for example one of the "women of the year" 2002 in "Ms. Magazine", honored for a great achievement: "Patty Bellasalma filed a racial discrimination class-action suit in Los Angeles county on behalf of police officers who patrol hospitals and parks - and won. The predominantly Latino, Asian and African-American department alleged that it were paid less for doing the same work than the Sheriff's Department, which is largely Caucasian. The $100 million settlement was the largest single race discrimination settlement in that county."

In contrast, here are two clips of the "faux feminists" this post is dealing with:

.