A challenge from Stan's employee

Part of Kati Jenkins duties at Northwestern Engineering must be to defend her boss, Stan Adelstein. Because just moments ago, she issued this challenge to me under the post I did yesterday...
Kati Jenkins has left a new comment on your post "More RC Mayor Stuff - On the net, and in the paper...":

You are incorrect in your story, PP. "Nix on Six PAC" is not Stan Adelstein's PAC. Check your source again.
Read that here as she falsely assumes I have no idea what I'm talking about. My response?

Click on either of the images to enlarge, or you can go review my source - the actual filing - here.

Sure. Don Frankenfeld's name might be on the PAC, but when I see that Stan was the sole donor - guess what - I think I'm pretty safe in my position that it might be considered Stan's PAC.

Especially in light of the fact that the PAC's donations seemingly had nothing to do with abortion, and everything to do with supporting Stan's slate of candidates - Tom Katus, his handpicked Democratic choice for his seat. Teresa Spry, the Democrat running against his arch nemesis Bill Napoli, and for Dennis Finch, the Democrat who was running against Dennis Schmidt (who turned out Stan's fellow MAINstream founder, JP Duniphan).

But of course, the PAC was all about abortion. (insert rolling of eyes here).

Unfortunately, I've been fighting this battle on this website since before last year. At one time, Stan made a lot of donations that no one would question, and I even worked with candidates who - very graciously and thankfully - got money from him. But soon after that, those donations seemed to take a darker turn.

Donations would go from one PAC through another - for no conceivable reason other than to obfuscate the source. And then they went from playing favorites in open primary contests to openly favoring defeating Republicans. I have a problem with this, and so do many others. In fact (as in the post below) Stan's playing with PAC was the genesis of legislators being forced to deal with campaign finance reform.

Getting back to the point: So Kati - you're trying to tell us all this this wasn't Stans' PAC? Despite him being the sole donor, and it being spent solely for his friends and against his political enemies?

Keep on spouting the company line.


Anonymous said…
And so it goes at SDwaronadelsteincollege.com
Anonymous said…
She brought it on herself
Anonymous said…
If Nix on Six is SA's pac and not DF's then whose PAC is Roger Hunt's? And why aren't you going ballistic about that one? At least Don and Stan are being completely transparent. And you chide them for this? Why? Because you speak with forked tongue, PP. That's why.

Plus, if you think making fun of Kati Jenkins is cool, you're the biggest creep on the planet. Have you met her? She's a bonafide cowgirl angel.
Anonymous said…
Get over it, PP. This is boring.
PP said…

I see you're not letting the facts get in the way of your argument.

The Roger Hunt thing is over whether or not a corporation has to file. (not a PAC) And that one is as clear as mud. That's why it's under litigation.

And I'm sure Kati is a good friend and a nice person. Where was I making fun of her? She challenged me, and I responded to her challenge. It's called debate.
Anonymous said…
The Liberals are running amuck! Boy do they hate to have the facts come out.

PP you are the best and don't ever stop telling the truth.

Thank you!!
Anonymous said…
What a no-mind response.

The difference between who owns a PAC and who owns a Corp is moot point. The real issue is, who is up front and who's not.

Basically, you just said the same thing I did and then tried to pretend you said something different. Doh.

Meanwhile, Kaity Jenkins is a woman among women. I could go on, but why bother?

Judging by your chauvenist disposition, toward her, you'll never have the pleasure.
Anonymous said…
judging by anonymous' typing and spelling skills, that's a dude pretending to be a girl.

And a stupid one at that. At least the other libs know what the whole hunt thing is about.
Anonymous said…
What does "a woman among women" mean?
Anonymous said…
That must mean she has Stan's stamp of approval, since he's the authority on protecting women's interests through planned un-parenthood.
Anonymous said…
Sam does look funny, but I didn't know he had a disability. I just thought he looked funny. But I'd still vote for him if I lived in Rapid. Mostly because Hanks lied to PP and was a pimp for his private interests in the legislature.
Anonymous said…
Once again, PAC's are simply a way around campaign finance reform and should be done away with.

And I'm with PP on this one. If a PAC has one donor, whoever it is, I'd say that PAC had been specifically set up for that person irregardless of whose name is on the paperwork. That should be obvious.
Anonymous said…
Irregardless is not a word.
Anonymous said…
9:53 anon. Better to keep thy mouth closed and be thought... (you know the rest of that saying).

Irregardless IS a word in Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary. Ha!
Anonymous said…
9:58 Well, yes, it is a word, a kind of dumb, self-contradicting word. Here's what Webster's really says:

Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
nonstandard : REGARDLESS
usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead."

Anyway, this is just a blog, and nonnie is... well, just nonnie, so...
Anonymous said…
9:33 See: "a man among men," a "soldiers' soldier," an "artists' artist," a "writers' writer" a "pimps' pimp" and "the king of kings."
Anonymous said…
Turd among turds.
Anonymous said…
Kati Jenkins merely commented the truth, and truth is very important to her. Don Frankenfeld did not establish Nix on Six PAC for Stan Adelstein. No way. DF established that PAC specifically regarding Referred Law 6 for last November's general election.
PP said…
If it was truly Don F.'s PAC, and Kati speaketh the truth, then why didn't Don put one dime into it?
Anonymous said…
12:13 Why don't you ask Don, PP?

Popular posts from this blog

Breaking News: Frederick not in SDGOP Chair Race

A strategic move by Sutton. Good for him, bad for Dems.