consultants are sandburs

Saturday, April 29, 2017

Watching that Montana debate, two things about Gianforte.

1. He's running against Nancy Pelosi. He said that in closing. Fact is, he's running against two people. Gianforte still belives in scaring children with a bogie man.

2. He sat there and flat out lied about a 90% marginal tax rate, with his "working into November for the government" BS. The aim he has, a low marginal rate is his because his cash flow from investment income is so vast compared to regular people that it puts most of his annual income at the high bracket margin. Everybody's first $50,000 is taxed the same for those making that or more; ditto, the first $100,000; money over the cut-off low income no-taxation level -up to the threshold for the next bracket - is taxed the same, for Quist or for Gianforte is at the lowest rate there is; and as income for some marches from lower to next, to higher, to highest bracket, then the marginal amount in that higher bracket sees the higher rate imposed on that fraction of income. The fact is, raising that floor and cutting bottom rates is where cuts help the entire economy. People who spend it all because they have to recirculate money into the community, they buy, they do not hoard. Those with loopholes dodge taxes regular people pay; and those at the highest margin level should see their marginal million hit hardest. They have benefited more by the public goods being provided in this nation and in their state, in that they get more money coming in with those assets helping, and they should pay more for those public goods so that others can have a better life by being taxed less. They owe it back to the nation that allowed them to prosper. It's called tax the rich. It's been sound policy forever. It's been fought by the rich forever. Gianforte being today's example.

Again, the big lie - deliberately fudging about the top marginal rate being raised, vs a flat tax of 90% - Gianforte mis-dressed that distinction in a lie that a 90% marginal rate would mean everybody having to work until November for the government. That is inexcusible, wanting to blandly mislead people that way. It is an insult to every man, woman and child in the State of Montana saying it that way because he is quite intelligent; meaning he knows better. He should stop.

The Libertarian candidate belonged; but on a few questions it looked as if Quist was ganged up on by two Republicans. If I were in Montana, disinclined to vote for Quist, he'd have my vote over Gianforte, as more of a straight shooter. Less a worry. Less in lockstep with Trump.

However, watching the live stream was reassuring. While being critical about the glide and slide Gianforte did on the deliberate confusion of total vs marginal rate taxation, (it was intentional misrepresentation and nothing short of itentional); I nonetheless admit and write that he would not be as disastrous were Montana voters to send him to DC as the disaster a majority of my home district voters in the Sixth Congressional District of Minnesota did in sending a total brickhead, Michele Bachmann, to Congress. And they did that more than once.

Gianforte, while a rabid creationist, is not anywhere near the threat and menace to reason as was/is/will be Michele Bachmann.

Faint praise? True it is that.

But it forms a perspective.

Were I there, a Montana voter, I would vote Quist. But Montanans are lucky in that any of the three gentlemen would be better as a representative than Bachmann was; and also far better than talk show host Jason Lewis, also from Minnesota, is as a first term Republican Congressman.

Montana is luckier that way.

UPDATE: In saying if I were a Montanan I'd vote Quist, is that saying I think Quist won the debate? No. I do not think he won the debate. I would not vote on that basis. I would look at the men as best as I could to be able to guess which of the three would be the best to send to DC. First, best for the nation because the nation is on an economic brink that could be worse than the Sept. 2008 Bush presidency burst of the securitized real estate mortgage bubble led to, and then, for the State who is best, and the question would be whose judgment would lead to the most good for the most people.

In that, I believe Quist has the best policies in mind, the best heart for others, and the best will to oppose business as usual in DC. I say that mindful that the Governor of my state after a single term in the Senate and refusing to stay there for more, correctly called the way government is done in DC a cesspool. Quist is the one of the three I see with the best likelihood of standing up to that and saying it is morally wrong and that he will not play ball on that team by those improper rules.

Opinions can differ. Gianforte in my view, of the three would be the least likely to rock the boat; since it's a comfortable yacht for his kind and he'd fit right in and he'd oppose rocking it. Not everybody is a yachtsman. (In passing, that analogy is chosen because he sold his business to an actual yachtsman; but the chance of reform of DC appears to me greatest with Quist, and better with the Libertarian than with Gianforte.) In saying all that, I would not be surprised if Montana did elect Gianforte to Congress. It's their choice. Not mine.

Today's Montana Special Election Debate will be streamed online, beginning at 7:00 pm Mountain Time, with a Sunday MTPR rebroadcast, 6:00 pm. [NOTE: post timestamp altered to keep this item at top of postings]

MTPR posted, here, linking to Billings' homepage.

If other outlets will livestream the event, none are known here at present.

Presumably an upload of the debate to YouTube shortly after the broadcast/rebroadcast is likely. Within days, hopefully.

  Here, the KTVQ website says:

Saturday evening at 7 p.m. MTN will broadcast the first live candidate debate from the studios of KRTV in Great Falls, Mont.

Democrat Rob Quist, Republican Greg Gianforte, and Libertarian Mark Wicks will answer questions from a panel of MTN journalists including debate moderator and Q2 news anchor Jay Kohn.

The debate will be broadcast on all MTN stations including KTVQ and will be streamed live on all MTN websites including

You have got to be kidding me.

This link, this screencapture:

Sure. White supremacist hand signals show up among: LeBron, James Harden, and Steph Curry; not because any made three point shot is involved. More food for thought; so who's to say? There is at least one hand signal less ambiguous -

- here and here, of course, what hand sign did you think I had in mind? Oh, those two images, thumb out, thumb crossed; does that make a difference?

YouTube, bonus.

"Despite the objections, an Obama spokesperson dismissed the idea that the large speaking fee compromised the former President's convictions. 'As we announced months ago, President Obama will deliver speeches from time to time,' Eric Schultz, a senior adviser to Obama, said in a statement Wednesday. 'Some of those speeches will be paid, some will be unpaid, and regardless of venue or sponsor, President Obama will be true to his values, his vision, and his record.' "

The headline is two paragraphs run together, out of this CNN report.

The man's record is the biggest Wall Street bailouts in history, no senior leadership forced to step down, not one single Wall Street crook got put into the slammer. True to that? Well -

$400,000 for first Wall Street speech. Big advance on book contract. Surely it would have looked unseemly had this all not waited until after the Trump inauguration. Even allowed a few extra months, how much more sensitive can you be?

Before Trump's inauguration, Cornel West wrote in this Guradian item:

Eight years ago the world was on the brink of a grand celebration: the inauguration of a brilliant and charismatic black president of the United States of America. Today we are on the edge of an abyss: the installation of a mendacious and cathartic white president who will replace him.

This is a depressing decline in the highest office of the most powerful empire in the history of the world. It could easily produce a pervasive cynicism and poisonous nihilism. Is there really any hope for truth and justice in this decadent time? Does America even have the capacity to be honest about itself and come to terms with its self-destructive addiction to money-worship and cowardly xenophobia?

Ralph Waldo Emerson and Herman Melville – the two great public intellectuals of 19th-century America – wrestled with similar questions and reached the same conclusion as Heraclitus: character is destiny (“sow a character and you reap a destiny”).

The age of Barack Obama may have been our last chance to break from our neoliberal soulcraft. We are rooted in market-driven brands that shun integrity and profit-driven policies that trump public goods. Our “post-integrity” and “post-truth” world is suffocated by entertaining brands and money-making activities that have little or nothing to do with truth, integrity or the long-term survival of the planet. We are witnessing the postmodern version of the full-scale gangsterization of the world.

The reign of Obama did not produce the nightmare of Donald Trump – but it did contribute to it. And those Obama cheerleaders who refused to make him accountable bear some responsibility.
Barack Obama forever changed black America | Peniel E Joseph
Read more

A few of us begged and pleaded with Obama to break with the Wall Street priorities and bail out Main Street. But he followed the advice of his “smart” neoliberal advisers to bail out Wall Street. In March 2009, Obama met with Wall Street leaders. He proclaimed: I stand between you and the pitchforks. I am on your side and I will protect you, he promised them. And not one Wall Street criminal executive went to jail.

The Obama legacy will stand in history with the [Bill] Clinton legacy. Uninspiring giving it the greatest leeway; awful by other measure. Bush with a brain. "Little or nothing to do with truth" is a phrase West wrote. It fits. Well-spoken in the process. But it fits.

These may appear as new critiques by people newly revulsed by the magnitude of the Wall Street low hanging fruit being picked now that the tires driving from the White House have cooled a bit. However, voices of the jaded did not need this particular mega-fee transgression to voice dissatisfaction earlier; here and here.

HOPE and CHANGE were a crock. Very sound people, with differing degrees of grace and constraint, are saying so.

Lesser evil than McCain-Palin; lesser evil than vulture-voucher [Romney-Ryan], is not mere faint praise. It is no praise at all. Properly so. Earned.

WSJ, behind a paywall, reports an update on the Bayrock/Trump situation.

WSJ, here, only lead sentences are open-posted.

This websearch for background.

No more to post of it here, now.

Give the guy a hammer and sickle, (even though his software was to outsource worker jobs). Oh, wait, that was yesterday, before the oligarchs of great wealth and will to buy influence took over. During the Cold War before this new one.

Cowgirl breaks a "put a fork in him" story for Montanans, by linking to INTERESTING news at Guardian. Cowboy posting on Cowgirl blog, excerpts and links, here, at Guradian. And Cowgirl analyzes, so read the Cowgirl's latest post for that. Guradian reported;

GOP candidate has financial ties to US-sanctioned Russian companies --
Congressional candidate Greg Gianforte owns shares in Russian index funds --
$250,000 invested in funds with holdings in Gazprom and Rosneft --
Ben Jacobs in Washington - Friday 28 April 2017 14.54 EDT

According to a financial disclosure filed with the clerk of the House of Representatives, the Montana tech mogul owns almost $150,000 worth of shares in VanEck Vectors Russia ETF and $92,400 in the IShares MSCF Russia ETF fund. Both are indexed to the Russian equities market and have significant holdings in companies such as Gazprom and Rosneft that came under US sanctions in the aftermath of the Russian invasion of the Crimea.

The holdings, while substantial, make up only a small portion of Gianforte’s wealth. [...]

Richard Nephew, the former principal deputy coordinator for sanctions policy at the state department, told the Guardian that “there is definitely a question here but my initial reaction is that this is not something to freak out about” [... but] it did raise some concerns from “a Russia policy perspective” as a conflict of interest because “betting on Russia’s economy is problematic”.

Shane Scanlon, a spokesman for Gianforte, told the Guardian that the Republican candidate did not oversee his portfolio on a day-to-day basis. Instead, Gianforte focused on the “overall performance”, he said.

[Guradian's linking omitted]

Well, gee. Portfolio so big a mere six-figure chunk of it can be dismissed as unimportant. Oligarchs use that kind of cash to light their cigars. Greg and Susan are attuned to the portfolio in toto. Boy, that's a relief. Yet, "not day to day" really says little about how long the bet on the Russian energy sector has lingered. Nor, more importantly, why the investment's been kept given sanctions in place against that very Russian energy sector, over Ukranian incursions by the portfolio's Russians. As if, by some action, sanctions could lift.

You'd think a politician holding out the Trump kid all around the State of Montana would have changed the portfolio first; FBI investigations being pending as they are in the direction they are taking. A savvy politician at least. Not a tone-deaf one.

So now we know. No wonder he's campaigning with Trump Jr. Of a feather. Flocking together, and borscht anyone? Just not this borscht, not Ukranian. Make it good ol' Mother Russia. But wait - isn't that getting into policy things the Russian investor might have to vote about, if he ever makes it to Congress?

An earlier but recent post is in a way related.

Quist verbally jabs at GOP opponent in 'health care town hall' in Missoula
By DAVID ERICKSON Mar 30, 2017

[...] Quist’s personal health issues have been in the media spotlight lately. The Billings Gazette has quoted Quist attributing his 16-year debt trail to 20 years of sporadic illness due to a botched gallbladder surgery in 1996. The Gazette also reported this week that, according to court documents, Quist said he was too sick to work and make mortgage payments in 2011, even though he played 35 shows with the Mission Mountain Wood band that year.

[...] “My health care issues have been splattered across the state,” he said. “This is something I have not hidden from. I kind of laid out all my issues in gory detail in my first speech at the Missoula Public Library.”

[...] “I challenge Gianforte and all their media mouthpieces to come listen to the stories today,” he said. “Greg Gianforte has $2.5 million in stock for some of these pharmaceutical companies that are charging such high prices. We need to reject Mr. Gianforte and the dinosaur he rode in on.”

[italics added] At a guess, most Montanans cannot understand the love between a rich man and his portfolio management goals and decisions: Keep betting on the Russians, and expect sanctions relief. Sometime. Somehow. Keep riding the profit-gouging Pharma-Industrial complex. It's good for one's money to do so.

How many Montanans might regard six-figure blocs of a portfolio as miniscule? Of little consequence? As not influencing policy likelihoods, were the portfolio holder to ever have a Congressional vote? As irrelevant to that?

As a bet, more Montanans live paycheck to paycheck and have suffered one time or another horrendously at the hands of "healthcare delivery costs" and pharmaceutical profiteering than have the money allocation concerns the Gianforte portfolio entails, or ones like it. You can trust Quist will make Congressional decisions in tune with his experiences, and you might expect that Gianforte might make decisions in tune with his investments.

In closing, perhaps it's an uncalled for jab, but Noah did not have a portfolio to comfortably sit on, he had an ark. Something useful.

Salon reports . . .


Montana congressional candidate Rob Quist wants to be considered a man of the people — clothed or unclothed.

The Washington Free Beacon reported on Wednesday that Quist is a frequent performer at Sun Meadow Resort, Idaho’s premier nudist resort for families.

The resort’s website had a picture of a clothed Quist playing guitar on stage, but the image was taken down as of Thursday. A blog post from 2009 recommends Quist’s $12 shows at the resort.

I'd bet Quist could tell you, the audience there looked as naked as Gianforte prancing around campaign events without his necktie. His Trump necktie. Affectations do have a way of showing things.

And for Gianforte, remind him that the original Singing Cowboy did NOT sing, "Let's Fence Them Out," (no shell-game shell corporation needed nor used by singing cowboys); tune time; and this item.

whose shell? this link

Beltway bastards hanging Quist out to dry?


As early voting kicks off in Montana this week, national Democrats are holding back from heavy investments in the state’s May 25 special House election, believing Democratic candidate Rob Quist still has a steep hill to climb to win a state that voted heavily for President Donald Trump just months ago.

[...] Republican outside groups hoping to avoid surprises are spending $2 million on TV ads savaging Quist, while Donald Trump Jr. recently stumped with Gianforte.

Along with his heady online fundraising, Quist will get a campaign assist from Bernie Sanders sometime in the next month. And the DCCC sent just under $200,000 to the state Democratic Party to help out. A DCCC aide said that the committee is “working with the Quist campaign and watching it closely. We’re excited about the energy and it’s possible we’ll invest more.”

But the House Democratic committee, which recently went on the air in Georgia, is not airing TV ads pushing back against the barrage of spots from the NRCC and Congressional Leadership Fund. Overall, GOP groups have already spent over $2.2 million attacking Quist, according to campaign finance disclosures.

“They’re doing what they can to get him in a position to where he can win, but until they see data that assures them that he can win and that the investment is worthwhile, you don’t spend that much money until you’re sure it pays off,” said Jesse Ferguson, who directed the DCCC’s independent expenditure unit in 2014.

Despite past Democratic successes in Montana by the likes of Gov. Steve Bullock and Sen. Jon Tester, some Democrats are concerned that Quist will simply hit a ceiling.

Telling Berniecrats to go it alone in Montana, and good luck, is telling Berniecrats they're not wanted, that perhaps the beltway entrenched inner party base feels a few alienated Berniecrats in affluent suburban Georgia seeing abandonment in Montana and put off is okay, and taht Ossoff will be without any measure of fallout harm? Big tent for big money? It got Trump elected, the Dem inner party dumping on Bernie's mass appeal yet expecting sheep-like adherence to what the money told them to do last November; the tepid-to-hostile feelings that engendered re the artificial Clinton-Kaine Podesta/Bubba managed ticket.

That "data that he can win" business; polling is all idiots know, and Clinton's polls said she'd win. End of that story. The fact is the inner party money loving DC base hung Thompson out to dry in Kansas, and appear so inclined in Montana. This is worrisome after the Kieth Ellison ambush, and such. Joe Biden will have problems besides age, in 2020.

New York mega-wealthy Trump Jr. in Montana to beat Gianforte's drum; reporting from Billings:


By the time 7:30 rolled around on a rainy, overcast evening in Billings, about 50 protesters had split up along either side of Mullowney Lane in front of the Red Lion Hotel and Convention Center for a protest timed with the arrival of Donald Trump Jr. in Billings to campaign for Republican candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives Greg Gianforte.

[...] For Billings resident Kirk Blee, the presence of the younger Trump, who helps manage the Trump Organization business with his brother Eric Trump, represented what he sees as abuse of the United States government by the Trump family in order to advance themselves financially.

"His daughter's making money off of this, he's making money off of this, his kids are making money off of this," Blee said. "He's just robbing the country blind. I don't really have much against Gianforte but he's aligning himself with a monster. It's disgusting. I can't believe this is happening in America."

Blee, a local property manager, said he views himself politically as an independent. Wearing a yellow rain jacket and holding a sign reading "Gianforte and Trump Make America Great Again=Billions In Tax Cuts For Them And Slogans And Ads for You," Blee said he had "not really" protested anything before.

Millionaires sticking together is not news. Ordinary people seeing nothing worthwhile to it, that is good news. Perhaps even watershed news; if it holds through 2018 and into the end of 2020.

___________FURTHER UPDATE____________
Hopefully, the women reported in protest, here, will remember not only to vote by May 25, but the each tell ten friends. Noted then:

Signs at the rally included [...] "Grab them by the ballot"

At a guess, Trump Jr. leaving Trump Tower in Manhattan to dink around in Montana has added inspiration to women nationwide to contribute to the Quist campaign, by check or by ActBlue. At least that's the hope. Blowback to Gianforte should happen, for hitching to Trump instead of running on his own merit, whatever that may be.


This Quist contributions page.

Checks can be mailed:

Rob Quist Congressional Campaign
PO Box 1917 Kalispell, MT 59903

Every dollar helps.
Remember: You don't need credit for helping. What you need is a better Congress.

______________FURTHER UPDATE________________
Early April HuffPo reporting, here, followed up by no helpful talk, no action, from DCCC. Money management by DCCC is a worry; a ton of donor cash has been put into the Ossoff effort in Georgia; leading to a special election set to happen after Rob Quist's fate in Montana has been measured; May 25. HuffPo sure reported something you'd expect, from reading the account, to be fully ripe for national party money to help; but DC is MIA. Go figure. Is it a Bernie freeze-out inclination? Is there any better explanation? Is the Party face going to look attractive with the nose cut off, in spite?

Friday, April 28, 2017

Taking too much round-about time to say it stinks.

Shaun King, NEW YORK DAILY NEWS, Friday, April 28, 2017, 1:19 PM.

Not unexpected, not here at least, but it stinks:

I didn't just vote for Barack Obama twice, I volunteered for his campaigns. My family donated to those campaigns. In my house, particularly around my wife, who worships the ground the Obamas walk on, you can't say anything wrong about them — it doesn't matter if it's about drones, or the misuse of our personal data, or anything else — the Obamas are right and everybody else is wrong, as far as she's concerned.

[...]I wasn't surprised to see that Barack and Michelle will be getting $60 million for their memoir. He's actually an amazing writer and storyteller and I could imagine it being one of the best presidential memoirs ever. I'm not even surprised to see him delivering speeches for a lot of money. He has a gift for speaking and it's not quite like he's about to get another job to build wealth off of. He was a gifted speaker and writer before he became President of the United States so he has every right to earn a living and build wealth with his own skills and gifts. However, it's not so cut and dry with President Obama or other politicians who hold so much influence and sway over how things get done in this country.

The news that President Obama signed with the same speaking agency used by Bill and Hillary Clinton makes sense. That agency clearly understands how to manage the affairs of such high-profile people. That's a unique skill held by very few agencies. However, it appears that President Obama could end up speaking to pretty much the same old crowd as the Clintons after it was revealed that he'll be paid $400,000 to speak to the Wall Street investment firm Cantor Fitzgerald.

I operate under the guise that these firms like Goldman Sachs and Cantor Fitzgerald spend that amount of money not simply because they want to hear what someone has to say, but that they want to curry favor and get in the good graces of the high-profile people they invite. If Hillary Clinton went to Goldman Sachs and put them on blast for their greed and bad practices, she damn sure would've released the transcripts.

Maybe President Obama will release his transcripts as a standard practice. I doubt it, though. When it comes to Wall Street, it's genuinely hard to tell Barack and Hillary apart. Again, I don't mean that as an insult — it's just the billionaire class are their friends. This is who they hobnob and vacation with. These are their buddies and the financiers of their campaigns. Neither of them will ever go down in history as being tough on billionaires or investment bankers.

That's also why I understand Elizabeth Warren's recent remarks expressing real reservations about Obama's paid speeches to Wall Street. It will be insincere for him to ever really talk about the problematic role of money in politics, particularly as it pertains to the billionaire class, particularly when he's being paid by them.

Earlier this year a major defense contractor asked my speaking agency if I'd be willing to speak there during Black History Month. I wasn't. I don't agree with their practices. I didn't want to be used as a prop.

[Warren link in original]. Is anybody at all really surprised? I have become very, very, very, VERY tired of voting lesser evil. That's why I refused to do it, 2016. (Not voting greater evil either, not Trump, but there were other ballot choices besides Clinton/Podesta/Goldman and Trump/Jarad/Goldman). It sucks. The author of that quoted item was gentle.


Bravo, Lizzy. Duly circumspect, but detecting a miasma too. Also this link. Sixty million for a book.

Even Pynchon does not make that money per pop; but he's paid only for the output - in writing the book, not for anything prior to it.

Do you think for one minute Lizzy got that kind of loot for her book mentioned in that perhaps too gentle report:

“I was troubled by that,” she said.

That was the extent of her comments aimed directly at Obama. She quickly launched into a broader discussion of her views of the corrupting influence of money in Washington.

“I describe it as a snake that slithers through Washington. And that it shows up in so many different ways here in Washington,” she said, referencing her just-published book, “This Fight Is Our Fight: The Battle to Save America’s Middle Class.”

“The influence of dollars on this place is what scares me,” she continued. “I think it ultimately threatens democracy.”

While Warren’s critique was a far cry from the withering criticism some on the left have leveled at Obama, it’s rougher than anything she said during the 2016 campaign about former secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s acceptance of hefty speaking fees from Wall Street firms.

Unlike Obama, Clinton was considering running for office when she gave her controversial speeches, while the former president’s days in elected public office are behind him.

Warren stayed neutral — and mostly silent — throughout the bitter primary contest between Clinton and Vermont independent Bernie Sanders, despite, as she writes in her book, coming under intense pressure from both sides to endorse her preferred candidate. “I didn’t want to undermine either of our candidates or to short-circuit any part of that debate,” she writes.

When Warren finally did endorse Clinton, after the New York Democrat had secured enough primary votes to clinch the nomination, the Globe asked whether Clinton should release the transcripts of paid speeches she gave to Goldman Sachs, an issue Sanders had hammered on the campaign trail.

“That’s for her to decide — there will be a whole lot of issues to talk about over the next several months,” Warren said.

Yeah. She waffled when she could have been more forceful. But aside from Warren feeling a need to be politically nice, the fair and honest truth is Obama's loot grabbing is obscene. But hardly unexpected. Ka-ching. Ka-ching.

From the sidebar:

Breaking the promise of Minnesota's Legacy Amendment.

A reader forwarded to me an email from:

Paul Austin
Executive Director
Conservation Minnesota
1101 West River Parkway, Suite 250, Minneapolis, MN, 55415 US

The item is online, here, stating in part:

When the Minnesota Legislature is in session, we make a point to keep an eye out to see what local news organizations are saying about Capitol activities. Recently the St. Cloud Times wrote an editorial, and it is the best summary that I have seen of the ways that the legislature is ignoring the values of Minnesotans and breaking the promise of the Legacy Amendment this session.

Our state currently has a $1.6 billion budget surplus. We also have communities with water that is too polluted for residents to drink and 40% of our lakes and rivers that don’t meet water quality standards. It makes no sense to slash funds and undermine polices that support the clean water, wildlife, parks and natural resources that are so important to our health, our economy, and our quality of life. Minnesotans have made this point clearly at the ballot box every time they have been asked.

Take a look at the article:

"Despite Constitution, legislators attack environment
By: Times Editorial Board, St. Cloud Times - April 22, 2017"

From the close of the Conservation Minnesota post:

About Paul Austin
Paul Austin has 23 years of public service as an elected leader, advocate and political strategist, Paul Austin brings a rare combination of skills and experience to his position as Executive Director. At age 25, Paul was elected Mayor of Clinton, Connecticut – the youngest in state history. Paul has served as Executive Director of Conservation Minnesota since 2004.

With readers strongly urged to read the St. Cloud Times Editorial in full, it is only briefly quoted here:

In the past 60-plus years, Minnesotans have been asked five times through constitutional amendments if and how much they value the state's natural resources. Every time their answer has been loud and clear and the same: Yes, a lot!

Yes, we want to establish (and financially sustain) a Minnesota Environmental and Natural Resources Trust Fund. Yes, we want to guarantee our right to hunt and fish. And most recently, yes, we will even raise our own taxes for 25 years to protect water resources, enhance natural habitat and support parks and trails.

The collective message to legislators is crystal clear: Preserving and protecting Mother Nature is a — perhaps even the — top Minnesota priority.

[...] Obvious attacks

Make no mistake. Proposals rooted solidly in Republican House and Senate majorities undoubtedly aim to weaken, even remove, scores of rules, regulations, public-input processes and funding put in place to uphold the very values Minnesotans have placed through the state Constitution on the state's natural resources. Among the easy-to-see examples: [... see original for listing detail]

There also is a push to curb or even eliminate the Environmental Quality Board, which for almost a half-century has served as a centerpoint for managing water resources while ensuring the public has a voice in those issues. Could that board be reformed or made better? Probably. Should it be neutered or eliminated? No.

[...] What's it going to take to show these legislators Minnesotans value — and are willing to pay for — clean air, water and land?

We'd say a constitutional amendment. But that's already been done — five different times! — and these legislators apparently don't think those votes matter.

The devil always is in details; and if you believe the editorial board judges legislative intentions harshly, do read the entire item and consider what voters did in amending our Minnesota Constitution and how that is being honored in the breach. If you've a legislator to write or phone, where you think it might make a difference, please do that. It would take you less time than it took to prepare this blog post.

A hope is the Trump outsider kid helped provide something Greg appears to have lost.

No, not momentum. Guess again.


image source

Before No.2:

image source

Before No.3:

image source

Before No.4:

image source


image from gregformontana Congressional campaign site

So young Trump, a millionaire helping another, should have a hand in promoting the family brand in order to make Greg look like himself again.

Wha' happened:
Somebody drew a map for Greg; a staffer got a sizes list from Susan to be sent to shop; or, they got the new-package duds online; what?

UPDATE: If having to guess, it looks REI to me.

The "Congressional Leadership Fund" is flooding Montana with negative advertising against Democrat Rob Quist. lists the moneymen behind the effort, some giving millions; three pages, no Montanans.

This link. Also informative of how they operate; here. They independently sling mud at Democratic Party candidates. It's their habit. Their Gestalt. Their reason for existing. Those are 2016 numbers, but those folks are tampering in Montana now.

The first link, go to each of the three pages of donor listings. Do a word search, each page, even the last low-budget page, search = Montana.

Go figure.

Second link; the nutshell info:

2016 PAC Contribution Data
Contributions from this PAC to federal candidates (list recipients) $0
Contributions to this PAC from individual donors of $200 or more ( list donors) $50,490,681

Fifty million dollars and not a single contribution to a campaign. Citizens United was a Supreme Court opinion inviting abuse, and these folks RSVP'd big time. The only thing "super" about this SuperPAC is the staggering amount of wealth being slung around when ordinary voting citizens struggle to make ends meet. It's more than grocery and rent money, and its not yours because these folks want it all!

The Montana Special Election has nationwide importance. Besides sidebar links and earlier posts, the two candidates will debate on MTN, tomorrow, Apr. 29.

click the thumbnail to read 

The information is that MTN, Montana Television Network, will televise statewide.

Unclear, I am trying to pin down; whether an online live stream will be available; and whether a YouTube of the debate video will be uploaded soon, since the election day is May 29.

If answer are found, look for a post update.

The screencapture is from here:

A special Quist contribution page (an page) has been created; this link.

Also, snail mail:

Rob Quist Congressional Campaign
PO Box 1917 Kalispell, MT 59903

Not just boosting, but doing it myself, second check mailed today.

"I don't need credit for helping. I need a better Congress."

Pretorian Guard? Time to fire Harteau? The mayor is the civilian elected head of the police department. Anybody else serves under the commander in chief. As with the over-sized federal military. Civilian control is bedrock.

This link.

Thursday, April 27, 2017

Reading this and that, a Clinton sighting recently, the question: Where's Huma?

image source
Wikipedia. Zippo about since Clinton left government and lost. Can anyone even in a comment indicate whether she's gotten her laptop computer back, or not?

Indeed, what's Teneo specializing in these days? This link, but a subscription wall. Yesterday's news.

Is there any chance Teneo might be tied to the Russians, Russian emigre oligarchs? Money gloms together a lot, after all.

A shot-in-the-dark websearch only turned up this and this. Largely a dry well. Who's to say?

Questions having more appeal than "Where's Hillary?"

This. This. All I know is what I read on the web. For all I know there might have been a Teneo Hospitality presence in that Russian hotel where Trump stayed during the beauty pageant.

Uranium One. Between election and inauguration.

Another shot-in-the-dark search; yielding as first two hits on the list, this and this, both fairly recent. One mentions Uranium One, the other does not.

But, where's Huma? A remaining mystery. Another dry well search.

UPDATE: Zain Endeavors LLC? What have you done for me lately? For anyone? Where do you endeavor? Who's Zain?

Wednesday, April 26, 2017

You have got to be kidding me. In suing to quiet title against a publicly held and publicly used road route to recreational public land and to a public waterway (a Montana stream) it seems a degree of lack of forethought to political ramifications might disqualify a person trying that stunt from being deemed by voters as in all ways qualified to handle the nuances of duty going with holding a posiiton of public trust. Voters should be informed, and then decide.

Not being a Montana lawyer, all I can write about is what I read on the internet, where a lawyer's opinion clearly would be needed to assess likelihoods and difficulties; law having its nuances and not being an exact science. Were it one, there would never be any disputes over law and the meanings of wording of statutes; only disputes of facts; and it is likely disputes of law have existed since territorial times. Again, for definitive advice on that or any word of this post, ask a practicing licensed Montana lawyer.

That said, Google Scholar has Montana case law online; this link for search = easement by prescription

This link for search = frivolous claim

The Gianforte complaint appears to allege some original defect of easement grant in that grantor persons named in the complaint are alleged to have lacked full title to be able to convey an easement, with that being suggested in the complaint as having fatal consequences for continuing pubic ingress/egress. See: This site, posting by link, this pdf of the court filing.

From the first Google Scholar search; Public Lands Access v. Boone & Crockett, 856 P. 2d 525, 259 Mont. 279 (Mont. 1993) teaches as black-letter law:

To establish an easement by prescription, the party claiming an easement "must show open, notorious, exclusive, adverse, continuous and uninterrupted use of the easement claimed for the full statutory period. The statutory period is five years." Keebler v. Harding (1991), 247 Mont. 518, 521, 807 P.2d 1354, 1356. (Citation omitted.) See also; Downing v. Grover (1989), 237 Mont. 172, 175, 772 P.2d 850, 852. The burden is on the party seeking to establish the prescriptive easement. Downing, 772 P.2d at 852. "All elements must be proved in a case such as this because `one who has legal title should not be forced to give up what is rightfully his without the opportunity to know that his title is in jeopardy and that he can fight for it'" Downing, 772 P.2d at 852.

"To be adverse, the use of the alleged easement must be exercised under a claim of right and not as a mere privilege or license revocable at the pleasure of the owner of the land; such claim must be known to, and acquiesced in by, the owner of the land." Keebler, 807 P.2d at 1356-1357. "If the owner shows permissive use, no easement can be acquired since the theory of prescriptive easement is based on adverse use." Rathbun v. Robson (1983), 203 Mont. 319, 322, 661 P.2d 850, 852. (Citation omitted.)

Landowners in their McMansion had to know people were coming and going over the route in question for as long as they occupied the McMansion. Use would have been open and notorious to a grade school student; and claim of right seems admitted in the complaint - a deed of record, claimed to be defective, but sufficient as a claim of right. Ingress/egress over the route had to exist over time, well over the five year prescriptive period, even if legal title had a defect.

Neighborly accommodation and extinguishment by actions evidencing a "distinct and positive assertion of a hostile right," if present, were not pleaded in the complaint. Only a defect in legal title was alleged. If the Gianforte spouses ever put a chain or other "keep out" barrier across the access route, such possibility is absent from the pleading.

A court would have to decide whether a frivolous action was involved; but the action was dismissed by the court on its own motion for lack of any diligent prosecution of the claim.

In any event, whether a lame and unwinnable claim was or was not at issue, for a politician to pull such a boneheaded bunch of crap against public access to public facilities staggers the imagination.

That's not a legal opinion. It's a plain common sense conclusion based on a belief of there being a functioning sensible psychology to a voting public. That the quiet title stunt; valid at law or not; was a fatal error for one wanting election by a majority vote of a voting public.

Apart from practicalities and legalities of the assertion of an attempt to close off a public recreational access route by one contemplating seeking office; there may or may not be a dimension at play of The Elihu Root Quotation.

Readers may form independent opinions of these subjective "judgment" questions; and one parting thought is helpful. The Enhancing Montana's Wildlife & Habitat post, already linked, seems the most thorough and helpful analysis of the factual detail of the Gianforte route killing effort; and voter judgment shall be the determinant of the wisdom of that anti-public-interest effort ever having seen the light of day.

UPDATE: Credit for reaching the EMWH item just mentioned, is due. This fork-in-him item, included a footer UPDATE link, with the update in turn linking to EMWH.

Referring back to the recent Timmer - LeftMN post, and a context for a thought.

Timmer here wrote:

The Democrats think that by being the Slightly Less Evil to Workers™ party and sitting back and letting Trump be Trump, we’ll be good.

In answer, perhaps.

Here is a recent tightly written post by Dan Burns online at MPP. A part of an extended online sequence, as is clear from the title.
Click to enlarge and read, or go to the original

While unsure of where Burns got the image, it tells its own story. Perhaps all but the most lumberheaded Dem inner party dweller might look at the jobs in the red, and say "lost spoils."

Perhaps, but don't bet on it, enough of the lower-income Dem inner party mavens may consider the wisdom of burying the hatchet and giving progressives their due.

Since Bernie would have won and all inner party persons, both parties, know that regardless of what they'll admit, what is "the progressives' due" might take time to establish given intransigence of ideologues of the Clinton Republican-lite Third Way; but coming to reason can be at least hoped for, if not being a good bet for any wager.

Those in-the-red job numbers have an eloquence that blog posting by Timmer, or here about Timmer, lack; however best we try to write and explain.

It is simple. Not rocket science. Polling proves: Bernie had the winning message, despite the money givers calling shots differently for the Dem candicacy handed us during the last presidential election.

It is not progressives' oxen being gored. If progressives are not given their due; there are other jobs, state levels, as well as federal. Even the entrenched donor-fed DC consultancies might suffer.

Dem Inner Party mavens - feel the rain.

UPDATE: The MPP chart, full size, is online here. The numbers are easier to read.

FURTHER UPDATE: As to labels, "progressives" is in common usage but is not as good as "democratic socialists," the term that Bernie and Jill Stein helped define and popularize last election cycle [see sidebar]. Woodrow Wilson has forever given a stain and taint to the term "progressiveism" since it was war-mongering and big-state to him, and he if anything was plain vanilla traditional liberal; with the neoliberals, both parties, being the present impediment to a decent nation. Terms such as "Our Revolution" and "Justice Democrats" serve well, to delineate distinctions.

While both were used during the recent Montana Governor race, these are two of the most effective short political ads done recently; and each applies to the pending special election contest in Montana.

Online videos. Here and here. Watch them. Fast food and fish, but so much more.

And the opponent highlighted in each is not a Tea Party GOP reformer. He is a part of the in-place GOP inner party plutocracy, and he makes no pretenses of offering Tea Party cred. That Montana special election could be a bellweather event. In part a referendum on Trump, talking populist, entrenching billionaires and plutocrats. If some Montana Trump voters feel buyer's remorse, it will show. May 25 will be a day of interest, nationwide.

For context on the second video, the litigation was widely reported in Montana; e.g., here, here and here.

It would be no big surprise if Rob Quist and Bernie Sanders campaigning in Montana were to book and the Montana Democratic Party were to widely publicize a major campaign event at that river access spot, with the fast-food carload invited there along with representatives of the state and national press. A happening. Smaller than Woodstock, but potentially big.

Gather there to bury the access spot's neighboring Caesar, not to praise him?

Can you imagine a give-em-hell Bernie speech about overreaching self-infatuated plutocrats, at that locale? It would be a humdinger.

UPDATE: The spot would also be good for a congregation event that Greg and Susan would have a difficult time voicing any effort to stymie, being who they publicly hold themselves out to be and all.

That could be a post-election event, depending on how things turn out.

Outsource partners? Wait a minute, he did clearly say "outsource partners."

On Fox he said, job outsourcing is our RightNow facilitation skill.

Steve Timmer is again actively posting at LeftMN.

You should bookmark it if you have not already:

Of recent items, without any quoting because readers are most strongly urged to follow the links: here, linking here.

There also is an embedded video Timmer values enough to embed; so rotor over and check things out.

One Montana election issue akin to the sulfide mining worry in the northern Minnesota Boundary Waters neighborhood.

For Minnesotans and others viewing public lands debate in Montana during the special election ramp-up; this websearch, hat tip to here, where Crabgrass first took notice. It appears late Obama presidency trending was to protect public lands adjacent to or near Yellowstone Park via a mining and mineral extraction lease ban. Now the appearance is that legislation would be needed given a current presidential disinclination to protect public lands. The linked "first notice" item links here, to this letter from Senator Tester to the administration.

click image to read it

Why resurrect the MN Progressive Project's world famous Norm Coleman Weasel Meter? Because he is. Also, was and will be. Nancy Pelosi cannot sing, but Norm's minions care not; in TV hijinks aimed against Montana's best and brightest hope for a future, Rob Quist. Only a weasel would do that.

Anybody wanting to know who Rob Quist really is should take the half-hour it takes to view this video, and leave the half-minute and minute-long GOP mud-slinging stuff alone as the pure out-of-state toxic waste it is.

world-famed metered weasel
was-is-will be

College Weasel, Norm Bullhorn
Congressional Leadership Fund's Board Chair, former single-term Minnesota Senator, Norm "College Bullhorn Agitator" Coleman, (who backed into his Senate term because Paul Wellstone died on election day eve), has a post-college history and a present reach.

As an ongoing agitator, this time a GOP outside agitator with a weasel-paw reach into Montana, Norm remains who he's been; as Rollcall reports:

GOP Super PAC Ties Montana's Rob Quist to Nancy Pelosi - Congressional Leadership Fund begins $800,000 media campaign
(Posted Apr 21, 2017 6:00 AM -- by Simone Pathé)

House GOP leadership is deploying House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi in a new TV attack on Democratic nominee Rob Quist.

The ad, which will debut Friday on broadcast and cable, marks the start of an $800,000 media buy from Congressional Leadership Fund. The super PAC ran its first TV ad against Quist last month, using many of the same attacks.

But this new ad adopts the longtime GOP strategy, which CLF has used on TV repeatedly in Georgia in recent weeks, of tying Democratic congressional candidates to Pelosi.

“Rob Quist talks folksy,” the narrator says, opening the spot. “But his record is more Nancy Pelosi than Montana,” the narrator says.

“Whether it’s cuts to the military or doubling down on a health care system more expensive than Obamacare, Rob Quist continues to prove he is more in-tune with Nancy Pelosi than Montana,” CLF executive director Corry Bliss said in a statement.

The ad also goes after Quist’s personal financial troubles, hitting him for a “long pattern of failing to pay his bills” and late taxes.

“Rob’s reckless financial past is a scary indication of how he’d treat Montanans’ hard-earned dollars. CLF will continue to expose Rob for what he is: out-of-touch and untrustworthy,” Bliss said.
[links in original]

Come on. Pelosi cannot sing and wears no hat. Beyond that, she's one of the corporatist Dem millionaire Congress members, and not the people's true populist and progressive Quist is. She's vanilla DC. Quist is eternal Blue Sky country legit.

As to Quist's openess about past financial stress, it qualifies him to represent real people who know distress as a too familiar unwelcome lifetime companion. Quist's pre-existing medical dilemma was a cause of piled up out-of-pocket medical bills he has since paid off.

Unlike Trump, no host of bankruptcy court meanderings. Facing a debt Quist paid it off. Something all of Congress cannot or fails to want to do for the nation's debt, so why would this line of Bullhorn be relevant? Because Norm knows his one way, and little of other ways and his superPAC cronies [super-lobbyist Minnesotan Vin Weber on that same slushPAC board according to Wikipedia] must be happy with his Chairmanship since he's still in that boss honcho saddle.

Go figure. The quality of the advertisements mirror the quality of the string pulling leadership team. Outsiders might be leaving an oilslick wherever they reach into Montana. And the truth is that attack-advertising Bullhorn Coleman dissing Quist's financial hardship must, himself, know something about hardship, given this one involving Coleman's reported past benefactor, Kaziminy. (Yes, a Chap. 11, a reorg and not throwing in the towel, it is fair to note that).

Like that mud-slinging ad says, "Rob Quist talks folksy." But the fact is, he's not a grifter.

Color it green. Should Norm and Vin's thing at all set a hook, and you believe Nancy Pelosi might not know what's best for Montana and have Montana's best future in mind; why in the world would you think otherwise of Las Vegas gambling house magnate Sheldon Adelson, who knows certainly what's best for Sheldon (from Ballotpedia, Norm and Vin's Congreessional Leadership adventure's green; with no more recent data yet found on the web):

So, on a nationwide basis, Norm Bullhorn and his Tonto, Vin, only do negative ad publishing; and the casino deep pocket is their prime green valley. Trust such a bunch, or trust Rob Quist or Greg Gianforte? As another Minnesotan, having that and only that in common with Norm and Vin, I also am an outsider to Montana. At least I've driven the interstate through there, and stopped for a fine dinner in Missoula. That likely is a step ahead of Norm, Vin, or Sheldon and family. So, trust me more; but mainly trust the candidates and not outsiders, especially dirt throwing advertisements (which takes little skill, as can be seen from the two things Rollcall linked to in giving a flavor of the brand).

Now if you've any faith in a claim Rob Quist has ever even talked to Nancy Pelosi or to any of her campaign people or House staff; please in a comment identify when, where, and who.

It simply is a manufactured totally fake claim.

Brought to you as Norm and Vin sideshow barking on Sheldon's bucks. Sheldon's casino cash.

________________FURTHER UPDATE________________
A gentler critique of the one-term former Senator, sort of, by another from Minnesota, here.

_______________FURTHER UPDATE________________
In advising Montanans, trust the candidates, that means take the time to show up and listen when either is in your town. See the person, the cut of his jib, the sincerity or falseness you might feel, in person. Trash half-minute TV stuff is for the super lazy, the ignorant, and the GOP shall likely outspend the Democrats in that direction.

To counter Sheldon's casino cash TV trash blurbs, send Rob Quist's campaign a check. I did. I likely will cut another soon. I don't need credit for it, I need a better House of Representatives:

Rob Quist Congressional Campaign
PO Box 1917, Kalispell MT, 59903

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

A quick tune time thought for Bernie and Rob Quist when campaigning together to send Quist to Congress. Good thoughts for two fine people.

Doing well to be here still, and Jerry is missed. This link.

Bonus tune. May 25 will be upon us soon.

A reposting from an Observer-Dispatch item. [Original post was revised and shortened]

An interesting Biden speech a while back at Colgate University, (interesting for what Biden neglected declined to address as well as for what the press reporting summarized as being said). With the present browser configuration used in posting, getting the media outlet's page to display proved problematic to me. But readers have the link below and are encouraged to give the site a try.

Colgate visit: Biden speaks of past, present, future

Friday -- Mar 24, 2017 at 9:38 PM Mar 24, 2017 at 9:52 PM

"At the end of the day, I just couldn't do it," former Vice President Joe Biden said about running a campaign to be president. "So I don't regret not running. Do I regret not being president? Yes."

In Colgate University's Sanford Field House, University President Brian W. Casey opened the Kerschner Family Global Leaders series lecture question-and-answer panel with Biden by asking if Biden regrets not running to be president

"On a college campus I will never, never do anything other than answer the question completely unvarnished and straightforward," Biden said. "The answer is that I had planned on running for president. And although it would have been a very difficult primary, I think I could have won."

[...] Colgate sophomore John Bennett, 19, a Democrat, was hoping to hear Biden speak on a variety of topics, including health care after President Donald Trump's bill for the American Health Care Act had failed to get enough support to pass earlier in the day before Biden's speech.

"I think it might be interesting to hear his take about foreign policy going forward with how we may be more isolationist in these coming years," he said.

Biden closed out the evening by speaking about the current administration. He said he knew many Republicans who are caring and excellent at their jobs. [...]

That quoted student should receive an A+ for perceptiveness. Much time, key issues ducked? And if he could have won he should have ran because who they ran flopped Podestadly. Aside from Biden poll and guess; Bernie both did run and would have won, if only the Joe Bidens of the party had the sense to step aside so he could have, and so that agency staff cuts would not have happened as now, under Trump.

Win or go home? A way for those in bureaus to think Dem-thought, in the future. Bernie would have won. No question. Slam dunk. Winning slam dunk.



Montana's special election: Outing the Outsorcerers' Apprentice.

Starting with a bit of jargon and a hope of getting it correct, CRM means "Customer Resource Management," "hosted CRM" means sited other than on-premises CRM, and "BPO" means "Business Product Outsourcing." Then a theme setting screencapture, one capturing the mood of the man:

screencapture from here

The Forbes blurb is dated, 2009; and the Cowgirl item yielding the capture, Oct. 2016. But is there more, and is cumulative evidence really needed? The answer here: yes, and yes. Does a pattern starting even earlier add something? (Another: yes.)

CRMbuyer, as early as 2004, wrote in this Gianforte interview article:

Bozeman, Montana-based RightNow Technologies is a major player in the on-demand CRM space. In an interview with CRM Buyer, RightNow CEO Greg Gianforte explained [...] his company allows organizations to use what they know about their customers, in the form of phone transcripts and e-mail records, to anticipate service inquiries and initiate upsell and cross-sell actions.

[...] CRM Buyer: How has RightNow seen the market for hosted CRM evolve in the past year?

Greg Gianforte:
Hosted CRM really began at our inception in 1997. In the past year, we have seen what have traditionally been thought of as barriers to adoption really crumble and fall away. The objections we used to hear were around customization, integration, security [and] not having control over the upgrade process. Slowly, through working with our customers, we've shown them that they don't lose control of the application in a hosting environment. If the systems are in place, they actually have better control of an application in a hosting environment than they would in an on-premise environment.

[...] CRM Buyer: What types of companies are RightNow's target customers -- SMBs? Large companies?

Historically, we sold primarily to middle-market companies, and we realized the buying characteristics of departments in a Global 2000 are nearly identical to the buying characteristics of middle-market companies. [...] And we typically serve companies that have between five and 500 dedicated people in their customer-service organization.

CRM Buyer: Do you have a lot of outsourcing customers?

We have deep relationships with many of the top outsourcers. In fact, we just announced what we believe to be the largest deal ever done by an on-demand CRM company with Convergys. It's a milestone, not just for RightNow Technologies but for the whole industry. There has been some question on whether this on-demand model can scale up. We already have 2,000 seats deployed at Convergys. It's a rubicon [sic] for the on-demand market because the question of being scalable has lingered. Last year we served over 200 million customers on behalf of our clients. That's a large system in anybody's book.

Domestic outsourcers are recognizing that, in the face of competition where they might be moving contact centers offshore, they have to bring to their clients a solution set that can allow them to maximize the efficiency and the quality of service they deliver. And these sorts of [RightNow -&- Convergys] automation efforts really allow you to do that.

[bolding in original, italics added] Convergys in 2012 being highlighted in another trade outlet, ABS-CBN News:

Posted at Apr 20 2012 11:07 PM | Updated as of Apr 21 2012 07:07 AM

MANILA, Philippines – Convergys Corporation was again named “BPO Employer of the Year” at this year’s International ICT Awards held in Manila.

The award marked the third time the customer management firm was named the top business process outsourcing (BPO) in the country.

“Convergys is dedicated to providing unparalleled service to our clients and their customers across the globe,” said Ivic Mueco, Convergys vice president and country manager in the Philippines.

“The hard work and dedication of our employees in the Philippines continues to support our growth and our goal of being the employer of choice throughout the country,” Mueco added.

The judging committee based its decision on the firm’s leadership, strategic HR practices, continuous improvement programs, corporate social responsibility efforts, and overall support for the industry.

Convergys has established 18 contact center facilities in the country within 8 years.

It has about 26,000 employees throughout these sites.

As noted in opening, BPO means "Business Product Outsourcing," and the above item was found via Wikipedia:Convergys, which highlights the firm of which Gianforte boasted his own firm putting in place ONE BLOCKBUSTER OF A DEAL, "a milestone, not just for RightNow Technologies but for the whole industry." Presumably by that he meant the BPO industry vs any "on-premise environment." Readers can follow the link, yet in marshaling evidence a quote helps, with original footnoting:

In 2012, Convergys Philippines, 8 years after its entry into the country established 18 centers with 26,000 employees in all, was named “BPO Employer of the Year” at the annual International ICT Awards.[8]

On April 3, 2013, Convergys completed the acquisition of New Zealand-based Datacom call center operations in Kuala Lumpur and Manila for $20 million.[9]

On January 6, 2014, Convergys and Stream Global Services announced entry into a definitive merger. Under the agreement, Convergys would acquire Stream for a total enterprise value of $820 million in cash.[10] On March 3, 2014, Convergys completed the acquisition of Stream creating the 2nd largest BPO provider in the outsourcing industry. The merger brought their total employees to approximately 125,000 with 150 centers in 31 countries supporting 47 languages.[11]

47 languages, in Montana? If Gianforte is servicing that Montana-job-based, all you can say is: Wow. Perhaps H-B1 foreign language help might factor into things, if in a Montana "on-premises environment."

But wait, in fairness, it is the boasted of contract partner, Convergys noted there at 47 languages. Convergys being the outsourcer, RightNow being the outsourcer's apprentice? (We don't see the contract, it's non-public, so we only can guess. Perhaps The Montana Cowgirl will ask Mr. G about that blockbuster of a contract deal; who's what got what, one firm and then the other. If he even now recollects it, or instead suffers a memory deficit.)

Readers are invited to follow those Wikipedia:Convergys footnote links for detail; or just have a look at who RightNow's landmark deal partner is, i.e., simply looking at the Convergys homepage:

What We Do

Great experiences don't happen by chance. They are the result of inspired thinking and design that transforms the mundane into something memorable.

Convergys is the world leader in customer experience outsourcing. We infuse innovation, insights, and operational excellence to make every experience great for your customers and your business.


150+ locations
33 Countries

Careers & Growing


Build Your Career With Convergys

When you become part of our team, you join 130,000 talented people around the world who represent some of today’s leading brands. At Convergys, one of our values is to "Grow As a Team." It's in our DNA to prioritize teamwork and develop our people. By working together, we achieve great things for clients and create opportunities to build rewarding careers. You can be part of that when you join our team. And it's all at your fingertips!

And that would be "at your fingertips" where; Helena, or Bozeman, or even possibly Cut Bank, where Rob Quist was born and spent his early life ranching before moving on to music art. Or was it farming? Ask Quist that; and ask Gianforte about his ranch and farm experiences.

If you labor, particularly in a union, and have seen jobs of co-workers escape overseas, a thought: You don't have to live in Montana to know which way the wind blows -

The Rob Quist/Montana campaign has its email subscription box on the homepage, so signing up is cost-free:

The Quist/Montana contributions page, with ActBlue enabled is here:

That page also gives the address for snail mail contribution by check:

PO Box 1917, Kalispell MT, 59903

disclaimer: I've no connection with the ROB QUIST campaign, I live in Minnesota not Montana, and I am an independent because the current Clintonian/Podesta Democratic Party is out of tune with needs of real people aside frm the super-wealthy. I have neither met nor spoken to Rob Quist nor Greg Gianforte - AND - I might be unable to recognize Quist in a crowd without the hat, nor Gianforte, wearing one. Furthermore, I take Greg Gianforte at his word, "Hosted CRM really began at our inception in 1997." Back in the Bubba presidency, that far back! With him, innovator, perhaps not "Apprentice?"

Outsourcery, 2004 again, in an SEC filing where untrue or misleading misstatements or omissions can be problematic under Rule 10b4; a wordsearch = outsource:

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

[...] Sales and Marketing

We sell our products primarily through our direct sales organization and to a lesser extent through indirect channels. Our direct sales organization is separated into new business and installed base sales groups. In our new business sales group, we employ personnel to make initial calls to potential clients and qualify client leads and direct sales representatives to close sales with clients and assist our client support group in implementation. Our installed base sales organization focuses on managing existing client relationships, further penetrating those relationships and cross-selling and up-selling into those relationships. [...] At March 31, 2004, we had relationships with over 30 indirect channel distributors. Domestically, our indirect channel consists primarily of relationships with outsourcers and referral partners who refer leads to us. Outsourcers represent a developing indirect channel for our solutions that we intend to expand and we currently have relationships with several outsourcers, including Convergys, ICT and KPN/SNT. We have dedicated staff in our sales organization calling on and servicing these partners.

Do you see any material misstatement or omission in that explanation of "dedicated staff ... servicing these partners?" Presumably head honcho G. read and approved statements before the lawyers filed them; or had as much input opportunity as he cared to have in SEC activities.

"Outsourcers represent a developing indirect channel for our solutions that we intend to expand and we currently have relationships with several outsourcers, including Convergys, ICT and KPN/SNT," would then NOT be a misstatement, if in an SEC filing?

And that would be with a 2004 intent to expand relationships with outsourcers, and a "dedicated staff in our sales organization calling on and servicing these partners;" so you decide, does that mean facilitating the outsourcing of jobs; or something surprisingly different from job outsourcing assistance being a reported corporate goal of the firm?

As a hypothetical: If we don't rob a bank, but aid and abet bank robbing, could we be prosecuted?

So after 2004, with the profits rolling in, would you presume the expansionary intent to aid and abet job outsourcing failed to materialize; from 2004 to the 2011 Oracle purchase? If so, why? Oracle paid big bucks after all.

_____________FURTHER UPDATE_____________
Perhaps Rob Quist should write a new song,

"Don't call me killer or a looter,
I did not gun Miss Hattie dead,
I only loaded the six-shooter,
Someone else unloaded on her head."

That would be like an analogy to something akin to aiding and abetting something like outsourcing but not doing it. Plausible deniability in a song.

Too awkward for song wording perhaps, but Quist is adept at taking a theme and turning good words and melody.

_____________FURTHER UPDATE______________A
Unsure whether this extremely well-written KXLH item was linked to earlier, or perhaps only a link given to an online post that linked to it; this is the real deal on outsourcery so read it. If it is redundant, less harm is done than if it is not and this opportunity to link were missed. Haste should not best thoroughness.

Will populist-progressive Rob Quist request that Bernie wear a cowboy hat?

screencapture from this Montana AP carry

Gianforte, if elected, would be another wealthy suit in DC. Worse is that, Gianforte if elected, is of the rabid fundie stripe, way off the mainstream that way, and that would represent adding too much more to a bad situation. Rob Quist understands the other side of being talented but not immune from day-to-day financial stress. Gianforte has a background of growing a business with a software product aimed at cutting customer jobs; a net job destroyer even though a local "creator" with a love for many, many H-1B visa arrows in his quiver.

Quist is a populist, truly more a Will Rogers brand than a phony Manhattan "populist" talker who'd inherited over a hundred million and talking all the time as if he'd hit a triple. Quist is legitimate. A too rare quality in DC. That he'd want to go there is a blessing, for the rest of us. That Gianforte wants it, big surprise.

This Huffington Post item was linked to in earlier posting, but this quote was not posted earlier:

Gianforte lost his bid to unseat Montana Gov. Steve Bullock (D) in November. It was a costly defeat: Gianforte spent at least $5.1 million of his own money on the campaign, which aired 30,661 television ads, more than any other state candidate in the country. Quist has sought to depict Gianforte, whose last campaign left him with strong name recognition, as an out-of-touch rich guy from out of state. Born in California, Gianforte lived for years in New Jersey, a fact of which Democrats have been quick to remind voters. Gianforte had a reported income of $220.5 million between 2005 and 2014 on his tax returns, and in 2011, he sold his software firm RightNow Technologies to the tech giant Oracle Corp. for $1.5 billion.

Quist, by contrast, is the son of ranchers from Flathead County, Montana. He struggled financially due to a pre-existing condition that prevented him from getting health care, forcing him to pay out of pocket for a series of surgeries in the early 2000s.

“Congress right now is dominated by politicians who worry about the needs of their wealthy campaign contributors,” Sanders said. “We need members of Congress like Rob who will work to rebuild the shrinking middle class, who will fight all attempts to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and will oppose tax breaks for the very rich.”

That is from the end of the HuffPo item, and to see the what you see is what you get honesty of the man, bullshit free and willing to be deferential to questions that lack immediate quick soundbite answers in his Montana campaigning, Quist, interviewed in a half hour video - at length and not given any "kid gloves" treatment, by capable Montana media people.

Note that Quist campaigns in his hat, but that is a badge and not an affectation. He'd be a good and decent addition to a Congress needing much new perspectives and decency. Gianforte, despite his great wealth and the ego going with it likely would carry Paul Ryan's luggage. It would be most refreshing to see Quist serving in Congress in the hat, working with Bernie there in the other House. It would define a difference from Gucci/Armani and the likes of the two Trump sons and Jarad. There now is no binding dress code in DC, true enough, but non-suits are needed of a kind with a heart and conscience that the likes of Brietbart's Steve Bannon either never had or lost early along his way.

LAST: In the course of investigating detail about the Montana special election, there is the Cowgirl.

Her writing is political, and her politics are discernible from a right-side part of the banner illustration she uses, given here at left, which is direct and unequivocal as a statement of grounding of thoughts and opinions.