Keegan Responds

John Keegan, the official from the Lou Barletta for Congress campaign who recently caught an acute case of Castoritis, responded to my article, not here, but on Gort 42.  Here is his statement from Gort 42:

John Keegan said...  

Gort,

Against my better judgment I am going to answer this person. As usual Pa Progressive did not provide you with the entire communication between us. Even with the post he gave you tell me where I "threatned" (sic) anything. Ask him to post my entire communications to him. See what credibility holds up. I even suggested to him that he reword his post to reflect his Opinion since he did not have facts to back up his statement.

Mr. Morgan, contrary to your post on the statement I had an issue with, here is your statement that prompted my email. ".The illegal $65,000 loan which Lou Barletta's campaign has on its books was a personal loan taken to retire his campaign debt from 2002 according tot he Hazleton Mayor."

The issue was over Mr. Morgan stating that a loan taken out by Lou Barletta to cover unfunded expenses from his last campaign was an "illegal loan." In fact it was a very legal loan taken out in the usual fashion at a bank.

As I stated to Mr. Morgan he does not have any proof for that statement. In fact after several email exchanges I proved to Mr. Morgan that there was no illegal loan. He asked for written proof and I sent him to the FEC site where the information is located. I even "held his hand" to point him to the documents.

He has chosen to cherry pick what was written.  And again I will ask the question.

What proof does Mr. Morgan possess for him to make the statement "The illegal $65,000.00 loan."? Freedom of speech has its limits. I don't call it thin skinned when one presents false information to the public. He calls himself part of the "press." He should be more responsible in what he presents as "facts." I know many journalists that lost their career over fabricated information.

His reckless statement about Lou Barletta's wife demonstrates the off the wall mentality in this situation. Attack and smear seems to be the order of the day from this man.

Here is my response:

Mr. Keegan did, indeed threaten me with legal action. He even included the charge in his email. I call that a legal threat. I asked him to provide proof to support his claim that Lou Barletta has made payments on this loan personally. In spite of repeated requests for this in the email exchanges Mr. Keegan refused to provide any proof.

He did, however, as an official of the Barletta campaign, reveal this as a loan secured by both Mr. Barletta and his wife secured by their jointly owned home.

That's an FEC violation. Mrs. Barletta was limited to a $1,000 contribution to her husband's campaign. Her half of the security for the loan was $32,500. Oops. Thanks for providing the official campaign evidence of a serious FEC violation Mr. Keegan. I imagine an official FEC complaint is already in the works against Mrs. Barletta.

Mr. Keegan can call this a smear, I call it proof.

Keegan's statement above: "He calls himself part of the "press." He should be more responsible in what he presents as "facts." I know many journalists that lost their career over fabricated information." is extremely reckless. He provided, himself, the facts behind my allegation that Mrs. Barletta violated the law. Check the link in my original story for the precedent. It's already established in the law. This statement is clearly a signal that he wants to come after me, but, again, he will deny it is a threat.

This is what the Lou Barletta campaign is all about folks, they threaten all sorts of people with ordinances, playing on fear and bigotry to advance the Mayor's political ambitions. Be very afraid of demagogues like Lou Barletta. Very afraid. Who will he decide he doesn't like next and try to run our of town?  You?

Here are the facts:  John Keegan wrote me voluntarily, numerous long, rambling emails containing much damaging information about his candidate.  He was unhinged upset over my opinion that the loan Lou Barletta's campaign has reported to the FEC for six years was, in fact, a personal loan and not related to the campaign.  Unfortunately for Lou Barletta his Treasurer kept reporting it as a campaign loan but neglected to reveal any repayments of either principal or interest.  Then the terms of the loan were renegotiated in violation of FEC rules.  The FEC requires loans to be repaid, otherwise they are contributions and subject to the laws, such as the ban on corporate contributions and individual limits.

Keegan claimed, in his emails to me, that Lou Barletta and his wife mortgaged their home to secure this line of credit with the bank to pay off their 2002 campaign debt.  That presents a problem because he also disclosed they own this home jointly.  That's a violation of the $1000 maximum contribution Mrs. Barletta was allowed to give her husband's campaign in 2002.  By FEC precedent in another 2002 case, her half of the secured loan violated this $1,000 limit by $31,500.

Here's a quote from the newspaper article about John Murtha's 2002 challenger and his fine for doing this very same thing:

"The Federal Election Commission challenged a loan made to the Mascara for Congress Campaign Committee during his unsuccessful 1992 congressional bid in the 20th District. The loan was secured by a $40,000 mortgage Mascara and his wife took on their Washington County residence.

Mascara said the FEC viewed the mortgage as an excess campaign contribution from his wife because she is a co-owner of the house."

This violation resulted in a $50,000 fine from the FEC.  Mr. Keegan has gotten his candidate into some very hot water.

Comments

[John Keegan]

Again I will ask you what proof you have that Lou Barletta made an illegal loan. Please do not tell me about whatever Mr. Murtha's challenger did. That is not evidence. It is a story. Tell me what proof you have. What written information do you have? You have yet to tell the world anything except an Aesop's fable. Where are the facts? Mr. Murtha's challenger story is not about the facts in this particular situation. You have yet to provide it.

[John Morgan]

Lou Barletta's campaign filed 22, get that, 22 FEC reports listing this as a campaign loan. None of those reports disclosed any repayments. The loan was renegotiated. That's all illegal. Now you're saying those 22 FEC reports were false because it was a personal loan. So which is it, an illegal loan or false FEC reports?

The Barletta loan is identical to the other loan in the Murtha race. Same loan, same year, same violation. Thanks for providing the information on that, by the way, it saved me having to drive to Wilkes Barre and dig it up. You provided the written information in your stupid emails. The evidence that loan was illegal lies in the $50,000 fine imposed by the FEC. Are you really this stupid Mr. Keegan? Really???

Here's an FEC page where the fine is listed: http://www.fec.gov/press/bkgnd/history.shtml

Here's the FEC page where they disclose this is for an illegal loan:
http://www.fec.gov/pdf/record/1997/apr97.pdf

[DWJESS55]

Wow great work John. Looks like you've unearthed another dishonest rat. Doesn't look like there's anyway around this one... it is what it is.

[John Morgan]

I have to admit Mr. Keegan did the work for me, sending all this wonderful stuff through email. It doesn't appear the Barletta campaign has good message discipline. Just anyone can contact press and media with no accountability.