James Harris

Shawn Bell, the GOP staffer involved in the now-infamous dust-up with Sen. Brian Nieves after the August 2010 primary, filed a personal injury suit against the Senator in Franklin County today. 

The Case.net data for the suit (Case 11AB-CC00142) indicates that Bell's petition accuses Nieves of "false imprisonment, "assault" and "intentional infliction of emotional distress." 

Tony Messenger of the Post-Dispatch and Jason Rosenbaum's reconstituted Capitol Calling blog have the run down of last night's drama in the Senate between Sen. Kevin Engler (R-Farmington), Sen. Brian Nieves(R-Freedom Bunker) and GOP consultant and lobbyist James Harris.

You should go read their recaps, and listen to Rosenbaum's audio of Engler's remarks (embedded here).

As you may recall, Harris was a consultant for former Washington Mayor Dick Stratman in 26th Senate district primary last year, and Nieves believes Harris was behind a letter distributed before the primary accusing Nieves of having extramarital affairs with female lobbyists.   Nieves and a Harris staffer also had a little tiff after the election, during which Nieves claims said staffer told him that Harris forced him to do "shady and illegal stuff."  So... they're not exactly friends. 

The good people at Talking Points Memo have nominated state Senator-elect Brian Nieves (R-Washington) for one of their annual "Golden Duke" awards.  TPM's summary indicates that Nieves may still face a civil suit for his post-election temper tantrum, but I'm not sure that's the case.  Here's how they summarize his scandal:

State Sen.-Elect Brian Nieves (R-MO) Faced Charges He Assaulted Rival's Staffer: It's one thing to menace a tracker, and yet another to wave a gun around at your GOP rival's chief of staff and force him to strip and apologize. Yet that's what staffer Shawn Bell said Nieves did to him when he stopped by to congratulate the winning team after the primary. Though the prosecutors declined to file charges, Bell plans a civil suit and Nieves called on people to pray for him.

The Washington Missourian published responses from GOP consultant James Harris and staffer Shawn Bell to Rep. Brian Nieves' accusations that Harris forced Bell to do "shady or illegal" things, and that Harris is forcing Bell to take frivolous legal action against Nieves.

Harris said he never forced Bell to do anything illegal and called Nieves' statements "baffling" and the "weirdest thing I've ever heard."

"I didn't tell Shawn to do anything. His (Nieves') comments are laughable. None of this is good for my business. But there is a matter of what's right is right. If someone is a victim of an alleged crime they have the right to pursue it," he told The Missourian.

In the statement, Nieves said he had no idea what the "shady or illegal" things Harris was involved in nor did he agree with Bell's statement that he was actually involved in anything illegal.

The Missourian also reports that Bell intends to file a civil suit against Nieves in the coming days.

A new Facebook fundraiser invite for Brian Nieves' legal fund calls for supporters to "send a strong message to the corrupt power brokers such as James Harris that we rebuke their thug tactics and their attempt to manipulate the outcome of an election."  In his personal message asking for money, Nieves calls the request for a protection order against him "an obvious case of Malicious Prosecution."

Screen cap of the invite below the break. 

Rep. Brian Nieves emailed supporters last night with a message and statement about the Franklin County Prosecutor's decision not to press criminal charges against him.  In the email, Nieves hints that he might be taking his own legal action against GOP consultant James Harris.

I am ready to forgive and forget things specific to Shawn Bell. I also reserve the right to seek action against persons we believe pushed and perhaps even directed Shawn to make these false allegations. Shawn’s police statement, in his own writing, suggests he had no intent to seek action against me until he spoke to his employer, James Harris....This entire scenario smacks of a young man being pushed to do things against his own will by people he is trying to stay or become ingratiated with or even employed by. At this point we are not prepared to say with certainty that James Harris has forced Shawn Bell to make these allegations nor are we accusing him of such but there are many who suggest that is exactly what has happened...

During Shawn’s visit to my office he said more than once that he wanted to get away from his current employer, James Harris, because, as Shawn said, “he makes me do shady and illegal stuff.” We have no idea what kind of “Shady” or “Illegal” stuff Shawn may have been referring to but I can tell you that in my opinion, Shawn wanted to terminate his relationship with James Harris. Shawn repeatedly asked me to not stand in the way of him seeking employment with political people who do not have the bad reputation he believed Harris to have and who will not, in Shawn’s words, “make me do shady and illegal stuff.”

...I feel bad for Shawn as he made it very clear that he believes James Harris forces him to do shady and illegal stuff but Shawn is going to have to stand up for himself and terminate his relationship with a boss (James Harris) who makes him that uncomfortable. I just hope that the “Shady & Illegal” stuff that Shawn alleges James Harris makes him do does not include forcing him to perjure him self … Let’s all pray for Shawn. 

Nieves' full message is below the break.

John Elliott is either a very bad or a very good right-wing front group president. I can't decided which.  

With oil industry and pro-environment money flowing heavily in a California ballot fight, one major contributor stands out: a little-known Missouri advocacy group that donated $498,000 and refuses to say where the money comes from....

John Elliott, an Adam Smith board member from the Kansas City area, said he was confident that his organization is acting within its rights. He declined during an interview to identify contributors, pointing to the anonymity granted under 501(c)4...

Asked whether the contributors were from Missouri, Elliott, who owns a marketing company, said he didn't know.

Earlier this month, Elliott told the San Francisco Chronicle that "he did not recall who contributed the money or who had argued for spending the money on California's Prop. 23."  He then recalled that the money all came from "about 10 individuals," and then "fewer than 10 individuals, not industry or corporations."  But after a month of press inquiries, he still professes to not have any idea where these 10ish pro-pollution donors actually live or do their polluting business. Uh-huh.

KOLR/KSFX has a fascinating story out of the 7th District about the Billy Long's willingness to debate debating -- but unwillingness to actually engaging in actual debates.  Long apparently isn't even allowed to discuss the idea of debates with Scott Eckersley on camera -- consultant James Harris has kept those reponsibilities to himself.

Remember as you watch this clip that Billy Long's campaign agreed to the debates Harris now says are "some type of media gimmick." 

I'm not sure Long's handlers could make it any more obvious that they're afraid to turn Long loose.

Yesterday on Facebook, Rep. Brian Nieves reiterated his belief that Shawn Bell, the rival campaign staffer who accused Nieves of assaulting him after the August 3 primary, "is being pushed, manipulated & used like a pawn that The Machine will toss aside as soon as he no longer serves their purposes."

The Beacon's Jo Mannies has a must-read story this morning about the Brian Nieves prayer vigil in Washington last night.

Nieves contended that [alleged victim Shawn Bell] was "a pawn" being used by top state politicians who want to destroy Nieves and keep him out of the state Senate. Nieves asserted that [Dick Stratman's] allies already have been publicly calling for him to step down as the GOP nominee for the Senate post, but he added, "I won't back down."

The state's powerbrokers, said Nieves, are "using [Bell] like day-old bread that they're going to throw away when they are done."

So the Post-Dispatch has a story today headlined, "GOP may restrict attack tactics in ads."   (Apologies if coffee just spewed out your nose).

The article is interesting, even if it doesn't provide any evidence to believe the headline, or give any indication of how Sen. Majority Leader Kevin Engler (R-Farmington) and House Floor Leader Steve Tilley (R-Perryville) might enforce a "a code of conduct for primary campaigns" if they ever get around to drafting such a code. What's notable (to me, anyway) is that in an article in which Engler complains about "hard-charging consultants who orchestrate political attacks" and  "political consultants that use people like pawns in a chess game and don't care whether what they're saying is the truth," the consultant retained by each of the allegedly dirty campaigns is Jeff Roe.  Something tells me Roe doesn't really care what Engler thinks.  "You strap on the chinstrap and go to war" when you run for office, Roe told the Post-Dispatch.

But stepping back from the intraparty squabbling for a moment, the thing I find most striking about Engler's proposal is that his alleged concern for honesty and dignity explicitly excludes general election and public policy campaigns. His "code of conduct" is only meant to apply to primaries, and he's only worried about "whether what they're saying is the truth" when it concerns his Republican candidates.  How commendable! 

Couldn't he at least pretend to care about honest campaigning in the 90 days between the primary and general elections?

Los Angeles Times business columnist Michael Hiltzik has a fascinating column today about Missouri's Adam Smith Foundation -- you should go read it. Hiltznik, like many Californians, is concerned about why and how the Jefferson City-based 501(c)(4) moved $500k into a ballot initiative trying to gut CA's "pioneering regulation of emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide."   

The organization was established in 2007 by a group of conservative political activists, some of whom were associated with former Missouri Gov. Matthew Blunt (whose father is Roy Blunt, the former House Republican leader currently running for U.S. Senate).

Its guiding spirit is James Harris, a political consultant in the Missouri capital, who says he was driven to found the group by "a need to have right-of-center organizations to counter the aggressive policies of the left, radicals like George Soros, and their ideas that are truly in contradiction to free markets."

I asked him why the foundation got involved in California. "When you look at — no offense — liberal politicians out there running California into the ground, often crazy radical ideas start in California and start moving," he said. (No offense, but the environmental program that Proposition 23 would overturn is a pet project of our Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.)

[...] Until now, it confined itself to a couple of local issues in Missouri. It spent $4,000 last year to support a proposal to kill the state's nonpartisan judge-selection process in favor of one subject to more political wrangling, and $2,500 to defeat a 63-cent tax levy in a local school district. The year before that it raised $30,000, made a single $2,000 grant, and spent $22,500 on professional fees and payments to "independent contractors."

The foundation's president, John Elliott, told me the Proposition 23 campaign is its first venture outside Missouri. He said the money for the donation came from "fewer than 10 individuals, not industry or corporations." He said the foundation's involvement in the California campaign was initiated by the donors, not the foundation's four-member board.

Following up on last week's post about how Jefferson City's own Adam Smith Foundation has funneled $498,000 into a California campaign to suspend California's greenhouse gas reduction law, the San Francisco Chronicle reports that the money came from "about 10 individuals," and not from corporations or industry groups.  But incredibly, Foundation president John Elliott previously told reporters that "he did not recall who contributed the money or who had argued for spending the money on California's Prop. 23."

The Chronicle breaks down the legal questions surrounding the huge cash transfers, and notes that "neither the spokeswoman for the campaign to pass Prop. 23 nor a lawmaker leading the effort said they had contact with the group, and they did not know any of its leaders."

So far, the other major contributors to the campaign to pass Prop. 23 are the Valero and Tesoro oil companies, which have spent $5.025 million on the campaign. Valero donated $3 million Friday, bringing its total contributions to $4.5 million. Some of the largest U.S. coal companies are headquartered in Missouri.

The legal issue is whether the foundation, which is named for the 18th century economist, violated its status as a 501(c)4 organization under IRS rules. Such nonprofits are supposed to exist "only to promote social welfare," but they can have some political involvement, according to the IRS.

However, the IRS guide for such states, "in order to retain tax-exempt status ... an organization must ensure that its political campaign activities do not constitute the organization's primary activity."

The foundation, created in 2007, has received $93,500 in contributions over the past three years, according to its tax filings. It has made some small donations to conservative groups in Missouri during that time. It consists of a president, treasurer, two directors and an unpaid executive director, Elliott said. He said the group meets either monthly or quarterly.

When first contacted by The Chronicle, Elliott said he did not recall who contributed the money or who had argued for spending the money on California's Prop. 23.

The Sacramento  Bee reports today that California officials are seeking a criminal investigation into whether the Adam Smith Foundation -- headquartered in Jefferson City -- is illegally moving money to a campaign to overturn the Golden State's greenhouse gas law.

State Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg and Assembly Speaker John Pérez have asked U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to open an investigation into a tiny Missouri nonprofit organization that has pumped nearly $500,000 into a voter initiative to suspend the state's landmark climate change law.

In a letter to Holder on Tuesday, Steinberg, D-Sacramento, and Pérez, D-Los Angeles, asked the Justice Department to determine whether the Adam Smith Foundation is illegally funneling campaign contributions from third parties to support the rollback measure, Proposition 23.

"Serious issues are implicated by the use of an out-of-state organization that may be abusing its tax status to avoid having to disclose the name of its donors to a campaign that will have a profound impact on the future of California," the lawmakers wrote.

John Elliott, the Adam Smith Foundation's president, could not be reached for comment, and an e-mail to the foundation's Jefferson City, Mo., office was not returned.

The $498,000 funneled through Jefferson City is a full 16% of the $3.1M raised by the "California Jobs Initiative committee" to date.

Steven Maviglio of The California Majority Report writes that "the Missouri-based Adam Smith Foundation had net revenue of $109 last year -- yet managed to give the Texas oil companies $498,000. Other newspaper reporters trying to learn more about the Foundation did not have their calls returned or were hung up on by Adam Smith officials."

The most recent filings with the Secretary of State show that the organization is led (on paper, at least) by John Elliott of Smithville; Thomas Shupe of St. Louis, Buddy Hardin of St. Charles; and Kurt Killen of Platte Woods. State Rep. Mike Lair was one of the organization's original board members. 

The cast of characters who appear on the organization's official documents has previously raised questions regarding the possible involvement of GOP operatives James Harris and Jeff Roe, and more recent filings with the IRS and Missouri Ethics Commission confirm those suspicions.

For instance: The only donations that appear on the group's 990 filing for 2009 are $4,000 to Harris' Better Courts for Missouri organization (now known as ShowMe Better Courts) and $2,500 to Roe's "Citizens Against Forever Tax" committee. 

ShowMe Better Courts, as you know, is all about junking the state's nonpartisan courts plan.  Roe's "Citizens Against Forever Tax" committee was set up last year to battle a school tax levy in St. Joseph. 

This year, the Adam Smith Foundation moved an additional $75,000 into  "Citizens Against Forever Tax" (CAFT) which in turn moved almost all of its money to Roe's Axiom Strategies for direct mail, robocalls and other services in this year's elections.  All told, Axiom has collected more than $89,000 from "Citizens Against Forever Tax" this year.

In addition: A July 27 donation of $35,000 from the Adam Smith Foundation to Citizens Against Forever Tax lists a St. Joseph address for the Foundation -- the address of the treasurer for Citizens Against Forever Tax, Ed Catron. 

Update: "Vote Yes To Stop Double Taxation" says they will sue to contest the signature county by local election authorities and the SOS. Their release is below the break.

Initiative petitions from the ShowMe Better Courts and the Vote Yes To Stop Double Taxation committees will not be on the fall ballot because they failed to collect enough valid signatures, the Secretary of State's office announced this afternoon.

I suspect this won't be the last we hear about the failed campaigns of  James Harris and David Barklage.  Harris was paid more than $44,000 by ShowMe Better Courts to run their campaign, and Barklage's Strategic Communications Group collected more than $200,000 from the Realtors-backed "Vote Yes To Stop Double Taxation" committee.

Speaker Ron Richard, the Most Powerful Man in Missouri, sent $25,000 today to his Majority Whip in the House, Brian Nieves.  Richard's last-minute infusion is presumably intended to help Nieves fight the "Chicago Style Thug Campaign" he says is being conducted by former Washington mayor Dick Stratman and consultant James Harris.

Billy Long -- a man so fed up with 'politics as usual' that he hired Jeff Roe, James Harris and an inside-the-Beltway media firm -- has responded to an ad from Americans for Job Security by slamming Gary Nodler and Jack Goodman for supporting "100 million in tax credits for a developer in St. Louis, Paul McKee Jr., helped southwest Missouri."

Left unsaid in Long's ad is the fact that Harris was paid by McKee to lobby for him on said $100 million tax-credit program. 

h/t PoliticMo

Roy Blunt, back when he lived in Missouri

Twenty-five years ago, Roy Blunt was elected to be Missouri's Secretary of State.  In that capacity, he oversaw things like initiative petitions and elections, just like the people who served before and after him in that role. 

Blunt's direct knowledge of SOS operations make his campaign's latest salvo really hard to understand.  As reported by The Beacon, Blunt's spokesman Rich Chrismer says "Missourians have every right to question [Robin Carnahan's] judgment and whether she can be trusted to make an independent or impartial decision on" whether or not the ShowMe Better Courts' petition should make the ballot.  While I'm sure that buddy James Harris appreciates the attempt to divert attention away from his apparent failure to collect enough signatures, the attack is dishonest and dumb.

As Blunt should recall, signatures are verified by local election authorities -- not partisan officials in Jefferson City. Once signatures are submitted to the SOS office, they're sent to local offices for checking.  The SOS office will then undertake the task of adding up the numbers provided to them.  Moreover, this whole process is done in the open -- there's not a lot of room for discretion.  Either Harris & Co. have the signatures, or they don't. 

I know this undercuts the Blunt campaign's entire argument, but it's how things work.

Ruh-ro, Shaggy.   The Missourians for Fair and Impartial Courts Action Fund (the campaign fighting ShowMe Better Courts' ballot initiative) says James Harris' signature gathering effort has come up woefully short in Congressional Districts 5, 7 and 9. 

Translation: The initiative won't make it on the ballot.

UPDATE: A statement James Harris provided to The Star suggests that Harris may pin the blame on "petition company reports." 

There are a few things to digest in a new post from the Post-Dispatch's Tony Messenger about ShowMe Better Courts' inability or refusal to pay their petition gatherers in a timely manner. 

Perhaps the most interesting nugget to long-time Fired Up! readers is the public reappearance of convicted felon Nathan Cooper in the GOP mix. As you may know, Cooper was sentenced to 15 months in federal prison in December 2007 for immigration fraud.