National Journal Criticizes Kinder's Tweets: Where was the Post-Dispatch?

The National Journal blog Hotline On Call came out with a list yesterday of the 5 biggest "Twitter Losers" among politicians in 2011. Out of all of the politicians in the country, Kinder came in #2 on the list, right behind Anthony Weiner. Here's what they had to say about Kinder:

Kinder never seemed to learn from his social media missteps, tweeting on multiple occasions about questionable things. In November, he re-tweeted a message about free wings at Hooters on Veterans Day while he was still considering a run to challenge Missouri Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon. It was far from the first time Kinder's tweets were scrutinized. He had previously urged his followers to "vote for [a] hot wife in the Top 25 Political Mom blogs" a day after Missouri was hit by the deadliest tornado in nearly 60 years and tweeted about "hostage situation" in a government building in 2009 only to later discover the incident never occurred.

Fired Up Missouri has a lot more about Kinder's unprofessional tweets over the years. But what I find strange is that national outlets like National Journal and Politico were so willing to call out Kinder's ridiculous tweets, but the Post-Dispatch remained largely silent on them for the past several years. In fact, in 2010, the Post-Dispatch actually edited out any references to Kinder's tweets in a column by Tony Messenger.

Unprofessional behavior online or elsewhere from politicians of any political party should be fair game for the media.

From Pantsless Parties to "Tight-Sweatered Hotness," It Sure Looks Like Kinder is Toast

The most prominent bad news today for Peter Kinder's gubernatorial campaign was that he was massively out-raised by Governor Jay Nixon and his campaign somehow managed to lose money this past quarter. But Dave Cantanese at Politico just dropped a bombshell that might be the final nail in the coffin:

Nonetheless, there are some red flags contained in Kinder's report. He raised less in a third quarter of an off year than any gubernatorial candidate in the last decade, according to a Democratic source.

In addition, both a Republican and a Democrat pointed to $1,441 expenditure at the Sky Hotel in Aspen.

Kinder spent two nights there in July and both sources couldn't help but note that it was dubbed the "sexiest ski lodge" by Playboy in 2006.

It's "packed with tight-sweatered hotness," according to Playboy's write-up, which was passed on to me.

A separate review by TheStreet.com in 2008 described the "late-night skinny-dipping" as "legendary."

The problem for Kinder is that this seems like a perfect combination of his two previous devastating scandals: his propensity for charging other people for his lavish lifestyle, and his alleged inappropriate behavior at a bar known for its "pantsless parties." Given that Christian conservatives are already uncomfortable with Kinder, this story could finally put his campaign to an end. On the other hand, no one really wants to run against Jay Nixon.

The First Honest Republican Criticism of the Kinder Debacle

While I've certainly enjoyed watching Republicans taking shots at Peter Kinder's disastrous gubernatorial campaign, it also has been more than a little exasperating watching so many of them pretending to be shocked that a Republican politician went to a strip club 17 years ago. Let's get serious here people.

So kudos to the conservative Missouri Record for actually offering an honest assessment of why many Republicans want Kinder to go:

Kinder's real sin, however, is not what he did 17 years ago, but that in this race he was never in danger of actually defeating Governor Nixon. Everything is forgivable in politics—except losing. The top of the ticket is viewed as so weak that Republicans are hesitant to run for Attorney General or Treasurer.

I do disagree with Patrick Tuohey on this last bit, though:

Kinder's choice is between leaving at the height of his career with the gratitude of many, or to risk becoming a liability to the very causes and candidates he holds dear.

Tuohey's trying to present this as if Kinder can still save face by leaving the race now. I have a hard time seeing that, considering how embarrassing the scandals of 2011 have been for him. And if he drops out and (as most people predict) Republicans lose anyway, he'll still get much of the blame.

Breitbart's Big Government Botches Peter Kinder Defense

As noted by many on Twitter yesterday, you know things are bad for Republican Lt. Governor Peter Kinder when his main media strategy seems to be leaking stories to his buddy Andrew Breitbart's blogs. Unsurprisingly, the stories on Brietbart's sites are full of speculation, unsupported assertions, and outright falsehoods.

One story on Big Government by Michelle Moore said the following:

Frankly, I find no evidence what-so-ever that he was a repeat visitor to said strip club OR that he had any interest in her at all. Pathetic.

That's some incisive reasoning, except for the tiny problem that Peter Kinder admitted to multiple media outlets that he visited the strip club "around 10 times:"

We were having a beer and the girls come by and chat. And you meet various of them, and that's where I met Tammy," Kinder said. "That much is true. Subsequently, I returned on a handful of occasions."

A "handful" was about 10 times, Kinder said. He compared his fondness to Chapman to a line in a Dean Martin song, "Let's Be Friendly."

A different post on Big Government suggests that either Chapman or her friend, John Ross, emailed the pictures to the Riverfront Times:

Over three years later, Kinder innocently enters a restaurant where Chapman was working, she asked him for a photo with her – hardly a thing a woman does with a man she accuses of being overly sexually aggressive with her in the first place – then she either sent the photo to Ross, or the Riverfront Times directly for publication, purely as a rationale for raising a 16 year-old smear with nothing to it.

This is false. The RFT noted that the original photo was not from Chapman, and said the following about Ross

We can also say that Ross is not the person who supplied us with the photo.

Finally, Big Goverment claims repeatedly that Ross worked for the Riverfront Times without offering any evidence for the claim:

The story breaks at the River Front Times, where John Ross occasionally writes and also posts several comments on the actual stories.

In fact, the RFT denies that he ever worked for them or wrote for them:

Here at Riverfront Times, we're baffled as to how Kinder came up with this theory. For starters, Ross has never worked or written for our publication. We can also say that Ross is not the person who supplied us with the photo.

Reached by phone today, Ross can't explain Kinder's conspiracy, either. Not only has he never written for the RFT, he says our publication tried to write a "hit piece" about him in 1998. He also says that he never saw the photo of Kinder and Chapman before its publication on the Riverfront Times'' website -- and advised Chapman against talking to the media after the picture went public.

In addition to outright falsehoods, the Big Goverment posts are chalk full of claims that are supported by no evidence. For example, they claim (as does Kinder) that "Democratic operatives" tried to push a similar story in 2008:

...one year later, in 2008, during Kinder’s Lieutenant Governor campaign, Democrats start carrying posters w/ pics of Chapman saying “Who is this woman?” at events including speaking events in Missouri.

However, they offer no evidence to support that claim, other than a link to a picture on Ross's website that they say was used in the campaign. Shouldn't they at least provide some shred of evidence to support a claim like this?

They further imply that Ross is a Democratic operative trying to sabotage Kinder to help Jay Nixon. However, Ross is a huge gun advocate who wrote a book based on the idea that the government would take away people's arms and the people who have to rise up in response. In fact, he told the RFT the following:

"One of the biggest efforts of my life was an eleven year effort to get conceal/carry passed in Missouri," says Ross. "I hired the original lobbyist for the bill out of my own pocket. For ten years, Peter Kinder supported us in our efforts. And for ten years, [then-Attorney General] Jay Nixon tried to block us. He was an opponent. I tell everyone who comes to my shooting school that. I tell them, if it comes down to voting for Kinder or voting for Nixon, I tell them to remember who's in favor of their right to self-defense."

It seems pretty likely to me that the reason Kinder is sending this stuff to Breitbart's sites is because no self-respecting operation would be willing to publish the junk.

Peter Kinder Ridiculously Blames Governor Nixon for His Latest Scandal

Peter Kinder finally has a statement out about his embarrassing scandal that has many Republicans wondering if they might be better off with a different sacrificial lamb to run against Governor Jay Nixon. Like any good Republican, Kinder thinks his problems are entirely the fault of some Democrat rather than his own decisions, and he explicitly blames Jay Nixon for the story. The KC Star's Steve Kraske tweeted a portion of the statement:

Kinder putting blame on Nixon's shoulders for news coverage: "Jay Nixon may want to make up false stories about the past..."

However, the idea that Nixon's people planted this story is ridiculous, as can be seen from even a cursory glance at the Riverfront Times' description of how the story unfolded. The RFT first posted a photo of Kinder in a joking post. Then commenters who frequent local bars recognized the woman in the picture and the RFT tracked her down for an interview. Here's the RFT's description:

...the whole sordid tale began unfolding last Thursday, when we jokingly published a photo of Kinder "pressing the flesh" at a St. Louis bar. We (honestly!) had no idea that the bar, Verlin's, was known for its "pantsless parties," in which bartenders sling drinks in their panties. Or that he was posing with a former "Penthouse pet of the month" -- or that the "pet," now a 39-year-old, openly gay bartender, would be interested in sharing her story when we tracked her down. We just thought the picture was moderately amusing.

Really, the only reason any of this came to light is because RFT readers are such barflies, they almost immediately recognized the bar -- and the bartender. The GOP may want to claim this was an organized effort, but it looks a whole lot more like that new-fangled "crowd sourcing" thing to us.

If you were going to plant an attack piece on an opponent, there'd be better ways to go about it then sending a random photo, then hoping the outlet would track down a woman based on comments on the web site.

Furthermore, the sad fact for Kinder is that Nixon's campaign wouldn't want to plant a hit piece on Kinder because they want to run against him. At this point, it's pretty obvious that Kinder has little to no chance of winning, barring some dramatic turn of events. Why would Nixon's campaign want to force him out of the race in August of 2011 for a November 2012 race? It's just silly, and journalists like Jo Mannies and Jake Wagman should know better.

Prominent Conservative Gives Up On Kinder

Renee Hulshof, host of a talk radio program and wife of former GOP Congressman Kenny Hulshof, went there earlier today. That's right: she shook her head at Peter Kinder:

Kudos to Hulshof for saying aloud what every Missouri Republican must be thinking. The problem, though, is that it just doesn't seem worth it for any up-and-coming Republican to take on Nixon next year rather than waiting for a winnable race in 2016.

Peter Kinder's Terrible Crisis Management

Let's review for a minute the way Peter Kinder handled allegations that he was inappropriately using taxpayer money for personal and political business:

• First, Kinder denied he did anything wrong.
• Then, he still claimed that he didn't do anything wrong, but decided to pay back a chunk of money.
• Then, yesterday, the Republican auditor found that Kinder needed to pay back $2,000 more dollars, which he did.
• Yet, even now, as the Post-Dispatch is reporting, Kinder still hasn't paid back the cost of taxpayer funded meals under questionable circumstances:

  The review also found that taxpayers paid for $10,893 worth of meals for Kinder on his in-state trips. Auditors said they couldn't tell whether those expenses were proper because Kinder's calendar "lacked sufficient detail.

  
  

An example of one of those meals:

...in June 2007, he billed taxpayers for two nights at the Chase Park Plaza and a $44 dinner. The only event listed on his expense form was a ribbon-cutting at a refurbished apartment complex. On another trip, in June 2009, he spent two nights at the Chase and ate two lunches at Plaza Frontenac and a $55 dinner at a French restaurant, Vin de Set. His official schedule listed an appearance on KMOX and a concert and reception for the Mormon Tabernacle Choir.

This is a political disaster and it's hard to imagine Kinder managing it any worse. Why wouldn't he just pay back absolutely everything remotely questionable the minute the first report came out? His handling of this is stretching out a damaging story over months.

And some news from Captain Obvious: being able to manage a crisis is actually a pretty important part of being a governor.

Auditor’s Office Serving Peter Kinder, Not Taxpayers (Press Release)

Press release from the Missouri Democratic Party:

Jefferson City, Mo.—As details about the State Auditor’s review of Lt. Governor Peter Kinder continue to emerge, more questions arise about the veracity and integrity of a review conducted by Kinder’s political allies. For months, the Missouri Democratic Party has called on Kinder to release his schedules and for an independent, third-party audit to determine how much Kinder used taxpayer funds to finance his extravagant lifestyle.

“It’s clear that the Auditor is more concerned about protecting Peter Kinder’s reputation than truly determining how much taxpayer money Kinder spent over the last seven years while gallivanting around town,” said Caitlin Legacki, Missouri Democratic Party spokeswoman. “Until Kinder releases his schedule and an independent, third-party audit is conducted, Missourians have no way of knowing what Kinder’s really been up to.”

The more we learn about the Auditor’s “review” of Kinder’s misuse of taxpayer funds, the clearer it becomes that a independent audit is needed here. The Auditor’s Office bends over backwards to let Kinder off the hook, offering little clarity on whether Kinder properly reimbursed the taxpayers for financing his political and personal activities.

Auditor Conveniently Redefines Role to Give Kinder A Free Pass

Auditor's Office: Not Our Job to Question Whether Events Are Political Or Official. At a press conference releasing the results of the "review," deputy auditor Harry Otto told reporters that: "It is not within our purview to make a judgment call on what is and what is not state business for a statewide elected official." [Press Conference, 7/6/11]

Reality: Earlier This Year, Schweich Said Rapid Response Team Would Address Precisely This Type of Waste. As reported by the St. Louis Post Dispatch just five months ago, Schweich said he will designate a "rapid response team" to jump in immediately when credible, serious allegations surface about waste or corruption. As an example, he cited the possibility of a state employee doing political work on state time. [St. Louis Post Dispatch, 2/17/11]

Auditor’s Office Turns Blind Eye to Kinder Charging Taxpayers for Expensive Meals While At Personal/Political Activities

Auditor’s Office: "We Do Not Dispute" Kinder's Assumption That Meal Costs Would be Offset By "Excessive Reimbursement" of Lodging Costs. While the audit report admits that the review did not determine whether "the amounts paid for meals were appropriate" and "cannot conclude with certainty" that Kinder has fully reimbursed inappropriate meal costs, Otto closes the report with the following outrageous statement: "However, you have assumed that any possible reimbursement calculation of potentially questionable meals (meals total $10,893.13) would more than be offset by your excessive reimbursement of in-state lodging. The findings of our report do not dispute this assumption." [Audit Report, 7/6/11]

Reality: Taxpayers Have No Way of Knowing Whether Kinder's Payment Was "Excessive" or Would Cover Inappropriate Meal Costs. The fact remains that because of Kinder's office's continued refusal to release his public schedule and the auditor's outrageous willingness to give him the benefit of the doubt, taxpayers still have no way of knowing how much of their hard-earned money Kinder spent wining and dining himself across the state. Otto's acknowledgement that the report "cannot conclude with certainty that you have fully reimbursed the state" stands in direct conflict with the deputy auditor's unwillingness to "dispute [Kinder's] assumption." [Audit Report, 7/6/11]

Vin de Set is just one example. In June 2009, Kinder spent two nights at the Chase, charging taxpayers for his hotel stays as well as two lunches at Plaza Frontenac and a $55 dinner at Vin de Set, the rooftop restaurant on Chouteau Avenue that serves southern French cuisine. Kinder's official schedule for those two days in St. Louis lists an appearance on KMOX and a concert and VIP reception for the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. [St. Louis Post Dispatch, 4/3/11]

Kinder Never Repaid Taxpayers for Costs to Take Him To/From Political and Personal Activities:

Auditor’s Office: Because Kinder Recently Stopped Getting Mileage Reimburements, They Don't Need to be Reviewed. According to the audito report, Kinder "subsequently ceased claiming mileage reimbursement and no mileage claims have been paid to you since May 2009. Therefore mileage reimbursements were not addressed for the purposes of this review." [Audit Report, 7/6/11]

Reality: Kinder Has Received More Than $12,000 in Mileage Reimbursements Since 2006. Despite the audit report's evasions, the fact remains that Peter Kinder has received more than $12,000 for in-state mileage reimbursements since 2006, and more than $8,000 in 2008 alone. Just because Kinder no longer seeks mileage reimbursements, Kinder shouldn't be let off the hook -- particularly given his evident disregard for ethics rules and sloppy record-keeping. [Missouri Accountability Portal, Accessed 7/6/11]

No Scrutiny Was Given to Kinder’s Schedule (public records) And It’s Being Kept From The Press and Public: 



Auditor’s Office: Kinder's Sloppy Record-Keeping Means We Don't Have to Perform a Thorough Audit. According to the report, Kinder's "documentation was not always complete or accurate as to the specifics of your scheduled events"... "Therefore we did not attempt to compare in-state lodging costs paid to you with activities or events scheduled on your calendar." [Audit Report, 7/6/11]

Reality: Auditor Has An Obligation to Ensure Taxpayers Are Made Whole -- Period. This audit practically provides a blueprint for any public officeholder seeking to live the high life on the taxpayers dime: just make sure your public schedule is unreliable, sloppy, and "cumbersome" to review, and the state auditor will simply give you the benefit of the doubt. In fact, Kinder himself repeatedly claimed that he kept detailed records delineating political from official events, and told the press in April that he could account for each event he attended. [Audit Report, 7/6/11; Kinder Press Conference, 4/5/11]

State Republican Party Message: Missouri Sucks and Should Be More Like Texas

Last night, Missouri Republicans (including 2nd Congressional District candidate Ann Wagner) cheered as Texas Governor Rick Perry told them that Missouri "can't compete" with Texas because of the state's personal income tax.



In case you thought this is merely polite clapping for a potential presidential candidate, the statements by Missouri Republican Party Executive Director Lloyd Smith make it clear that "Missouri Sucks and Texas Rocks" was the intended message of the evening:

Said state Republican Party executive director Lloyd Smith: "We are excited to hear from Gov. Rick Perry, who, unlike Jay Nixon, has exhibited tremendous leadership during the economic downturn."

Continued Smith: "The results could not be more clear: Rick Perry's Texas is growing and prospering, while Jay Nixon's Missouri is falling behind. Rick Perry is an example of the kind of responsible, conservative, job-creating leadership that Peter Kinder would provide for Missouri."

Before all the state Republicans go out and stock up on Texas A&M gear, they may want to consider that Texas is having it's own massive budget crisis comparable to states like Illinois, New York, and California, and has the largest number (and tied for largest percentage) of people working at or below the federal minimum wage.

Schweich Attends Fundraiser for the Guy He Should Be Investigating

New press release from the Missouri Democratic Party that makes a pretty strong argument about the inappropriateness of Missouri Auditor Tom Schweich attending a fundraiser for Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder while his office is supposed to be investigating Kinder:

Jefferson City, Mo.—State Auditor Tom Schweich attended a fundraiser for Peter Kinder in Chesterfield last night, despite the fact Schweich's office is in the middle of a highly-publicized investigation of Peter Kinder’s inappropriate use of taxpayer dollars.

Schweich’s attendance at the fundraiser further underscores Schweich’s conflict of interest with Peter Kinder and the need for an independent, third party investigation of Kinder’s travel.

“Tom Schweich has made it clear that he’s a politician first, State Auditor second and has compromised any ability for his office to conduct a real investigation as to how much taxpayer money Peter Kinder wasted,” said Caitlin Legacki, Missouri Democratic Party spokeswoman. “Schweich needs to appoint a third-party, independent auditor to conduct an appropriate investigation of how much taxpayer money Peter Kinder wasted to facilitate his lavish lifestyle.”

Three things to look for when Schweich’s office releases their “review” of Peter Kinder’s misuse of tax dollars:

• Since the auditor’s office has said they’d have access to Kinder’s schedules, will those schedules be made public? To date, Kinder has refused to make his schedules available to the press and public.
• Did the auditor’s office examine the costs of the meals of Kinder’s personal and political travels for which he charged taxpayers?
• Did the auditor’s office examine the costs of Kinder's travel to attend personal and political events for which he charged taxpayers?

State Auditor Tom Schweich -- and his staff -- have serious conflicts-of-interest when it comes to Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder.

• Deputy Auditor Harry Otto, a Schweich Appointee, Contributed to Kinder. In 2004, now-Deputy Auditor Harry Otto contributed $200 to Peter Kinder's debt committee. Schweich appointed Otto to the position of Deputy Auditor by in January 2011. Otto has also contributed generously to former Gov. Matt Blunt, State Sen. Brad Lager, and the Missouri GOP. [Missouri Ethics Commission; AP, 1/13/11]
• Kinder Emceed Schweich Fundraiser Before Billing Taxpayers for a Night at the Chase. In 2009, Kinder was the master of ceremonies at a fundraiser for Schweich fundraiser, after which he billed taxpayers for a night at the Chase Park Plaza. [St. Louis Beacon, 10/5/09; Kinder Hotel Receipt]

• Kinder Helped Persuade Schweich Not To Run For Senate & Contributed More Than $200,000 to His Auditor Campaign. The lieutenant governor kicked in a whopping $220,000 for Schweich’s 2010 campaign for state auditor. In fact, according to the Associated Press, “Kinder played a role in persuading Schweich to run for auditor instead of challenging Matt Blunt’s father, U.S. Rep. Roy Blunt, in a Republican primary for U.S. Senate.” Matt Blunt later forgave a $300,000 loan made to Kinder’s 2008 re-election campaign. [AP, 12/30/10; Kansas City Star, 1/9/2011]


As noted previously, Schweich's deputy auditor Harry Otto has already gone out of his way to water down the potential investigation.

Is there any function of government that modern day Republicans don't reduce to partisan politics?

Rick Perry Calls For Elimination of State Personal Income Tax

At a fundraiser for Peter Kinder, Texas Governor Rick Perry claims that Missouri is not "as competitive as it should be" because residents pay a personal income tax:



The text:

What that says to me is, the federal government was created by the states to be an agent for the states not the other way around. This man gets it about competition. See there is a reason that Missouri is not as competitive as it should be. Want me to tell you what it is? It's called an "income tax." A personal income tax. You've got one and we don't! You get rid of your personal income tax and then you can come compete with us. I'm serious as a heart attack here.

Because, as we all know, if there's one thing Missouri needs, it's even more cuts to education and vital services.

And by the way, that's 2nd Congressional District Republican candidate Ann Wagner seen on the video clapping for Perry's suggestion.

MO Democratic Party Slams Rick Perry and Peter Kinder for Living Large On the Taxpayers Dime

Press Release:

Jefferson City, Mo.—As Peter Kinder welcomes Texas Governor Rick Perry to Missouri for a fundraiser tonight, Kinder draws attention to their shared tendency for mismanaging public funds and living extravagantly at the expense of taxpayers.

“Peter Kinder and Rick Perry are two undeclared candidates who think they deserve promotions, but here's the biggest difference: you can find Republicans who actually want Rick Perry to run,” said Caitlin Legacki, Missouri Democratic Party spokeswoman. “Peter Kinder's been nothing short of an embarrassment, still fumbling to explain why he hangs out at five-star hotels and sends the bill to taxpayers.”

Kinder, who repaid taxpayers more than $52,000 after filing inappropriate reimbursements to attend political and personal events, is still being audited by State Auditor (and Kinder campaign beneficiary) Tom Schweich. Will Schweich or any staff from the Auditor’s office attend the Kinder fundraiser tonight?

BACKGROUND

Gov. Rick Perry and Lt. Gov Peter Kinder have more in common than you might think. Specifically, a penchant for living the high life on the taxpayer's dime.

• Texas Faced a $27 Billion Shortfall for Fiscal 2012. Texas faced a $27 billion shortfall for fiscal 2012, among the worst in the nation. [Austin American Statesman, 6/15/11]
• Perry Lives in $9,000 Per Month Mansion At Taxpayer Expense. Since 2007, Gov. Perry has charged taxpayers to live in a swank $9,000-per-month home in a gated community outside Austin. Texas taxpayers have been forced to foot the bill for more than $600,000 in rent and housing-related expenses for the Governor. [Austin American Statesman, 10/16/10; AP, 5/17/10]
• During Tight Budget Times, Gov. Perry Spares No Expense for Life of Luxury. As reported by the AP, “it costs more than $10,000 a month in rent, utilities and upkeep to house Perry in a five-bedroom, seven-bath mansion that has pecan-wood floors, a gourmet kitchen and three dining rooms… Perry's state-paid expenses at the home include $18,000 for "consumables" such as household supplies and cleaning products, $1,001.46 in window coverings from upscale retailer Neiman Marcus, a $1,000 "emergency repair" of the governor's filtered ice machine, a $700 clothes rack, and a little over $70 for a two year subscription to Food & Wine Magazine.” [AP, 5/17/10]

Meanwhile, questions remain about Peter Kinder’s ongoing audit:

Deputy State Auditor Harry Otto and Schweich have already gone out of their way to manage expectations about the veracity and integrity of their “audit,” but here’s what we can expect:

• Otto Will Have Access to the Calendars. Otto said the auditor's office has the technical experts needed to deal with any technical issues, and access the calendars. The auditor's office also plans to make its findings public -- without charge. [St. Louis Beacon, 4/28/11]

BUT...

• Otto Will Not Review Appropriateness of Kinder’s Stays. Deputy Auditor Harry Otto said the review will focus primarily on Kinder’s math and methodology in determining his payment — not on whether each reimbursement Kinder had received for lodging, meals or travel was appropriate based on the breakdown of official, political or personal functions he attended. “We don’t intend to drill into a calendar and make a determination with respect to whether a trip was 82.5 percent state and 17.5 percent non-state business,” Otto said. Rather, he added, “We want to see the supporting documents that justify the calculation that office has made.” [AP, 4/28/11]
• Otto Will Not Delve Deeply into Whether Trips Were Personal or State Business. Otto said the audit would not delve too deeply into examining whether or not trips were for personal or state business purposes, unless contradictions were obvious. “A statewide elected official has some discretion with respect to determining what or what is not in the best of interest of the state government when it comes to traveling,” Otto said. “We don’t second guess every trip.” [Missouri News Horizon, 4/28/11]
• Otto Will Not Evaluate Whether Kinder Mixed Political & Personal. The deputy auditor assigned to the inquiry, Harry Otto, said the focus is not whether Kinder mixed official business and political activity. Instead, "we want to see the supporting documents that justify the calculations that were made," Otto said. But, Otto said, if auditors notice a trip that was overtly personal or political, "we'll make the appropriate adjustments." It's also possible, the auditor's office said, that the review could find Kinder paid too much, in which case he could get money back. [St. Louis Post Dispatch, 4/28/11]
• But We Know Kinder Billed Taxpayers While Attending Personal & Political Events. As reported by the Post Dispatch, “Kinder billed the state for hotel stays and meals when he came to St. Louis to attend society balls, baseball games and political events” and “often listed no official reason on his expense reports for billing taxpayers for nights at the Chase or Four Seasons.” [St. Louis Post Dispatch, 4/3/11]

• And the St. Louis Stays May Only Be The Tip of the Iceberg: Earlier this month, the Kansas City Star raised new questions about Kinder’s use of the Kansas City Intercontinental Hotel at “taxpayer expense” after raising over $9,000 for his campaign and attending a fundraiser with Republican strategist Karl Rove. As reported by Star, “the bill for Kinder’s three-day stay at the Intercontinental may have exceeded the limits on government lodging reimbursement.” [Kansas City Star, 4/7/11]

• What About Meals Associated with Politics/Personal Travel? Kinder told the press that the $52,320 check he wrote last month reflected all of the money Kinder was reimbursed by the state for in-state travel. But according to public records, Kinder has been reimbursed for over $11,000 in meal costs since 2006. An audit is needed to confirm these costs were associated with official state business. [St. Louis Post Dispatch, 4/26/11; Missouri Accountability Portal, Accessed 4/5/11]

Now Todd Akin on the other hand, he just likes to bill taxpayers for his tea party rallies.

Democracy Now Exposes the Dishonest Smear Campaign of Loesch and Kinder

Democracy Now had Judy Ancel on as a guest in studio and did a great job laying bare the nasty smear campaign against UMSL and UMKC led by CNN contributor Dana Loesch:
Also of note: they criticized the Post-Dispatch for failing to call out the lies.

Kinder's Office Claims They "Lost" The Records That Totally Prove them Right

Today, Peter Kinder announced that he would be paying back the $35,050 of taxpayer money he spent staying in St. Louis hotels. Or, rather, he would use campaign funds to pay back the money. However, as Jo Mannies notes at the Beacon, this might cause some additional problems:

But using campaign money could set Kinder up for a new round of political headaches. Campaign money is not to be used for personal expenses, and has gotten some state officials in trouble when the Missouri Ethics Commission found them guilty of doing so. (Just ask former state Rep. Cynthia Davis, R-O'Fallon, who was accused of using campaign money for personal expenses, such as buying a truck and paying taxes.)

The Missouri Democratic Party filed the ethics complaint that got Davis into hot water and may be about to do the same thing to Kinder as a result of his decision to use campaign money for the $35,000. That's because some of the stays have been linked to personal events, such as attending a wedding.

The fact that Kinder is paying it back sure seems like an admission of guilt. However, he's still claiming that he "will never apologize" and that the whole thing is the result of a "search and destroy mission" by the Post-Dispatch. With chest-thumping bravado like this, Kinder must really have some good evidence that he wasn't using the taxpayer money for personal or political purposes, right?

Actually, it's quite the opposite. It was already pointed out that many of Kinder's trips to St. Louis were accompanied by no explanation whatsoever for why he was in town. And now his office has told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that they "lost" the records of what he was doing:

Bill Kenney, Kinder's chief of staff, added that the lieutenant governor's official schedule goes into greater detail and lists more events than do expense reports and invoices. However, Kenney said, the state Office of Administration has lost all records of Kinder's calendars prior to June 2009.

Uh huh. He "lost" them. I think some more investigation is in order.

Peter Kinder's Problems In a Nutshell

Here's the short version of the excellent investigative reporting on Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder by Jake Wagman:

The Lt. Governor is only supposed to spend taxpayer money on activities that are essential for performing his official duties:

According to Missouri regulations, the state government will foot the bill for travel only if "limited to those expenses authorized and essential for transacting official business of the state."

But the "official duties" of the Lt. Governor are pretty limited:

The governor, the state's chief executive, also has broad responsibilities under the state constitution. The lieutenant governor's role is more prescribed. In addition to serving as senior citizens' advocate, he is the tie-breaking vote in the state Senate, heads the line of succession to replace the governor and sits on several economic development boards.

Kinder used taxpayer money to stay at hotels when he was in town for things like tea party rallies (where he was introduced as "our next Governor") and baseball games:

Kinder has billed the state three times to attend events organized by Tea Party groups, which have criticized government spending. On April 15, when he spoke at Tea Party events in St. Louis and St. Charles counties, Kinder charged taxpayers $118 to stay at the Chase and $28 for dinner at Oceano in Clayton.

When the Cardinals were in the World Series in 2006, Kinder billed taxpayers to stay at the Chase so he could attend an invitation-only party thrown by Major League Baseball at the City Museum.

On the night before the 2009 Cardinals opener, invoices from Kinder's office show he billed taxpayers to stay the night at the Chase. While his expense report lists no events for the day, according to Ethics Commission filings, an Anheuser-Busch lobbyist gave Kinder a $150 ticket to the game.

Later in 2009, Kinder spent three nights at the Chase - costing taxpayers $357 - the week that baseball's All-Star Game was held in St. Louis.

In fact, Kinder provided no reasons whatsoever for many of his taxpayer-funded stays:

More than two dozen times since 2006, Kinder billed taxpayers for hotel stays when no official events appeared on expense reimbursement forms or invoices. Kinder's office says his "schedule often excludes appointments and meetings that are made while he is traveling" or that he schedules himself.

Kinder also refused comment for the story:

Kinder, a Republican who is widely expected to run for governor next year, declined to be interviewed for this story. "I'm not talking to you," Kinder told a reporter before hanging up the phone

Kinder says he didn't do anything wrong. But if that's true, then why did he decide to rent an apartment in St. Louis using campaign funds, rather than taxpayer funds, only after the story broke? As Sean asks, why didn't Kinder do this a long time ago? And, of course, all of this is made much worse by the fact that Kinder has frequently criticized the travel of Governor Nixon and continuously accuses Democrats of wasting taxpayers' money.

Only the Post-Dispatch...

The Post-Dispatch writes one, count it, one single article about Peter Kinder staying in St. Louis hotels over 300 nights on the taxpayer dime at a cost of more than $35,000 and already one of their editors is now lamenting that the paper has treated Kinder unfairly. The Post-Dispatch wrote over 10 articles about Senator McCaskill's plane problems, including two in the "lede position" according to editor Ronald Wade, yet Wade somehow comes to the conclusion that Kinder is getting "harsher treatment" than McCaskill. Absolutely pathetic! Why don't they just make Phyllis Schlafly the editor of the paper and get it over with?

Fortunately, though, Wade left us his email address: rwade@post-dispatch.com Please send him a polite email and tell him not to apologize for reporting unpleasant facts about Republicans, especially since the paper just spend the last two weeks writing negative stories about Senator McCaskill, continually coming up with flimsy excuses to write the same story over and over.

Update: Looking at it again, perhaps I've been a little harsh. My interpretation of Wade's article as being apologetic hinges on this sentence:

To paraphrase one commenter, Kinder's behavior -- "slime-ball" but legal -- appears to have gotten far harsher treatment than the "slime-ball" illegal behavior of Democratic U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill.

Now, I think in normal usage if I say something like, "It's a rough year to be a Cardinals fan. To paraphrase Gordon, they're soft at third base," then most people would understand me as agreeing that the Cardinals are soft at third base. Thus, I read the quoted sentence as suggesting that the editor agreed with the commenter. However, applying the principal of charity, I believe that sentence might also be interpreted as "One commenter said Kinder got harsher treatment." So I think the best way to read the post is probably as simply asking a question, rather than as agreeing with the right-wing comment brigade. Now I personally believe that the Post-Dispatch should stand up for Jake Wagman's reporting on Kinder rather than meekly asking a question; but, given the current reporting ethos of balance-as-getting-quotes-from-both-sides-rather-than-standing-up-for-the-facts, I can see why they'd be hesitant to do so.

Props To The Post-Dispatch

I've been pretty critical of St. Louis Post-Dispatch political reporting recently, but I'm happy to say that there have been several recent events that suggest that they may be bringing better balance and accuracy into their stories. First, I recently complained that the Post's website included an article about a puny 200 person tea party rally in Washington D.C., though they had previously ignored a 4,300 person union rally in St. Louis. After a Twitter exchange with an employee I posted the following update:

The Post-Dispatch Weatherbird suggests that AP articles automatically feed into the site:

It would be a little strange to me if there was no selection process whatsoever for which articles appear on their national news section, but perhaps this is accurate. However, this clearly would not be a good excuse for them deciding to run the story in the print edition tomorrow.

Well, it looks like the print edition got it right. In fact, it included the following passage in the story about the budget (h/t Hotflash at Show Me Progress):

Congressional leaders are inching closer to a deal on how much to cut federal spending for the next six months.

They seem to be pretty much ignoring the spending-cut absolutists of the Tea Party, the grass-roots movement that's losing influence despite having helped elect dozens of Republicans last November.

Tea Party activists had hoped to send a loud message Thursday to Republican lawmakers, telling them at a long-scheduled Capitol Hill rally either to stick to tough budget-slashing principles or face the movement's wrath.

Instead, only a few hundred people showed up.

I'm not sure I agree with this analysis since it seems to me that the House Republicans are paying far too much attention to the tea party given how much their "movement" has dissipated, but I appreciate the Post-Dispatch at least using an article that acknowledged the fact that the rally was overhyped and largely a failure.

I also recently criticized Post-Dispatch reporting generally, and Jake Wagman's reporting specifically, about the fact that they were stretching out the Claire McCaskill plane flap over a long period of time with numerous articles containing a dubiously small amount of additional substance. I would argue that no similar scrutiny or perseverance has been applied to examining the records of Ed Martin or Roy Blunt. However, today Jake Wagman published an impressive investigative piece on Peter Kinder billing taxpayers for what seems to be political or personal expenses, and Wagman did a fantastic job of collecting and organizing the information. Of course, in order to completely refute my previous criticisms and show me to be a frothing-at-the-mouth unhinged liberal blogger with an overzealous desire to criticize honest reporters, Wagman would have to continue to report on all of the twists and turns of the upcoming discussion of Kinder's records as he did with Senator McCaskill, and also to apply similar diligence to the records of Roy Blunt and Ed Martin, but he at least appears to be off to a good start.

Of course, none of this is to say that we don't need to continue building a progressive media voice in St. Louis via ForwardSTL. ForwardSTL was never intended as a replacement of the traditional media; it ideally will be a supplement to the traditional media that will ensure that a certain demographic of news and opinion consumers get the content they desire. Unlike the St. Louis Tea Party and Ed Martin, I don't want to see the Post-Dispatch go out of business, and I recognize the fact that they provide the region with crucial information. However, I do think we need to be diligent in keeping them honest, and that will include both criticizing them when they do their jobs poorly, and praising them when they get it right. Jake Wagman did a fantastic job on the Kinder story, and I hope this good work continues during some remarkable and important political times.

Peter Kinder Hates High Speed Rail

Via Jason Rosenbaum, here's a video of Lt. Governor Peter Kinder dissing high-speed rail and praising Republican Governors who refused federal money for high-speed rail lines. Kinder refers to high-speed rail as "19th-century technology."

So much for capturing any of the urban enthusiast vote.

Lt. Gov. Cowers Before Breitbart Bloggers: Won't Defend Tilley

Earlier this week, the St. Louis Tea Party baselessly and absurdly attacked GOP House Speaker Tilley, questioning his leadership and judgment and suggesting he was associated with the New Black Panther Party:

When Tilley had the audacity to respond to their baseless allegations, the tea party flipped out, and even enlisted the editor of Breitbart's Big Government to help threaten Tilley, Peter Kinder, and Carl Bearden:

Of course, if the St. Louis tea party had any real political power left or ability to organize, they wouldn't need to be begging Breitbart bloggers for help. But more importantly, Peter Kinder was too scared to even stand up for his supposed friend Tilley, instead deciding to grovel to Flynn and asking to be left out of it.

Considering that the tea party has been attacking Tilley for weeks, is Kinder really so gutless as to not stick up for his ally when he is being baselessly smeared by Breitbart bloggers? How far the GOP has fallen.

Did Kinder Have to Put Ed Martin In His Place?

Several media outlets reported that State Republicans were not enthusiastic about Ed Martin's desperate, far-fetched suggestions of voter fraud following his loss to Congressman Russ Carnahan. Jo Mannies in the Beacon reported:

Republican consultant John Hancock has talked to Martin. While not divulging their conversation, Hancock said that "any time there's a possibility of election tampering, fraud or deficiencies, they ought to be thoroughly investigated."

Hancock added that he was proud of Martin's enthusiastic effort. "Sometimes there's a political victory in defeat," Hancock said. "He can claim that now."

Hancock's comments indicated he wasn't challenging the outcome of the Carnahan-Martin contest, a view that appears to be held by some other prominent Republicans. Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder noted Wednesday that Carnahan's victory was large enough to prevent an automatic recount.

And David Weigal at Slate:

What's the evidence for this? There isn't any. There is nothing that suggests that the late counts from St. Louis weren't in line with every other late count from St. Louis. There are no local Republicans backing him up; they won a lot of races in the state while he was losing, and the vote patterns don't point to anything unusual in a district that's voted Democratic since the 1940s.

But aside from the behind the scenes discussions, the especially interesting thing was that Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder, fairly early on, spoke out publicly against the suggestions of voter fraud. As first reported on FiredUp Missouri, Kinder said the following on Dana Loesch's radio program:

When you're 4,400 votes down it's pretty hard, okay, to mount a legal challenge. And I don't expect that one will get very far. I understand the frustration. I understand the suspicions. But we have a Republican Director of Elections in St. Louis City named Scott Leiendecker. Ed Martin and I both talked to Scott today, and he says there -- while he understands the reasons for some suspicion, he personally had his hands on the whole thing and there's no reason for us to disbelieve the numbers.

Kinder had even harsher words for Martin in the Beacon:

Kinder, reflecting his role as party powerbroker, isn't going along with Martin's call. While praising Martin's performance, Kinder said, "Ed Martin clearly did not get it done in St. Louis County, and we're clearly taking note of that."

So why would Kinder feel a need to so publicly squelch Ed Martin's conspiracy theories? One interesting thing first noted by Jo Mannies, is that on the exact same day that Ed Martin purchased his "edmartinforcongress.com" domain, "edmartinforgovernor.com" was also purchased.

This seems to indicate that Martin has higher aspirations than just hanging out with the St. Louis Tea Party. In fact, it sure looks like he might be stepping on some toes, considering that Kinder had been the presumptive GOP candidate for Governor for quite some time. Did Kinder feel a need to put Ed Martin in his place?