Dallas Thiesen is an aspiring political consultant who is on his third attempt to pass the bar.
He has the political consultant part down pat – lie and obfuscate to change the rules of the game once caught. He does not have the bar exam part down very well at all.
Mr. Thiesen is attempting to defend the invalid Senate District Director Caucus in SD12 to cover up his bad behavior. As with the other complaints – this one is a brazen attempt to memorialize fraud in to the CRA lexicon forever.
I take note that Team Alice did not attempt to get us thrown out over the SD19 or SD27 Caucuses, both of which we challenged as well.
Dallas Thiesen is attempting to say that they violated the CRA By-Laws in SD12 because I told them to. Then, he is saying that it was George’s responsibility to verify the veracity of the caucus that same day. Mylinda Mason thought she lived in SD12, which is fine – however in the brilliant legal mind of Dallas – since I told her she could caucus in SD12 based on her statement to me, it is now my fault and I should be thrown out of CRA for it.
This is where you can see why Mr. Thiesen has failed the bar exam twice. His complaint also only mentions two of the three participants. One is Mylinda Mason who lives in SD05, the other is Joanna Bothelo who lives in SD12 (the only valid member of the three that participated). The third participant is none other than previously mentioned CRA Rhodes Scholar Mark Gardner who lives in SD08.
Using Dallas’ logic – Mr. Gardner who fancies himself an expert on CRA By-Laws should be tossed for participating in the wrong Senate District Caucus???
Young Mr. Thiesen hung himself by omitting any mention of CRA VP Mark Gardner in his complaint. Mr. Gardner told George he lives in SD12 at the convention. Gardner lives in SD08 and is not close to SD12.
George and Aaron should be thrown out of CRA for not recognizing the problem AT the convention. Just brilliant.
It looks like the fetching Dallas Thiesen is embarrassed and is needing to cover for himself and CRA VP Mark Gardner for their stupidity and violations of the CRA’s by-laws that he admits to in the letter (as he attempts to blame me for what he did). He also accuses George of violating CRA By-Laws that don’t exist – perhaps he had Mark Gardner read them for him before writing his complaint?
Young Mr. Thiesen should also know that we called Tom Hudson before raising the issue publicly. The Results of the elections were never announced and challenges could indeed be heard at the next board meeting according to the advice Mr. Hudson gave us. Perhaps Mr. Thiesen should write a complaint against Tom Hudson as well?
This is the CRA now and this is why the CRA is ungovernable.