Text of email PROVES Jean Schmidt took money from Turks to deny Armenian Genocide

By Nate Noy

You may remember my first post on this subject from almost two weeks ago:

Jean Schmidt & Adolph Hitler versus Dave Krikorian & Ronald Reagan at the Ohio Elections Commission (OEC)

Now this story has been picked up by the Washington Post; LA Times; MSNBC; and virtually every major and small paper in the entire county. So I decided to have a closer look at the public record of this case to see if there is anything the media is not telling us.

Yesterday at the Ohio Elections Commission, David Krikorian submitted a defense in OEC Case 2009E 003. His defense (which is now part of the public record) included an interesting email:

Dear Turkish American Community,

2008 is the election year. We, TURKISH-AMERICANS, have to remain alert and keep educating members of the Congress on this and many other issues that we care about. Most importantly, we have to show our own political representatives that we EXIST and that we are a force to be reckoned with.

I urge you to show your continuous support to the Turkish American Friends: Congressman Dan Burton (IN) and Congresswoman Jean Schmidt (OH) with your generous contributions.

FIRST EVENT:

PLEASE SUPPORT GREAT TURKISH-AMERICAN FRIEND: CONGRESSWOMAN JEAN SCHMIDT

You are cordially invited to a Turkish American Luncheon Reception honoring CONGRESSWOMAN JEAN SCHMIDT (Republican- Ohio/2nd District)

Monday, February 18, 2008 1:00 – 2:30 pm

Café Istanbul*
1 Levee Wy Ste 1112
Newport, Kentucky 41071

RSVP by Friday, February 15, 2008, to
Ahmet Gultekin, argmd@yahoo. com
Telephone 513-376-2444

Congresswoman Schmidt is one of the few members of Congress who actually read Guenter Lewy's book about the genocide and is one of the few members of congress who actually doesn't believe that it was genocide. An Armenian American is running against her in the election because she opposes the resolution. We have a member of congress from Ohio who is willing to stand up to the Armenian lobby, and it is important for the Turkish American community to support her.

Make donation online: http://www.jeanschm idt.com/

Please let the organizer know your contribution by via email so he can update our list accordingly.




The key part of this email is: “Congresswoman Schmidt is one of the few members of Congress who actually read Guenter Lewy's book about the genocide and is one of the few members of congress who actually doesn't believe that it was genocide.”

So, the Turks are asking for money because Schmidt “does not believe that it was a genocide.” Sounds like Krikorian was right on the money when he accused Schmidt of taking money to deny the Genocide.

Another really interesting part of the defense included references to this report: http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=935

It looks like there is a much larger effort on the part of the Turkish propaganda machine and once again Krikorian was correct when he called Jean Schmidt a “puppet” of this effort.

The best part of the above article is the conclusion:
“But as the saying goes, a lie isn't the other side of any story. It's just a lie.” "When it comes to the historical reality of the Armenian genocide, there is no 'Armenian' or 'Turkish' side of the question, any more than there is a 'Jewish' or 'German' side of the historical reality of the Holocaust," writes Torben Jorgensen, of the Danish Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies. "There is a scientific side and an unscientific side — acknowledgement or denial."”

I’m sure there will be more to come in this case (I'm still reading the public record and there is much more to share), and I’m sure as we approach the final hearing, more and more people will realize how guilty Jean Schmidt really is in this case.

Jean Schmidt Poll and Prediction (Brinkman by 9 points)

By Nate Noy

Jean Schmidt is in serious trouble Tuesday; one telltale sign of this is the fact that her campaign has not even bothered to release any bogus polls lately. We’ll get to the polls and my prediction for this race in a moment, but first I wanted to recap the coverage we have given this race in the past month with links to my previous posts:

Jean Schmidt beware character matters to OH-2 voters
Jean Schmidt endorsed by 2,144,597th most popular site on the Internet
Jean Schmidt’s Liberal Base
Jean Schmidt’s shill Nathan Bailey
Jean Schmidt 409th most powerful member of Congress
My favorite Jean Schmidt lie
Jean Schmidt’s $1.3 million IRS problem
The Truth about Jean Schmidt
Jean Schmidt’s position on Cuba “bought and paid for” by lobbyists
Tom Brinkman NOT corrupt enough for Congress
Republicans in Ohio-2 beware: Jean Schmidt has NO CHANCE in the general election

The above material has been thoroughly researched and I personally attest to its truthfulness and accuracy. Hopefully my work has helped share the truth about Jean Schmidt and dissuaded any would be “sucker” that may have voted for her before reviewing the above.

Now on to my discussion about polls:

Some of you may remember this one from mid-April 2006:

Schmidt 56%
McEwen 33%
Other/ undecided 11%

Of course the actual results of the election were:

Schmidt 47.67%
McEwen 42.56%
Other 9.78%

So Jean’s poll had her up 23 points and she won by a little more than five and received less than 50% of the vote; clearly the validity of any Schmidt poll should be questioned after a result like this.

Subsequently a poll before the general election showed the following:

Schmidt 48%
Wulsin 40%
Other / Undecided 12%

The final results of this one were:
Schmidt 50.45%
Wulsin 49.39%
Write-in 0.16%

In this match-up Schmidt won by a whopping 1.06%, not quite the 8% her earlier poll showed.

Schmidt released another poll on January 17, 2008 showing her with 52% of would be voters, the same poll (taken before Phil Heimlich dropped out of the race) showed Tom Brinkman with only 9%.

Since this mid-January poll was released Schmidt has not come public with another poll. We all know she is taking them and it is safe to assume she is behind, or she would be releasing the results.

Predictions:

Schmidt’s polls tend to be about 7-15 points off, and I predict she will end up with 44% of the vote. I will project Nathan Bailey at 3% and Tom Brinkman at 53%. Yes, you heard it here first, I predict Tom to win by 9 points on Tuesday. Enough people FINALLY know the truth about Schmidt and the time has finally come to throw her out of office.

Jean Schmidt endorsed by 2,144,597th most popular site on the Internet

By Nate Noy

For those of you that don’t know Alexa.com is the equivalent for ranking Internet traffic that the Nielsen ratings are for television.

Below are the current rankings for the sites that have covered the Ohio-2 primary:

Thefdhlounge.blogspot.com has a traffic rank of: 814,365
Thebellwetherdaily.blogspot.com has a traffic rank of: 1,279,563
Nixguy.com has a traffic rank of: 1,860,957
Massdiscussion.blogspot.com has a traffic rank of: 2,144,597


To the defense of Nixguy I believe he does blog at another site and he has pretty much stayed behind the scenes with his support of Jean Schmidt this time around.

Bill Sloat at Thebellwetherdaily.blogspot.com has done a sound job reporting the truth about Jean Schmidt and encouraging voters to select the one true conservative candidate in this election Tom Brinkman.

Our blog of course has enjoyed much success due largely to the tireless efforts of Rick Morris and the other FDH Lounge Dignitaries who have been busy blogging about subjects other than my favorite topic: Jean Schmidt. (In fact, our ranking for the last week is up over 200,000 spots.)

That brings us of course to the site that currently is Jean Schmidt’s biggest fan: Matt Hurley at WMD. The one good thing I will say about Matt is that he is man enough to let me post on his blog without deleting my comments. Of course, some people may ask: why do I spend my time posting on a blog that is 1,330,232 spots behind us in the rankings? Well, my response is that I hope somewhere among the tumbleweeds that make up Matt’s audience is the occasional truth seeker.

I KNOW for a fact that my support of Tom Brinkman will bring him at least 298 votes this primary (that’s the number of people that actually wrote in my name in 2006 against Schmidt.) Since Matt does not even live in Ohio-2, and not many people read his blog anyway, I wonder what his impact for Schmidt will be?

Jean Schmidt’s Liberal Base

By Nate Noy

One of the best lies going in the Jean Schmidt “shill blogosphere” is that she is a “true conservative.” Anyone read Rolling Stone Magazine lately?

Two issues that really rattle my cage from the left are: minimum wage and gun control.

On 1/10/07 Congress passed Vote 18 H.R.2 The minimum wage increase. Those voting yea included:

Ted Kennedy
Barney Frank
Nancy Pelosi
Dennis Kucinich.
Jean Schmidt

Some nay votes included:

John Boehner
Steve Chabot
Jim Jordan
Pat Tiberi
Roy Blunt
Tom Trancredo

ALL “true conservatives” opposed this vote because they actually have some comprehension as to what a minimum wage increase does to the economy.

I have a degree in Economics and anyone that does understands that minimum wage acts as a price floor, creating a deficit in employment, i.e., a higher rate of unemployment. It also leads to much higher inflation rates, which is something the media has finally started to talk about recently. The end result of a minimum wage increase is stagflation, and it is devastating to the economy.

People in general simply are not educated on this issue. I ask them: why not make minimum wage $20 or $25 an hour if it is such a great savior?

So when unemployment rates continue to rise this summer and the price of everything just seems to be going up, people everywhere can look to the likes of Kennedy, Pelosi, and Schmidt for the root cause.

My other hot issue is gun control and gun free zones. Jean Schmidt of course voted to ban guns in Clermont County when she was a trustee there, however she subsequently duped enough people in the NRA into actually believing she was with them on this issue too.

This argument is so, so simple as far as I’m concerned. If the kids at Va Tech or NIU had all been carrying guns, then how many of them would still be alive today? The answer is that maybe the first kid or two would have been killed, but someone in the group would have been able to stop the massacre before it reached epic levels.

Gun bans and gun free zones will NEVER stop the criminals from having guns; they are by definition criminals and could care less about the law. The only thing that these laws accomplish is preventing those of us that are law abiding and would be willing to protect ourselves and others by taking appropriate action against a deranged gunman if necessary.

Jean Schmidt didn’t get that back in Clermont County, I doubt she gets that now either, or she NEVER would have voted for a gun ban in the first place. Her vote will always be for sale to the highest bidder, and folks the public is NOT the highest bidder as far as Jean Schmidt is concerned, she had proven that to us over and over again.

Jean Schmidt’s shill Nathan Bailey

By Nate Noy

Quick question: if you were an unpopular and corrupt Congresswomen how would you try to siphon off some of the anti-incumbent vote in a dangerously close primary election?

Answer: find a shill to help split the anti-Schmidt vote.

Below is what the Cincinnati Enquirer had to say about Nathan Bailey:


Nathan N. Bailey

Bailey, 26, is an accountant who lives in Stonelick Township in Clermont County.

His campaign has been chiefly an online effort, with Facebook and MySpace pages. He said he joined the race largely to encourage young conservative Republicans like himself to vote. He said he admires Schmidt, and that his chief advantage over her would be “I could serve for 40 years.”

Bailey said he has spent $1,355, but accepted only $250 in donations, turning down other offers.

I’ll have to give a “hat’s off” to Schmidt and her corrupt cronies on this one. Everyone knows there will be 50-55% of the voters next Tuesday that won’t pull the lever for Jean Schmidt on a bet. Her ONLY prayer to beat Tom Brinkman is to hope the people in Pike, Scioto, Brown, and Adams Counties (the four counties Bob McEwen trounced her in back in the 2006 primary) accidentally vote for Bailey instead of Brinkman.

Anyone, and I mean ANYONE that “admires Schmidt” is either as corrupt and dishonest as she is, or a shill for her. I hope in the case of Nathan Bailey it is simply the latter. However, once Schmidt is indicted, convicted, or whatever this summer anyone that has been duped into supporting her will certainly feel like the world’s biggest fool. I just hope the voters in Ohio-2 next Tuesday are educated enough to vote for the ONLY OPTION on the ballot: Tom Brinkman.

Jean Schmidt 409th most powerful member of Congress

By Nate Noy

The website Congress.org has always been a great way for DC insiders to gauge where they should be spending their time trying to influence legislation. Capitol Advantage is the company that compiles and publishes the rankings and is well respected as an independent and unbiased source.

Everyone of course hopes that “their” representative has some pull in Washington, so my question of the day is this: does Jean Schmidt have any “pull” whatsoever?

First let’s look at the data for the members of Congress from Ohio:

Name Rank in State Score Rank in House
Rep. Boehner (R-OH-8) 1 39.09 5
Rep. Kaptur (D-OH-9) 2 23.53 64
Rep. Jones (D-OH-11) 3 22.02 79
Rep. Regula (R-OH-16) 4 18.00 150
Rep. Ryan (D-OH-17) 5 16.09 179
Rep. Kucinich (D-OH-10) 6 15.09 198
Rep. Hobson (R-OH-7) 7 14.53 207
Rep. Sutton (D-OH-13) 8 14.00 226
Rep. Space (D-OH-18) 9 12.50 252
Rep. Wilson (D-OH-6) 10 11.50 290
Rep. LaTourette (R-OH-14) 11 11.28 293
Rep. Chabot (R-OH-1) 12 11.03 296
Rep. Pryce (R-OH-15) 14 9.53 324
Rep. Turner (R-OH-3) 14 9.53 324
Rep. Tiberi (R-OH-12) 16 9.28 335
Rep. Schmidt (R-OH-2) 17 6.50 409
Rep. Jordan (R-OH-4) 18 2.38 435

No real shocks here, Boehner of course a Minority Leader is near the top and followed by members with significant tenure. As expected Schmidt is near the bottom.

A closer look at how Schmidt obtains her ranking:


The rankings are broken into three subcategories:

Position – Based on numbers of years served in Congress as well as committee assignments and leadership positions the Member of Congress holds. Much of the power a member wields is directly a result of their seniority on a committee or in the chamber as a whole.

Indirect Influence – Refers to the action taken by a member of Congress in 2006 to attempt to affect the outcome of an issue or bill by proactive means. For example this may include, appearing on a Sunday morning talk show, getting newspaper interviews or leading a caucus such as the Congressional Women’s Caucus demonstrates that the Member of Congress influenced the legislative agenda of Congress. This could also include raising and donating money to colleagues or challengers in an attempt to gain allies and support for election to leadership positions or for passing legislation.

Legislation – Refers to the success at each stage of the lawmaking process of the passage of a bill into law in 2006. Members receive points when their bills are passed out of committee, successfully passed on the floor in their chamber, passed by the other chamber, and then signed into law by the President. This also includes attempts to shape the bill through amendments.


For Position Jean scores a 13. A point of comparison would be Zack Space who is a first term Congressman, he scores a 27. Charlie Wilson, another first-termer, scored a 25.

For both Influence and Legislation Schmidt scores a whopping 0, notta, nil, nothing! In other words Schmidt has no pull whatsoever in the media and has failed to introduce or cosponsor any legislation with success.

Basically when Jean Schmidt opens her mouth no one ever listens or cares what she has to say, unless of course she is once again making a fool of herself. NICE, just the kind of “representation” Ohio-2 deserves, but I guess if you people vote for her on Tuesday then you will in fact get what you deserve. It is just a shame that the fools that vote for and support Schmidt subject the rest of us to her uselessness.

My favorite Jean Schmidt lie

By Nate Noy

OK, by now everyone KNOWS that Jean Schmidt is a sloppy compulsive liar who could never be trusted, from her OEC reprimand for a “reckless disregard for truth” and making “false and misleading statements” about her fake college degree to the lies on TV in the cover up that followed.

Of course there are the lies she told to Ohio farmers regarding her support of lifting the embargo in Cuba (until anti-Castro groups with a larger checkbook changed her mind.) There is her plagiarism scandal, her lies in a deposition regarding her fake college degree, the money she took from USEC (the company bringing the nuclear waste dump to my hometown in Piketon, Ohio) and her support of that effort.

There also is the lie that she is a “conservative” that believes in the 2nd Amendment (she voted to ban guns in Clermont County when she was a trustee there) and the fact that she voted to devastate our economy by voting to raise the rates of inflation and unemployment.

But MY personal favorite Jean Schmidt lie is one that has gone completely under the radar since October 2004.

The website marathon guide.com publishes results of marathons. As everyone knows Schmidt has made her marathon experience an integral part of her persona, in fact one of her paid shill bloggers often uses “94-lb marathon runner from Loveland” when spewing her paid shilling for Schmidt. When I was researching Schmidt for the OEC complaints I filed against her in 2006 I came across the following results:

Chicago Marathon 10/10/04: Jean Schmidt (F52) 4:02:37 11147th place.
Columbus Marathon 10/17/04: Jean Schmidt (F52) 4:13:37 2401st place.

For those of you that have never actually completed a marathon this may seem plausible, however those of us that have run a marathon with a competitive time KNOW that only a small handful of super athletes could ever accomplish this feat. In fact Road Runner Sports has a guide to marathon recovery, in which it states the following about day seven following a marathon:

7. Elevate your legs whenever possible. When you're watching TV, lie on the floor with a pillow supporting your lower back and your legs against a wall. Let your co-workers know that they're apt to find you with your legs on your desk occasionally during the day-you're a marathoner-they'll understand!


People that run marathons can barely walk a week later, and if Jean Schmidt really did run two marathons under 4:14 in one week then she should have been on the cover of Sports Illustrated or something. Of course Jean Schmidt does have a twin sister, so my question for the day is: did Jean’s sister run the race for her in Chicago or Columbus?

You may ask, why would someone bother to have their twin run a race for them? Well, the answer to this is in Schmidt’s character and the medical condition I personally believe she has:

Diagnostic criteria (DSM-IV-TR)
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, a widely used manual for diagnosing mental and behavioral disorders, defines antisocial personality disorder as a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others occurring since age 15, as indicated by three (or more) of the following:

failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest
deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure
impulsivity or failure to plan ahead
irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults
reckless disregard for safety of self or others
consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain steady work or honor financial obligations
lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another

Sound like Jean Schmidt to you? Sure does to me!

Mnemonic
A mnemonic that can be used to remember the criteria for antisocial personality disorder is CORRUPT[1][2]:

C - cannot follow law
O - obligations ignored
R - remorselessness
R - recklessness
U - underhandedness
P - planning deficit
T - temper
Yep, still SOUNDS LIKE JEAN SCHMIDT!!!!!!

As I’ve said before Jean Schmidt is a psychopath that likely would have been in jail many years ago had she not had a multi-millionaire daddy to bail her out at every turn.

Additionally we all now know that she will soon be facing an IRS investigation for her blatant and intentional disregard of campaign finance law. We also know that she stands no chance in the general election in November. The fact that anyone may actually vote for her next week still boggles the mind of those of us that know the truth about her.

Jean Schmidt’s $1.3 million IRS problem

By Nate Noy

Today I filed a Form 3949 A with the IRS reporting Jean Schmidt, the Committee to Elect Schmidt and the Schmidt for Congress Committee for blatant violations of 26 U.S.C. Section 6113(a). Additionally, I provided evidence that this violation falls within the parameters of 26 U.S.C. section 6710(c) constituting an intentional disregard of 6113(a) and therefore subjecting Schmidt and her campaign committees to a $1,000 per day fine for the aforementioned violation.

For those of you that are not experts in campaign finance law, IRS code 26 U.S.C. section 6113(a) states:

(a) General rule. Each fundraising solicitation by (or on behalf of) an organization to which this section applies shall contain an express statement (in a conspicuous and easily recognizable format) that contributions or gifts to such organization are not deductible as charitable contributions for Federal income tax purposes.

26 U.S.C. section 6710 (a) and (c) provide:

(a) Imposition of penalty. If there is a failure to meet the requirement of section 6113 with respect to a fundraising solicitation by (or on behalf of) an organization to which section 6113 applies, such organization shall pay a penalty of $1,000 for each day on which such a failure occurred. The maximum penalty imposed under this subsection on failures by any organization during any calendar year shall not exceed $10,000.


(c) $10,000 limitation not to apply where intentional disregard. If any failure to which subsection (a) applies is due to intentional disregard of the requirement of section 6113—
(1) the penalty under subsection (a) for the day on which such failure occurred shall be the greater of—
(A) $1,000, or
(B) 50 percent of the aggregate cost of the solicitations which occurred on such day and with respect to which there was such a failure


Thanks again to archive.org, a complete historical review of www.jeanschmidt.com is available.

Excerpts from my correspondence with the IRS are provided below:

The website www.jeanschmidt.com was established as a campaign website by the Committee to Elect Schmidt on 4/22/01. The Committee’s initial solicitation for funds was published on 2/17/03 and remained unchanged until 7/19/05 a total of 884 calendar days.

On 4/1/2005 the Schmidt for Congress Committee was formed. The contribution solicitation section of campaign website was not altered until 7/20/2005 and remained unchanged until 12/01/2006 a total of 500 calendar days. I have included a printout of the contribution solicitation section of the website. A complete review of the website’s history is available at: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.jeanschmidt.com.

A review of the public solicitation for campaign funds posted on the above website clearly shows a blatant and intentional disregard for 26 U.S.C. section 6113(a). The website clearly failed to disclose that contributions are nondeductible. In fact, that the website intentionally disregarded this requirement by misleading potential contributors. The website contained a link to make contributions titled: “Contributions and Tax credits.” While technically correct that Ohio law allows a $50.00 tax credit for the purposes of state income tax, the site failed to notify potential contributors that this tax credit did not apply to federal income tax and was not tax deducible for federal income tax.

Based on this intentional disregard for 26 U.S.C. section 6113(a) the IRS should apply 26 U.S.C. section 6710(c) constituting an intentional disregard of 6113(a) and therefore subjecting Schmidt and her campaign committees to a $1,000 per day fine for the aforementioned violation. Her campaign was in violation for a total of 1,384 days spanning four calendar years.

The evidence:

2/17/2003 – 7/19/05 (884 days)

http://web.archive.org/web/20030409125545/jeanschmidt.com/Contributionsgroup.htm

I HAVE EXCITING NEWS FOR YOU!!
A change in the Ohio income tax laws now allow a once per year, dollar-for dollar CREDIT for donations to candidates for the Ohio State Legislature. The credit consists of $50.00 for a single person or $100 for a married couple filing jointly.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR YOU?
If you make your check payable to "Committee to Elect Schmidt, 771 Wards Corner Rd., Loveland, OH 45140" for $100.00, the State of Ohio will reduce your tax by the full $100.00 when you file your Year 2003 Ohio Form IT-1040 and report your contribution on line 52 of your joint return ($50.00 credit if you file an individual return).
What a great way to support my candidacy by sending your check to my campaign committee instead of sending it to the State of Ohio in the form of $50.00 or $100.00 in state taxes!
(Just print and fill out this form below)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I would like to contribute to your campaign. I have enclosed a check for _____. (No corporate checks please.)
Please print the form below, as this information is required by Ohio law.
NAME _____________________________________________________
ADDRESS _____________________________ PHONE ______________
EMPLOYER/TITLE ____________________________________________
CITY ___________________ STATE ________ ZIP _______________
-------------------------------------------------------------
Mail your contributions to:
Committee to Elect Schmidt
771 Wards Corner Rd
Loveland, OH 45140

7/20/2005 – 12/1/2006 (500 days)

http://web.archive.org/web/20051024131544/www.jeanschmidt.com/ContributeVolunteerGroup.htm

(Just print and fill out this form below)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Schmidt for Congress Committee
Yes, I would like to contribute to your campaign.

I have enclosed a check for $________.

(Corporate and foreign national contributions are not permitted)
Please make check payable to ?Schmidt for Congress Committee?
Name___________________________________________________________
Home Address____________________________________________________

City/State/ZIP____________________________________________________
Phone______________________ Email_______________________________
Employer/Occupation______________________________________________
Paid for by the Schmidt for Congress Committee
The maximum an individual may contribute
at this time is $2100.00 ($4200.00 per couple)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Mail your contributions to:
Schmidt for Congress Committee
P.O. Box 867
Milford, OH 45150

What this means for Team Schmidt:

If the IRS agrees with my assertion that this constitutes an “intentional disregard” for the law, then Schmidt will be subject to a $1000 per day fine totaling $1,384,000.00. The BEST CASE scenario for Schmidt is that the IRS does not consider this an intentional disregard and ONLY fines her $10,000 for calendar years 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006. If she is lucky, this blatant disregard for the law will only cost her $40,000.

Once again Jean Schmidt shows that she is either incompetent (and surrounded by completely incompetent advisers) OR she again shows she really doesn’t think the law applies to her. I’m sure the IRS and US Department of Justice will disagree with Schmidt’s “untouchable” persona.

The Truth about Jean Schmidt

By Nate Noy

What keeps you up at night? People that know me would tell you it’s the thought of having the likes of Bob Ney or Rick Renzi “represent” me in Congress. Jean Schmidt has more than a few things in common with these disgraced Congressmen, the most important of which to me is that fact that they ALL are LIARS.

People have asked me: “why do you detest Jean Schmidt as you do?” Well, my pet peeve in life is lying, and Jean Schmidt may be the mother of all liars. I’m also not a big fan of corrupt politicians that only stand for the people that fund their campaigns. Jean Schmidt can NEVER be trusted and anyone that casts a vote for her is either too lazy to research the truth or a mindless part of the establishment.

I KNOW I’ll be able to sleep at night after I cast my vote for Tom Brinkman on March 4th, I just wonder how anyone that votes for Jean Schmidt will be able to do the same.

Jean Schmidt’s position on Cuba “bought and paid for” by lobbyists

By Nate Noy

Truth seekers everywhere should be grateful for two things: (1) that transparency exists regarding campaign contributes, therefore they must be disclosed and; (2) the Internet site archive.org where one can go back and view websites from the past verbatim.

I’ll let the facts speak for themselves on my most recent discovery regarding Jean Schmidt.

Fact: The Ohio Farm Bureau Federation has a PAC with Ohio Registration number C00161265. This PAC made numerous campaign contributions to Jean Schmidt while she was a State Representative.

Fact: The Ohio Farm Bureau Federation like many farm trade associations has long been a strong proponent of lifting the trade embargo with Cuba. A few years back the federation even sponsored a trip to visit Cuba; Jean Schmidt was on that trip.

Fact: Jean Schmidt was a major supporter of lifting the trade embargo. On her campaign website she linked to a number of articles urging the lifting of the embargo and even wrote her own opinion on the subject.

Fact: On 4/21/2006 three anti-Castro PACs made campaign contributions to Jean Schmidt totally $6,000.
Democracy Believers PAC
1155 21st St. NW Suite 300
Washington, DC 20036
Date Contributed = 04/21/2006
Amount Contributed = 2000.00
IRL PAC
PO Box 10460
Burke, Virginia 22009
Date Contributed = 04/21/2006
Amount Contributed = 1000.00
US Cuba Democracy PAC
1200 W. 49th St.
Hialeah, Florida 33012
Date Contributed = 04/21/2006
Amount Contributed = 3000.00

Fact: The US Cuba Democracy PAC was happy to report that this past summer an amendment to the farm bill to ease trade restrictions with Cuba was defeated on the House Floor.

Fact: Jean Schmidt voted against this amendment.

H.AMDT.707 to H.R.2419 Amendment sought to remove certain banking restrictions related to Cuba's payment for agricultural purchases from U.S. producers.
Sponsor: Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] (introduced 7/27/2007) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 7/27/2007 House amendment not agreed to. Status: On agreeing to the Rangel amendment (A008) Failed by recorded vote: 182 - 245 (Roll no. 749).

Fact: there are two other major pieces of legislation that are currently before Congress urging the lifting of the embargo and to allow travel to Cuba. Jean Schmidt is NOT a cosponsor for either bill.

H.R.624 : To lift the trade embargo on Cuba, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] (introduced 1/22/2007) Cosponsors (54)
Committees: House Foreign Affairs; House Ways and Means; House Energy and Commerce; House Judiciary; House Financial Services; House Oversight and Government Reform; House Agriculture
Latest Major Action: 4/12/2007 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology.

H.R.654 : To allow travel between the United States and Cuba.
Sponsor: Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] (introduced 1/24/2007) Cosponsors (119)
Committees: House Foreign Affairs
Latest Major Action: 1/24/2007 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Here is what Jean Schmidt previously wrote on her campaign website:

Ohio Farmers Look to Cuba for Their Future
February 4, 2003

"What is the definition of insanity? It’s doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results each time. That can be said of the nearly 40-year-old embargo that the United States stubbornly maintains against Cuba, the Caribbean country of eleven million people. The reasoning behind the move back in the 1960’s was noble enough. Bring pressure to bear on a Communist dictatorship that was oppressing its people, taking away all their personal freedoms, the very hint of which is repugnant to Americans. But, the times they are a-changin’ and like it or not, we’re losing precious time and opportunities to other countries and other states that have seen the possibilities we’ve continued to shun for four decades.

The good news is that may be coming to an end. Ohio Farm Bureau Federation (OFBF) president Terry McClure recently visited Cuba and returned with visions of a new market for Ohio’s struggling farm community. Our Caribbean neighbor, who is a mere 90 miles from Miami, Florida, is capable of purchasing $700 million dollars in food, much of it the very crops we grow in Ohio. Already $250 million has been spent in trade with the United States, but not with Ohio farmers. To begin a reversal of that trend and open up the doors to Ohio farmers, the Ohio Farm Bureau has organized an initial fact finding trip to Cuba in March. I am very happy to report that I will be along on that trip. I am also happy to tell you that not one cent of this trip will be paid for by your tax dollars. I am paying for all of my expenses.

My interest in Cuba is not new. My husband’s family had business interests in Cuba in the 1950's. During my first term in the legislature, I approached the Department of Development about sponsoring a State delegation of business and agriculture leaders to Cuba. I met with the Cuban Trade Council in New York to learn the mechanics of putting a trip together, as well as, with Cuban American business people in Ohio to gain a greater insight to the economic benefits that could result from such a trip.

By now, we are all painfully aware of the dire straits of the state economy is in. Now more than ever, it is important to look at new opportunities that will help bring dollars back into our economy and offset the staggering deficit that looms in the near future. This trip, sponsored by the Ohio Farm Bureau through the Columbus Council on World Affairs, takes the critical first steps in establishing relationships and opening doors that have been closed too long. Along with touring working farms, port facilities, cooperatives, processing facilities and seeing various cultural sites, I will be meeting with high-level Cuban government officials, farmers and business people. It is a first step in reversing the effects of sanctions whose time has come and gone.

If you are interested in learning more about Cuba, or have questions or comments, you may write to me at my Columbus office at State Representative Jean Schmidt 77 S. High Street Columbus, OH 43215, calling me at (614) 466-8134, or sending an email to me at district66@ohr.state.oh.us. I look forward to reporting back to you on the progress we make during this trip. Look for more information on my website, www.jeanschmidt.com, including photos. I am proud to have this opportunity to explore opening new markets for the hard working farmers in Ohio. It’s time to open our doors to this new trading partner and to leave behind the outdated ideas from forty years ago that have never attained their goals. "

Conclusion: When Jean Schmidt was getting payoffs from a group in favor of lifting the embargo her position was that “It’s time to open our doors to this new trading partner and to leave behind the outdated ideas from forty years ago that have never attained their goals.” However, as soon as she gets to Congress she accepts money from anti-Castro groups opposed to what her previous contributors stood for and she has delivered by voting against an amendment that would ease restrictions and is not a cosponsor for bills that would directly result in what she previously advocated.

Cuba has been a hot topic in the news as of late and many people are starting to advocate lifting the embargo and allowing US travel to Cuba. Where do you suppose our Congresswoman stands on this issue, the answer likely is that she will stand behind the group with the biggest checkbook.

Jean Schmidt, the Congresswoman reprimanded by the Ohio Elections Commission for a “reckless disregard for truth,” should it surprise anyone that her vote appears to always be for sale? One thing is for sure, Jean Schmidt has proven that she IS corrupt enough to be a member of Congress.

Tom Brinkman NOT corrupt enough for Congress

By Nate Noy

Most Americans agree that our current 435 “representatives” in Congress are collectively one of the most vile and untrustworthy groups in this great nation’s history. Those of us that have inside knowledge of how Washington DC “really” works know that most politicians at that level are bought and paid for by special interest groups. Sure there is the occasional honest Congressman, but for the most part the character of the members is fairly consistent with recent approval ratings (which hover somewhere around 20% or below.) I for one KNOW that Tom Brinkman does not fit the “norm” for this group.

I personally have had two memorable discussions with politicians in the past 18 months. The first was when I had the pleasure of deposing our “esteemed” Congresswoman Jean Schmidt. I had a number of questions that Jean was forced to answer under oath since my case was before the Ohio Elections Commission. When Schmidt was asked about October 24, 1993 she remembered the day as if she had just watched a movie about it. She stated that she “had to use the restroom [sic]’ before the race and that the line was too long. She added that she thought she would use it during the race but decided to hold it for 3 hours and 19+ minutes.” This recall ability was consistent with an article the Cincinnati Enquire wrote on July 31, 2005 stating that Schmidt had a “file card memory.”

The perplexing thing about Schmidt’s incredible memory was the sworn testimony she gave before the OEC on April 20, 2006. Excerpts from this include:

Q. Is that a B.S. or a B.A.?
A. I'm not sure. I think it's a B.A., or is it a Bachelor of Science? I don't know. I would have to say I don't know.

Q. And when did you start pursuing, then, the master's of education degree at UC?
A. I'm not sure.
Q. When did you stop attending the classes in pursuit of the master's?
A. I'm not sure.
Q. Do you know what years -- after 1974, do you know what years specifically you attended classes at UC?
A. I'm not sure.
Q. To your knowledge, did you attend any classes after 1986?
A. I'm not sure.

Q. And have you ever received a degree in social studies?
A. I'm not sure.
Q. What classes would you have taken that would make you unsure or make it a possibility that you would have obtained a degree in social studies?
A. I don't know.

Q. You completed some course work in 1986 at UC, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. That was in pursuit of the master's degree, is that right?
A. I'm not sure.

Q. Have you ever had a teaching certificate?
A. Yes.
Q. When was that?
A. I'm not sure.
Q. When you completed your course work, then you also had to do certain hours of teaching, isn't that correct?
A. I don't know.

Q. What is your understanding of the certificate that you had?
A. I don't have any understanding of the certificate that I have.

We ALL know how the above turned out for Jean Schmidt, the OEC found her GUILTY of lying about her FAKE college degree and gave her a public reprimand for a “reckless disregard for truth” and making "false and misleading statements."

Of course this is par for the course for Schmidt who also taken campaign contributions from lobbyists trying to bring a nuclear waste dump to Pike county, plagiarized another congresswoman’s opt ed piece, and voted to destroy our economy by raising the rates of unemployment and inflation with her support of the minimum wage increase. Jean Schmidt fits right in with Congress from any honest person’s perspective.


My other memorable moment was a meeting I had with Tom Brinkman in June. I had only actually met Tom once prior at the Anderson Township GOP picnic in August 2006; I had called Tom and asked for a few minutes of his time in Columbus to discuss the 2008 election. Tom got caught up in a subcommittee meeting and I arrived early, so I sat in the lobby on the floor he shares with 8-10 other State Reps in Columbus for about 1 ½ hours. During that time I saw about 20 different lobbyists come and go, all had meetings with the other 8-9 State Reps that share the same floor as Tom, NONE had meetings with Tom. I also had a chat with Tom’s assistant and it became pretty clear that the lobbyists KNEW they were wasting their time playing “politics as usual” with Tom, because Tom simply does not play that game.

While I was researching Jean Schmidt I reviewed about six years worth of the official record of the Ohio House. I wanted to see how Jean voted and I personally verified that she had in fact been a puppet for Bob Taft and Larry Householder and voted for every single tax increase and expanded government intervention proposed by her puppet masters. However, the thing I remember the most from reviewing these votes was the number of 98-1 votes in the record. The topics of legislation ranged from tax increases to expanding the reach of various state government agencies and programs, and I was amazed how many times a single vote was cast for NO TAX INCREASES and limited government. Tom had stood against the lobbyists, the Democrats and even his own Republican Party on so many occasions it was almost mind boggling. That’s when I thought to myself, “Wow, here is a politician that actually has a set of beliefs and sticks to them.”

When I actually sat down with Tom and had a talk ALL of my initial perceptions about his beliefs and character were reinforced. Talking with Tom was like sitting down and talking with one of my friends, he came across as a genuine and honest person, and I NEVER would have taken him for a politician if I did not already know what his job was. The other thing that stuck with me from the meeting was that Tom had to wrap it up about 3:30pm because he was going back to Cincinnati for the night, like he did EVERY night to spend time with his wife and kids. While the other State Reps spent the afternoon meeting with lobbyists and being wined and dined after hours, Tom was in his car driving back to Cincinnati and later at home enjoying his nightly quality family time.

“Change” has become a hop topic as of late. I KNOW that Tom Brinkman would bring a serious change to Congress by adding an individual that actually can be trusted, believes in the same type of government that our Founding Fathers believed in and will stand for the beliefs of the conservatives that overwhelmingly make up the base of Ohio-2. Jean Schmidt on the other hand (who likely will not even survive the general election if she does win the primary) is THE candidate for those in the controlling elite and lobbyists that want the “game” to go on as usual.

UPDATE: For anyone that may have missed it, this is one of the best websites I have found regarding this primary (be sure to watch the 2nd video if you have never seen it.)

Republicans in Ohio-2 beware: Jean Schmidt has NO CHANCE in the general election

By Nathan Noy

Let me paint a quick picture of what is going to happen this summer. Rolling Stone Magazine is going to give a great plug to help promote a film that is coming out that focuses on corruption in Ohio politics. The movie will almost certainly get significant traction and will have a major impact on the fall election if any of the featured individuals in the film are still candidates for political office.

Fact: As John Craig reported in the Cincinnati Enquirer I spent a few days with a Hollywood film crew in the fall of 2006.

Fact: My friend at Rolling Stone Magazine Matt Taibbi did a hilariously funny article about Jean Schmidt in November 2006 calling me a “classic Reagan-era Conservative.”

It is a virtual given that Matt will run another great piece this summer giving significant exposure to the aforementioned film. What did not get reported in the press was the purpose of the film: an in depth review of corruption in Ohio politics, focusing primarily on the likes of Tom Noe, Bob Ney, and Jean Schmidt.

I corresponded with the producers of the film this week and found out the release date is set for July 4, 2008. The ironic thing is that the time I spent with this film crew and producers actually cost me the endorsement of the Constitution Party in 2006. I had already wrapped up endorsements from the Reform Party and America First Party and I was informed that my relationship with the people from Hollywood had cost me the CP endorsement. It turns out the folks at the CP did some research and the producers of the film had strong ties to Michael Moore and the CP felt the film would essentially be a DCCC hit piece, I was skeptical of this at the time, but given what I know now, this in fact appears to be what we are in store for later this year.

I won’t spoil the film by divulging the gory details of what I gave the folks from Hollywood, but it can be safely assumed that the dirt I provided on Schmidt would rival the work of even the best investigative reporters. It was amazing how many people came out of the proverbial woodwork with information on Schmidt for me while I made my run in 2006, she has made more than a few enemies in her day.

I spent some quality time with the crew and they made it clear that my appearance in the film would be about Schmidt, not about me, but that is exactly what I wanted. After they finished with me they spent a day in Cincinnati with Jean Schmidt’s other greatest fan: Charles Foster Kane aka The Whistleblower. And if you doubt how much dirt I was able to provide on Schmidt you can rest assured that The Blower gave them enough dirt to make a dent in filling the Grand Canyon.

For those that still doubt Schmidt could have that much hanging out there consider that a person who is a sloppy enough liar to actually get publicly reprimanded by the OEC for a “reckless disregard for truth” has left more than just a few loose ends on her way up the food chain. Believe me when I say that not only will the movie paint Schmidt in a very similar light to Bob Ney, but it will also leave voters as likely to vote for Ney as they will Schmidt this fall. Also mind you that the aforementioned Ney and Noe are already doing time in the federal prison system, a place Schmidt may be headed as well if the proper authorities actually launch a few investigations after seeing the film.

The key thing in all this: everything and I mean EVERYTHING I gave these guys was 100% true. Jean Schmidt did it all, the fact that she was successful in covering it up and it finally will come back to haunt her is her own fault. When someone decides to go after a person as shady as Jean Schmidt it isn’t hard to build a strong case in a nanosecond as long as the proper stones are unturned.

So, Republicans in Ohio-2 you have the chance that the voters in Ohio-18 did not have in 2006. Imagine if the voters in OH-18 knew what they did about Ney before the primary and not after it? The seat would likely still be controlled by the Republican Party.

If Republicans want to keep this seat they MUST vote for Tom Brinkman. Oh, and by the way, Brinkman just happens to be the candidate of the two that actually voted against all of Bob Taft’s tax hikes. Brinkman happens to be the one with a clean conservative record who never bows to the special interests, and Brinkman happens to be the one that actually has an honest character. If Schmidt wins this primary, Republicans will regret it, especially as they watch a Democrat get sworn in next January.