Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
Michele Bachmann Refuses to Pay Employees Unless They Promise to Hide Illegal Activities
more from Hrafnkell Haraldsson
Americans should be asking themselves this weekend why Michele Bachmann (R-MN), who won re-election this past November as a member of the House of Representatives, is refusing to pay five of her staffers for the work they did helping her try to win the presidential nomination.
Salon reported Thursday,
Peter Waldron, her controversial former national field coordinator, told Salon the dispute started when former Iowa straw poll staffers refused to sign a nondisclosure agreement that would bar them from discussing any “unethical, immoral, or criminal activity” they witnessed on the campaign with police or reporters.
What kind of employer, save perhaps for the mob, asks an employee to sign a statement barring them from discussing “unethical, immoral, or criminal activity’? Just what kind of activities was Michele Bachmann engaged in during her failed presidential run?
It will be remembered that Bachmann’s campaign was a shoddy and poorly run affair. God apparently wanted her to be president but did not provide her with the requisite skills to see his will done. We can assume God did not tell her to lie, cheat, and steal, to accomplish that goal, though one does have to question the Almighty’s judgment if he picked Bachmann.
And it’s not simply her politics or her devotion to an aberrant form of Christianity. She did not pay her campaign workers. As Salon reminds us, in October, 2011, her New Hamphire organization deserted her and lack of pay was one of the reasons.
It’s not that Bachmann lacked the money. She has plenty of that – more than $2 million in her warchest and her last Personal Financial Disclosure puts her net worth between $1,300,000 and $2,800,000. So it’s not about the money.
Apparently, Bachmann thinks it’s a Christian virtue to pay those who do work on your behalf – unless they agree not to reveal what a thoroughly rotten person you are.
Waldron says that when negotiations with Bachmann Finance Chairman James Pollack broke down, he went public on Christian Newswire:
“Recently Mr. Pollack demanded that each unpaid staff member sign a non-disclosure agreement that prohibits any discussion of any criminal, moral, and/or unethical behavior witnessed during Mrs. Bachmann’s campaign in Iowa. In fact, Mr. Pollack insists that each staffer not speak to law enforcement and/or lawyers without first speaking with Mrs. Bachmann’s attorneys.”
Hard as it is to believe that any fundamentalist Christian would behave in an unethical manner, Americans, and Minnesotans in particular, should wonder what Bachmann feels she has to hide. One would think that Bachmann’s much-vaunted “Christian” ethics would require, even insist upon those in her employ reporting illegal activities wherever they saw them.
Afterall, we are assured: without the Bible and Ten Commandments, human morality is an impossibility.
Waldron said,
I feel a moral obligation to see that my Christian brothers and sisters are paid for worked performed in good faith. I’ve continually communicated by telephone and email with Mr. Pollack for 1 year but he broke every promise made to me to pay the staff. I appealed to Dr. Bachmann for help. I appealed to Representative Bachmann’s Chief of Staff Robert Boland to intercede with Mrs. Bachmann on behalf of her loyal Iowa staff – all of whom are married, all have children.
Moral obligation. Heard of that, Rep. Bachmann?
Apparently not, as Christian Newswire goes on to report that “Rep. Bachmann currently is a defendant in a lawsuit filed in Polk County, Iowa. And, the Urbandale, Iowa, police department is investigating the theft of confidential data from a staff member’s personal laptop computer and cover-up of the theft by her staff.”
Oh dear, oh dear.
As Waldron said, “It is sobering to think that a Christian member of Congress would betray her testimony to the Lord and the public by withholding earned wages from deserving staff.”
What the hell was going on in Iowa? She didn’t trust God to get it done for her and decided to tip the odds in her favor through less than savory means?
Salon updated their story to report that Pollack disputes Waldron’s charges, saying they are “false and inaccurate” though he does not refer to the non-disclosure agreement. It would probably violate his own to talk about it, given how unsavory the very idea of such an agreement is and all that it suggests.
Pollack, in true Republican fashion, blames the victim, saying, “Why Mr Waldren would be motivated to attempt to disparage the Congresswoman, the campaign, or fellow campaign members I can’t explain.”
Oh, I don’t know…I have a couple of ideas though: maybe 1) he thinks people should be fairly compensated for the work they do, an admittedly anti-Republican concept, and 2) thinks people should not be bound to lie for their employer when their employer is engaged in illegal and unethical activities.
Pollack’s claim that Bachmann has paid off 90 percent of her campaign debt hardly excuses her from paying all of it. Imagine telling a police officer, “Well, officer, I did stop at nine out of ten of those stop signs.”
Somehow, I think neither the police officer nor the courts would be impressed by your logic.
MSNBC points out that “Whether or not this particularly allegation is true, Bachmann certainly has a history of refusing to pay bills, having voting against raising the debt ceiling in 2011.”
Something is rotten in the state of Iowa, and in the state of Minnesota. It is time to demand of Michele Bachmann what that might be, and what she intends to do about it besides screwing honest people out of their fair and just compensation.
While she continues to call for President Obama to be impeached, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) is being i ...
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) renewed her push for Obama impeachment, while she is under investigation fo ...
What is it about extremist Christian Dominionist Republicans that makes you think Koch whore? Maybe ...
Michele Bachmann Who isn't investigating Michele Bachmann right now? That list would be shorter than the ...
A Michele Bachmann presidential campaign "faith organizer" was arrested for terrorism in Uganda and is h ...
Reynardine
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 6:53 pm
In fact, a contract to procure illegal conduct (such as either perjury or misprision of crimes) is unenforceable. The staff, having performed the lawful terms of their contracts, cannot be denied pay for refusing to agree to an illegal term. They are entitled to recover under several legal theories (and I foresee first-year law students finding this case in their contracts class)
Cc
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 4:28 pm
I Reeeeally hope this is true. But you know the court system… especially when Big ‘white’ connected money is involved.
djchefron
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 7:25 pm
I want to call her a grifter but we already knew that.Anyone with half a brain would say her whole religious spiel is a con.But what I want to know is WTF is she doing on the intelligence committee?
I know alcohol does terrible things to the brain Speaker Boner but really?COME ON MANNNNN….
John Sheets
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 8:58 pm
She is a Tea Bagger what do you expect?
She barely won and by only 500 votes. Had I been her opponent I would have demanded a recount.
Thank God she is only a congressman and can be removed in 2 years.
JazzTazz
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 12:27 pm
gerrymandering is how she got in! she is an ignorant piece of crap!
gsb
Jan. 14th, 2013 at 10:47 am
I live in Mn. and wonder also about her honesty,her christianity,no question she does not belong in the house.
I do not live in her district, thank God,lets hope in two years she, will be a dot in history,.
Beaglemom
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 8:24 am
I guess in the current GOP Michele Bachmann passes for “intelligent” and therefore qualifies for the committee.
Grasshopper
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 7:49 pm
That’s an old Palin trick, except Sarah pays off. Her pac refers to it as “postage” and Todd refers to it as “prostitution proceeds”. Guess you missed that one, eh Shelly? Does Marcus have that many little boys to pay off you’re going broke? Awwww. Too bad.
John Sheets
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 9:02 pm
Marcus likes the hard hat daddys.
Trouble is he can’t find any that are chubby chasers that are into the “row-ho for Beethoven with fat nelly old men.
mathazar
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 7:50 pm
I reckon orange will look good on Michele.
And I’m growing weary of seeing that (MN) after her name. This is the state that gave us Paul Wellstone! And the only state that never voted for a Reagan or a Bush!
gsb
Jan. 14th, 2013 at 10:50 am
hear, hear, I’m for that. Have always loved that about Mn .Not voting for Reagen.
Duane
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 8:19 pm
The non-disclosure agreement is illegal on its face.
First, you cannot forbid some one to reveal information regarding potentially illegal acts if the police question you about it. That is obstructing a police investigation, which is itself a crime punishable by fines and/or incarceration. If you lie to the police, that’s a crime, too. You also cannot tell the police that you can’t answer their questions without clearing it with some one else. You cannot demand to have an attorney present while you’re being interviewed by police unless you have yourself been arrested first.
Second, if you receive a subpoena from an attorney to be deposed with questions regarding illegal or unethical acts, you must show-up to answer those questions because a subpoena has the force of law behind it. You would be obligated, under penalty of perjury, to answer all questions put to you during the deposition. Failure to go to the deposition can result in your being charged with contempt.
As far as “immoral” acts, those are subjective. If you witnessed somebody cheating on their spouse or looking at porn on a computer, you could be legally bound not to reveal that kind of information to anyone.
But, actions that are illegal and/or unethical cannot legally be concealed by people who are aware of them from legitimate authorities. Refusing to answer such questions put to you by law enforcement authorities is not an option.
The former employees cannot legally sign such a contract because they would be agreeing to commit a crime by doing so. The Bachmann campaign is essentially asking the former employees to risk fines and/or imprisonment, which they cannot legally do.
Any contract wherein the two parties agree to commit a crime is not only unenforceable, it is illegal and the very act of signing such a contract is the crime of conspiracy.
Michele Bachmann is an attorney and her campaign is asking its former staff to break the law.
Irony can be pretty ironic,…
Shiva (Moderator)
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 8:26 pm
“But, actions that are illegal and/or unethical cannot legally be concealed by people who are aware of them from legitimate authorities. Refusing to answer such questions put to you by law enforcement authorities is not an option.”
that sent me into spasms of laughter. Certainly not at you, but at the very stupidity of signing an oath to not tell about illegal activities when its illegal to NOT tell about them
Good post
Reynardine
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 9:01 pm
Actually, if the pornography involved live child actors, or were a genuine (not simulated) snuff or rape episode, you would be obliged to divulge it if you knew or had reason to know what you were looking at. Not “Fritz the Cat,” though.
Mark Phillips
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 8:39 pm
The first illegal thing that they need to reveal? That bringing in a contract to sign AFTER receiving services doesn’t fly.
Reynardine
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 9:07 pm
Quite true. Contracts can be revised, extended, or added to with the consent of both parties, but when a party to the original contract has performed, they are owed the agreed-on consideration (in this case, their pay). To hold that back until they consent to an additional condition constitutes duress.
Beaglemom
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 8:26 am
Didn’t she graduate from a law school?
Shiva (Moderator)
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 8:48 am
Yes, tax lawyer I think
Reynardine
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 11:17 am
She got her J.D. from Oral Roberts University, so clearly, this sort of thing is proper if Gahd wants it.
Anne
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 9:05 pm
Michele Bachmann is a nasty piece of work who is a hypocrite, among other things. She rants against government-generated “entitlements” while feeding off the government trough like a pig going after slop. Now, she wants people to refrain from commenting about any unethical behavior they witnessed in return for her paying them for serving on her campaign. I thought she was just terminally stupid, but I see that her dishonesty and selfishness match her dumbness.
savageDOG
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 9:42 pm
this story should automatically create an investigation / questions by officials in Iowa and Michigan into any/all affairs of this “pillar of moral standards”, directed to all those unpaid former employees. Any up n coming DA can surely see his name in the headlines now. instant fame and success would draw the cannibals out of the GOP and teabaggers
inez
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 10:39 pm
they should colloborate and write a “tell all book”, i’d buy it. michelle needs to be exposed forwhat she is! evidently she is afraid of the outcome of truth telling. a couple of good journalists could unfold a possible cover up..maybe dr bachman can cleanse her as he supposedly can do with homosexuals.
Fredric
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 11:01 pm
“What kind of employer, save perhaps for the mob, asks an employee to sign a statement barring them from discussing “unethical, immoral, or criminal activity’?”
Scientology does. It’s known as “The Lisa Clause” which you can Google and get a copy of. This insane right wing Christian fascist has all the morality of the Scientology crime syndicate.
Barbara Jungbauer
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 11:08 pm
I’m a Minnesotan and of the opinion that Bachmann is as crooked as the day is long. She’s a lying, cheating, bigoted sleezebag married to a closet queen.
majii
Jan. 12th, 2013 at 11:38 pm
One of the ironies in this saga is that it is a group of homeschoolers that are suing Bachmann. She’s a thief, a liar, and a fake Christian who knows she’s violated the law and is now trying to gag the witnesses. I wish I were one of these people she owed because I’d be on every news network spilling my guts, telling everything I know about her and her misdeeds.
Cc
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 4:34 pm
And I’d even buy their book and pay to see the movie…oh, yeah, money is flowing here!
djchefron
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 12:17 am
OK Mr.split personality you got us.Now prove it.Links would be helpful.
Brigita Petrutis
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 5:45 am
Finally, a scandal of enough legal proportion to catapult her out of public office.
SinghX
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 7:29 am
…” Waldron said, “It is sobering to think that a Christian member of Congress would betray her testimony to the Lord and the public by withholding earned wages from deserving staff.”…
NO! Ces’ne pas vrais! O clutch the pearls, girl (Marcus)! Miz Mee-Me, Minnie-sota’s prize waspette, is in the doo-doo…not only with the law, but with the flock. Tacky, tacky, tacky…ummm-Umm! Somebody better tell her those pom-poms she shakes around to keep evil spirits away aren’t going to help her on this one!
(“sobering” he say…Just when are these people going to wake up? Makes you just wanna slap somebody!)
Mark
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 12:25 pm
Don’t pay…. no contract… sell the story.
Rylex
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 2:04 pm
Reads like a radically liberal smear piece. Dragging God into it was unnecessary, and discounts this article from being used in constructive cross-aisle debates. You have penned what is more or less liberal leisure reading, as no conservative would sit through an article of this obviously biased tone. 2/10 would not link to friends.
Shiva (Moderator)
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 2:34 pm
You dont know a thing about Bachmann do you?
TigerLily
Jan. 14th, 2013 at 11:09 am
Rylex is as empty headed and ignorant as the very immoral bachmann he tries to justify and obviously defends and more obviously is a FOX viewing moron. Please sir…proceed making a complete fool of yourself on this blog.
Hrafnkell Haraldsson
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 3:29 pm
I brought God into it, Rylex? Did you read the article? Waldron brought God into it. Please read before commenting next time.
majii
Jan. 14th, 2013 at 9:00 pm
It was Waldman, Bachmann’s own former national field coordinator, who introduced Christianity into the issue in respect to Bachman: “It is sobering to think that a Christian member of Congress would betray her testimony to the Lord and the public by withholding earned wages from deserving staff.”
Good reading comprehension skills are essential to understanding the written word. You may not like the information that is revealed about Bachmann in this post, but you cannot logically say that it is liberals criticizing Bachmann’s behavior and Christianity, not when it is a former member of her campaign–unless you are willing to lie on behalf of someone you like.
Alex
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 2:22 pm
That is very messed up that she did that, but this article is out to destroy her. I am a democrat, but you can see just by the picture they included in this page that they are demonizing her. Literally, she looks like a demon. I don’t like her, but that disgusts me. I know republicans do the same thing, too. I wish that it would cease, but we are far from a perfect world…
TigerLily
Jan. 14th, 2013 at 11:11 am
Alex.. Rylex clearly fallen from the same tree. you better hope you get paid by bachman…clearly you are bought and paid for
majii
Jan. 14th, 2013 at 9:05 pm
If telling the truth about someone and using direct quotes and accurate pictures of them is “destroying” him/her, let the destroying begin. I look upon this article as disseminating accurate information about who/what Bachmann really is. If revealing this information destroys her career, so be it. She shouldn’t try to force those she owes money to to sign a non-disclosure agreement in order to get paid. They did the work. She should pay them. If there is any wrongdoing on the part of anyone, it’s on Bachmann’s part.
JT
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 3:02 pm
“Hard as it is to believe that any fundamentalist Christian would behave in an unethical manner,”
Hahaha, that was a good one. You got a chuckle out of me with that, bravo.
Brian Loudermilch
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 3:23 pm
How Stupid Can a Person End up Being ?
Let’s ALL Watch Michele Bachmann So We can Find Out !
Teh Stupid ! – It Burns My Eyes !
FrIosneks
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 5:00 pm
Shades of the “loyalty oaths” during the McCarthy era of the 1950′s and the agreements that had to be signed during Dubya’s presidency that people would behave at rallies where he appeared or be confined to “Free Speech Zones” so he couldn’t be heckled.
Jane Heal
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 5:33 pm
This is EXACTLY the problem I have with organized religion and fundamental Christianity, you can’t trust them. ha ha.
SHEREEN GREENE
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 7:45 pm
She IS the mob. And they voted for her. Can’t wait to see some of that “The Departed” action going on between them.
David
Jan. 13th, 2013 at 11:32 pm
Why are y’all jealous of Michele Bachmann. She would have been a much better choice than what we have currently, but y’all already had to know that.
TigerLily
Jan. 14th, 2013 at 12:05 pm
David .. why do you RW people always think we’re jealous. Jealous of what? Jealous that we do not have the level of OBSTRUCTIONISTS on the left that you have on the right? THERE IS NOTHING TO BE JEALOUS ABOUT! Am I supposed to be jealous because I can’t lie cheat and steal and use God’s name like this woman so blatantly does for monetary wealth? Am I supposed to be that stupid as to be jealous of a woman that is so immoral in every sense of the word and just ignore her bigotry too? This woman is a bigger grifter than sarah the palin. And I know bachmann stole that election because there is no way there are that many ignorant people in Min. The RW constituency seems to want thee most uneducated crazy moronic people as their reps. Why? I will never know. I would never admit I was a repub today. Way too embarassing. I have never seen such uncivility in a party as the GOP. AND NO, BOTH PARTIES ARE NOT DOING IT. Everytime they get caught in something so outrageous–which is daily–they right away say well both sides do it. NO WE DON’T. But I hope you leaders continue your insane policies because all of you ARE OUT including your ding bat bachmann in 2014. THE GOP IS FINISHED. Thank you God. See? there really is a God for those who believe in the real one not the one used by the GOP for monetary gain and dumbing down their constituency.
majii
Jan. 14th, 2013 at 9:15 pm
What motivates me to oppose Bachmann isn’t jealousy, it’s anger. I’m angry that some Americans have allowed her to lie her way into Congress. I’m angry that they continue to pay her $174,000 + benefits of our hard earned money when she hasn’t had one bill she’s written passed in 6 years of being in Congress. I’m angry because she takes more days off than any member of the House and still gets paid with some of my tax money. I’m angry because some Americans allow themselves to be manipulated by the lies, conspiracy theories, and insane propaganda she sells. Bachmann is one of America’s top grifters because she has produced nothing for the money and benefits she’s received from us and she uses Christianity to convince gullible Americans that she’s right, when she’s never right about anything. Death panels? Bachmann was wrong. Autism? She was wrong. The debt ceiling? She was wrong again. Obamacare? Bachmann was wrong about this, too. Huma Abedin? Bachmann was wrong about this, also.
Rooster
Jan. 14th, 2013 at 10:36 am
Seems like a pretty standard agreement to me. The clause does not forbid anyone from revealing criminal activity, it simply requires they notify Bachman’s counsel before doing so. Taken further, I suspect you’ll see language speaking to subpoenaed information as well.
Actually, it a standard legal phrase used in most, if not all, non-disclosure agreements. I suspect if the entire agreement were made available, your readership would fully understand the context of the statement…but then there wouldn’t be a story, would there?
The only thing Bachman did incorrectly was she didn’t require the the agreement as a prerequisite of working on her campaign.