PART 1 - Behind the Buckeye Curtain: Ohio's Problems are a result of the Ohio Republican Party losing its Moral Compass.
With the HB6 scandal still fresh in the Public's mind and a State Teachers Retirement System debacle that is unfolding - we can see why this illegal activity is tolerated. A lack of Ethics!
Did Ohio Republicans get our just Desserts in 2023 for bearing False Witness?
It’s no secret that politics can get a little dirty, but when it gets downright dishonest, it’s like finding a lump of coal in your Christmas stocking when you were hoping for a toy truck. In the case of the race for Ohio's 32nd House District between Bob Young and Matt Shaughnessy, we've got a classic case of a political mudslide.
Here's the scenario: The Ohio Republican Party took an illegally obtained 20-year-old police report and, without even batting an eye, distorted it to make a completely false accusation against Democratic candidate Matt Shaughnessy. They claimed he beat his wife and plastered images of a battered and bruised woman on campaign literature. Only, the woman in those images wasn't his wife. Not only was this misleading, but it was also a direct attack on Shaughnessy's character and family. It was also an attack on his livelihood as a lawyer.
I don’t mind at all in calling out Democrats - but you don’t lie, cheat, and steal to win - because if you do you are no better than those that you are running against. Creating a false impression of someone is most certainly bearing witness. I cringe when I see this type of campaigning because it causes everyday Republicans to lose respect for the party and become ashamed of how the party operates.
But here's the real kicker. Shaughnessy, being an attorney, didn't take this lying down. He filed a libel lawsuit that not only cost the Ohio Republican Party time but also plenty of money to defend itself against his claims (more money was spent on defending the ORP’s reprehensible behavior than what was spent on defending Ohio from abortion on-demand, issue 1). The police report that the Republican party got its hands on clearly stated that there was no sign of bruising or redness on Shaughnessy’s wife, and guess what? No charges were filed. No one was arrested.
The irony of all this is that shortly after Bob Young won his seat, he went on a drunken rampage, assaulting his wife and her brother and was arrested. If that wasn't enough, he violated his wife’s protection order and got rearrested. It's like the pot calling the kettle black, only this time, the kettle wasn't even on the stove.
Now, I don't know about you, but I'm not okay with the Ohio Republican Party—or any party for that matter—spreading falsehoods to win an election. It's one thing to point out the flaws of your opponent when they're genuine. It's another to manipulate the truth and use deceit to sway voters. When you start crossing those lines, you're not just playing a dirty game; you're eroding the very foundation of democracy.
It makes you wonder if all the scandals the Ohio Republican Party has faced over the last 30 years are just part of some cosmic joke, or maybe a not-so-subtle hint from above that it's time to clean up our act. I mean, if you spend too long in the slime, you start to forget what it's like to walk on solid ground.
But it doesn't have to be this way. We, as a party, have a duty to act with ethics and morality. That means no more bearing false witness, no more smear campaigns, and no more bending the truth to fit a political agenda. What we need is a rule that says the Ohio Republican Party won't spend money on creating negative campaigns against fellow Republicans or running smear ads against other campaigns.
Negative campaigns should be defined as advertisements that focus more on tearing down an opponent rather than building up the candidate. Smear ads? They're the ones that twist the truth or outright lie to make someone look bad. If you're taking things out of context or just making stuff up, that's not how you win elections—that's how you lose your soul. We all suffer when dirty campaigning is utilized. Who wants to run for office when they can be assured their name will be dragged through the mud? The unwarranted mudslinging is a self-fulfilling prophecy. When parties resort to such reprehensible behavior they get less than virtuous candidates to run for office. We all suffer with less than virtuous candidates.
Remember as a member of the State Central Committee - the committee puts it name on supporting candidates and then either allows them to act unethically and indignantly or holds their candidates to standard of conduct up as something to be admired from an ethical and moral perspective.
So, let's put a stop to this nonsense and get back to what really matters: electing leaders who can stand on their own merit without having to drag their opponents through the mud. Because when it comes down to it, if you have to lie to win, maybe you're in the wrong game.
Connecticut Cash - how the Ohio GOP illegally washes that Dirty Money?
Welcome back, folks, to another episode of “How the Sausage Gets Made” with me, your host who isn’t afraid to dig into the gritty details other Republicans shy away from. Why? Because I want the Ohio Republican Party to be run morally, ethically, and lawfully. Today, we’re turning our collective eyes towards unethical and illegal activity so twisted it’d make George Takei look straight (Star Trek reference), and it involves the Ohio Republican State Central Committee, loads of money, a Democrat, and some shady transactions that smell fishier than a tuna sandwich on a hot summer day.
Now, let’s get one thing straight—this isn’t just a simple tale of political donations; it’s a masterclass in what I’d call the dark arts of deception, disingenuity, propaganda, and hiding campaign finances from the State Central Committee.
Picture this: in 2023, when the Ohio Republican Party should have been safeguarding its coffers like a mother hen as the mid terms were the following year, they instead decided to make an expenditure of $35,000, sending it over to the Connecticut Republican Party. What’s more baffling? This hefty sum eclipses what the Ohio Republican Party spent on opposing key issues like combating abortion on-demand (from what we can confirm the party only spent a little over $16,000 opposing issue 1) by two times— a priority the Ohio Republican Party still claims to hold dear. Just not dear enough to spend any substantial time or money on the right to protect innocent life.
Let’s keep in mind - Since 2023, when the party did not have enough money to save babies, the Party suddenly, in 2024, has magically become so flush with so much cash it allowed Republican funds to be used to attack fellow Republicans in a style reminiscent of the reprehensible attacks on Democrat Matt Shaughnessy. The Republican State Central Committee sat on its collective hands and allowed its auxiliary legislative fund, the Ohio House Republican Alliance (OHRA) fund, to spend $3.1 million in the primary election of 2024 to support the campaigns of incumbent Republicans that support pro-abortion Democrat causes. All this spending by the Ohio Speaker of the House was accomplished with the aid of Republican State Central Committee Chairman Alex Triantafilou who refused to take any significant action to stop the OHRA fund from being raided and led efforts to ensure the now infamous Blue 22 were not disaffiliated from the Republican Party.
But just like a Ronco commercial - wait, there’s more! Just when you thought this couldn’t get any murkier, enter John David Kelsey of Old Lyme, Connecticut. This generous gentleman donated a whopping $40,000 a few days before the Ohio Republican Party made a donation to the Connecticut Republican Party. Keep in mind the Ohio Republican Party made that donation after Kelsey maxed out his contributions back home in Connecticut to the Connecticut Republican Party so there was no legal way for Kelsey to donate to the Connecticut Republican Party. Coincidence? Well if you think so, I have some ocean front property in Arizona to sell you.
And to add insult to injury, there’s no record of this $35,000 transaction on the Ohio Secretary of State’s website - but there is on the Federal Election Commissions website. If that’s not suspicious, I don’t know what is. This activity coming from a party that screamed bloody murder when outside interests interfered in Ohio Elections on Issue 1. How is the Ohio Republican Party not interfering in Connecticut’s elections?
So, what’s really going on here? It’s simple: this smells like a classic case of interstate money laundering, dressed up in a suit and tie. The Ohio Republican Party wasn’t just redistributing funds; they were, as far as reasonable people could tell - helping Mr. Kelsey circumvent Connecticut’s campaign finance laws for a cool profit. And guess what? Members of the Ohio Republican State Central Committee never approved this transaction—talk about a rogue operation!
Now, I’ve been around the political block, and I’ve seen all sorts of dirty tricks, but this? This takes the cake. In other States, rather than circle the wagon and taking the party down with leadership - the leadership would be cleansed (fired and the party would work with investigators to expose the corruption.) The Ohio Revised Code is clear as day about these shenanigans - which the FBI and FEC call “conduit contributions.” Engaging in deception, fraud, or misappropriation at this level and using the party as the middle man for these funds? All big no-nos that do not allow you to pass go, go straight to jail, and receive a felony with a cherry on top. And yet, here we are, staring down a $5,000 profit that the Ohio Party made off this unethical and legally questionable transaction.
It’s not just about the money, folks. It’s about integrity, transparency, and playing by the rules. These are the principles that should guide any political operation, and when they’re thrown out the window, we all lose—Republicans, Democrats, and everyone in between. This isn’t a partisan issue; it’s a matter of right and wrong.
So, where do we go from here? It’s time for a serious cleanup. This isn’t just a one-man job; it’s going to take a concerted effort from all involved to restore trust and ensure these kinds of underhanded tactics are left in the past where they belong. The Ohio Republican State Central Committee needs to come clean, open the books, and let the sunlight be the best disinfectant.
What is the Law?
let's break down some of the specific sections of the Ohio Revised Code that appear to have been violated based on the questionable financial maneuvers described:
Ohio Revised Code 2913.01 - This section defines deception and fraud. It specifically details that "deception" means knowingly deceiving another or causing another to be deceived by any false or misleading representation or by withholding information. The curious absence of the $35,000 transaction from the Ohio Secretary of State’s campaign finance information webpage might fall under this definition.
Ohio Revised Code 2913.02 - This is the statute concerning theft, which stipulates that no person, with purpose to deprive the owner of property or services, shall knowingly obtain or exert control over either the property or services by deception among other means. The potential misrepresentation of fund allocation and the failure to disclose this transaction could constitute a "theft" by deception.
Ohio Revised Code 2921.41 - Concerning "theft in office", this section makes it illegal for any public or party official to commit any theft offense when the property or service involved is owned by the state, a political party, or is part of a political campaign fund.
Ohio Revised Code 3517.03 - This regulation states that the State Central Committee is the controlling committee of the party, not the chairman. Any unauthorized actions that bypass the committee’s approval for financial transactions may violate this code, especially in regard to how financial decisions should be made within a party.
Ohio Revised Code 1333.63 - Regarding misappropriation, this code allows for the collection of damages in cases of misappropriation, which might apply here if funds were used without proper authorization, especially in the scenario where funds were shifted in ways that benefited individuals rather than approved party objectives.
In the context of our discussion, it seems these sections of the Ohio Revised Code were not only disregarded but potentially blatantly violated to facilitate transactions that might conceal the origins and intended purposes of political donations, leading to a potential case of money laundering and misappropriation of funds. The legal implications here could be significant, not only for the individuals directly involved but also for the integrity of the party’s operations in the state of Ohio. These actions undermine trust and transparency, fundamental to democratic processes and the rule of law.
No Checks on Paduchik - a tale of willing Accomplices.
The actions of former Chairman Bob Paduchik stand out as a particularly glaring example of power run amok. As we peel back the layers of this sordid affair, it’s essential to understand the gravity of the missteps and outright violations that occurred under Paduchik’s watch.
Bob Paduchik wielded his authority as Chairman of the State Central Committee with a cavalier disregard for the bylaws set forth to govern the party’s financial integrity. The crux of the issue lies in his unilateral decision-making, especially his controversial use of party funds—actions that raise serious legal and ethical questions.
According to the Ohio Revised Code 3517.03, the State Central Committee is the controlling entity within the party structure, not the chairman. The purpose of this crucial piece of legislation underscores that all financial decisions should undergo rigorous scrutiny and approval by the central committee to ensure transparency and accountability. However, under Paduchik's leadership, an unsettling pattern emerged: the bypassing of these established protocols to funnel party resources towards Paduchik preferred candidates that had not been endorsed and personal projects, often without the requisite endorsement or approval from the State Central Committee.
The allegations against Paduchik include misappropriating over a million dollars of party funds. This was not just a breach of internal trust but a violation of Ohio Revised Code 2921.41, which explicitly prohibits misappropriation/theft in office. If these funds were indeed used without proper authorization, it constitutes a misappropriation that not only undermines the legal foundations of the party’s operations but also erodes the moral high ground from which the party is expected to operate.
Even more troubling is the apparent indifference to the legal bindings of bylaws. Paduchik’s actions, as described, suggest a belief that tradition or personal authority could override legally binding governance rules—an attitude that can lead to significant legal repercussions and public backlash. This notion of tradition trumping bylaws is not only fundamentally flawed but also legally untenable, as Ohio Revised Code 3517.03 makes no allowances for such discretionary interpretations as Bob Paduchik has claimed.
This part of our history serves as a stark reminder of the dangers of centralized power unchecked by the democratic safeguards meant to prevent such abuses. It illustrates not just a failure of one individual but a systemic loophole that allowed significant sums of money to be handled in ways that could potentially skirt the edges of legality.
Former Treasurer Johnson and former Chairman Paduchik have communicated to ORSCC members that the funds in the State Candidates Fund do not belong to the ORSCC but rather to the candidates who raise money into the fund. The question is since the former chairman freely admitted that it is illegal for the party to earmark funds going into the State Candidates fund (because that would circumvent Ohio’s Campaign finance laws and maximum contribution laws) the party
However, a transaction of $221,773.24 on July 1st, 2023, was transferred from the State Candidates Fund to the ORSCC general fund in the first half of 2023. This prompts questions about potential miscommunication to ORSCC members, raising concerns about whether funds raised for State Candidates were redirected for other purposes. As former treasurer David Johnson made the case that the funds was not the Central Committees money and that the committee is just the middleman and that the party earmarks these funds to be redistributed to the candidates - helping them to avoid State Campaign Finance Laws of maximum contributions..
Understanding the allocation of funds in the State Candidates Fund is crucial for State Central Committee members, especially when making decisions such as supporting or opposing issues like Issue 1 last November.
Former Treasurer Johnson mentioned that $189,000 was spent on defending the State Central Committee from a lawsuit, with his last claims being over $200,000 supposedly paid to Bricker and Eckler. However, a review of expenditures from the Secretary of State’s website shows no funds paid to Bricker and Eckler from the General Fund in 2021, 2022, or 2023. This inconsistency prompts the question of whether the Secretary of State records are accurate, if Johnson's statement was misleading, or if there is another explanation. Has the party failed to pay this bill? If they failed to pay the bill would this be an in-kind contribution by Bricker and Eckler? Another question - why spend $200,000 on such a “poorly constructed case” as Johnson explains - there are much more affordable and competent attorneys?
Additionally, there's an inquiry into the reluctance to allow ORSCC members to view the books and transactional data. The question arises: if there is nothing to hide, why spend $200,000 to prevent members from accessing this information? Former Treasurer Johnson's assertion that the Secretary of State audits everything does not align with the uncertainty surrounding the claimed $200,000 expenditure to Bricker and Eckler. Instead of internal conflicts, allocating resources to proactively address crucial issues, such as defeating Issue 1 and protecting the unborn (The Ohio Republican Party spent 10X times more money on preventing State Central Committee members from examining the financials than they did on issue 1), could have been a more constructive use of party funds. The party's commitment to transparency and financial accountability comes into question with these discrepancies.
This goes to getting fair and accurate Treasurer reports that reflect the true financial position of the ORSCC. The basic reports that State Central Committee members should receive as members of the State Central Committee are an “Income Statement”, “Balance Sheet”, “Statement of Functional Expenses”, “Fundraising Campaign Performance”, “Change in Assets”, “Expenses: In-kind Contribution Detail Report”, “Employee and Independent Contractor Function and Delegation Report” and “Statement of Cashflows”
As we consider the implications of the Paduchik era, it’s crucial for the Ohio Republican State Central Committee to reassess its oversight mechanisms. Ensuring that all financial activities strictly adhere to both state law and internal regulations is not merely about compliance but about restoring faith in a system shaken by misdeeds. The party’s ability to govern itself judiciously is fundamental to its credibility and, by extension, its capacity to govern others.
The Zanesville Aviation Transaction: High-Flying Expenses and Hidden Agendas
A particularly opaque instance in the tangled narrative of the Ohio Republican State Central Committee’s financial dealings involves a payment to Zanesville Aviation. This transaction, as eyebrow-raising as it is, encapsulates the unchecked liberties taken with party funds and raises profound concerns about the underlying intentions and accountability within the party's ranks.
On December 28, 2023, a peculiar expenditure emerged—an extraordinary $19,746.00 was paid to Zanesville Aviation for what was labeled as a private chartered flight. Now, the timing and nature of this expense are curious for several reasons. Firstly, this transaction occurred in an off-year, right after the general election, a period typically characterized by reduced political activity and, consequently, expenditures. What then, could justify such a lavish expense?
Scuttlebutt around the drinking fountain in Columbus believes that this was a trip to Florida with Chairman of the State Central Committee (Alex Triantafilou), Speaker of the House Jason Stephens, State Representative John Cross, State Representative Jay Edwards, State Representative DJ Swearingen, and a blonde-haired woman believed to be Democrat minority leader Allison Russo. Until the Ohio Republican Party proves otherwise - I am going with this assertion.
Upon digging deeper, the layers of this mystery begin to unravel. No record of this extraordinary payment appears on the Ohio Secretary of State website, a discrepancy that throws up red flags regarding transparency and compliance with state campaign finance laws. The absence of documentation and the secretive nature of the expenditure suggest a deliberate attempt to keep this transaction under wraps.
The rationale provided by the party, when pressed, does little to assuage concerns. Allegedly, the unofficial answer was for a flight that was chartered for a private golf outing fundraiser in Florida that was arranged by Ginni Ragan for the Ohio Speaker of the House (Ginni Ragan is indeed a large contributor to Speaker of the House Stephens—a statement that, if true, only serves to muddy the ethical waters further. Utilizing party funds for an event that seems to serve limited public or political interest challenges the boundaries of acceptable use of such resources and raises questions about personal benefits derived from donated funds - especially when it involves the Democrat minority leader.
This transaction not only flouts Ohio law, which stipulates strict controls and transparent reporting for party expenditures but also violates the spirit of Ohio Revised Code 2913.01 and 2913.02 concerning fraud and misappropriation of funds. The non-disclosure of this payment on required public platforms can be perceived as an attempt to deceive or prevent information acquisition, actions that might meet the legal definition of fraud.
The Zanesville Aviation episode is emblematic of a larger issue at play within the Ohio Republican State Central Committee—a cavalier attitude toward financial stewardship and an apparent disregard for the protocols designed to safeguard the integrity of political financing. It underscores a troubling pattern of behavior that prioritizes convenience and personal agendas over legal and ethical mandates.
As we continue to peel back the layers on these transactions, it is imperative for all involved to remember that each dollar spent by a political committee is not just a reflection of political priorities but also of the trust placed by contributors and constituents alike. Missteps such as the Zanesville Aviation transaction not only jeopardize this trust but also threaten the foundational transparency and accountability mechanisms essential to democratic governance.
For the Ohio Republican State Central Committee, it’s high time to land back on solid ground, to reconcile these financial discrepancies, and ensure such deviations do not recur. This incident serves as a stern reminder that even the most high-flying plans must be grounded in ethical practices and transparent operations.
Does the Ohio Secretary of State know how to perform an Audit?
From all outwardly appearances - there is a great and reasonable perception when it comes to Ohio’s campaign finance reporting - that Secretary of State Frank LaRose could be helping to facilitate deception within the Ohio Republican Party’s finances.
The Secretary of State’s data - utilizing basic auditing techniques does not add up. Not only do FEC records not match Ohio SOS records as described above - but the records do not match between the party and candidate campaigns of its own candidates.
When the books are as off and inconsistent as they are - it has been my experience that someone is cooking the books to such a degree as to not be able to hide the fraud and corruption.
In closing, remember this: where there’s smoke, there’s usually fire. And in Ohio, it seems like someone’s been playing with matches. Let’s put out the flames, hold the guilty parties accountable, and ensure that our political landscape isn’t tarnished by those who believe they can operate above the law. Thanks for tuning in, and remember, we’re not just watching—they’re watching us, too. Let’s keep them honest.
Great article