TKC EXCLUSIVE!!! FORMER KANSAS CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATE MICHAEL FLETCHER REBUKES CITY HALL ETHICS CHARGES!!!

Michael Fletcher was part of one of the most hotly contested City Council Primaries of the last election cycle.

After a stunning legal battle with Clinton Adams and Sharon Sanders Brooks, Fletcher's name was taken off the ballot. Jermaine Reed eventually won the office and became the youngest member of The City Council.

Allegations of ethics violations quickly followed Mr. Fletcher regarding campaign finance rules and regs.

Here is Mr. Fletcher's response wherein he CALLS OUT:

City Attorney Galen Beaufort . . .

Members of the Missouri Judiciary . . .

And he notes that the Ethics Investigation is nothing more than "a fishing expedition" and represents fault in the current City Charter.

Most City Hall debates rarely provide as skillful of a examination of local, political life as this note . . .

READ THE RESPONSE FROM MR. FLETCHER FOR YOURSELF:

Mr. Greenway,

I am in receipt of your June 8, 2011 correspondence, which you maintain is a hard copy of a previous email.

In the June 8th correspondence you incorrectly represent that you have attached a "May 8, 2011 letter" wherein you allegedly "requested a written and signed response regarding" whether certain campaign contributions were appropriate.

You did not, however, attach any such letter nor have I received one.

Perhaps, this is an oversight or perhaps it is yet another attempt by you and the City to present misleading facts which you hope you can convince the City prosecutor to rely upon.

I assume you understand that each correspondence from you and the City is going to be used in any subsequent legal proceeding to show that the actions of your office are thinly covered attempts to mislead me and/or the public. As such, you should refrain from making representations that are false, like claiming you have enclosed a letter that you did not enclose.

I have repeatedly demanded that you provide 1) a written document that shows the specific allegation that you claim supports your contention that I or my treasurer or more appallingly that individuals who have no way or reason to know the contributions limits for KCMO have committed criminal offenses; 2) to produce the evidence which you claim supports your criminal and civil allegations and 3) the legal basis upon which you contend the City Charter dealing with campaign contributions is not preempted by state and federal law.

To date, less than ten days from the date that you and the City allege that you will produce facts that support your--as you have threatened--contention that the Ethics Committee can "charge" me or my supporters with a crime, you have refused to produce any of these requested materials.

In essence you and the City are refusing to comply with the most basic and elementary aspects of procedural and substantive due process in the hopes of trapping me or my supporters in some governmental maze thus allowing you to misrepresent the facts concerning the law which changes based on who it is that is alleged to have violated it.
In your May 11, 2011 letter you demand that I provide information concerning the "contributions shown below." Specifically you ask about two in the amount of $1,500.

Since even the newest version of the City Charter that you allege I have violated allows for a $1,500 contribution in both the general and primary elections, you have no basis whatsoever to be asking these questions other than providing even more proof that you and the city are engaged in nothing more than a fishing expedition.

However, because I want the citizens of KCMO to know the extent to which you and the Committee are wiling to go to further your retaliatory actions, once you have provided me the information that I have requested, repeatedly, so that I can respond to your allegations without than allowing you and the City to then change your allegations, I will be more than happy to respond. But I will not allow you to change your claims based on my response.

So please tell me the specific allegations, the evidence that you believe supports it and the legal basis from which you conclude the U.S. Supreme Court and the Missouri Supreme Court are inferior court's to the Kansas City, Missouri City Charter and I will immediately respond to your inquiry, if for no other reason to save the taxpayers of KCMO from the City wasting even more of our tax dollars based on the legal opinions and personal motivations of Galen Beaufort--who THIS YEAR has cost the City nearly $7,000,000, excluding the loss of services for his appearing on behalf of the totally nude stripper who is not his wife nor, assumedly, on the City payroll.

Because I believe the Charter provision at issue clearly violates the 1st Amendment right of free speech and is therefore unconstitutional, I am demanding that you forward the legal opinion that upon information and belief Galen Beaufort has provided to this commission so that I can immediately provide you legal briefing that shows Mr. Beaufort is distorting his legal analysis to further his retaliation against me personally for, among other issues, demanding that he be terminated for denying or defrauding the KCMO taxpayers the value of his services for which we are entitled based on his salaried position when he 1) provided free legal services to a totally nude stripper while he was supposedly working for KCMO (please confirm that Mr. Beaufort's employment with KCMO does not allow for him to conduct personal business while being paid by the City) and 2) when he accompanied Sharon Brooks to the KC Call and gave the impression that the City would take legal action against the Call based on their having done a story about, shocks of all shocks, Sharon Sanders Brooks failing to do her job on behalf of the 3rd District.

Also, I intend to produce witnesses who will testify that Ms. LaJuana Counts maintained a personal and professional relationships with members of the Fedeal District Court for the Western District of Missouri. To that end, it is my understanding that Ms. Counts solicited letters of recommendation and or support from members of the WDMO when she sought to be appointed to a judgeship at both the state and city level--I believe on six (6) different occasions. I am demanding that Ms. Counts produce not only the letters she received in support from members of the WDMO but also from each member of the Missouri judiciary. These letters will show that Ms. Counts is beholden to these people and thus is willing to sell out and compromise the interests of the African American and Latino community to please the Caucasian judges who will not support her in the future if she refuses to go along with their efforts at continuing to deny communities of color appropriate PIAC funding, TIF projects and which accept a murder rate within the African American and Latino community which would never been accepted in other communities.

As I am sure you are aware, the "appearance of impropriety" is what mandates recusal and these letters and request for letters from people with whom I have sued along with the witnesses that I will produce on the 22nd will leave no question that Ms. Counts' actions in this matter are carried out based on the demand from the federal judges who like Gary Fenner and Ortrie Smith, who demand that NO African American lawyer actually stand up for their community and is exchange for a modicum of hope that one day she will be appointed to a judgeship. I know most people would be shocked to know that an African American woman attorney would agree to sell out her own community in the hopes of getting a municipal judgeship, but this is exactly what Ms. Counts has historically proven a willingness to do.

My suit against the very people Ms. Counts relies upon for any hope that she can continue to support herself in the public sector is currently being litigated in the 9th Circuit. The fact that Ms. Counts cannot be appointed to a judgeship without placating these individuals is all the more obvious now, since she has previously been rejected six (6) times, thus making it imperative that Ms. Counts does whatever she can to please the very people who I have sued in federal and state courts, i.e., ignore binding state and federal precedent in an effort to damage me which has the result of scaring other minority candidates who seek office from standing against judges who openly brag about their acts of racial discrimination.

Please immediately provide these letters and correspondence so that I can produce my motion to recuse prior to this hearing so the community can know exactly why Ms. Counts would advocate punishing an African American candidate who promised to fight for black people and brown people.

Again I CANNOT wait to attend this hearing to expose the outright fraud that you and your committee have relied upon and/or created in the hopes of your belief that you can intimate me by your threats of being "charged" with a crime or fined.

As I have repeatedly stated, your premise in this matter inherently relies on your belief that every Missouri state judge that this case comes before is corrupted by their personal and racial animus and will be willing to ignore the constitution of Missouri and of the U.S. in order to punish me.

I have zero doubt that there are plenty of Missouri judges who will and have violated their duties imposed under the constitution in an effort to try to punish me, however, I do believe that there are judges in Missouri who will not be corrupted by the demands of the federal judiciary and who believe in the constitution, but I admit that I could be wrong on this point.

But more importantly, as I have proved throughout my adult life, I will never allow the threat of racial discrimination to cause me to turn my back on my community.

Therefore, please forward the information I have requested over the last two months so that the public will know exactly why their time and money has been wasted.

Michael Fletcher
#######