Today could be an interesting day when it comes to “The FOIA War”. Yesterday I had this email exchange with Terri Pfister, a key figure in the upcoming “Independent Investigation”. As you can see Ms. Pfister states she will have more information for me today regarding my FOIA request. Let’s all hope it isn’t a claim that all further records are exempt from public disclosure based upon the ongoing investigation exemption to the release of public records.


Insert 1


Insert 2



Insert 3


Another interesting thing happening today is this Editorial appearing in the Spokesman Review. The reason it is interesting is because Ms. Pfister has still not advised me whether or not 3rd parties, which would include the Spokesman Review have objected to release of the public records I am seeking.


“Bender”, whomever that might be, pretty well sums things up in his comment to the Editorial. Bender’s comment was of course deleted the second someone at the SR noticed it. I wonder whom “Bender” actually is? 🙂

Insert 5





Terri Pfister did supply me yesterday with copies of the additional Public Records Requests made by Nick Deshais of the Spokesman Review beyond his August 18th request which were mentioned by Addy Hatch in the SR Comments Section. Here are links to what I have received so far.



There are some things I find interesting about these records. The records demonstrate that Nick Deshais was in some type of discussion with former Spokesman Review Employee, and now “Mouth Piece to the Mayor on or about October 8th 2015 when Deshais requested records regarding “suit filed by Frank Straub”. That brings up some questions at least in my mind regarding Coddington’s letter to the Ethics Committee.



It would be interesting to know exactly what the discussions between Deshais and Coddington were but beyond that, I also noted the addition of certain names in Deshais PRR requests of August 20th and 21st, he was apparently getting ongoing tips during that time period.



If you have been following my Blog you likely have noted my efforts to get the Washington State Attorney General involved in this issue, in an effort to get some form of transparency going as well as to determine if there have been violations of the Public Records Act or other matters. On December 7th I also received this email from ATG. Nancy Krier which you might find interesting.


Insert 4




This is the truth as we know it so far!







  1. Ha ha ha ha ha ha

    The Sled~Review must have read your most recent post, The FOIA Wars Continue, after being alerted to it by the snitch and little lap dog Sled. They pulled the Lisa Jennings’ post from your above screen capture of that opinion piece in the Sled~Review! Dude, they really hate you and extend that animosity to people that agree with you, apparently. Poor Lisa, she was so young, so vibrant, so full of life!

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha

    Glad to know your audience is expanding!
    Go get ’em Buff!
    ; )

    Liked by 1 person

  2. @Buff

    The Sled~Review doesn’t like you showing them up or telling them how to do their job. They also hate The Inlander and other media sources that show them up or scoop them on stories, like The Coeur d’ Alene Press did on the Racial Dolezal story. Shawn Vestal is still butt hurt over that one!
    ; )

    Of course dealing with a yapping pissing little dog like Sled must be tiresome also. Every time you post on the Sled~Review he burns up the phone/internet lines bitching to the moderators and other minders. Since you set off his OCD Thread Nazi tendencies and when he is annoyed he becomes even MORE annoying to others (especially to anyone that doesn’t agree with his sophomoric cheer leading and fake champion of the down trodden meme), I’d say your abilities to whip Sled into a frothy fervent frenzy is another reason to try and keep you off of the Sled~Review threads.

    And knowing your dogged determination, I’d tell them “good luck with that!”
    ; )

    Liked by 1 person

  3. FOIA Rules Cont…

    Thanks for the screen shot on the opinion piece, Buff. Noticed something had stirred Sled’s ire on that thread but missed the comment by Bender. Nick and pals must love the slobbering loyalty of Sled and his conditioned response to defend all things Sled~Review; too bad he is like that little dachshund that pees all over itself because it gets so excited.

    Lisa Jennings got it mostly correct in her comment on the same thread. And I agree with her observation of the rear-view reporting that the Sled~Review has been doing on the subject.

    Glad there’s this blog and The Inlander, two sources willing to dig to get to the truth.

    Thanks, Buff!
    ; )

    Liked by 1 person

  4. That response from Nancy Krier looks to me like a lot of bureaucratic ducking and buck-passing. Is she saying the AG’s office can’t even look into this unless some court or other investigative body determines there has been wrongdoing? If that’s the case WTH do we need them for?? IMO asking a government entity to investigate/enforce requirements for transparency is like having the WSP or any other LE agency investigate incidents from other LE agencies. In neither case are the “investigators” actually interested in transparency because then they would be held to the same standard and AG’s or prosecutors are no more immune from misconduct or outright corruption than any other government entity.

    Liked by 2 people

Your Response Here:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.