This is not good for Oath Keepers, and I would prefer that this not go any further,
Elias, this is already out in the public.
Obviously, Been There has a bone to pick and chose TMM
for his agenda driven 'spread the hate' BASHING.
It was discussed on the OK forum in
mid-November of 2015 where Stewart posted
his side of the story and it was largely put to rest.
It had a ripple effect, at the time, with some members
and leadership leaving. Fortunately, there are more
members that can discern the dire importance of the Mission
and keep the man separate. Principles before personality.
I have his posted response, in full, in my files and can post it here
or email it to you, at your discretion.
Elias Alias, what one prefers be done can be contrary to what should be done. It is in the best interest of OK that every member, and potential member, know this. Without full disclosure, it will be used by those who want to discredit OK at a time of their choosing. You don't want to worry about how or when that will happen. You want to be the one to decide how and when. You don't want it to look like there is a cover up.
Waking Enigma, I got no bone to pick. I was considering joining OK. But, I don't join any organization without fully vetting the leadership and key members. I do the homework. It's called due diligence. It didn't take long to find out about Rhodes. That is why the lack of knowledge about him is surprising - if I can find this information, you can be sure your detractors can. Is it good for the membership to know less about their leader than his enemies? There lies the road to ruin. Speaking the truth is not 'spreading the hate bashing.'
If it was discussed in a forum during November 2015, that was before the disbarment. I for one would like to see Rhodes' explanation. Right now, the facts seem to bear that Rhodes did a number of things that a lawyer just does not do - he misrepresented himself before a federal court, he mislead and then abandoned clients without notice to them and the court, he ignored orders to respond to the complaints, and he blew off a court order to appear. Again, you just don't do that if you still want a career in law. Of course, if you have another source of income (like some organization you "lead") then maybe you don't care. But that's not the point. He had obligations to others, and he shrugged them off. As a man, that is something you just don't do.
You are both right, the mission is what is important. However, you cannot keep the mission and the man separate when the man threatens the success of the mission. Especially when the personality has no principles, as has been amply demonstrated. For bringing dishonor upon Oathkeepers, the only honorable thing for Rhodes to do would be to resign and remove himself from anything to do with Oathkeepers.
Well, you're just quite the philosopher, indeed. Of course, the way you see things is always the correct way to see things, I can surmise that from your manifest un-wavering self-assurance that
you know what is best.
I am not arguing with your points. I do disagree with your perceived need to open this up and then keep it open. To me, the whole matter should be between you and Stewart, not a topic for public discussion. But that is just my opinion, and obviously is not what you would choose.
Whatever damage you want to do has already been done, so I release you to your highest good. You have every right to your opinion, and you also have the right to be void of class, dignity, compassion, and forgiveness. If that is what gives you your jollies, then so be it. I'm just cut from a different cloth, so I'll invite you to keep your opinions while you reciprocate that right to me as well. It is my opinion that a man -- any man -- can make mistakes, for we all seem to make mistakes at one time or another. However, when a man has given this country as valuable a vision as Stewart has given the nation, I tend to recall my capacity for compassion and forgiveness, while it appears that you enjoy twisting the knife after you've stabbed it in. Like I said, I sense that you and I are not cut from the same cloth, but I'm okay with that.
As the owner of these forums and having been the senior editor for Oath Keepers for almost seven years now, I can tell you that I may know more about Stewart and Oath Keepers than your "due diligence" has provided your discernment. I submit (not to you, but to other readers here) that if you knew what I know you may not be so sure about how to respond to Stewart's mistakes. I am not going to be the one to throw Stewart under the bus, for I still believe that all men make mistakes and I would not deprive Stewart of the opportunity to correct past mistakes. That would be what Christians refer to as "God's business", not mine. It's between Stewart and his conscience.
I am just lamenting that TMM now is on record for publishing this embarrassment, but I am not saying you are wrong about your ice-cold points. What I would love to see happen in your mind would be a recollection of various aspects of Love's thought system, such as compassion, mercy, forgiveness, considerateness, empathy, personal dignity, balance, and oh yes, also some refreshing humility. Your notion of Stewart somehow needing to resign from the organization he created, based on some errors he made in his private role as an attorney, indicates to me that you have little of those traits I just listed. But please do go forward as you will. You are abiding by our terms of service here, and are welcome to express your truest nature as best you will.
I would like to state that Stewart owns Oath Keepers, but I own TMM's forums and national website. The two are not related, not connected other than by coincidences such as Stewart having been registered here for a couple of years before he started Oath Keepers and the fact that I work for Oath Keepers as their editor. TMM is its own entity, was here long before Oath Keepers came along, and remains completely a separate entity in all respects. I own the license for The Mental Militia LLC, which is a registered business. I have no ownership in Oath Keepers. In that context, what goes on with Oath Keepers cannot be a reflection upon The Mental Militia. Thanks for reading. As Kurt Vonnegut would say, "Welcome To The Monkey House".

Salute!
Elias