URGENT UPDATE: Affidavits obtained today prove Cook County GOP Chair Lee Roupas knew about date rape complaint filed against CYR board member in 2009, but did not act on it for an entire year. Claims he did not know about the complaint until June 2010, but has been caught in his lie.
Crook County GOP Chair Lee "Pinocchio" Roupas, pants afire, lying about the fact he knew about a date rape complaint filed against a Chicago Young Republican board member a full year before he decided to act on it, or acknowledge he knew what was going on in his own county. Shame, shame, shame on Roupas for not only lying, but for being so damn terrible at it. In Chicago, this is actually the worst crime of all.
UPDATE 1121pm CST 7/16/10: We have just secured an affidavit from a prominent Republican who is swearing under oath that Lee Roupas was not only informed about the complaint against “The Prophet” in July or August 2009, but that he was read the entire complaint over the telephone.
As we suspected, Roupas is being deliberately lawyerly in his use of the word “received” in terms of this complaint. He is, in essence, insisting he never TOUCHED the complaint until June of 2010…but he RECEIVED the information in the complaint verbally in July or August 2009, as we have maintained.
This is the first of several affidavits we foresee being secured in the coming week that will prove Lee Roupas to be a liar.
All Republican Committee Members in Cook County need to step up to the plate and challenge Roupas to put in writing that he never:
(1) spoke about the complaint in July or August of 2009
(2) had the complaint read to him in July or August of 2009
(3) had a telephone conversation about the complaint in July or August in 2009
Let’s give Lee Roupas the chance to clear this up, before more affidavits roll in to prove him a liar.
*************************************************
Lee Roupas’ mouth has been moving all day today, though he won’t answer calls and isn’t speaking to the media. He’s been hunkered down in a secure and undisclosed location somewhere, writing this email to Republicans in Cook County:
Click above to embiggen.
Pay attention to that last point, (5), above.
Roupas starts off by admitting he is being represented by counsel at this point…counsel that apparently helped him write this very lawyerly paragraph of parsed words (and poor grammar, so our guess is “counsel” is either someone who went to correspondence school or is a sock puppet Roupas MacGyvered to keep him company in his bunker).
(a) Roupas states he received a letter from Eloise Gerson dated June 11th, 2010
(b) Roupas claims “the first time I received the actually complaint was upon receipt of Chairman Gerson’s letter in June of 2010″
Can you spot a few interesting things in the above?
For starters, Roupas does not acknowledge when he KNEW about the alleged assault on a young female CYR member by a current Cook County employee. We maintain Roupas knew about this matter since July of 2009, August at the latest, which means he knew about this almost a full year before he is owning up to.
He is very lawyerly saying that sometime after June 11th 2010 he RECEIVED THE ACTUALLY COMPLAINT. What’s an “actually complaint”? Does it make a sentence legally null if nonsense words like “actually complaint” are used in them? IE, is this a typo or did Roupas deliberately misphrase this to build wiggle room for himself in the future, allowing himself the option of reworking the whole sentence for later clarification to give him whatever meaning he will want this to have next week or the week thereafter?
What is the “actual complaint”, if we grant Roupas the human spelling error and assume he meant to say he “received the actual complaint” in the letter from Gerson? What defines the “actual complaint”…is it a formal document prepared by someone and notarized…is it a document printed on special paper…would a regular home printer version qualify as “actual”, or did someone need to go to Kinko’s and use “good paper” for it to be “actual”…is it a signed version of the complainant’s account or is it the first July 1, 2009 email she sent to various parties initially informing them of what took place (which subsequently led to her being interviewed and other papers generated).
We were not copied on whatever Gerson sent to Roupas in that letter dated June 11th, 2010 so we don’t know what “actual complaint”, or “actually complaint”in Roupas-speak, means to Lee Roupas. We do, however, know for a fact he was sent the July 1, 2009 document prepared by the complainant that was the initial blush of a problem with the CYR board member known as “The Prophet”. We know this because Lee Roupas was the acting Cook County GOP Chair at the time, and that July 1, 2009 document was sent to him by USPS. This statement was sent to GOP National and the Young Republican National Organization as well.
That statement was then taken to the YR National Convention in Indianapolis where it was given to other Republicans in leadership positions. It was during this Convention we were told the document was hand-delivered to Roupas. That means he should have received it TWICE in July of 2009, one in the mail, and one in person.
But, is that document not the “actually complaint” Roupas is referring to? Depends on how counsel advised him to look at it, actually.
We’re prepping a little study guide and timeline on all of this to show the myriad opportunities Lee Roupas was given to view the “actually complaint” almost a year before he ultimately admits to finally “receiving the actually complaint”. NOTE: ”receiving” is a lawyerly word…it does not mean “see”, as in Roupas could have seen a document but then claims he never touched it, so he never “received” it…it also does not mean “read”, as Roupas could have viewed the document on a crackberry, iPhone, or other computer device that had been opened by someone else, so he didn’t “receive” anything in that case either. Roupas could have been “told” about the document, but that’s not “receiving” in his counsel’s eyes either.
For years, Republicans have mocked President Clinton for his gymnastic abuse of the meaning of the word “is”. Conservatives in Illinois, meet Lee Roupas, student extraordinaire of Clintonian verbiage.
The timeline will establish that either Lee Roupas is lying about when he “received the actually complaint”, and should be removed as the Cook County GOP Chair, or he willfully avoided “receiving” the “actually complaint” because he wanted to have implausible deniability, in which case he should be removed as the Cook County GOP Chair for gross incompetence and dereliction of duty.
As Roupas notes in his email, the event in “The Prophet’s” apartment happened before Roupas hired the man named in this “actually complaint” to work for the Cook County GOP as a subordinate of Roupas’. That means, once it’s clearly established that a reasonable person in Roupas’ position should have had a working knowledge of the “actually complaint” by the time the decision to hire “The Prophet” was made, and that Roupas hired “The Prophet” while having said working knowledge of the “actually complaint” — and did not bother to launch an investigation into the merits of the “actually complaint” before hiring “The Prophet” to represent the Cook County GOP — then the question needs to be asked whether or not this is acceptable professional behavior on the part of a Republican County Chair in today’s GOP.
What did Lee Roupas know, and when did he know it?
That’s the question we hope to answer with some measure of reasonable certainty tomorrow. Anything you can contribute to help sort this timeline out, please let us know, since a graphic visually representing all the opportunities Roupas had to become familiar with this “actually complaint” blows his round of lies today right out of the water.
© 2010, HillBuzz. All rights reserved.
If you enjoyed this post, please leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
It appears the “actually complaint” is the result of either loose, sloppy thinking or a dim-bulb intellect. In paragraph 3 he also writes: “…please consider the free websites we our offering.”
Pathetic.
Someone needs a grammarian to proof *everything*. I’d volunteer, but I neither live there nor have any desire to help this scum!
Or an 8th grade education.
Anyone can make dumb errors/typos in quickly fired off communications like twitter or blog comments but this is a formal memorandum from the Chairman on letterhead.
I maintain, pathetic.
Hillbuzz, please keep up the good works. Your writings and snark are brilliant and entertaining respectively, but your integrity and valor stand above all else. Keep it up, and thanks for all you do.
NICE sarcasm, actually. No complaint.
Susan, are you referring to the above? If so, how can you think that something so on point and true is meant sarcasticly? Do you find anything in the above untrue? I meant every word, and would think you and others would totally agree with it.
It’s kind of creepy when a huge fan who is incredulously grateful for what the boyz expose, and teach for that matter, is suspect of being an “ingratiating crawler”.[below]
Sometimes praise, or a question is just that. I so think back to when one post was dissected as a troll and then she posted how she swears she was just a conservative grandmother seeking further information, or something along those lines. I believed her, cause what she had written was not far off from what I might have said or asked, and I’m sure she was so hurt.
Shame on us when so much work needs to be done, and we need, and can unite on some very important issues, and unity is critical to overcoming the frightening things happening to our country right now. I’ve never been so scared and yet we risk allienating and turning away our own because we can’t accept sincerity. I hope that grandmother is still with us, and I’m certainly not ready to quit a blog that shares my concerns and has the integrity and ingenuity to try to tackle, expose and overcome it. I repeat with utmost sincerity:
Hillbuzz, please keep up the good works. Your writings and snark are brilliant and entertaining respectively, but your integrity and valor stand above all else. Keep it up, and thanks for all you do.
I would love to say we have your back, but I know I can’t do anything to keep you safe except to get you more and more reknown – which I try to do as much as possible. So take care, and the more stuff like this you expose, the more credible you become, thus the more following and fans you will have so that you will be all the harder to take down unnoticed. Still, I worry and pray for you because I know the evil out there.
Icky looking. An ingratiating crawler.
This keeps looking worse and worse.
Why is Roupas lawyering up internally? If he’s in receipt of an allegation that a serious crime has been committed against a female victim, why isn’t he just turning that evidence over to law enforcement authorities? Shouldn’t they be the ones dealing with this? What good is any Roupas led “review” going to do, other than protect any wrongdoers? Since when is the Cook County GOP in the business of investigating rape allegations?
This is all unbelievable.
Isn’t Roupas himself a lawyer? Didn’t he recently finish law school? Didn’t he recently pass the bar exam? (Most everyone in Illinois does pass the bar.)
Assuming so, Roupas is an officer of the court. He has a duty that’s higher than any scummy desire to protect scummy friends.
Roupas should stop the stonewalling and come clean. Otherwise he should give up any law license he may have.
Maybe it will take the female victim suing the Cook County GOP, Chicago GOP, Illinois Republican Party, RNC, and all their officials and committeemen to get some action.
A Chi-Town friend was right. When I asked if the GOP in Illinois could be this dumb, they corrected me and said, “No dumber.”
Roupas and all who protected that, dare I allude to this, Ted Bundy-esque monster called the Prophet need to go. As for the Prophet, time in the pokey for you. As for any Rrpublicans running for office in Illinois, run away from the state party fast.
All political organizations and government agencies maintain legal council to help them navigate any issues. Most of these lawyers are skilled in voting and government administrative law. It would not be unusual to hire special council if a hot issues rears its head – esp. if YOU are the target of criticism! That letter does sound like it was slightly edited, but not written by, a lawyer. Ms. Cristie better warm up her pen.