The reject Sternoff PAC website makes accusations about the Freedom Foundation and my reporting that I take serious exception to since it accuses us of unethical behavior.
For the record, I am no longer employed by the Freedom Foundation. In May, I moved to New Jersey where my wife lives. I’m now working as a freelance investigative and political writer and reporter.
I sent the following email to the PAC via their form:
Your home page misrepresents what the Freedom Foundation, formerly the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, did with the Bob Sternoff emails. A correction is in order.
We didn't "sit on the information" as you assert. I wrote a story that was posted on our blog and subsequently republished in the Kirkland Reporter in September 2009. In addition, the story was picked up by KOMO News 4, and as the investigative reporter who uncovered the offending emails and wrote the story, I was interviewed on camera. I showed the emails to the KOMO reporter to verify that they were as alleged.
The Freedom Foundation chose not to publish the emails because of the nature of their content. Nor did we link them online. People who called asking for them were told they could get them the same way I did by filing a public records request under the Public Records Act.
Since it would have been a serious violation of journalistic ethics to share the emails with anyone who intended to use them for partisan political purposes, the several requests for them were refused.
Had it not been for my investigative reporting the existence of the emails would never have come to light. That's hardly "sitting on the information."
You have an obligation to set the record straight, and I await your response.
Scott St. Clair
[box type="info" style="rounded" border="full"]Kirkland Views is also accused by the Concerned Citizens of Kirkland of "sitting on the information" originally requested by Mr. St. Clair. We obtained copies through a public records request. We received the data shortly after the Freedom Foundation. We reported how the Seattle press covered the issue on these pages and we hosted a lively discussion in our comments section, however, we chose not to publish the contents of the emails as they were of a personal nature. We did not believe they warranted being published on the internet. -- Editor[/box]