Sie sind auf Seite 1von 21


To: Michael Kadenacy; Washoe Republican Party Chairman

From: Dan Coats; RNC Nevada State Director, Trey Rosser; Heller for Senate Political Director
Re: Washoe County Paid Door to Door Canvassing
Date: April 24th, 2018

The Purpose of this memorandum is to show the inconsistent performance of Washoe GOP’s Paid Door
to Door Canvassing Program. Looking merely at the metrics produced in any field program is just not
enough. Below will outline the following.

• Lack of Voter’s identified

• Falsification of Doors
• Boosting up of Metrics
• Individual usernames and correlating maps

First and foremost, the purpose of door to door canvassing isn’t to put up the highest voter contact
attempts a field program can, rather to put up the highest voter contacts a field program can. Below
outlines to differences in Voters Contacted. The graph below shows the number of doors hit in Washoe
County from January 1st, 2018 until April 15th, 2018.

Washoe County Voter Responses


0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

No Answer at Door 4431

Answered Door, Refused Survey 1778

Took Survey 1053

Deceased 13

Wrong Person at door-Took Survey

Wrong Person at door-Refused 865

Gated Community 3662

Washoe County was directly responsible for 11,802 Doors in a three-and-a-half-month period, and while
that may seem impressive, the contact rate of 8.9% is lower than expected in a more traditional 9 – 5
type community. Even the teams in Clark County, a notoriously difficult town to contact voters as it is a
24 – hour town, were able to have a marginally better ID rate at 9.3% (3,732 IDs out of 39,455

Another concerning aspect of the graph shown above is the number of doors marked as Gated
Community. This falls into two separate categories. Boosting up numbers and not following direction. Of
the 11,802 doors attempted by the Washoe GOP Paid Program, a startling 31% of all doors knocked are
marked as Gated Community, almost one in three doors during that time-period. While there have been
many requests of the Washoe GOP to inform paid canvassers of this request, the continuing trend
shows that this request was not given to those in the field.

An additional concern is the blatant overlooking of offenders who did all the above. We have seen more
than a few issues of boosting door attempts by marking gated communities, but one of the tell-tale signs
of paid staff of volunteers not trying is the lack of voters contacted. The screenshot below will show two
paid individuals from January 1st, 2018 until March 15th of 2018.

These two, have been getting away with receiving a paycheck without knocking on doors. This is not
only a waste of Nevada GOP’s time and Washoe GOP’s time, but it’s a waste of Washoe GOP’s finances.
It is almost impossible for a volunteer to knock on 2000-plus doors and speak to fewer than fifty
individual voters. This is again showing that the paid staff are only marking gated communities, or they
are just not knocking doors at all, and marking houses.

Over the next few pages, there will be individual usernames and photos of the locations of the paid
canvasser and the location of the household. It is abundantly clear that doors are being falsified, and the
paid program is not being taken seriously in any way, shape or form.

A.GOYECHENTE (Map 1 of 4)
Doors Submitted on 3/31/2018

The Map show that the user in question was

nowhere near the positioning of the household
in which he was knocking. It’s also clear to see
that he was in a similar location for the entirety
of this walk list.

A.GOYECHENTE (Map 2 of 4)
Doors Submitted on 3/31/2018 at 10:40:30 AM

This is Part one of two. This is showing a lack of

effort. While the user was able to get into the
neighborhood, the user didn’t attempt to knock
a single of the 150+ houses. I noted the time
above, as you’ll see they finished this list in
fewer than ten minutes

A.GOYECHENTE (Map 3 of 4)
Doors Submitted on 3/31/2018 at 10:47:26 AM

For part two of this map. You can compare the

start point and start time from above. In Just
under ten minutes, the user was able to
“complete” a list of 70 voters. Attached at the
end of this document is an excel spreadsheet
with timestamps, longitude and latitudes of
volunteer location, showing the
intention of not even attempting doors.

A.GOYECHENTE (Map 4 of 4)
Doors Submitted on 2/21/2018

This map shows that the user was close

enough to the doors assigned, but he was in a
shopping strip. Again, if there were any issues
of household locations, had those been
brought up to appropriate staff, this could’ve
been changed. Regardless, the location of the
knocker to the doors shows malicious intent
to not attempt canvassing.

J.PERRY (Map 1 of 1)
Doors Submitted on 4/14/2018

This is one of the more egregiously fraudulent

doors seen this cycle. This user was over 18
miles away from the door pictured in the
screenshot. Additionally, looking at exported
timestamps, it seems he took the time to
drive down, and back up.

K.HOFFMAN (Map 1 of 1)
Doors Submitted on 4/14/2018

This user has an extremely similar map as the

one above. It’s not hard to see that the user
above and below “knocked together”.
Looking into this, it’s plain to see that both
this user, and one above entered in most of
their doors at their Fraternity House, Theta
Chi. Again, the user like the one above was
roughly 18 miles away from their targeted

M.DEREVIANKO (Map 1 of 2)
Doors Submitted 4/14

This user looks as if he has found a gated

community. This is troublesome like other on
March 14th, as that was the day of the National
Day of Action where Washoe wanted to show
capacity and how many doors teams could
produce. This is a perfect example of quantity
as opposed to quality.

M.DEREVIANKO (Map 2 of 2)
Doors Submitted 4/08

Again, the user was not near the targeted

households. Mapping shows this was over two
miles between the targeted household and
the volunteer location.

D.JIMINEZ (Map 1 of 1)
Doors Submitted on 4/12/2018

This is another example of the user not being

in the correct location. While up towards the
top right, it seems like they were in the area
and knocked doors, they stopped at Starbucks
in the bottom corner, and input over two
dozen responses into the application.

S.BARNARD (Map 1 of 1)
Doors Submitted 3/11/2018

This is an interesting map, as you can see only

a few targeted households. The user was
pressing responses in wherever he was,
however its plain to see they’re aren’t enough
targeted household for the user to knock,
thus, the user is just marking responses for
doors not listed anywhere near him. Another
interesting note on this user, is that the
volunteer location is almost always never on.
This was the only example found.

In conclusion,

Make Washoe County RED Again

Friday, May 4, 2018

Mr. Dan Coats

Nevada State Director, Republican National Committee

Ref: RNC Critique of Washoe County Republican Party Paid Walker Program
Dear Dan,
On April 24, 2018 a meeting was held at the offices of Rew Goodenow in Reno, Nevada. The
following people were in attendance: Dan Coats, RNC Nevada State Director, Greg Bailor,
Executive Director NVGOP, Trey Rosser, Political Director for Senator Dean Heller, Kristin
Davison, Campaign Manager for Laxalt for Governor, Michael A Kadenacy, Chairman of the
Washoe County Republican Party, Michael B. Jack, 1st Vice Chairman of the Washoe County
Republican Party, Rew Goodenow, Fundraising Chair for the Washoe County Republican Party,
and Cole Azare, Political Director of the Washoe County Republican Party. At that meeting a
report detailing anomalies in the data for the County Party field program and the conclusions
derived from those anomalies by an unidentified author was presented.
This report will detail the results of the analysis of the report by the Washoe County Republican
Party and offer more logical conclusions that can be drawn from the same data.
The data contained in the report is at best suspect for the reasons stated below. Further some
of the statistics do not match what has been communicated to us in the past. However, even
taken at face value, that data does not support the conclusions contained in the report nor the
overblown description of the Washoe County Republican Party Paid Intern Program. In fact,
the Washoe County Republican Party Paid Intern Program ID rate exceeds those from
the rest of the state managed by the RNC itself for February and March.

1|Page of 5
Analysis by Data Sets as shown in RNC staff report:

1. Without seeing the underlying walk-book data covering the entire summary it is
impossible to perform any meaningful analysis of the two screen shots of a two-and-a-
half-month period totals. However, the conclusions are unsupported by even a cursory
review of the two summaries. The statement that “it is impossible” to knock 2000 doors
and speak to only 50 people is not a fact, it is an unsupported opinion of the writer.
Moreover, the statement that the results in the rest of the state were an ID rate of 12.6%
does not comport with figures given by Dan Coats in an email dated April 6, copy of
which is appended at Attachment 1. See a more detailed discussion of this apparent
misstatement in Paragraph 5 below. Likewise, even a cursory look at the first three
walk-book maps plus that of Mr. Derevienko, do not correlate to the totals shown in the
summaries. It would appear the total number of homes within those gated communities
is 335. Clearly the gated community issue ought to be addressed but it does not seem to
be a significant one. We have spoken with Mr. Goyechente and Mr. Derevianko, each
of whom advised they were trained when encountering a gated or limited access
community to attempt to gain entry and, if unable, to mark the community as “gated”
on the app then move on. Neither Mr. Derevianko nor Mr. Goyechente were informed
as to what the consequences within the app their actions would be. Each recalled the
incidents depicted in the screen shots provided within the RNC report and provided
plausible explanations. Given the apparent foibles of the Advantage App, the nature
and insufficiency of the training given, and the haphazard manner in which the walk-
books were created by the RNC operative working with the program it is no wonder
there were anomalies in the data.

2. During this same time frame, however, another issue was identified. The fourth Map
image appears to refer to a homeless shelter where there were over 1000 respondents at
a single address. This was addressed at the time with the RNC staff. There were two
further incidents identified in the downtown area. Specifically, an incident on February
14th with what was then termed as "Walk Book 8" and had a transient hotel attached to
a rather infamous strip club. At the hotel, Andrew (the canvasser) was made to vacate
the premises by a "pimp lady who owns the hotel" (direct quote from canvasser
statement taken while investigation was conducted). The canvasser then entered the
following results (as stated in the text messages provided by Mr. William Sexauer): No
answer- 34, Answered and refused- 10, Wrong person at door- 339. This equates to 383
potentially problematic doors. The canvasser stated he proceeded down the rest of
Virginia street on his list and ran into multiple businesses and weekly/monthly stay
motels which kicked him out, as well as locations that were simply parking lots. In the
end, an email chain shows that Dan Coats, William Sexauer, Henry Kummerer were all
informed of facts relating to this incident. In the email chain, Henry also passed his
appreciation to the canvasser for receiving ongoing feedback reports and referred to the

2|Page of 5
situation as an "unreliable nature of the data we used for *this particular universe* is at
the heart of why this happened."
For some reason this same location was included in a repeat walk-book resulting in an
additional 383 knocks. All three matters were discussed with Henry and Andrew (the
canvasser) and concluded that Andrew closed out a single address and all respondents
were marked as “knocked” from that. Henry agreed this was part of the previously
discussed inaccurate data issue. There is an email chain to support this narrative
which has been appended as Attachment 2. We were informed by Henry that
because of the switch over from Geo-Connect to Advantage that the data in Advantage
had significant problems and that the NVGOP was going to refrain from walking until
they received better data. This data was installed in March. For that reason, the data
presented in the report is suspect and therefore cannot and should not be used to
support most of the conclusory language presented in the document in question.

3. Referring to the two maps attributed to a Mr. Perry and Mr. Hoffman, our review of our
payroll data indicates that neither Perry or Hoffman ever worked for the Washoe
County Republican Party.

4. The App anomalies delineated in Paragraph 1 above represented a total of 2108 incorrect
doors included in total doors knocked because of the App problems, reducing the total
number of doors as stated in the RNC document from 11,802 (Page 1 of RNC Analysis) to
9701. Using the contact numbers from that same analysis of 1053, of The Washoe
County Party ID rate then becomes 10.8%. Not particularly good. But let us compare
that to the state ID rate per the figures given to us by the RNC in Attachment 1.

Rest of State: Knocks ID Rate Washoe

February 9870 789 7.99% uncorrected 8.9%
March 23708 1868 7.87% corrected 10.8%

You will note that even uncorrected Washoe County did better, hardly abysmal
and certainly not fraudulent (Your words, Dan).

5. Research conducted since the above meeting by our IT Committee has determined
there are some inherent problems with the Advantage System. First, when a gated
community is encountered by a walker and the walker indicates such in the app, the
app apparently flags all the locations within the gated community as being visited, thus
giving a false reading that does not coincide with the GPS position of the walker. We
have learned that to compensate for this flaw in the system those responsible for
preparing the walk-books are to take care not to include gated or similar limited access
communities. It has become apparent that the RNC Operative working with the
Washoe County Walker Program did not do so either because he was poorly trained or
3|Page of 5
just chose otherwise. This problem explains the issues raised with the Goyechente map
#1. The map depicts the Arrowcreek community which is gated. All the red flags were
addresses on the map-book. The Green flags stop at the guarded gate at the entrance to
Arrowcreek. It also explains Derevianko map #1. The green flags show progression along
Sparks Blvd north bound and a right turn on Winery Dr. At that point the entrances to
three gated communities are encountered. The app flags all to the addresses within
these communities with red markers without the walker entering the gates.

Secondly, the smart phones being used by the Washoe County Walkers were not capable
of utilizing a direct connection with the GPS satellite system, which is the most accurate
and will provide positioning to within 8 meters. Their phones utilized either the WIFI
positioning system (accurate to within 74 meters) and/or the cellular system (accurate to
within 600 meters). Each of the above two systems is susceptible to distortion due to
terrain, tall building, and cell tower location. This problem explains the issue brought up
with map Goyechente 4. The area depicted with this map is a two-block location of
homeless shelters, soup kitchens, thrift stores, resources centers and food pantries. The
green flags are at a food pantry (not a shopping center), which is less than half a block
from the location of the red flags. This accuracy problem also explains issues with Perry
map #1 and Hoffman map #1 (neither of which are WC Walker Program employees). The
red flags at the south end of the route are addresses less than a quarter mile apart
straight-line distance. The north end appears to terminate on the south side of I80. The
Pi Kappa Phi house is located on the north side of the freeway.
The data presented, at its worst, suggest some QC & App problems only and supports neither
the conclusions contained in the report nor the verbal hyperbole voiced at the meeting. More
likely is the conclusion that there are holes in the App and intemperate words like abysmal
and fraudulent (Your words, Dan) are not helpful. We also note that the County Party has
never had complete access to the data and have had to rely on RNC both for summaries for
data, full state data for comparison and for QC purposes. Our walker program leadership team
understood that the RNC would flag such QC problems, should they exist, on a timely basis so
they could take remedial action. Unfortunately, it would appear such was not the case.
On a separate note, we cannot help but comment that two heads of campaigns were present at
the invitation of the RNC at a meeting where the report was presented. We remain unclear as
to why they were there except to discredit the Paid Intern Program of the Washoe County
Republican Party.

4|Page of 5
Methodology of Response Preparation
Investigation of each of the incidents in the document submitted were performed by Michael
Jack, First Vice Chairman, Jim Sievers, member of the IT Standing Committee, and Cole Azare,
Political Director, Washoe County Republican Party, with drafting and editing assistance from
Rew Goodenow, Esq., Fundraising Standing Committee Chair, and Carole Fineberg, Chair, Field
Operations Standing Committee. CV’s of Jim Sievers and M Jack are appended.
Going Forward
Our county party and, I suspect, the other county parties in the state of Nevada are valuable
assets in election cycles but they cannot reach their potential if they are not included in the full
process. Much of the App problems could and would have been ameliorated had the RNC seen
fit to share their concerns in a timely manner instead of saving multiple incidents of what
turned out to be App problems. The Washoe County Party will continue to work with the RNC
but only as a partner. Let’s stand together and make Washoe County and Nevada RED Again.

Washoe County Republican Party

By Michael A Kadenacy, Chairman


Michael McDonald
Washoe County Republican Party Executive Committee
Kistin Davison
Trey Rosser
Rew Goodenow

5|Page of 5
May 16, 2018
Michael A. Kadenacy
Chairman, Washoe County Republican Party

Ref: Unanswered Questions from RNC Critique of WCRP Field Program and the WCRP
Response in Turn

After reviewing much of the information provided by the RNC in the person of Dan Coats
in their interesting report presented on April 24, 2018 and the WCRP’s findings regarding
that document, I feel we should be discussing some of the more problematic aspects of
this situation. I would also like to point out that the context of this overall situation
should be seen for what it is. We at the WCRP, knowing that the RNC rarely has even the
slightest concept of respect for the states and counties in which it operates, still made our
best effort to work with them as partners here in Washoe County (Attachment 1 of this
document). An effort which provided Dan Coats and his team the moniker of “best team
in the nation”, as you recall we provided upwards of sixty percent of their statewide
metrics for several months—an effort which was proven to be unappreciated and
seemingly worthy only of the RNC’s contempt so long as they did not have managerial
control of the program. Below I will list what I have noticed about this, sadly not unusual,
Contents and Key Points –

• Lies then or lies now? Page 2. Questions regarding Mr. Coats’ inconsistent data
reports and the April 24th document.
• Quality control entrusted with the RNC, a mistake? Page 3. A brief writeup on
the nature of the failure of Mr. Coats to provide the quality control he agreed to.
• Who does he work for, the NVGOP or someone else? Page 4. Questions on the
nature of Greg Bailor’s employment and the appropriateness of his decision to
involve himself in this incident.
• Heller campaign involvement at a senior level? Page 5. Questions revolving
around the possible involvement of Trey Rosser to embarrass the WCRP.

Page 1|7
Prepared by Cole Azare, Elected At-Large Member of the Executive Committee
• Breaking written agreements under false pretenses? Page 5. Clarification of
the nature of the February Agreement, who its signatories were, Mr. Coats lack of
rights to actually break it, and the implications that doing so could have.
• False accusations, twice in two months? Page 6. A brief writeup and
clarification on bad behavior that seems to be a track record of the RNC senior
staff in Nevada.
• Conclusion. Page 6. My conclusions and final thoughts regarding the severity of
the actions recently taken against the WCRP and its leadership.
Report -
1. Lies then or lies now? - We know that Dan Coats and his staff sent us emails with
data during the period that the RNC report claims to cover. The data from those
emails is contradictory to the data which was provided in the report that he
delivered to us on April 24, 2018.
a. The data from those previous emails also shows that the WCRP Field
Program was performing in an exemplary fashion, in line with industry
standards of quality control, and regularly outperforming the state average.
Meaning, we were outperforming Dan Coats’ own team. Numbers that Dan
and his team benefitted from until an incident on January 30th committed
by his own senior staff.
b. There is the possibility that the April 24th report was authored by someone
not in Nevada, unaware of these other emails or it was authored by
someone in Nevada with an axe to grind who thought that cherry picking
the date period to show a stronger state average over our program would go
c. Whatever the motivations for these discrepancies, a grossly inaccurate
claim was made by Mr. Coats during that meeting. There really are only
three logical choices I can see here though.
i. The months of data report emails showing our exemplary
performance were lies. If so, we need to have a serious discussion
with Mr. Coats regarding his liability in possibly misspent donor
funds (discussion on quality control to be covered further down).
ii. The report given on April 24th was a lie to create an embarrassing
situation for the WCRP in front of the two largest campaigns in
Nevada and the NVGOP executive director. If so, we need to have a

Page 2|7
Prepared by Cole Azare, Elected At-Large Member of the Executive Committee
serious conversation with Mr. Coats regarding the consequences of
libel and slander.
iii. An unknown author wrote this report and Mr. Coats is not
intelligent enough to notice that it was in complete contradiction of
data he had already provided to us previously. My interactions with
Dan have proven that he is not this unintelligent. So, unless the
report was drafted by someone outside of Nevada and Mr. Coats was
instructed to ignore the data he had already provided us, this
scenario seems unlikely.
d. At which point was Mr. Coats lying to us? It’s time he be made to answer
that question. Nevada Republicans deserve to have an answer.
2. Quality control entrusted with the RNC, a mistake? - It was agreed that Dan
Coats would be responsible for the quality control aspect of the Advantage
program regarding the WCRP Field Team. Mr. Coats agreed that should the
slightest deviation in data be seen, he would call me and then we would go over it
together with Henry Kummerer on a video conference call. He took on this
responsibility to prevent any repeated occurrences of his deputy state director’s
previous overzealousness which resulted in false accusations being made before
evidence had been investigated which placed him in an awkward position
(incident discussed further down in detail). You and I both know that not a single
call was ever placed to us regarding that subject. Statements made which he tries
to justify why he couldn’t call me yet admits that he did not call you, show a clear
dereliction of duty on Mr. Coats’ part and should discussed. In addition to sending
data report emails that showed how well the field program has been performing
compared to the rest of the state, Mr. Coats also stated during conference calls
that we had been meeting our agreed metrics. His only complaint was that the
tracker was not quite being filled out right by Taton Thompson, a complaint I
honestly considered be of little concern as it was indicative of redundant RNC
metrics tracking policies which still exist, but still addressed when it was brought
up as a courtesy, and to keep the peace.
a. Dan Coats was responsible for the quality control aspect of the WCRP Field
Program from the Advantage side of the house and either neglected his
duties there, deliberately failed to report deviations, or lied during the April
24th report to further a narrative which would embarrass the WCRP.
b. During the April 24th meeting he talked about us misusing donor funds due
to poor management of our program. If he insists on pursuing this line of

Page 3|7
Prepared by Cole Azare, Elected At-Large Member of the Executive Committee
logic, then he must also accept the existence of his own liability and the
possible costs therein.
3. Who does he work for, the NVGOP or someone else? - Greg Bailor’s presence
at the meeting on April 24th is interesting at best and deeply troublesome at worst.
a. Greg knows he does not have the most positive relationship with the
leadership of the WCRP and regularly skips meeting with us when he is up
in Washoe for business purposes. He also knows that he has been caught
lying to the WCRP and the State Chairman in the past (the commerce tax
phone question being an FEC violation, for example). Yet during this
meeting, not at our office but at an attorney’s conference room, he was
there. Clearly, he was invited by someone. Who invited him is the question.
He was not on the original invite list and we were not notified of his
planned attendance when we were informed that Kristin Davison of the
Laxalt campaign would be joining us. As a matter of etiquette, Greg should
at least have been included on the guest list as staff do not have automatic
standing with elected leadership.
b. While not damning evidence, Greg’s body language during Dan’s
presentation of the April 24th report indicates that he knew what was going
to be presented by Mr. Coats beforehand. The whole “gotcha” look on his
face didn’t help. Again, not damning, but certainly noticeable.
c. It would be almost laughable to assume that he would take a meeting
almost over four hundred miles from his office without some idea of what
was going to be discussed.
d. After speaking to State Chairman Michael McDonald, I learned that Greg
had not informed him of his reasons for coming up here, only that he was
doing so. This is especially disturbing as you are on the executive board
which employs Greg and he appears to have taken part in what seems to be
a deliberate character assassination attempt aimed at the WCRP, you, and I.
I would surmise that he just took part in an overt attempt to embarrass a
board member of the organization which employs him. I think we both
know where I am going with this. The tail is now finally openly wagging the
e. Because of this, the question as to the nature of his attendance and the level
of knowledge he had regarding Dan Coats’ planned presentation is a
question deserving of being asked and answered. Should it be shown that
he knew of Dan’s intentions before attending the meeting and done this

Page 4|7
Prepared by Cole Azare, Elected At-Large Member of the Executive Committee
without the approval of his employers, no county party affiliated with the
NVGOP should trust that his further involvement with them is not a
4. Heller campaign involvement at senior level? - Trey Rosser of the Heller
campaign had Elliot Malin request this meeting under the pretense that we would
be making the presentation to the Heller campaign that we have made to other
campaigns regarding our field program. When this meeting took place, it was clear
that this was not the intention.
a. Upon speaking to Trey, I was informed that he had learned of Dan’s
intentions only a couple of days prior to the April 24th meeting.
i. Even if he only learned of Dan’s intentions just prior to the meeting,
a seasoned campaign operative would have refused to participate as
they would know that this would look like they had directly colluded
with Dan. They would not want the Senator to be implicated, should
these accusations prove to be false and the accused party decide it
now deserves recompense.
ii. Dan’s inclusion in the original request for the meeting (Elliot Malin
stated it would be Trey and Dan who would be attending) leads me
to believe that Trey was aware that something was going on much
earlier than the timeframe he stated to me on April 24th.
1. Trey should be given the chance to explain whether he was
misled by Dan Coats and fully planned on having the
requested meeting for the stated purpose or if he was aware of
Dan’s intentions the entire time. Out of respect for the
Senator, I believe they should receive this courtesy.
5. Breaking written agreements under false pretenses? - This is especially
troubling to me. Dan Coats used the information presented in his report to justify
pulling out of the February agreement—an agreement he was not a signatory to.
This was his own choice, as you recall, due to the RNC legal team having to get
involved if he were to be—one cannot have their cake and eat it too. That means
that only you and Michael McDonald had the authority to end that agreement.
After everything we have discovered, it also means that Dan has ended an
agreement between the WCRP and the NVGOP on, at best, false pretenses—a
somewhat serious implication when it comes to relations between the state party
and our own county party especially when it wasn’t his agreement to break.

Page 5|7
Prepared by Cole Azare, Elected At-Large Member of the Executive Committee
a. I would also point out that Mr. Coats’ characterization of the February
agreement as an act of good faith towards the WCRP is a fundamental
misrepresentation of the facts. It was, at best, a counter offer from Dan to
placate the WCRP after multiple weeks of escalating tensions first caused by
NVGOP Deputy State Director William Sexauer at the end of January which
came to a boil when Mr. Sexauer then falsely accused a WCRP intern of
fraudulent activity on February 14th (this is discussed more in detail in the
next section) resulting in our open demand that Mr. Sexauer be removed
from Nevada. To characterize this agreement as an act of good faith is
insulting. It was a peace treaty at best—and one that Dan Coats broke.
6. False accusations, twice in two months? - Dan Coats’ baseless use of the word
“fraudulent” when discussing the WCRP Field Frogram during the April 24th
meeting is the second time a senior staff member in the operation he manages has
done so. So how long until we see a third accusation? I am in support of
emphasizing the possible costs of libel and slander to Mr. Coats to deter future
incidents or even making an example of him so that future individuals realize that
these can be costly words when one has no evidence to base them on.
a. The first time was on February 14th where his deputy state director, William
Sexauer made such claims and quickly had them disproven by their staff’s
own data personnel. The emails showing his claims in the text messages, his
admission of already running the claim to the national field director for the
RNC, and their data staff member, Henry Kummerer, disproving those
claims are included in your previous memo to Dan. On February 16th it was
made abundantly clear to Dan that this was a mistake that should not
happen again.
Conclusion –
Michael, the situation here has implications which are horrendous to even think about.
The possible direct collusion between the RNC State Director and the NVGOP Executive
Director in a botched effort to embarrass the WCRP to what end? The possible
involvement of Trey Rosser of the Heller campaign in that effort? These alone are
situations which would severely damage the integrity of the NVGOP, the RNC in Nevada,
and the Heller campaign—thus harming the entire Republican effort across Nevada. I can
only imagine how the Senator would feel should he be informed that his own campaign
might have been involved in this attempt as well. I think we can reasonably call what has
developed a “train wreck”, and it appears, at this junction, to be a train that was piloted

Page 6|7
Prepared by Cole Azare, Elected At-Large Member of the Executive Committee
by at least Dan Coats, if not Greg Bailor and Trey Rosser as well. I must recommend that
we take the necessary actions to begin the process of discerning the involvement of these
individuals. Should they be found to have culpability, their respective employers should
be notified so that they may make the decision as to whether their continued
employment is beneficial to their organizations. Simply put sir, what happened here was
reckless on so many levels. No experienced political staffers would make such a mistake
unless they were consumed by such a profound level of arrogance that they honestly felt
that no consequences could possibly be leveed against them.
As the member of the WCRP that was most invested in the success of this relationship, I
truly wish that this had turned out differently. For a moment, with Taton’s arrival and
Dan Coats’ public visage of friendliness and cooperation, I believed that we had
succeeded. But I think, after April 24th, we can all agree that this was never the case. No
matter how much they benefitted from us, they could never accept that they would have
to treat us as partners and with respect to maintain those benefits. You might recall that
we kept hearing rumors of people warning them of the dangers of “paid programs” and in
the end, they themselves proved to be the greatest danger when they proceeded to spread
false information in order to discredit this party and its flagship field program.
Cole Azare
Elected At-Large Member of the Executive Board
Political Affairs Director
Washoe County Republican Party

A scorpion and a frog meet on the bank of a stream and the scorpion asks the frog to carry him across on
its back. The frog asks, “How do I know you won’t sting me?” The scorpion says, “Because if I do, I will
die too.”

The frog is satisfied, and they set out. But in midstream, the scorpion stings the frog. The frog feels the
onset of paralysis and starts to sink, knowing they both will drown, but has just enough time to gasp

Replies the scorpion: “It’s my nature…”

Aesop’s Fables, “The Scorpion and the Frog”

Page 7|7
Prepared by Cole Azare, Elected At-Large Member of the Executive Committee
Mr. Michael J. McDonald
Chairman, Nevada Republican Party

Ref: Synopsis of verbal portion of April 24th meeting.

June 27, 2018


This is a synopsis of the verbal portion of the meeting on April 24th with Dan Coats, Greg Bailor, Trey
Rosser, Kristin Davison, Michael Kadenacy, Michael Jack, Rew Goodenow, and myself.

Just after the April 14th National Day of Action, a request was made by the Heller Campaign for the
WCRP to present its presentation of our field program to the senator’s campaign. We naturally agreed
and the date of April 24th was set. At the time we were informed that the attendees from the Heller
campaign would be Trey Rosser and Dan Coats.

On Wednesday the 18th of April, we were informed that Kristin Davison from the Laxalt campaign would
also be in attendance as well. With the additional known attendees, we decided that it would be best to
also invite our new finance director, Rew Goodenow, who offered his offices as a venue.

On April 24th Michael Kadenacy, Michael Jack, Rew Goodenow, and me met up at Rew’s offices to make
the presentation. I was prepared prior to the meeting with power point and projector all set up for what
had been requested. Trey Rosser, Dan Coats, Kristin Davison, and Greg Bailor arrived at the same time
for the meeting. Notably, we were never informed of Greg’s planned attendance at a meeting between
the Heller campaign and the WCRP. We began the meeting by having Trey open with his comments
which consisted mostly of platitudes and notions of how we all should work together. We then moved
on to Dan Coats who then presented the report which you have a copy of and regularly used the words
“abysmal results” and “fraudulent” while presenting open hostility towards the WCRP and informing us
that they were simply going to tell us what we would be doing in Washoe County to support them. Dan
also informed us that he was writing a plan that included Washoe County and would be presenting it to
the White House and would inform us of our role in it. When queried about where they received their
input for our county, Dan stated first that it was from many individuals, but upon further pressing for
specific names, stated that Greg Bailor had been asked as he was “the most experienced person
regarding Washoe County” compared to everyone in the room. Dan Coats also took it upon himself to
inform us that he was pulling out of the agreement signed in February between the NVGOP and the
WCRP based on the report he was presenting. A report that Chairman Kadenacy’s response shows
significant errors with.

After the meeting concluded and Dan Coats had been informed that he had held this information for
months and did not share it as he was obligated to do, Dan pulled Chairman Kadenacy into a private
room at Rew Goodenow’s office and stated “If Cole is involved, the RNC will have nothing to do with the
WCRP”. Chairman Kadenacy took that as the RNC dictating to us who we are permitted to use and that
they will be the arbiters of our actions. The chairman treated the statement with the dignity it deserved
and ignored it.

As you can see, whatever the stated purpose of the meeting, it was clear, based on who was in
attendance, that the true intention was to denigrate the county party’s flagship paid intern program in
front of representatives of the Heller and Laxalt campaigns. This was nothing more than a coordinated
effort of character assassination, committed by people who are supposed to be our allies, and in one
case, Nevada GOP staff.



Cole Azare
Elected Member-at-Large, Washoe County Republican Party Executive Committee

P.S. After the meeting, we started hearing from multiple campaigns that representatives from the RNC
were informing them that they should be circumspect in dealing with us because we were “not in
compliance”. When asked what we were not complying with, nearly all these parties stated that the
RNC reps had failed to mention that part.