Replies

-- Its Schaffly's forum. She let 6 directors go as in fired. They are now illegally attempting to wrest control of the forum from her. --

I know the general sequence of events, and recognize the names of the more prominent players, and I am entirely sympathetic with Phyllis's side of this war.

But I am not sure that the board meeting and resulting action (firing of Ed Martin) were in fact illegal.

Brief timeline, the way I see it. I am not claiming these items have any sort of cause and effect relationship:

20 members of Eagle Forum endorse Ted Cruz for president (January 18)
Phyllis Schlafley endorses Donald Trump
Phyllis Schlafley accuses a faction of the board of attempting to wrest control, and requests their resignations
The board meets via teleconference, mutes Phyllis from a substantial part of that meeting, and fires Ed Martin
Phyllis Schlafley publicly states that she is opposed to the board's actions, and views it as hostile

The takeover side claims that Ed Martin was improperly influencing Phyllis and others who work (some volunteers) for Eagle Forum. Some insinuate that Phyllis is batty (a twofer, takes here out of control of the company and taints her endorsement of Trump).

Based on other news reports, unrelated to the recent unpleasantness, I find the excuses and reasons given by the takeover defenders to be deliberately misleading. In addition to news reports that appear to show alignment between Phyllis and Ed Martin, I have fielded several direct, false assertions made by posters on this forum, with no evidence to back up the assertion. For example, Slyfox asserts that Ed Martin is posting on Phyllis Schlafley's Facebook page.

All that said, it is possible that the coup was undertaken legally. That sort of thing happens. See National review, see Mark Levin, and so on and so forth.