I have to partially agree with freebilly in Post #2 in that the format of the presentation could use some work to improve readability and make a clearer case. Scams like these, like most white-collar crime, often make peoples' eyes glaze over the moment they are mentioned.
To counteract that natural reaction, in the spirit of vicarious editing, I respectfully recommend the following:
1) Although I know you want people to draw their own conclusions, help us along by stating yours at the very beginning. What have you, who have obviously looked into this rather deeply, concluded? Lay out your conclusions in either the introduction or a summary immediately following the intro, as any good thesis would do. This will help people skimming the article decide if the topic interests them enough to check out your sources.
2) Lay out the case, step by step. Some parts of this are more likely than others. Start with those parts of the story that are easiest to prove and most fundamental to making the case. Present your source information in the context of these points, beginning with the most verifiable. Doing this will help people to examine the source data with an eye for what's relevant to these scams.
3) Where not enough direct source information exists to form a solid conclusion, but signs point in a given direction, say so, distinguishing speculation from facts. With that disclaimer, explain the other, indirect evidence, that has lead you to believe something that is unproven may nonetheless be true. People will key in to that and it will help lend credibility to the case.
In my callow youth, I spent a lot of time bopping around the Mojave, and consider it one of the most beautiful places on Earth. Stories like this one interest me. I am always interested when scoundrels in public office abuse the public trust to enrich themselves and their cronies (ala Teapot Dome or Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument).
This looks potentially bigger than Teapot Dome (but probably not bigger than the Escalante clean-burning coal scam), and I would like to see more investigation into this.
I am willing to bounce this back and forth on the email backchannel and help out as an amateur editor. Just send me an email if you would like to do this.
Thanks again for presenting this information!
Maybe with this report coming out in Free Republic, now the media will begin to do some real reporting. Real reporting sells papers too--I think they forgot that fact in their quest for feel-good news for the happy masses.
So I elected to lay out the available facts and pose questions to help the readers think. They can not but help to see what's going one. But lots of weasel clauses were needed.
In retrospect, I should have created a simple, eye and interest catching front page and posted that, hoping the readers would click on the original and read more. With that in mind, I did start out with gold.
I see you are well informed about the Escalante Staircase National Monument and the coal tie up. I covered that topic in my Limited Federal Government thesis and posted a discussion on FR under the title "KBD" ("Klamath Basin Document") regarding the Klamath Basin Crisis. There definitely appears to be a link there. And there, as here, simply follow the money trail. I consider this present Goldgate to be much larger than Clinton's Stairgate. With Chinagate in the picture, there are more possibile traitors in Goldgate. This could prove quite interesting.
Again, I thank you for your kind words and scholary input.
Forest