Soooooo Concerned!

 

Library Board Meeting

 

Defamation: Lawfare's Comrade

 

By Gretchen Garrity

The Christian County Library Board of Trustees has been under attack for some months, ever since a majority of board members voted to oust the then president, Allyson Tuckness. Resistance from without has included local activists who have lately been joined by their partners and friends with connections to larger state and national organizations. Corporate and NGO media groups have also joined in with articles suggestive of bringing the board’s integrity into question.

Last September former board attorney, Harry Styron, filed a lawsuit on behalf of Trustee Janis Hagen, as well as the library district. Who authorized that lawsuit on behalf of the library district is unknown. It was not the board as a corporate body. The suit has given the Left fodder for accusations of criminal intent, collusion, embezzlement, intentional violations of the Sunshine Law, and so on.

Activists have published social media posts, spoken at library board meetings, and appealed to the county commissioners. However, in order to widen their impact some individuals have taken another tactic. Although all the board members were required to pass background checks, one individual went digging into board members’ lives to cast dirt on them.

 

It wasn’t long before former reporter for the Springfield Daily Citizen Susan Wade and U-turn in Education (founded by MSU professor ElizabethDudash-Buskirk) joined a campaign to defame the board members who were taking action. Statements and actions were taken out of context and misconstrued. Accusations were spread. An anonymous blog suddenly appeared that gave voice to the more outrageous attacks, conveniently allowing individuals like Wade and Professor Dudash-Buskirk’s organization to spread malicious defamatory information on social media without being directly associated with the blog. 

As a former member of the press and as a communications professor, respectively, one would think that Wade and Dudash-Buskirk would have confirmed the circumstances of the accusations by the anonymous blog. By promoting the anonymous blogger they attached themselves to the WAC blog. If they had reached out to the board members they might have learned that at least one of the 16-year-old bankruptcies they so gleefully exposed was due to medical expenses and a creditor who was later sued in a class action suit and had to pay out (even if it was a pittance) for their illegal actions.

Indeed, if Wade and Dudash-Buskirk had done their due diligence, they might not have been so eager to share that a board member’s property taxes were late. It was not because of the board member’s financial negligence but because their new mortgage company was late in paying the taxes. A rather common situation that was rectified by the mortgage company shortly after the article’s release.

And what was the purpose of promoting another anonymous article from the blog that doxxed a board member’s work history, attempting to put it in a negative light? These and other accusations are personal and malicious and defamatory.

WHO WRITES THE WAC BLOG?

Naturally, when such attacks are happening, it is of interest to find out who is writing the anonymous blog. U-turn in Education and Wade claim they have no knowledge of who is writing the blog.

The ten articles that have been published so far include accusations of power grabs, criminal intent, “loose” interpretation of state statutes, ignoring state guidelines, hiring a new board attorney (horrors), holding closed meetings illegally, holding too many meetings, embezzlement, actively campaigning for “book removal” and “labeling,” being responsible for late fees/penalties for overdue library bills, and on.

A proverbial litany of crimes that cry out for justice. Volunteers who care about their community have suddenly become cancerous tumors full of uncleanness.

Many of the anonymous blogger’s conclusions do not make much sense, unless one is determined to find fiends on the library board. The intent is not so much to get the truth out there, but to publicly shame and defame the board members. This is a very common tactic of the Left when they cannot win on the merits of their position, and we have seen it play out on the national stage as well.

So, let’s get to who might be behind the WAC blog. If you look at social media posts surrounding each published article, a pattern begins to emerge. Making a list of the dates of social media posts and the blog posts, an unmistakable pattern emerges.

Pro-tip: If one were to make a Sunshine request of those who have made Sunshine requests, even more information emerges. (Thank you, David Rice.)

The anonymous blogger seems to be promoted almost exclusively by Susan Wade, U-turn in Education, and a couple of their circle. 

In fact, Wade was the first individual to mention bankruptcies in a Facebook post on Feb. 9, 2025 (see screenshot above). On Feb. 11, 2025 Wade closes out a fundraiser she had conducted for Trustee Hagen’s lawsuit against her fellow board members, and mentions “alleged” violations and secret decisions.

On Feb. 12, 2025 Susan Wade submitted a Sunshine request for library late bills and overdue fees, for attorney fees, board emails, and the library budget. Note: This is intriguing because neither the present or previous treasurer were made aware of any late fees until it was publicized by the anonymous blogger.

 

Question: How would Wade know to request information about late fees when even board members were not made aware of them by staff? Is someone inside the library sharing information? Could information have been shared with Wade that lead to the Sunshine requests? 

On Feb. 21, 2025, Wade’s Sunshine request was returned. The very next morning on Feb. 22 at 7:52 a.m., Wade promoted an article on the anonymous blog that included information on the late fees. That article was published on Feb. 22. It stated:

“A Sunshine request shows that since Garrity and company staged their low-rent takeover in order for him to take over as treasurer (landing them in court) the library has had to pay over $250 in late and overdue fees to vendors, service providers, and basic utilities. Why are there so many late penalties Mr. Treasurer? Are you bleeding the library dry on purpose to make a point?”

Request: As a writer, I am operating with full transparency of the sources in this article, but would also ask that you consider limiting traffic to monetized sites that are financially fueling lawfare in our communities. I have PDFs of the articles that I can email to any interested parties.

Was Susan Wade aware of the circumstances of the late fees? If not, why would she either publish or share that information with the anonymous blogger without confirming the background information? If she was aware, then malicious intent is on the table. The anonymous blogger then details expenses for the board’s legal counsel against the lawsuit, which were also sought in Wade’s Sunshine request.

Over the next several days, Wade and U-turn in Education push the anonymous blogger's articles on social media. 

Request: As a writer, I am operating with full transparency of the sources in this article, but would also ask that you consider limiting traffic to monetized sites that are financially fueling lawfare in our communities. I have PDFs of the articles that I can email to any interested parties.

Then, on Feb. 22 and Feb. 24, both Wade and U-turn in Education decide they need to deny writing, formally endorsing, or knowing who is authoring the blog.

Request: As a writer, I am operating with full transparency of the sources in this article, but would also ask that you consider limiting traffic to monetized sites that are financially fueling lawfare in our communities. I have PDFs of the articles that I can email to any interested parties.

 Why did a professional journalist and communications professor decide to share an anonymous blog without knowing the author or the author’s veracity?  It’s possible Susan Wade took her Sunshine request and passed it along to the “anonymous” blogger, but then that would mean she is lying about not knowing the blogger. At best, she is being coy about the author's identity.

 

The pattern, both before and after the article in question was published, is very similar. An article is published and close on its heels, both Wade and U-turn begin pushing it out on social media. Each of the articles is designed to embarrass, accuse and defame the board members. There are ten articles so far, the latest being published March 23, 2025.

It’s classic Saul Alinsky: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.”

Request: As a writer, I am operating with full transparency of the sources in this article, but would also ask that you consider limiting traffic to monetized sites that are financially fueling lawfare in our communities. I have PDFs of the articles that I can email to any interested parties.

 So who do you think is writing the WAC blog? What conclusion do you draw from the information?