FW: Overdue: Unanimous LNC Directive Awaiting Litigation Committee Action

From: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 11:12 AM

lnc-public_forward

unread,

Feb 12, 2026, 11:42:13 AMFeb 12

to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com

From: Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 4:42:04 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: Overdue: Unanimous LNC Directive Awaiting Litigation Committee Action

As the litigation committee is meeting this evening - may we please get an update from the committee, following their meeting, on the demand letters sent to the former LNC Chair?

I would appreciate their input on how we may move forward, as I'm sure no one here wishes for that to stall out.

Thanks,

Keith Thompson

Region 3 South Rep

From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 10:26 AM

lnc-public_forward

unread,

Feb 12, 2026, 11:43:12 AMFeb 12

to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com

From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 4:43:03 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: Overdue: Unanimous LNC Directive Awaiting Litigation Committee Action

We will ask council about how and when to discuss these matters.

Evan McMahon

Secretary

Libertarian National Committee

From: Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 11:42 AM

lnc-public_forward

unread,

Feb 12, 2026, 12:29:47 PMFeb 12

to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com

From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 5:29:36 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: Overdue: Unanimous LNC Directive Awaiting Litigation Committee Action

I'm calling out the bullshit here — because it is obvious based on past conversation and out-of-spotlight behavior.

I think nearly every one of you wants to stall out this case.

That's what I truly think is actually happening here.

Purposeful nonfeasance.

Am I mistaken?

Join the fight and support the removal of Antifa from the LP by donating at the link below:

Ua may ke ea o ka ʻāina i ka pono

From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 6:43:03 AM

lnc-public_forward

unread,

Feb 12, 2026, 3:51:18 PMFeb 12

to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com

From: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 8:51:10 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: Overdue: Unanimous LNC Directive Awaiting Litigation Committee Action

Mr. Thompson,

It is both interesting and concerning to learn that demand letters are being sent to the former chair. Given the extensive concerns I raised regarding misconduct by members within the SIC, as well as the significant deficiencies in the SIC findings, that were both systematically swept under the rug by members of this board, I am deeply troubled by the prospect of ongoing legal engagement on that matter without the LNC having been made aware prior to its implementation.

This raises a broader concern. The Litigation Committee was specifically instructed at its inception to keep me well informed of its work. Despite that instruction, I have endured months of unanswered inquiries — and I am now learning of significant developments not from the committee itself, but from a non-committee member on a public email thread. That this is how such information reaches me, rather than through the reporting the committee was directed to provide, only lends credibility to the concerns Mr. Martin has raised.

Mr. McMahon,

While I appreciate the confidential update you sent in response to my initial email, I must be direct: the brief record of actions you provided, combined with the reply above that introduces topics never previously disclosed to the LNC, raises more questions than it answers and further demonstrates the credibility of my concerns. More importantly, none of these measures satisfy the clear and unambiguous directive the LNC put forward on October 5 — a unanimous vote to bring a proposal for initiation of litigation before the Executive Committee, following a long and documented history of non-cooperation and escalating infringement by those misusing our mark in New Mexico.

Your statement that there "is not and will not be" a proposal brought before the Executive Committee is a matter I take very seriously. The LNC voted unanimously. That directive is not optional, and a committee formed to carry it out does not have the authority to simply decline to do so. Nor does the Chair.

I stand by my demand for immediate action by the Litigation Committee to comply with the directive of the unanimous LNC vote. Given the explicit refusal conveyed in your reply, I am now prepared to bring this matter before the full LNC to address the committee's noncompliance — and I intend to do so.

Andrew Chadderdon

Region 1 Rep | Libertarian National Committee

From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 12:29:36 PM

lnc-public_forward

unread,

Feb 12, 2026, 5:02:30 PMFeb 12

to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com

From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 10:02:18 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: Overdue: Unanimous LNC Directive Awaiting Litigation Committee Action

Mr. Chadderdon,

Again, had you attended the December in-person meeting in Dallas, Texas or seen the posts from that meeting you would have learned that the Chair - in accordance with the motions passed by the LNC previously and then again on August 8th, 2025 - sent a demand letter to the former chair.

At the December meeting of the Executive Committee the scope of the Litigation Committee was expanded to include issues surrounding the former chair and a lawsuit filed by the former secretary.

Also, Mr. Thompson has no additional information on how the Litigation Committee has handled the former chair situation, everything he knows was publicly disclosed by the Chair at the LNC meeting. I believe he was simply asking if there was an update on any response from the demand letter since it is now within the scope of the Litigation Committee.

You may continue to have issues with the SIC report, but this body and the Judicial Committee have upheld the findings and the call for actions on it. So you're concerns and whatever significant deficiencies you believe there to be and whatever method you continue to inflict that narrative on us... we are moving on. You may continue to stomp your feet and be big mad, but we are going to do the thing.

As far as the report sent to you and the other Region 1 Reps and Alt... I was trying to be diplomatic. We do not have a retainer agreement from affiliate's attorney, after asking for it multiple times. The affiliate had trouble depositing the payment from the LNC due to the bank account being in a slightly different name compounded by health issues and the holidays. We have not received the revised draft complaint from the attorney. Even with that each member of the litigation committee is determined to see the name and assets returned to our affiliate and for the affiliate to be made whole again by those who have abused them (ballot access, funds lost petitioning, damages to the brand, etc). One more time for those in the back... the AFFILIATE CHAIR IS ON THE COMMITTEE! I am not sure what your actual intent is, but I for one will not be bullied off this important task.

Oh... and if you really really need it... Here's the litigation plan that was adopted in that December meeting you didn't attend. The Executive Committee approved the request form the Litigation Committee to send an initial $2,500 to the affiliate with $2,000 going towards the retaining by the LNC of the affiliate's recommend council and $500 for filing of the initial complaint specifically for the trademark matters. It was a unanimous recommendation of the Litigation Committee and was approved by the five present Executive Committee members (one EC member was absent).

In Liberty,

Evan

Evan McMahon

Secretary

Libertarian National Committee

From: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 3:51 PM

lnc-public_forward

unread,

Feb 12, 2026, 6:47:42 PMFeb 12

to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com

From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 11:47:31 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: Overdue: Unanimous LNC Directive Awaiting Litigation Committee Action

Aloha, Mr. Secretary!

I thought one of the "findings" of the SIC was that suing the former chair would NOT be in the best financial or political interests of the LP.

We also learned from an inside whistleblower that the committee's findings were predetermined, political in nature, and not based on best practices. Are you now agreeing with us that the findings of the SIC report were incorrect?

Also: why do you have time to support improper legal actions against former members of the LNC but not have time to produce basic draft minutes for our meetings?

We aren't even publishing the meetings on YouTube.

Please do your job before spending your time defending lawfare that your own team already agreed was not in the LP's best interests. Even if they were lying about their true feelings in that finding to not look malicious, it doesn't change the fact that was a finding.

We can plainly see the commitment to communist tactics: like the prosecutor's trick of making the innocent appear guilty — "show me the man and I'll show you his crime".

That kind of COINTELPRO horseshit has no place in the LP.

Kindly knock it TF off.

Sincerely,

Austin Martin

Join the fight and support the removal of Antifa from the LP by donating at the link below:

Ua may ke ea o ka ʻāina i ka pono

From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 12:02:18 PM

lnc-public_forward

unread,

Feb 12, 2026, 7:07:14 PMFeb 12

to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com

From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2026 12:07:03 AM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>; Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: Overdue: Unanimous LNC Directive Awaiting Litigation Committee Action

Sorry I'm unbale to give your essay any attention as I am busy in the Litigation Committee practicing lawfare on behalf of our New Mexico affiliate, the Free New Mexico Party.

Evan McMahon

Secretary

Libertarian National Committee

From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 6:47 PM

lnc-public_forward

unread,

Feb 12, 2026, 7:09:21 PMFeb 12

to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com

From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2026 12:09:12 AM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik

To: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: Overdue: Unanimous LNC Directive Awaiting Litigation Committee Action

Does this mean that lawfare is also why you don't have time to make minutes?

Have fun, I guess.

Austin

Join the fight and support the removal of Antifa from the LP by donating at the link below:

Ua may ke ea o ka ʻāina i ka pono

From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 2:07:03 PM

lnc-public_forward

unread,

Feb 12, 2026, 7:10:26 PMFeb 12

to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com

From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2026 12:10:19 AM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik

To: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>; Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: Overdue: Unanimous LNC Directive Awaiting Litigation Committee Action

Minutes are presented at the next regular meeting in accordance with the Policy Manual.

Evan McMahon

Secretary

Libertarian National Committee

From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 7:09 PM

lnc-public_forward

unread,

Feb 12, 2026, 9:10:41 PMFeb 12

to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com

From: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2026 2:10:27 AM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: Overdue: Unanimous LNC Directive Awaiting Litigation Committee Action

Mr. McMahon,

Your reply contains a great deal of detail, none of which addresses the fundamental concern I have raised: that the Litigation Committee has failed to comply with the unanimous directive of the LNC.

To be clear — by your own account, the plan adopted in December allocates $2,500 to retain counsel and file an initial complaint for a federal trademark enforcement action. For context, the LNC's successful defense of its trademark in Michigan — a matter of comparable nature — cost the party approximately $50,000 in legal fees to my knowledge, and that figure was significantly reduced by the volunteer efforts of an LNC member with paralegal expertise who contributed substantial work to the case at no cost. A $2,500 allocation, after four months of delay, does not reflect a serious commitment to enforcing the LNC's trademark rights — it reflects the appearance of action in the absence of substance. And even at that level, you acknowledge that no retainer agreement has been executed and no draft complaint has been received. I would also note that the LNC is the sole entity with standing to bring a federal trademark enforcement action — no affiliate, no committee, and no other party can do so on its behalf. Every day that passes without a complaint being filed is a day that our mark remains undefended by the only body capable of defending it, while the committee occupies itself with matters that others could pursue independently. What you have described is not progress toward compliance with the LNC's directive — it is four months spent arriving at a starting line the body directed you to have crossed within one week.

You have twice suggested that I would have known these things had I attended the December meeting. The Dallas meeting was the first meeting I have missed this term — one absence, expressly permitted under the Policy Manual — and the notice for that meeting was delayed to a point that made travel arrangements more difficult and costly. But I would be happy to review the minutes from that meeting to inform myself of what transpired. Unfortunately, as Secretary, you have not yet produced them. Members of this party and of the LNC itself have been left without a written record of proceedings which you now cite as the basis for your defense. You will forgive me if I find it difficult to accept "you should have been there" from the officer responsible for ensuring that those who were not can remain informed.

More to the point, my absence from a single meeting does not relieve the Litigation Committee of its obligation to report to me as it was specifically directed to do, nor does it relieve the committee of its duty to execute the unanimous will of the LNC.

I note that you have characterized my raising of these concerns as stomping my feet and being "big mad." I would encourage you to consider how that language reads to the members of this party who are watching this exchange — members who expect their governing body to act on its own directives and to take the defense of our trademark seriously. The posture you are displaying is not one of accountability.

I intend to bring this matter before the full LNC, and I further intend to pursue every avenue of accountability available to me under our bylaws for the conduct that has led us to this point.

Respectfully,

Andrew Chadderdon

Region 1 Rep | Libertarian National Committee

From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 7:10:19 PM

lnc-public_forward

unread,

Feb 13, 2026, 8:39:59 AMFeb 13

to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com

From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2026 1:39:47 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: Overdue: Unanimous LNC Directive Awaiting Litigation Committee Action

Mr. Chadderdon,

I would like to remind the body for the record that it was the action of you and Mr. Martin that had resulted in the need to start a litigation committee for this matter due to your unprofessional and abusive behavior toward our general council which resulted in the retraction of the pro-bono legal services he was offering.

I want to repeat that, so it is crystal clear, the actions of Andrew Chadderdon and Austin Martin, representatives of Region 1, resulted in the LOSS of pro-bono legal counsel for ballot access and trademark defense due to their unprofessionalism, abuse, and harassment of the LNC’s legal counsel (not to mention breach of confidentiality and decorum), which has resulted in the LNC’s need to subsidize your mistakes to the potential tune of tens of thousands of dollars to defend a state in YOUR REGION, which you have the disservice of representing despite screwing up what would have been FREE to both the LNC and the affiliate.

And now you have the gal to propose that we aren’t fixing your mistakes fast enough?

And on top of that you believe the litigation committee reports to YOU and not the ExCom?

I wish I could say I am surprised by the complete lack of self-awareness on the situation, but here is what is going to happen, and if you do not like my answer you can take it up with the LNC:

You are not in charge of the litigation efforts, the motion that was passed enabled the Chair to make a proposal to the LNC on how to fix your mistakes. The proposal was the creation of the litigation committee for the purpose of taking on the trademark and ballot access issues, which despite what the peanut gallery says, we are taking very seriously and handling professionally unlike prior attempts by the likes of you and Martin which has so far lost us $25,000 in free representation.
Derek Scott, the Chairman of the rightful affiliate is on the litigation committee. I have recommended that the committee meet more frequently, especially since the scope has expanded, and can assure that progress is being made. If you do not believe me, speak to the Chair of the rightful NM affiliate you claim to represent and have already harmed along with the LNC thanks to your actions, we now have to pay for services we would have previously received at no cost.
You do not represent this case, the ExCom does, you will be kept up to date, however, you are not in a managerial or decision making role and should not expect to be.

This will be my last communication with you on this topic, feel free to bring it up to the LNC, we are working diligently to fix your mistakes. If you would like to help, please submit $25,000 to the following link, lp.org/stevendonor.

Sincerely,

Steven Nekhaila

Chairman, LNC

From: Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2026 9:10:27 PM

lnc-public_forward

unread,

Feb 13, 2026, 1:14:01 PMFeb 13

to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com

From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2026 6:13:46 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: Overdue: Unanimous LNC Directive Awaiting Litigation Committee Action

Gee, Mr. Chair — you're saying that doing our jobs to provide oversight and ask questions about (OBVIOUS CORRUPTION) lost us a "generous gift" from a totally-not-super-corrupt lawyer, who totally isn't playing politics on this board?

Hmm, I wonder how that happened.

Join the fight and support the removal of Antifa from the LP by donating at the link below:

Ua may ke ea o ka ʻāina i ka pono

From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2026 3:39:47 AM

lnc-public_forward

unread,

Feb 13, 2026, 1:53:19 PMFeb 13

to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com

From: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2026 6:53:09 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>; Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: Overdue: Unanimous LNC Directive Awaiting Litigation Committee Action

Exhibit 137B.

Sincerely,

Steven Nekhaila

Chairman, LNC

From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2026 1:13:46 PM

lnc-public_forward

unread,

Feb 13, 2026, 2:41:35 PMFeb 13

to lnc-p...@googlegroups.com

From: Austin Martin <austin...@lp.org>
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2026 7:41:24 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik

To: Steven Nekhaila <steven....@lp.org>; Andrew Chadderdon <andrew.c...@lp.org>; Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>; Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>; Entire LNC <entir...@lp.org>; lnc-public_forward <lnc-publi...@lp.org>
Subject: Re: Overdue: Unanimous LNC Directive Awaiting Litigation Committee Action

Are you implying you intend to sue members of this board?

Join the fight and support the removal of Antifa from the LP by donating at the link below: