Advertise Here!




It's been policy MySaline's since October 2013... Use your real first and last name as your username. Use the Settings link to change it. Don't be afraid to update your profile pic while you're there!  You're beautiful!

Opinions expressed on are not necessarily those of MySaline. Members are responsible for their own content. Read the terms of service on your profile page. Read it. Read.

Contact MySaline with questions about the website, advertising, donating to support MySaline, or any other reason:

PO Box 307, Bryant AR 72089, 501.303.4010, is news & community for Saline County, Arkansas since 2007. Join today and get involved!



Received a letter in the mail about Dennis Milligan

My name is Allen House,  I moved to the Bryant area about a year ago. I am not much into politics but a few days ago this letter came in the mail concerning a politician running for  re   election, Dennis Milligan. 

I have scanned the letter and attached it below.


Views: 129117


You need to be a member of to add comments!


Comment by The Shadow on April 19, 2012 at 9:20am

Longwinded?  Yes, but necessary.  You people are thick.

Comment by Duck Bill on April 19, 2012 at 9:18am

The letter that Allen House posted above is the actual "MEET THE REAL DENNIS MILLIGAN" the your other post is nothing but propaganda to bolster votes.  

Comment by The Shadow on April 19, 2012 at 8:51am

Mr. Smith, I'm going to step in at this time.  Unlike Mr. Tripp, who is free to respond if he chooses, I do not have to answer to you or anyone else how I know things.  It appears that this is the focus much of the time inasmuch as Mr. Sutter practically lives on this site, seeking people he can depose on other suits.  But I will be happy to respond to yours and others statements here.

The first question you need to be asking -- assuming that you are reading the other remarks on this site -- is where the knowledge base comes from all the OTHER experts who show up here and talk with great authority about what Milligan has and has not done in office?  Did you bother to wonder that? 

How about this disingenuous poster, "BoydB" who keeps coming on here and allegedly quoting from depositions on Milligan?  Does he think we're stupid?  That we have no idea who he is?

I would tend to agree with you that Mr. Tripp appears to be a reasonable, if longwinded guy.  I am often as well.  But in his defense -- I've read pretty much everything he's written here -- why is it so hard for you to see that when attacks come on individuals like Milligan and Dabbs UPON ELECTION, that their actions and conduct are not the real issue?  Why are you struggling with the idea that there is an Old Way that cannot accept the loss of power?

Obviously, Mr. Tripp and Mr. Milligan are friends and Mr. Tripp has shown an interest in these cases because of his personal knowledge of Milligan and his character.  He wrote a rather glowing review of the man in evidence of this, but no one appears to have read it.  No one is pouring over it, as they are the horrible letter associated with this blog to see if it's true.

Do you wonder why?  Did you read Tripp's "Meet The Real Dennis Milligan"?  If not, why?  If so, were you moved by any of it?  Or are you only focused on allegations that would drive him from office in the primary?

I have done my own investigating on this, and have found numerous and well placed individuals who will tell you that Milligan stumbled a bit at the outset, moving into his learning curve, but once up and running has done a terrific job in the clerk's office deserving of voter confidence.  No one I interviewed will support the statements being made here -- and we are talking about no fewer than a dozen individual attorneys and at least two judges (I will NOT identify anyone, so don't bother asking as this is confidential and will remain so.)

Tripp gets passionate, as I sometimes do, but I would hardly point to his rhetoric as something tearing the country apart.  He sees wrong being done against innocent people in Saline County and wants it to stop.  He sees a "tribe" that is beset with one-dimensional thinking, based on generations of perceived ownership of all things Saline.  I tend to disagree with that thinking, if I understand his concept, but that requires me to further clarify my term, the "Old Way."

I see a much smaller group than I think Tripp does, but every bit as power hungry.  The Old Way is not about a "tribe" because it could be argued that officials like Dabbs have just created another one.  The Old Way is more about a real, as opposed to a perceived power base, that actually has skin in the game, something much larger than the sheer satisfaction obtained from winning back an office.

On that level, my "Old Way" people actually USE the "tribe" that Tripp speaks of by generating their emotions, manipulating them into carrying the water.  This is what I believe is going on with the doomed recall efforts in Bryant and the absolutely absurd lawsuit that keeps deeply disturbed men like Danny Steele up in the middle of the night, combing this site for new statements he can copy while pretending that he isn't blogging under a pseudonym.

Steele, in my opinion, is just a pawn of a much bigger group made up of a number of people who have wielded power over business, legal and political process for some time, with attorneys thrown in for good measure (and one prominent name definitely comes up.)  They are serving a master, these Dark Three who so viciously pursue their mayor, but the tide is turning and they are NOT going to "get" that woman.

Similarly, they are not going to "get" Dennis Milligan either.  He's campaigning for his job when taxpayers are paying him to be working?  Is this not also true of other two-year term candidates like the Saline County Sheriff?  Exactly how do they keep their two-year term jobs, Casey?  You have just made a case for four-year terms for these gentlemen.

I found your highlight of his so-called "9/11" gaff to be interesting.  I heard about the remark.  I got it.  Most reasonable people got it, and weren't stupid enough to consider it a call for another 9/11 when the context was included in the deal.  President Bush's role in protecting America following 9/11 was being denigraded and ridiculed.  For some of the more dense among us, another 9/11 -- God forbid -- would have to occur for his role in protecting America to be appreciated more.

It is beyond the pale to suggest that this obviously moral man would make any statement that could be reasonably perceived of as calling for another attack on the nation.  That the discussion even goes there is a red flag on reasonableness in communication.

I've noticed in the past, when Tripp commented in the middle of others literally dismembering their targets politically here, how his critics then turned on him and told him "You're only hurting the mayor, you're not helping her."  As if his silence would somehow end the lynch mob putting a rope over a limb for the mayor, as if my being silent about the Dark Three would make their abuses go away.  This is beyond naive.

Mr. Smith, you seem like a pretty reasonable fellow too, from the thoughtful if not misguided questions you asked.  Let me try to help here.

Others can do YOUR job, but you're doing it, whatever it is, and you want to continue to do it.  So does Mr. Milligan.  And unless there is a compelling reason to change horses in the middle of the stream -- and there isn't -- the voters are likely to affirm the incumbent on May 22.  Then we will learn what his opponents really have up their sleeves, as they pull out all stops to destroy him and tear him from office.

Let me summarize this for you:

Everything you're witnessing, including the false charges made against Milligan regarding his job performance and even the form that Mrs. McDaniel stole and kept for a year, has all been about him exercising a lawful prerogative to determine who his own staff will be.

The staff of the former clerk, who obviously liked the man, were hostile toward Mr. Milligan because of the issue upon which much of his campaign was based -- the hiring of convicted felon Dan Harmon to work in the circuit clerk's office.  Perhaps some of these same ladies liked him as well, despite his horrific crime against the county and the families he harmed.

To say that the relationship between Milligan and the Kidd staff was contentious would be a reasonable statement.  To say that the likelihood of these individuals being able to separate their work from their animosity toward Milligan is nil.  To assume that there was aggression and defiance is a given, and no one can function in an office beset with such attitudes.

You need to understand this, Mr. Smith -- the "at will" provisions of Arkansas law, no matter what Mr. Sutter says to the contrary, expressly permit Mr. Milligan or any other elected official to dismiss ANYONE for ANY REASON, unless that reason is discriminatory as described under law.  You cannot dismiss anyone for exercising free speech -- which is why Sutter falsely went after this issue, because he knew it would have weight.  He knew that Mattingly had published harshly critical remarks and made allegations on line exercising that right that were abrasive, divisive and abusive, but were nonetheless free speech.

In like manner, I have exercised similar privileges here along with a gaggle of other anonymous writers, for which three aldermen are falsely and maliciously pursuing Shelli Russell, despite her denials that the suit isn't about her, in order to make discovery of identities so that they can punish their detractors -- not with the truth, but in other ways after the SLAPP lawsuit is thrown out.  Mattingly had every right to write what she did on Facebook, but in her case unlike mine, her motive was different.

The evidence seems to support the idea that she wanted to punish Milligan by generating a firestorm (Tripp referred to it as a s---tstorm) against him.  It worked.  Friends of the Milligan family report that his phone literally rang off the hook from angry, abusive, profane individuals who were deeply offended.  Why?  Because the ladies who were dismissed were friends and because people had ignored the "at will" provision of employment in elected offices for so long that it just felt wrong to them that the ladies were dismissed.

What was lawful and even practical didn't seem "fair."  The reaction was so deep because few if any knew the real principles in play, as well as the problems of proceeding with a hostile staff.

So the challenge then became finding ways to tie the dismissals to things other than allowable reasons.  Answer: Allege discrimination or wrongful discharge.  Your first clue to the real causes to these lawsuits, as has been pointed out earlier, is the fact that all of the lawsuit involved workers in the clerk's office who were dismissed and ALL of them are represented by a single attorney who is known for filing such lawsuits.

If Milligan does anything to defend himself, his critics fall back to claims of him doing it on work time at the public trough.  Rather than question the motives of the attackers, critics simply say that he brought it on himself.  The answer, evidently, was for him to do exactly as others before him had done -- serve his time and leave the staff alone, the deeply entrenched staff absorbed in its own sense of entitlement where there was none.

As it has also been pointed out before, NO ONE in Saline County history had ever, EVER invoked this little-known provision of "at will" law.  They just didn't do it.  And paybacks are hell.  That is what you're seeing right now, Mr. Smith, paybacks -- except for Luther Sutter.

He calls them paydays.

Comment by BoydB on April 19, 2012 at 6:55am

Right Again!  Dennis Milligan, P.36.

Bethca can't guess who was so impressed with Myka Sample's abilities that he combined two postions into one, assigned the position to Ms. Sample, and had her in charge of, among other things, coordinating the jury, electronic filing, and "all of our scanning."

I'll save some time:  Dennis Milligan, Deposition taken April 7, 2011, P.104.



Comment by Casey Smith on April 18, 2012 at 9:38pm

Mr. Tripp,


You seem to be a reasonable guy. So why is it so hard to understand that this was not about denial of free speech, but retaliation of her free speech? It puzzles me that you seem to know so much about the inner workings of these offices. Where you an employee there? What is your angle to this? Do you just enjoy thinking your friends with people in authoritative positions? Maybe it’s all just a game for you but it’s not for the taxpayers. I want to see competent people in these positions and Milligan had a great opportunity to do his job without all of the mess he created. The facts in his disposition speak for themselves. Why is it that his opponent is the devil in your eyes? You have chastised Democrats on this blog, and even tried to paint his opponent as one, yet she is running as a Republican. I have news for you; having a label on your name does not make you a better person. You talk about how this country is falling apart, but its political rhetoric like yours that is tearing it apart. You seem to think that there is only one person for a job when many others can do it as well. I personally hate to hear Milligan on the radio during the day. He’s campaigning for his job when taxpayers are paying him to be working. Is this a good way to use our tax dollars? Where are you when it comes to being conservative with our money on that issue? What point is there to any clerk being on a radio show? They have no influence on any legislation. All the political spin is nauseating as this is not about new way or old. It’s about getting the job done right and Mr. Milligan had his chance.  People will judge and this information needs to be put out there… too much of it is true and has facts to back it up. 

You never have spoken about his statement as to needing another attack like 9/11. IF someone that you were not friends with said something like this, I bet you would crucify them and send a letter to all their constituents.

Comment by honest on April 18, 2012 at 9:09pm

 Plausible deniability

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Plausible deniability is, at root, credible (plausible) ability:

1.      to deny a fact or allegation, or

2.      to deny previous knowledge of a fact.

The term most often refers to the denial of blame in (formal or informal) chains of command, where upper rungs quarantine the blame to the lower rungs, and the lower rungs are often inaccessible, meaning confirming responsibility for the action is nearly impossible. In the case that illegal or otherwise disreputable and unpopular activities become public, high-ranking officials may deny any awareness of such act or any connection to the agents used to carry out such acts.

 It typically implies forethought, such as intentionally setting up the conditions to plausibly avoid responsibility for one's (future) actions or knowledge.

In politics and espionage, deniability refers to the ability of a "powerful player" or actor to avoid "blowback" by secretly arranging for an action to be taken on their behalf by a third party—ostensibly unconnected with the major player.

 In political campaigns, plausible deniability enables candidates to stay "clean" and denounce advertisements that use unethical approaches or innuendo based on opposition research.

Note: Above information should be applied when question arises as to “why” politicians enlist journalist press agents as chiefs of staff and further set up a political network that can sanitize perceptions of questionable actions and decisions that will potentially negatively affect current and future election campaigns.The political spin machine is more of an office image cleaner than it is a washing machine; when you put dirty laundry in a washing machine; with water and soap, turn it on; the end result is clean laundry.When you put dirty laundry in the political spin machine; the end result will be the same dirty laundry hidden by an image of clean laundry. Look at this dirty shirt; No!, look at that clean shirt. I see dirt here; No!, look over there; see how clean it is! This is broke; it does not work correctly. No! It is not broke; it works fine, look at that; it works perfectly! I see that as wrong; No!, it is good; look at it my way and you will see just how good it looks!

 If they can change what you think; they can change what you see; if they can not change what you think, then they will attempt to change what you are looking at; if they cannot change what you are looking at, then they will attempt to affect the way others see you; if they cannot affect the way others see you, then they will normally just move on to the next potential ally.

Comment by BoydB on April 18, 2012 at 8:52pm

No one wants to guess?  Dennis Milligan Deposition, P. 24-25

Betcha can't guess who said under oath and under penalty of perjury, and in contradiction to the contention of others on this blog,  that, in the absence of her Facebook entry, Dana Mattingly would have still been employed at the clerk's office on January 3, 2011. 

(Incidentally, there is no "right" to fire someone.  Rights are set forth in the Constitution.  Someone might have the "authority" to fire someone, and, if that authority is abused, one must answer.  But no one has the right to walk all over others and treat them like dirt.)



Comment by Ricky David Tripp on April 18, 2012 at 8:05pm

Casey, I've already explained this several times.  Cases like this one are frequently settled without a finding of fault.  It points to a tremendous need for major tort reform we aren't likely to see in our lifetimes, because attorneys right now are in control of most everything. 

I'll repeat this once more, and invite you to check it out with someone OUTSIDE of the Tribe who actually knows what they are talking about. No finding of fault or court judgment was rendered in the Mattingly case -- period.  None. Nada.  Zip.  Zilch.  This was strictly a money decision, that continuing to defend the case, given its challenges of establishing the fact that NO denial of free speech was engaged would have cost more money to defend successfully than the perceived benefits to the county.

Ms. Mattingly stirred a s---tstorm with her Facebook remarks.  The results were quite negative because those reading them had no idea of what the Milligan version of events were.  It made things quite uncomfortable for everyone in the clerk's office, because emotions were running high at the time over the dismissals.  But never once did Milligan ever question or challenge Dana's right to speak her mind.  To the contrary, he made every reasonable attempt to make peace with her, as the events were reported to others. 

It is a matter of common knowledge that Mattingly was furious and defiant -- bad combinations when trying to work with a new boss you openly dislike.

It was Mattingly who reportedly made the statement that they would probably be best parting ways, and Mr. Milligan agreed.  It is also a matter of record that he approached Ms. Mattingly about the possibility of reconsidering her positions and possibly returning -- and she refused.

This was NOT, REPEAT NOT about free speech, sir.  It was about abusing the principle of free speech in order to exact political revenge.  In case you didn't notice, and I can almost guarantee that you haven't.....

EVERY ONE of these lawsuits involve women who were dismissed from duty at the clerk's office, and every one of these women were represented by the same attorney.  That tells a lot of people out here VOLUMES about these cases.  The timing was also quite convenient, as one after another complaint was staged at suspicious intervals, like a carefully scripted three-act play.  I would submit to you that had Mr. Milligan ignored his lawful right to restructure his staff and had done what all other officials in Saline County have done in years past, and quietly let the unelected oligarchy remain, keep their planters in the corners and their pictures on the wall, NONE OF THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED.

This was ALL, in my opinion, retribution for breaking the Tribe, choosing a new team and letting go of individuals who were known and liked within the Circuit Court universe.  It was at the heart of Judge Grisham Phillips' unconscionable decision to refuse to swear Mr. Milligan into office.

In Saline County, the Tribe in all its forms is untouchable.  If you are elected, you are to come in the door, say hello to everyone on your way in, do your job, shut up, leave everyone alone, and then say goodbye when you leave.

Here's a newsflash for you, sir -- it's not supposed to work that way.  The law is written in one way, then ignored and done the Saline County way.

Until now.

Comment by Casey Smith on April 18, 2012 at 6:37pm


Harper posted a clear understanding of that suit.

Comment by honest on April 18, 2012 at 6:29pm

Comment by Harper5 hours ago

Mr. Milligan's defense by Ricky D and the shadow is nothing more than an attempt to blame the victims. I guess that's all they have, and it's sleazy.

"Free will" employment had absolutely nothing to do with the Mattingly suit. The central issue to the complaint was the denial of free speech. Employment was relevant only as the means Milligan used to effect that denial. It wasn't his act of firing Mattingly that led to the settlement, it was his use of employment to silence her that was unlawful. And the documents and depositions showed that's exactly what he did. The county had really no choice but to cut the loss and settle.

Comment by Casey Smith6 minutes ago

I never said the Mayor was drinking in the park, I said she was there while her friends were drinking. The picture shows this clearly. You should read the post more carefully.

As for the statement about "at will". NO----> Honest <----posted a statment that made this real clear. The lawsuit is not about "at will" employment. Its about someones free speech being violated. It had merit to go to court. Since you know it all then why dont you tell me why someone would settle a case that they are not at fault for? Please dont give me the lame excuse of saving money because the county already pays a lawyer to defend against these charges.


© 2016   Created by Shelli Poole.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service