Monday, December 31, 2018

An Open Letter to Steven M. Craig -

Steven M Craig was not a journalist.  He wrote restaurant reviews and faxed them to the willing from his home fax machine.  It is likely, however, Steven was a recepient of aid from the Alterman - Fund Fund for Employment-Challenged Journalists. 

An Open Letter To Steven M. Craig

Dear Mr. Craig,

            I received a copy of your faxed newsletter from a third party.  Even though I am continuously mentioned, and I might add, libeled, you did not see fit to contact me in advance of publication.  A curious omission. 
            You have violated the usual standards and practices for journalistic endeavors in so many particulars that I am somewhat at a loss to know where to start.  But I will try to be as brief as possible given the obvious constraints. 
            First, I know you only from four or less phone conversations all of which took place last summer or autumn.  I talked to you because you expressed concern for Morgan and positioned yourself as a friend of hers who wanted to protect her from behavior on John’s part that was inappropriate.  You were never contacted as a journalist. I always believed you were Morgan’s friend, not a journalist looking for a quick sale. 
In the last conversation we had you expressed concern that John was trying to create the appearance of fraud on Morgan’s part.   You asserted this many times with great detail as to how it could be accomplished, why John was both capable and likely to do so.
 Morgan was handling the house finances as John had asked and you warned both her and myself of the possibility that she was being set up by John Fund, who is frequently characterized as the individual most responsible for the various ‘dirty tricks’ that so exercised the liberal media during the Clinton Presidency.    You forcefully urged me to make sure that Morgan documented every transaction.  John Fund, you said, is a dangerous man who will stop at nothing.  This chain of events, very clear in my mind, certainly, makes your ‘article’ even more outrageous.  
You touched on one issue that strikes everyone.  Why did John Fund allow Morgan to move in with him, remain, and continue to handle his affairs?  Why did the doyen of devious devisings do what he did?  All chains of causality link to the real nature of the participants. Through their actions people tell us who they are behind the smoke and mirrors, if we possess the insight to really see. 
We will soon see, of that you can be sure. 
Back to the subject. 
            I will itemize your specific untruths and misstatements so that you can recant and publish a retraction in an orderly fashion. This retraction should include a written apology to myself along with a list of  those to whom this idiocy was faxed.
            First page, second column, line 27 – 37.  “When it was learned that he not only had an affair with Morgan’s Mother while he babysat for young Morgan but later impregnated her when she came to New York as an adult, it caused a shudder in the right wing community.”
            John never babysat any of my children.  He lived in Sacramento; I lived in the Los Angeles area. He was in their presence once or twice. I keep hearing this story and still wonder where it came from.  As to the reaction of the ‘right wing community,’ I would not know.  I know lots of right-wingers, but most of them are entirely oblivious to this drama.  As I have frequently told John, he is not as important as he thinks he is. Most people neither know nor care who he is.  But everyone who knows about it who is a friend of mine is just appalled.    Are you intimating with your comment that somehow left-wingers believe it is open season on the children of their friends?  What a curious world you inhabit. 
First page; 3rd column ;line 8 – 18.  “There was even the possibility expressed by Morgan herself that Fund was her Brother’s sire.” 
First, you should not capitalize brother.  You are not u sing it as a proper name. A simple glance at my youngest son leaves the viewer with no doubt as to his parentage.  I was very sure of the matter and, in fact, knew that no other genetic combination could have been possible except that which is acknowledged. This may surprise you, so brace yourself.  Women generally know these things.  Certainly I did.  Biology, unlike politics, has laws based on physical reality.  If Morgan told you that was a possibility then she was mistaken. Morgan’s relationship with the truth used to be problematical.  She is much improved in the last year, having had to deal with the continuous lies of Mr. Fund.  Now she understands how totally aggravating it is to slog through unending mires of mendacity.   
First page: 4th column; line 39 – 41 to Second page; 1st column; Lines 1 – 9   “Her Mother, Melinda Pillsbury-Foster, during this time was in the campaign and had sent off e-mails to executives of the Journal and even to Laura Bush, or so she claimed to me, disparaging Mr. Fund’s character.  She oddly, however felt he should do the “right thing” and marry her daughter when he was her ex-lover, Family Values Libertarian Style. (She is a prominent and well known spokesperson for the cause.)”
Campaign?  I write a letter asking people to let them alone to deal with their problems and I am interfering. But if I had done nothing I would have been neglectful.  Rock and a hard place, don’t you think?
Morgan is my daughter.  Parents don’t abandon their children even when those children do stupid things.  I did not want them to marry.  But I could not get Morgan to leave.  I was hoping you were wrong about John and that these two troubled people could work things out.  We all entertain hopes on the way to reality.   Parts of the story were invisible to me, living as I do 3,000miles away.
When is a mother deemed to be absolved of the bindings of motherhood?   Short answer:  Never.  Morgan is a woman grown and of mature years.  I cannot order her.  I can only attempt to persuade and to point out the inappropriateness of behavior revealed to me either by her or by others.   I never stop hoping.  Not an easy job, rest assured. 
I have never sent a letter to Laura Bush regarding this matter nor did I tell you I intended to do so.   I am sure the First Lady keeps accurate records so you could ask her office.  I cannot imagine what writing to her would have accomplished.  This is not a problem with literacy, presumably. However, I did go to tea at the White House last spring before this all happened.  But the event, while not public, was on behalf of Federated Republican Women.  I am a member of Federated Women.  In fact, I am First Vice-President for Santa Barbara County this year.  I am also a regent for Federated and attend lots of their events.  This leads me to the next point. 
I am not a spokesperson for the LP.  I am sure they would reel with horror at the suggestion.  I reregistered Republican in 1988, joining Federated soon afterwards.   Surely 14 years is a long time, even to someone as inexact as you seem to be.  I have donated to Libertarian candidates from time to time; helped out here and there when asked by a friend.  I have occupied no office. 
If you know many Libertarians you know that they harbor opinions on issues pertaining to “Family Values’ on pretty much the same range of outrageous and sublimely horrible as do individuals in other parties.  Individuals within that party have also been known to act in ways that contradict their expressed opinions.  That is one of the problems with all collectivism. It uses specifics to ignore ranges of behavior.  As individuals, most Libertarians are as responsible as Reps. and Dems; or Greens, for that matter.  You get stinkers in every bunch. 
I did write a private letter to Paul Gigot asking him to intervene at one point. That was after Morgan was being battered.   John’s behavior underwent a salutary change for the better immediately thereafter.  Unfortunately, it did not stick. 
Page 2; 1st column; lines 9 – 21    “It there fore came as no surprise when Page Six of The New York Post ran an item in January that they were engaged and that invitations were sent out.  The very next day there was a retraction with a comment by Morgan that her mother should in effect mind her own business.”
I would be very interested to see any material that backs up any part of this assertion.  First, I grudgingly agreed to host a small private wedding after a conversation with John and an e-mail that indicted to me his wish that they marry.    I begin the very moderate and private arrangements for that wedding immediately since the date loomed.  Even small weddings take time. I e-mailed updates and questions to John and Morgan regularly.  I was especially worried about John’s family’s ability to eat the fish I planned for the reception, as I remember.  John’s one comment was on the program I planned to give attendees.  The twenty invitations to what I insisted must be a small and very private wedding are still sitting in a pile in my office. None were ever mailed.  I e-mailed two people with the artwork for that invitation before retracting it.  Those two people were, surprise, Morgan and John.  One of them sent it onto various people, evidently.  I did not.  I sent an e-mailed copy to Lloyd Grove afterwards at his request.  I didn’t consider the matter confidential. Just not interesting to non-family members. 
            Page 2;column 3; lines 26 – 34.  “Her mother, coincidently happened to come to New York while all these recent activities were taking place and presumably is lending moral support to her abused daughter. 
            I made plans to come to NY when asked to attend the American Theatre Critics Conference by my friend Michael Grossberg. Michael and I have been friends for 25 years.  He is a theatre critic for the Columbus Dispatch and active in the organization.  He will confirm what I have said.  I do not doubt that Morgan has been abused.  She was shaky and distraught when I arrived.  John Fund had decamped just minutes before I walked in. He is over six feet tall.  Morgan is 5’1” in height.  John denied being there.  The security at the door later affirmed that he had been. I have and will testify that I believe Morgan was abused, then and earlier.  I do not lightly commit myself on such matters. 
            Morgan has been known to lie.  That is why she taped John in the first place.  I still ask her for documentation when ever possible. She gives it to me.  John never would. 
            You can send your retraction to me care of Morgan’s attorney, William Cobb.

Free Republic's Deluded Fund Supporters - 2002

The gentleman who wrote the short article below is a good man, committed to honor, justice and his country.

Banned from Free Republic… for Goring a Sacred Cow???

Morgan warned me this would happen.

My screen name was MaligneInterceptor.  I was a happy Freeper until this August.  Loved FR.  Posted semi-regularly with a group of cyberfriends on the Freeoples Thread.  Celebrated conservative/libertarian ideas.  Observed the posting rules religiously.  Promoted FR among friends and relatives, encouraging them to join the fun.  EVEN DONATED MONEY.  Yet after compiling a two year record of no infractions, I was banned without explanation.

I hadn’t posted much in the past year – a second child really soaks up the time.

Recently Morgan pointed me to a thread entitled “Who Framed John Fund?”  I’d read a few of the earlier John Fund/Morgan Pillsbury threads; this one wasn’t much different from the others.  The usual Fundies were out, hurling invective at Morgan and her mother.  Some genuinely good people also made an appearance, offering their support for what they believed to be a good man.  Entirely missing was any post in support of Morgan.  Having been banned from FR close to eighteen months ago, she was unable to respond for herself.  The one-sidedness of the thread appalled me; I decided to respond. 

I initially Freepmailed those whom I was reasonably certain weren’t Fund’s friends/acquaintances/paramours.  I avoided those thought to be his associates; I reasoned there was no point attempting to engage them, since they appeared close-minded on the issue.  Upon reflection, I decided to post publicly – their trashing of Morgan had been public, so it seemed fair that their defense of their position should be also.

I put up a lengthy post, detailing the facts as I knew them.  The response of the Fundies was typical; no attempts were made to challenge my post; their response was more invective.  The other Freepers responded as Freepers do when they believe a troll has soiled a thread:  they gave no ground, persisting in their support of Fund.

I responded to their individual posts one-by-one about a week later, giving further details in hopes of persuading them that their support of Fund was misplaced.  Less than an hour after I posted my final reply, the entire thread was pulled, and my posting privileges were revoked.  It was after 2am EST on the day this happened.

Did I break any rules in my posts?  None that I’m aware of.  Was I banned for presenting the other side of an argument about a Free Republic favorite son?  Perhaps.

You be the judge. 

The “offending” thread disappeared before I was able to save it, but I did capture the “My Comments” section of my Free Republic account.  Linked here is that document – if you scroll down to the first lengthy post (about halfway down, dated “08/07/2003 5:00 AM PDT #42 of 86”), you’ll see my first comment on this thread.  Scrolling up, you’ll be able to read the responses in order, as well as my replies to them.

I’ll miss Free Republic.  Lots of good stuff happens there.  There was nothing good about this.


Thursday, December 27, 2018

Letter to WebCommanders demanding refund. The owner of Webcommanders was Jack Dean

August 29, 2002

Dear WebCommanders:

You might not have noticed that I sent you a letter regarding this account that clearly indicated that your non-sites, not maintained for the last three years are of less than no value.  Presence on the web?  What a joke. 
I want my money back.  I have at this point three very functional sites with wonderful content and great service from a reliable provider who is better than his word.  Sites were up and functional in less than a week. 

Those are:

            Just send back the money, including the retainer of $2,000 I originally sent.  It has been real.


Melinda Pillsbury-Foster

Friday, November 16, 2018

2011 - Had me again. Morgan Gell, Psychopath

To:  Morgan Gell

The POA was issued to Jay, not yourself. If Jay turned this over to you then he did so without consulting me, which was his fiduciary obligation.  I now know, as I did not before, that failure to provide reports to me was also a breech of that same fiduciary obligation.  While this was a legal matter I trusted both of you because you are my daughter and because of your many apologies for your past behavior and your assurances to me of your continuing love. 
The POA has been revoked. You will receive a copy by mail, tracked and expedited, sent today.  It would be wise not to wait for that moment.
  Any action taken by either yourself or Jay would clearly indicate further violations under taken in attempts to cover up your previous abuses.  It sorrows me to say this, but it is the bald truth. 
You are no longer acting for me and all your previous actions are now subject to examination for these causes.  Send the named materials to my appointed agent, who is well apprised of this background and the facts.  All the parties you told me were notified or with whom you have discussed this matter are now being contacted to verify their correspondence with the two of you. Since these actions were taken on my behalf I have an absolute right to obtain copies from those various sources.
Charles Lincoln, my agent to receive these materials, is being copied on this. The first thing I knew about Charles was his disbarment from his own words. We all make mistakes.  Some  people recognize this and change.  If you expected to surprise me, you failed. 
You are not entitled to any information about myself or my activities, now or in the future. This letter serves as your second notice to send the material to Charles Edward Lincoln, III, at the address already provided, repeated here, since your record of successful delivery of materials is well known, raising further questions on your veracity.   A copy of this letter goes to Sassoon Saleem Sassoon as your prevarication has been of concern to both of us.
Office of Charles Edward Lincoln, III
9595 Wilshire Blvd Suite 900
Beverly Hills, 90212

You are obligated to turn over to my named agent all materials related to the GHS settlement, including all tax related issues, either those entrusted to you or generated in relation to that matter by anyone, including you or Jay, officials or employees of the State of Delaware, Department of Defense, correspondence with Dr. Larry Gell, and all other agencies, governmental or otherwise, and individuals falling within these guidelines.  None of this is your property. 
The IRS will receive a copy of the now revoked POA and an explanation of what has transpired along with other materials and documents if I am not completely satisfied. 
All” includes any recordings you made of me without my knowledge and any correspondence, emails, records, or other material from such individuals as Anne Fisher, who is also being notified. 
A POA is not a license to use my documents and other materials for your own profit. Jay, you told me, was undertaking this action because of a sense of family obligation which he shared with yourself, not playing dialing for dollars.
As part of his fiduciary duties Jay was obligated to provide accurate reports on his progress. Instead, he refused to talk to me and you lied about such elemental points as having filed a law suit.  You have also slandered me to an undisclosed number of people, now including, but not limited to, Charles Lincoln.
According to Jay, this reported to Charles Lincoln, no law suit was ever filed or even planned, an astonishing deviation from your verbal reports and, by Lincoln's report, citing my cousin, Melinda Pillsbury Arnold, I am a psychopath. Melinda has already refuted this statement and would so testify.

Since Jay acted as a Trustee or Executor for the estate of Van Hughes, who he well knew, held a power of attorney from me on the same matter, you have a responsibility to send those papers and recordings as well.  Hughes also had a fiduciary responsibility in this regard and violated this, refusing to turn over those materials when I revoked his POA. If Lisa Hughes, the widow of Van Hughes, has been put in possession of these, I will so inform the court in South Carolina. We can involve the court in North Carolina with these questions as well.  Lisa Hughes is being contacted as well. 

Those materials are mine, not Hughes', and not yours as they were generated on my behalf while Hughes was acting under my POA for the purpose of the GHS settlement. If any of these materials are not received you will be reported to the requisite authorities, including your local court.

What are you asserting you 'own?'  Be specific. I am curious to hear. You certainly do not own the photos which I trusted you to receive and send on to me and which you stole, to speak plainly.  The photos are not mine, but a trust, necessary to carry out the work Father laid on my shoulders.  If Father knew what you have done he would disown you.  You well know he asked me to act for him because he could not do so himself.  He told me I was his only hope of justice for his father.  I take this very seriously. 
Send the photos now or I will file complaints with the appropriate agencies.
Using the trust relationship documented by the POA, for extortionate purposes, for instance your attempts to get me to testify under penalty of perjury, to issues I told you I had not myself, witnessed, are documented.
I have no interest in continuing a relationship with you. Your constant lies to me, your abusive, deceitful behavior,  and your calloused attempts to manipulate your disabled brother,  are reason enough.  Every other one of my children, your siblings, warned me never to trust you again.  They were all right. I was wrong. 
These causes, and your slanders and libels, make any relationship impossible.


Melinda Pillsbury-Foster

P.S.  I kept all of the notes and cards we have exchanged since we started talking again.  This is one example, included in the time line to explain why I forgave your past transgressions and again, wrongly, trusted you.  I have every right to publish on these issues.

Monday, November 12, 2018

September 26, 2007 - Jay trying to get Melinda to start talking to them.

Why Don't you Give Morgan a Call Friday Morning?

  • Jay Gell <>
    Sep 26, 2007 at 9:32 PM
    Morgan may like to hear from you.

    We have moved web photos to and will be uploading newest ones over this weekend.



Wednesday, November 7, 2018

September 26, 2007 - Email from Jay Gell to Melinda

[Flickr] Jay Gell has invited you to join!
Yahoo/Family Justice
  • Jay Gell (via Flickr) <>
    Sep 26, 2007 at 9:30 PM
    Hi Melinda,

    Jay Gell would like to share some photos with you!

    I want to share my photos with you since you may be
    interested in at very least seeing the your grandchildren
    my "stypid" EX-sister threatened. see other email

    Signing up for Flickr is free, and takes less than a
    minute. Just click here:

    See you there!

    Jay Gell

    p.s. If you are not interested, just ignore this email.
    Flickr won't bug you again and there's nothing special you
    have to do.

March 6, 2005 - Correspondence Jay Gell - Melinda Pillsbury-Foster

M. P.F. <>
Mar 6, 2005 at 10:30 AM
Hello Jay,

I have spoken with my attorney friend in California,
who advises me to write you this letter so as to make
it perfectly clear to you, that you are to immediately
cease and desist all and any further communications
with any third parties, or toward any third parties
about me or my personal or business matters.  This
means anyone and everyone, with whom you have come
into contact with, arising from our coincidental

If you should choose to continue our relationship on a
mother-in-law and son-in-law basis then fine.  I will
accept your apology - you accept mine. We can let
bygones be bygones!  All other offers, plans,
involvement or relationships income opportunities or
dealings are off!

You have forced me to consider taking measures to
protect myself, and my financial interests, and you
have already been notified that you are not, and have
never been actually appointed as my power of attorney.
Your friend was given that role, and I am considering
the possibility of replacing him with someone else as
well.  Any further or continued representations of
such will be dealt with as a criminal matter,
whereupon I will file criminal charges for fraud,
misrepresentation, extortion , engaging in the
practice of law without a license in California and
North Carolina, and spousal abuse.

Put your emotions aside and way the consequences, if
you think you will have a family life interjecting
yourself between me and my daughter you are wrong!  If
you think you will prevail by maliciously using
extortion, threats and retaliation against me posing
as my personal representative you will pay a price
beyond what you might imagine.

I know that you have been listening in on phone
conversations with Morgan, and I am placing you on
notice that any continued interference manipulation or
control with my open communications with my daughter,
and any continued unhealthy or abusive practices with
my daughter will result in my direct intervention with
the appropriate legal authorities which will unlease
all kinds of unwanted controversy for you and your

My offer will be open until the noon tomorrow March 7,
2005, where you are to respond to me with your
decision of acceptance or rejection, of my peace
offering, and we continue our relationship as mother
and son-in-law, otherwise you will leave me no
alternative but to take steps to protect myself, and
the interest and long-term wellbeing of my daughter!

I trust that you clearly understand my point, as well
as my position of power in this matter!


Melinda Pillsbury-Foster

Fwd: sorry about drug dealing pee stealing dyke's threats2
    Sep 3, 2006 at 5:12 PM
    Note: this email is in response to an article called
      John Fund and the Truth:  On Trial in New York
      published at
    The hate email and threats to your life or mine, Morgan's, Jacob's, or Gabriel's lives are not to be taken lightly. Bonita Gell is the one. We have been advised you need to file a complaint wherever you are. Bonnie has already threatend Morgan twice here. She is a pyscotic drug dealer who has many connections of the worst kind. It would appear she is a huge John Fund fan and may be involved in a conspiracey with him to continue harassing, threatening, slandering Morgan. Bonnie is "working (a cover job)" as craft services in the film (comercials) industry locally. I need your info on the IP where the post was made from. email Morgan at for recent pictures of the boys.

    Jay E. Gell.

October 7, 2002 - Morgan Moves in on Fred

Fred was a Libertarian acquaintance of mine who offered to let Morgan stay with him when we told him about the attempt on her life in New York.  I apologize, Fred, for inflicting Morgan on you.  If I had known I would never have done so.  If I had known I also would have had the abortion my doctor urged on me.  You see, he knew the Barteaux family and was the physician who had the care of Richard, Morgan's father.  Richard Lee Barteaux

10/7/2002 12:15:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Sent from the Internet

>From: "badalli fred"
>Subject: MORGAN
>Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 18:54:59 +0000

Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: Click Here

Received: from by with HTTP;
    Mon, 07 Oct 2002 18:54:59 GMT
X-Originating-IP: []
From: "badalli fred" <>
Subject: MORGAN
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 18:54:59 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html

 Sorry, but I want her out and gone as soon as possible!!! November will not wait! I am also tired of the past somewhat insulting, paranoid e-mails that exaggerate and distort what I am about. She is no longer welcome in my house. I'm tired of this soap opera, I don't trust her, she's a loose cannon and I am soon evicting her. I do not need any tax write-offs! etc. I do not need any money! I did not ask her to move in. I do not need her help to keep my place functioning. I only need her to leave!
   I want my privacy back. I am very uncomfortable having her around. I am having a very dear female visitor over tomorrow for a week and I don't need any stress or aggravation from her. You should also know that I was so pissed off with her while I was gone that I almost flew back to kick her out. Whatever problems she has is her/your problem. I'm sick and tired of the whole situation. If she has emotional problems, than you can get her some therapy. If she fears for her life than she can buy a gun.
   My mind is made up. I want her out. We can do this peacefully or I will involve the local authorities. 

Monday, November 5, 2018

Note to my then attorney Alison February 11, 1998

Note to Alison written by Melinda Pillsbury-Foster

            As you requested, here are the details, as I can remember them, regarding the incident witty the UN-invitation to the Libertarian Convention issued this morning by Laura McFadden.  Her telephone number is (562) 428-8113.  The P.O. Box used on the flyer was, 17121, Long Beach, CA 90807.

            I called Laura on Monday night to make reservations for myself and my daughter, Dawn Pillsbury, to attend the banquet for the Libertarian Party of California.  Gene Burns, someone I have known for fifteen years, on and off, is the speaker and I thought it would be fun to go.  I did not know when I decided to attend that my estranged husband, Craig Franklin, would also be attending.
            I had made arrangements to see an old friend, Dolores White, on Sunday morning for brunch at the hotel.  I had called other friends to see if we could get together. 
            I gave Laura my credit card information, asked about the program and rang off.  Then I forgot the matter. 
            This morning I received a call on my answering machine informing me that my reservations would not be honored and that I was ‘requested’ not to attend the four day event.  I was shocked.  I had been a state officer in the LPC for six years, served as County Chairman in Los Angeles for two terms, managed many campaigns and opened and funded two different officers over the years I was active.  I had also been a candidate for 20th State Senate, receiving nearly 5% of the vote in a four way race in 1982. 
            I have many friends in the LPC and wanted to renew old friendships.  I also wanted to promote the non-profit foundation which I founded, The Women’s Institute for Individual and Political Justice.  I am presently working on a book outlining the philosophy of the organization. 
            I called an old friend, Jack Dean, who does fundraising for the National LP.  He also has done work for the Women’s Institute and is presently putting up a web page for us, domain name, Salem’s voice.  Jack said he would call around and find out what was going on. 
            A few minutes later I received a call from Mark Hinkle, presently serving as state chairman of the LPC.  He had talked to Jack.  He told me that he had been told, on good authority, that if I came I would, “disrupt the banquet.”  I would, “pass out literature,” and, “have a violent confrontation with my estranged husband.”   
            I asked him who had said this.  I pointed out that he had known me for many years and that I had never acted violently or inappropriately at any event.  In fact, I hadn’t even been rude when I had been provoked.  I asked who had made these remarks.  I said that I knew it was Michael Emerling Cloud.  He did not disagree.
            Mark and I talked.  I explained why I was coming to the convention.  He was obviously nervous.  He had been badly alarmed by someone.  I am sure that this person is Michael because Michael made some of the same remarks to my step-son, Scott, who was shocked at the suggestion of something so out of character in me. 
            Mark re-invited me.  I told him that I had no desire to talk to Craig.  That I would simply ignore his existence. 
            We said our good bys and I hung up. 
            The conversation occurred on February 11, 1998 between 11 and noon. 

Wednesday, October 31, 2018

November 20, 2001 - Email from John Fund to Teranto, James, Miniter, Brendan

The Accusation Morgan Made Up Phony Email Addresses as John

Fund in his deposition claimed the email account,, was never his.  He accused Morgan of making up and using the account.  The fact is Morgan started the account for him in August 2001, at his request, leaving the password unfilled on the computer in their home.  John then put in the password and started the account. Morgan never had access.  

Here below you see Fund refer to the account in an email exchange with James Taranto, asking him to send the copy to him after it is edited at two addresses, his "wjs  address" and this one:  

Here is the article as it appeared the next day. 

From the WSJ Opinion Archives:

-----Original Message-----
 From: Fund, John
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 9:21 PM
To: Taranto, James; Miniter, Brendan
 Subject: Political Diary

 Can you e-mail final copy to as well as my wsj
 address? Thanks.

 Prince of Darkness Sheds Some Light

Bob Novak, a syndicated columnist for 38 years and a fixture on CNN for two decades, looked just a tad uncomfortable receiving the National Press Club's award for lifetime achievement last week.
Bob has seen enough Beltway awards dinners filled with flattery in his time to be leery about being the subject of one. But then the roasting of the man Washington
journalists have dubbed "The Prince of Darkness" began and Bob began to enjoy himself. There's nothing like creating a role for yourself and then having your peers recognize you for being good at it.

But in addition to poking fun at Bob's tough-guy image, the dinner speakers also recognized the talents that have made Bob's "Inside Report" the best shoe-leather "reported" column in America. Bob may have passed his 70th birthday, but he outworks most journalists two generations younger than he is. I should know. I became the first reporter that Bob and his late partner Rowland Evans ever hired back in 1982, and both of them always outdid me both in savvy AND stamina.
 The roasters -- Jack Germond of the Baltimore Sun, Fred Barnes of the New Republic and Mark Shields of PBS -- poked gentle fun at Novakian foibles, especially his passion for following basketball teams on the road and then finding a convenient political story in whatever city he was in. They also
effectively lampooned the writing style he and Rowly Evans perfected -- an insider argot that constantly referred to "secret memos" and "little-noticed meetings" took on major policy and political significance.
 An hilarious sendup of a "lost" Bob Novak column prepared for the Press
Club dinner can be found at the Weekly Standard's website (subscription required)
Mark Shields joked that Novak really wasn't as important as he thought he
was in Washington: "After all tonight's Press Club banquet room is the only one in town without a metal detector." As he said that, I looked around and noted that while the room was filled with interesting people, no elected officials or cabinet officers were in evidence. In part that was because Congress had already cleared out of town for the weekend and the war was no doubt occupying Bush officials, but the observation nonetheless held. Bob is a fine journalist, but
not one to cozy up too close to politicans, the stray exception such as Jack Kemp not withstanding. Bob isn't a Republican, he's a tough reporter who does his
own roasting of people on both sides of the aisle.

 But he's also of an old school that recognizes how blessed he has been to
have had a chance to have a career in which he can tell people what he thinks. When Bob stood up to give his response to the "roasters," he thanked his family and the people who took a chance on him during his career. He also took time to recognize the print and TV outlets that paid his bills -- "I know who I work for, and it isn't the government."

Bob finished up by having some fun at the expense of the many sources for his column who were in the audience. He noted that he had learned one important thing in his 43 years in Washington: "There are two kinds of people in this town. Sources...and targets, and you better make up your mind which you are." But in reality there is a third kind of person: readers and viewers. There remain more than enough of those, both in Washington and all over the country, who appreciate Bob Novak to keep him a valuable political tip-sheet and provocative influence on American journalism for years to come.