Broad + Liberal = Kringle

Posted August 23rd, 2007 by Joe Kaiser

Dear Rob,

The proposed settle agreement we’ve discussed of late demonstrates how misguided former AAG Cheryl Kringle was in handling this investigation.

I think I understand why that is, at least in part.

Look at the second point she makes here . . .


Anything jump out at you?

In the real world

I wonder how Cheryl is doing now, in the real world, where there’s no “Assistant Attorney General” after her name on her business card.

She’s probably discovered people no longer go in to apoplectic shock when she announces her arrival on the scene, and that without the hammer of the AAG tagline after her name, she actually has to earn it.

Earning it is key.

As an AAG, she didn’t have to. There was no reason or need, frankly, to earn anything. With AAG on her business card, she can do or say anything and people, I suspect, will let her get away with it because that’s the easiest way to make her go away.

I’m guessing they just smile and say, “okay,” and hope it all ends before she’s taken their every last dollar.

Liberal broad

But that’s not half the problem.

With the AAG thing going for her, she’s free to do and say almost anything, knowing there will likely be zero pushback. That much, we get.

And if someone does push?

Well, she’s got the resources of the state’s largest lawfirm at her disposal.

Add to it the concepts she describes below and you have the potential for a train wreck . . .

The Attorney General’s Office has broad authority to enforce the CPA. Courts are required to liberally construe the CPA so its beneficial purposes may be served— Cheryl Kringle, former AAG
5/9/2007 Settlement Proposal

And this is why it’s gotten out of control.

With the broad authority the Office of the Attorney General affords her and statutes she knows to be so liberally construed she cannot possibly lose, anything she does or says in her role as AAG is almost certain to be impossible for an average citizen to argue, much less defend.

the misadventure

So, we find ourselves today in a situation where an out of control AAG, having the power of your office behind her, with laws heavily slanted in her favor, created an entire case of consumer protection misadventure out of nothing but whole cloth.

Why, you ask?

Because she could.

Except that

Every now and then, it turns out, she runs into some clown who doesn’t get it. Oh sure, she tries to explain it so we do, but we’re not so smart and it doesn’t sink in.

When she makes it clear she intends to bankrupt us with multi-million dollar judgments and crush us out of existence, we still don’t get it, dumbasses that we are.

So she ratchets it up even further, hoping we’ll see we have no choice but to settle with her if we hope to come out alive and kicking.

And even then, frustratingly, we’re just too stupid to go along with it.

the facts matter

That AAG thing on a business card gets zero respect from me, Rob, and I’m not quaking in my boots over here.

I’m also confident the judge won’t be quite so moved by your “broad authority” and “liberally construed” arguments when the facts are made clear.

“Broad authority” isn’t code for doing and saying things that in the real world would never be allowed, or worse, that the rules don’t apply to you.

Nor does “liberally construed” mean you just get to make stuff up as you go, like you did with the Public Records Act fiasco (among a host of other things).

I prefer a different concept. One that doesn’t require the crutches of “broad authority” or “liberally contrued” to justify.

Perhaps you’ve heard of it . . .



Joe Kaiser

8 Responses to: “Broad + Liberal = Kringle”

  1. anemonehead responds:
    Posted: August 23rd, 2007 at 8:38 pm

    Thanks for spelling that out Joe. I would never have figured out that Kringle is a liberal broad.

    You think maybe this case might be the reason she decided to leave the AG’s office?

  2. Joe Kaiser responds:
    Posted: August 23rd, 2007 at 8:56 pm

    You’re presuming leaving was her idea. I’m not so sure we should assume as much. I’ll be sure to check if she left or was asked to leave.

    With the Pacific Health Center fiasco just coming to an embarrassing end for the AG, and then what must be seen internally as another mess she got them into, I’d say there’s a decent chance leaving was someone else’s suggestion .

  3. anemonehead responds:
    Posted: August 23rd, 2007 at 10:12 pm

    Didn’t realize she wsas a party to that mess as well. Seems the AG should invest in egg remover.

  4. Joe Kaiser responds:
    Posted: August 23rd, 2007 at 11:06 pm

    Yes, they don’t call her Cheryl “no complaints, no problem” Kringle for nothing.

    A party to it?

    You’d be well suited to lay odds she was in charge of that million dollar mess.

  5. Vlad responds:
    Posted: August 24th, 2007 at 6:41 am


    Were it me, I’d be curious to look into the web stats and see if Ms.Kringle’s current employer is checking out your blog (shaking their heads in realization of the liability they’ve brought on board).

    But, I believe, web stats are not detailed enough beyond domain name/IP address to tell you exactly who is lurking here.

    Could be the Diva of this debacle herself…

  6. anemonehead responds:
    Posted: August 24th, 2007 at 7:02 am

    At least she’s consistent. Still doesn’t explain why the AG is pusuing the claim against you, especially with her track record. If I was the AG I’d be trying to distance myself from her, let’s say, ambitious undertakings. I’m sure they weren’t counting on running into two guys back to back that refused to bow to the pressure.

    Keep fighting the good fight. Someone has to keep them in their place.

  7. DaveD responds:
    Posted: August 24th, 2007 at 9:33 am

    I wonder if Cheryl’s performance in the real world still rises to the level of “fine work?”

    It’s got to be tough to soldier on when she realizes inconveniances like truth, evidence and accountability will tend to obstruct her ambition. Hope her new boss understands.

  8. Davido responds:
    Posted: August 24th, 2007 at 7:24 pm

    Joe, Once again, your point is well put. This is the kind of talk that needs to be heard by Judge or Jury.

Post a Comment

Enter Your Details:

You may write the following basic XHTML Strict in your comments:
<a href="" title=""></a> · <acronym title=""></acronym> · <abbr title=""></abbr>
<blockquote cite=""></blockquote> · <code></code> · <strong></strong> · <em></em>

  • If you’re a first-time commenter, your response will be moderated.
  • If your response includes a link, it will require moderator approval.
Enter Your Comments:

Note: This is the end of the usable page. The image(s) below are preloaded for performance only.