Rodney Martin has gone beyond the pale, part 1

Published by carolyn on Sun, 2013-12-15 20:36

by Carolyn Yeager

Why Rodney Martin's Conspiracy Theory Doesn't Hold Up

The following is Part One of my response to Rod Martin's radio podcast on Sat. Dec. 14, 2012 on the ANN and Blog Talk networks. I am posting my response in two parts because I don't want to wait until I complete all of it, and I do want to set the record straight on as many of the untruths uttered by Rodney as possible.

After I complete this two-part response, I will not engage with Rodney in any further discussion of "he said- she said". But it's important to address all the falsehoods he came up with in this single "special broadcase." I will say that Rodney has shown himself to be a far worse fraud than I realized when I decided to bring to light the newspaper article revealing his work with Indian tribes and his wife being described as an Indian herself.

A look at the evidence and how Rodney responded to it will show that he is capable of "lying on his feet" - that is, making it up as he goes along. He does not trouble himself with inconsistencies and gaps in his narrative,  something we are familiar with in "holocaust survivors"--so confident is he that he will be believed. I can't say I understand what gives him his confidence as I am not one of his type. Maybe it's just bravado he has developed from working around easily-fooled people.

The ridiculous "fake name" argument

I will begin with his ridiculous remarks about my name. According to him, I am using a "fake" name. Can the name one is given at birth be considered a fake name? Carolyn Yeager is my real name more than any other name; that's why I use it. I am the daughter of Stephen Yeager. I relate to my own family lineage more than to any lineage of my former husband. My former husband and I went through a divorce which was finalized in 1982. That's a long time ago now, isn't it? I don't want to use his name for my personal websites and web presence in general.

I intend to post my genealogy at when I get it completed. I can't say when that will be as I am swamped with so much to do.

Speaking of names, Rodney said, "My father is, knew Pastor Butler." (Correction made here from what I previously had misunderstood) He seems to think I knew that, which I didn't/don't, and failed to take it into consideration. I don't see the point of that. Rodney always says he was raised by his "German" grandparents.

I might as well add here that Rodney made a big deal that I "knew" that his other set of grandparents were Scottish and "played dumb", but I did not, or I had forgotten. I'm glad it's finally on record that he is half German, half Scottish ancestry. He talks about being German all the time, giving the impression he is 100% German. It's just his thing.

Rodney also says "I knew" that his wife's father and brother were "hard core racialists and skinheads" who had served time in prison. No, I didn't. And that his wife is "more hard core than he is." Yet he also has to "protect the honor of his wife" from my exposure of what was printed in a California newspaper in 2007. He may have told me these things but it didn't stick in my mind. It actually sounds like they could be an Indian family though. (Rodney says Native American is an incorrect term and he knows more about Indians than I do.)

Rodney tells you that I knew all about his prior career and he doesn't know why I'm denying that. No. My recollection is that he said he had a business of his own (he may have said consulting) but he didn't offer what it was and I didn't ask. Whatever he might have said, it did not impress me enough to remember it. It's possible I have a selective memory, remembering only the things that mean something to me.

I think that's enough preliminary personal items.What's far more important is what he said about the Porterville Recorder newspaper article.

The "two villianous journalists" conspiracy theory

Rodney tries to explain away the reality that he was directly in the employ of an Indian Tribe from 2006 to 2009 (he was appointed by the Tribal Council on Aug. 20, 2006 and began work at the post on Aug. 25). What else can the Tribal Council Administrator be? He wants to imply he was actually working for the city in some liaison role. Nor is he comfortable with the fact that he sought the support of the "latino community" in his subsequent political career up to 2012. Having now positioned himself as a Pro-White leader with zero tolerance for anything non-White, he is afraid this will ruin his image as the "purest of the pure."

The crucial article in question is a friendly news story about a man in a new, somewhat high profile job in the community served by the newspaper.    I will put Rodney's comments and "explanations" uttered on his radio broadcast first, followed by my own comments and explanations in blue.

Rodney said, "I did sit for the interview. (One doesn't "sit" for interviews) And the reporter was a Black and the copy editor was a Jew – turned out to be quite an activist I've had several run-ins with, but be that as it may be, they asked a series of questions on the personal side, and they asked me if I was -quote- native."

(I'm a newspaper veteran - worked for newspapers a lot and I know that copy editors do not accompany reporters to their assignment - not ever! So Rodney is saying something really stupid here, which immediately warns us that he's making something up.

"They had a hard time understanding why I was involved in this, uh, this tribal city project." (Whaaat? Not at all surprising to people in this locale. Rod is trying to play the reverse race card - as though that played a part in anyone's thinking.)

"And I said no.(to whether he was "native." How reasonable is it that this reporter would ask him if he were a "native" or ask if his wife was? Not at all.) They asked if my family was (native), and I said (his voice gets testy here) “Well, isn't that the same question?” They asked about my wife and I SMIRKED and, uh, commented 'Yes, all whites affiliated with or working with the Tribes are Eastern Cherokees.' And the reason I say that is there is a uh “slur” among the uh Indian tribes and communities that whites uh believe it or not, uh they don't like the fact that Whites tried to assimilate into their culture any more than White Nationalists uh uh find it offensive as well." (@8min into the program)

(This would be totally unprofessional behavior for Rodney. It's not believable at all that he spoke in this way to a newspaper reporter. She would be completely taken aback by such unwarranted sarcasm. And why would he select "Eastern Cherokee" to say anyway? But it is so he can then say ...)

"Well, they printed that, as you can see, in the article the author (newspaper stories don't have authors, but writers) identified my wife as an Eastern Cherokee – what's interesting is it's a, itza, itza, itza slur, itz mocking, itz a mocking, itza, itz used to mock – oftentimes Indians will mock white people who claim that uh lineage."

"They also misrepresented several other elements in the story. Talked about me working for Indian Affairs. Carolyn cited that as well. INTERESTING, that's not accurate either. I worked, certainly after uh after my working carrying weapons for Uncle Sam, I worked for the committee, was assigned to a committee on Indian Affairs by a Congressman when I came back. That was ommitted – there were several other ommissions and uh it was very heavily slanted and uh the secretary in the office where I worked brought that to my attention."

(Here he is denying that he worked in Arizona for Indian affairs since 1994. But at that time, in 2007, he was proud to tell of his experience with Indian issues because this was what his new job was about. Rodney himself told the reporter everything she wrote. He even gave her the names and ages of his children! And his wife's name. How else would she have known?

And how would the secretary know what was in the article and what was ommitted before it was published?  What was the secretary's name?)

"And uh before I could even do anything ... uh the papers at that time came out late in the afternoon. I received a phone call that my wife was at the newpaper office (call from whom?) uh cussing the editor. (She's some sweet little lady isn't she?) It was a very mild-mannered person (the editor?) and [she?] was demanding that they do something uh about … now it wasn't that much longer uh that both of the individuals were terminated from the newspaper, and I can't say that it had to do with this situation, it was a to – I was told it was a culmination of a series of articles in which uh they had identified and misrepresented facts and ommissions and slanted things and it was what they called sloppy journalism, but I can say that I wasn't the only one that had complained and that had problems with our local “distorter” newspaper, others had as well." (No evidence for this.)

"And subsequently a whole series, a plethora of newspaper articles were removed because they were considered unreliable and, and junk journalism AS CAROLYN INDICATED ON HER SHOW." (he now sounds enthused, but the problem is that no articles were removed. THIS interview article of Jan. 12, 2007 was not removed either.) 

"And so, this speaks to a much broader issue in our movement."

Rodney's use of "what Carolyn said" has backfired on him

Rodney heard me say on my program that the article in question seemed to have been removed. From that he devised his entire story about the reporter and the copy editor and how they put it in the article about his wife being a Cherokee. His wife then complained and the editors and owners discovered other problems with these two villains and dismissed them. This page, and others they had "corrupted," were removed from the archives ...

Except that's not true! Nothing that he said is true. He made it all up. Can we say LIE?

All the articles can be retrieved using the search function at the Porterville Recorder. A search for Rodney Martin brings up 10 pages with ten stories each--that is 100 articles and editorials with Rodney in them! It includes this article in question on the 4th search results page.

*      *      *

Rodney said on his sleeze program: "And the fact that those articles are not available spoke to a much broader issue between two activist personnel at the local paper . The paper subsequently went into bankruptcy and changed owners."  Those articles ARE available and the ownership of the paper didn't change until 2013.

From Wikipedia:  The Porterville Recorder is a daily newspaper in the town of Porterville, California. Freedom Communications bought the paper in 1974 and sold it to current owner Rhode Island Suburban Newspapers in 2013.

"But that all happened after the removal of these reporters uh that not only did hit pieces and did some “distortion” as the paper's recorded about me, but about some other persons who, ya know, aren't even pro white. The copy editor had learned that I had been posting comments on pro-white blogs, wanted to make an issue about THAT, and as I said, uh early on one of the individuals has been seen posting NASTY comments in the newspaper's comment section. Most recently when I attended a city meeting and spoke against the Gay Pride proclamation that the city had passed. (This has nothing at all to do with 2007-8, but he's getting in a plug for himself here) 

Summing Up

What we have here is someone trying to come up with a cover story for  a newspaper article that stated, probably correctly, that his wife is an "Eastern Cherokee." He was proud to say it at the time, in 2007, because it benefited him in his job -- a job he found lucrative and in which he was right at home.

The reporter who interviewed him and wrote the news story is named Anita Stackhouse-Hite. She is Black. She continued to work at the Porterville Recorder for at least two years.You can put her name into the search window and you will come up with 11 pages with 10 stories each. She was not expunged from the newspaper's archives because she had falsified articles.

Contact Anita Stackhouse-Hite at 784-5000. Ext. 1043, or [email protected]

Here's a story by her from Oct. 2008:

Ane here's one from Jan. 25, 2009, two years from the date of Rodney's article mentioning his wife and family:

Yet Rodney said above that "now it wasn't that much longer that both of the individuals were terminated from the newspaper." What does he consider 'not that much longer?'

So everything that Rodney "explained" seems not to be true. There is no evidence that this reporter "planted" the line that Martin's wife was an Eastern Cherokee. There is no evidence that the reporter conspired with a Jewish copy editor to do so. There is counter evidence that the article that Rodney said was "permanently removed" was in fact not only never removed, but it was also never corrected due to the intervention of Rodney's wife.

And where is Rodney's wife? He certainly keeps her hidden away for someone who constantly says how proud he is of her. Now he says he might post a picture of her "standing next to him." Couldn't he show something more intimate? How about a wedding picture?

No, nothing adds up. Rodney Martin would have been better off had he admitted the truth about his wife. Now he is not only a miscegenator, but also a fraud of the 1st magnitude. How do you recover from that?

[Additional reading: ]

Part Two coming soon.


Race, White Nationalism