UPDATED: Montana Republican Caught Using the N-Word: says he is “by no means a racist”

Yellowstone County Republican Max Lenington

MT GOPer “baffled” that Obama elected; Says “It must mean there are more lesbians, queers, Indians, Mexicans and n—words than the rest of us”

Billings Gazette is reporting today that an elected Republican official in Billings says he won’t resign after using the n-word in an email criticizing President Obama.

UPDATE: While the local KULR 8 station reported that Lenington called president the n-word in an email message, the Billings Gazette reports that what County Superintendent and Treasurer Max Lenington actually said is:

“It still baffles me as to how he got elected,” Lenington wrote of the president. “It must mean there are more lesbians, queers, Indians, Mexicans and n——— than the rest of us!”

Lenington told the local NBC station that “he is by no means racist and only used the word out of frustration.”

When overcome with the urge to use the n-word to describe American voters, Lenington was emailing his sister from his work computer, who then forwarded the email to others–proving that imbecility is probably genetic.

Lenington told KULR-8 of the email, “It wasn’t made for public consumption. I thought it was a private conversation,” and also, “I don’t talk that way and I would like to apologize.”

However, he told a Billings Gazette reporter that

“he ‘probably’ regrets the email. He also told a reporter that ‘you’ve got to get out with the real people because you’ll see that people still use that word periodically,’ the newspaper reported.”

The Republican has been under fire in the past for writing things like this.  In August he made national news after he was caught plagiarizing a racist rant about the Obamas.  He has also accused the president of committing “treason.”

Lenington is not the only Yellowstone County Republican to be accused of racism. Earlier this year, the Chair of the Yellowstone County Republicans was caught posting a photo of a device designed to trap president Obama by luring him with a watermelon in February.

Jennifer Olsen at first refused to comment on the post and, like Lenington, Olsen refused to resign.  She kept mum while allowing the County GOP to release an idiotic statement on her behalf, defending her on grounds that “none of Olsen’s 1,000 or so Facebook friends have corroborated” that they ever received the posting, and that the possibility thus exists that Olsen “may have been hacked.”

But the shoe finally dropped for Olsen when a young conservative who was friends with the Chair on Facebook came forward and told reporters at the Billings Outpost that he received Olsen’s racist Facebook post in his news feed. He even took a screenshot of the incident.

A month later, the Billings Gazette reported that the Chair of Montana’s largest GOP county group would not seek re-election and instead was “looking forward to spending some time with my wonderful boyfriend.”




64 Comments on "UPDATED: Montana Republican Caught Using the N-Word: says he is “by no means a racist”"

  1. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | November 1, 2013 6:41 PM at 6:41 PM |

    Alzheimer or asshole, or maybe both! But in any case, a good Pubbie! It’s part of their new minority outreach program!

  2. Welcome to Montana

  3. So, its not racist if you only use the n-word outside of press releases? Good to know – or if you get frustrated with a black person, guess its ok to get racist? This appears to be Lenington’s “reasoning.”

  4. I was just reflecting on Obama’s wars, civilian deaths, drone strikes, surveillance, assassination of Americans along with foreigners … I needed a reminder of why you are morally superior to the other party: You don’t spout racist epithets while you commit the same crimes that they did.

    • Guess what Mark, racism is not a moral trait, and people who aren’t racists are in fact more moral than racists. People who take food from hungry kids and and seniors because they hate the president are not doing it because they love Jesus, as they claim. they’re doing it because they hate poor people and want to punish them.

      • I get it! you’re the morally superior party! Every dead Arab knows this.

      • I also realize that Food Stamps, for instance, are being cut back and that Democrats, while not totally responsible, are not powerless and yet have not stopped it. This is my problem with you – no fight, no gumption, just windy protests about things that you can stop if you have the leadership and energy. You have neither.

        So don’t ever ask me to join your worthless party. Do something or shut up about your supposed high moral fibre.

        • I wish I could see a picture of you. You sound like the perfect asshole.

          • I don’ truck with hypocrites. That’s all you are, pretending to have all these high ideals when all you care about is winning elections. Once in office you don’t give a rat’s ass what they do. You got this big thing going because Obama is half African American. So what? He’s a weak dissembling vision less placeholder. His skin color is of no consequence. A

      • Isaiah 10:1-3…READ IT DAINES!

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | November 1, 2013 7:27 PM at 7:27 PM |

      Easy answer. Any black folk at the Pubbie conventions? Nope. Now, take a look at the Dem convention! For all their faults, the Dems LOOK like America. The ReePubes look like a whites only KLAN rally! That is morally superior in my book.

  5. Exactly, 96 % of black voters voted for Obama. 83% Voted for Clinton. 89 % voted for Dukakis.

  6. The best outcome? The voters giving him a good old fashioned behind the barn bare butt thrashing at the polls. He’s earned it.

  7. I don’t think the problem with the guy is just that he is racist. He thinks that everyone who is white and voted for Obama is “queer.” So he is racist and homophobic and terrifically ill-informed. My white mama who raised 7 children on a Montana wheat farm along with my father voted for Obama — twice!

    • Can’t the county fire him? Is he not a county employee even though he was elected? It seems he should just be canned by the county commission.

      • Do you really think a county commission should have the power to nullify an election?

        • Two rupuglican and one Democrat…….the first two don’t have the balls to become involved in the issue for they think and feel the same as Lenington does.

        • No I guess not- but I think it is virtually impossible in Montana to recall a politician. I don’t trust the legislature to pass laws to faciltate their own recalls

          • It is virtually impossible to recall a Montana elected official. Without going into the entire legal breakdown, a Montana Supreme court decision coupled with three District Court Decisions (the last one made by Judge Tucker in the Malesich Recall case) have effectively gutted recall in Montana.

            • That recall petition was rejected because a required warning and the reasoning for the recall did not appear on each page of the recall petition. T supreme court ruling had nothing to do with Malesich’s case it was it was a previous case, that made marty’s case infinitely clear. the petition like so many other half baked schemes of Mike Klakken and George Warner was fatally flawed from the get go.

              People were deceived by Klakken’s/ warners group in 2006, and you were right in the middle of that mess. It was devious not to put the warning and reason on each page. People had no explanation to what they were signing, except whatever BS they were told… And a lot of people felt betrayed by Klakken for not telling them, and wouldn’t have signed if they were told the truth. Nice ty Kenneth at bending Bending the truth….. But the outcome was far different then what your telling folks.

              • Norma, once again, you do not know what you are talking about. The FIRST recall petition was denied because the form of the recall petition was incorrect. The second recall petition was the one that actually went to court and, in his decision, Judge Tucker essentially said that to recall an elected official, you basically have to prove that the elected official committed a crime.

                At least you are correct in that I was “in the middle of it”. I sat through the court hearing so that I could report on it.

                • let me give you all the news regarding the Petition and it was only one again nice try at the BS.



                  If two did exist the other one was so bad it wasnot even newsworthy.

                  Secondly you have never been a reporter just a blogger, and your friends with Klakken and Warner, more than just a blogger… you were a suppoerter of the cause because of you own personal dislike of Marty.

                  Please save your revisionist history, for someone who doesn’t know Dillon as well as another dillonite does!

                  • Norma, you are an idiot. Anyone that actually, you know, lives in Dillon knows that there were two petitions. The first one was thrown out because the forms were not up to the statute. The second one went to court (actually multiple times). I have the documentation here. I was actually there in the courtroom. The fact that you were unable to google the news of the event means nothing. Turner was there.. We were ALL there. You have just – once again – proven to everyone that actually knows something that you do not care about the truth – only your version of it.

                    • and Warner Turned out to be a complete nutcase. And shamefully a democrat. Klakken, Warren and you were probably in the news here every week from 2006- 2007, plenty of conspricy stories,but what all of you all lacked was evidence……

                      Shameful time for Dillon!

                    • No, Norma, the other two charges were NOT thrown out, which is why Tucker’s decision set precedent.

                      I know that this is hard for you to understand, but Tucker deciding that the people who ran the recall did not “prove” the first three allegations is what set precedent. In essence, he established a level of proof consistent with a criminal case, basically making it easier to charge an elected official with a crime rather than running a recall.

                      Further, the other two charges were not thrown out, they were never discussed. Tucker, instead, searched for a precedence in other states to deny the entire petition based on the three counts he threw out. With six case precidents in five states, he chose to go with the one that supported Malesich instead of the FIVE that supported the case moving forward.

                      I do find it interesting that – finding your were wrong about the second petition – you suddenly have a link to the second petition that you massage to try to support your idiocy.

                    • Let me break this down so that your simple mind can wrap itself around this.

                      1) there was a recall petition circulated to recall mayor malesich. It garnered more than the required signatures to move forward. Malesich challenged the petition on a number of grounds (Wilber is really good at the shotgun approach to law). Judge Tucker threw out the recall petition because the paperwork did not meet the legal standard for a recall petition based on the previous Montana Supreme Court decision. For the record, I was not part of or involved in the first petition.

                      2) A second petition was circulated. I followed that petition from it’s inception (in part to learn more about recall law). Malesich and I were not yet involved in the major fights were would end up being involved in yet, but I had issues with a number of things he was doing – including his signing Wilber’s contract by bypassing the city Council.

                      3) Again, Malesich challenged the petition on a number of grounds. In the first hearing, Tucker found the petition to meet the legal standard for a petition but he placed an injunction on the recall petition until the other issues of Malesich’s challenge could be adjudicated.

                      4) in the second court battle, Tucker established the level of proof required for a recall petition (there was no real legal establishment before that case) and found that three of the five charges made against Malesich did not hold to that standard. Did those charges have merit? We will never know. The evidence supplied with the petition did not meet the standard that Tucker established and therefore did not move forward.

                      4) A third hearing was held on the two remaining charges. Wilber made the argument that the recall could not go forward because of the three charges that Tucker disallowed. In a review of case law, there was no precedent in Montana (there couldn’t be because Tucker established the level of evidence needed to move forward), so case law from other states were examined. Six precedents were found. Five supported moving forward, one did not. Tucker chose to rule in favor of not moving forward.

                      The charges against Malesich of signinig Wilber’s contract without City Council approval and using his office to conduct election tasks (in violation with Montana law) were never ruled on. It should be noted that there was sufficient proof that these things occurred to move forward with the recall petition, though.

                      This is what I have said from the beginning and your links simply prove me correct. For once in your life, Norma, be a real human and recognize that you may not know everything in the world and some of us have experiences outside the scope your life.

                    • It should also be added that there was an even more bizarre precedent set by the second recall legal battle.

                      After Tucker decided that the recall would not move forward, Malesich sued for legal fees against the people who ran the petition. Tucker awarded legal fees amounting to thousands of dollars – even though the actual charges of the recall were never adjudicated. This set the precedence that, if you run a recall petition against an elected official, and you lose, you could be on the hook for the elected officials legal fees in fighting it. This precedence was further enforced by a subsequent recall case elsewhere in Montana where the elected official used Tucker’s decision as a precedence.

                      As I have said before, Recall in Montana is effectively dead unless it is seriously reworked.

                    • There is another element that should be considered when analyzing Judge Tucker’s decision. At the same time this was all going on, there was a petition being passed around about a citizen’s initiative that would have allowed for recall of a sitting judge in Montana. Remember that one? I voted against it but now I am wondering if that entered into Judge Tucker’s mind when he was deliberating his decision in the Malesich case. It could be argued (and a number of people – not me – did argue it) that Judge Tucker’s decision as designed to make recall more difficult and expensive in an attempt to judicially nullify the law allowing judges to be recalled. The citizen’s initiative failed but the precedence Judge Tucker set was already on the books.

                  • I am done with you. You are a talking head without a brain. Spout whatever nonsense makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside. I don’t care anymore. This site is once again becoming the Norma and Larry show and I simply will cannot and will not deal with it.

                    • Who has the evidence dude, who doesn’t. I am linking mine and you tell me I don’t know what I am talking about.

                    • Thank you, Norma, for providing the evidence (that I already had, btw) that there was, in fact a second petition and that it did go to court (multiple times). Yah… who had the evidence?

                    • Oh you mean thank you for proving nothing you guys said and lied about regarding Marty sticked?
                      Nothing you conspricy dabblers here in Dillon invented became the truth, just cause you open your mouths? Every time you took your fight to court you lost? It was trashed for being inaccurate lies. Thats what your thanking me for?

                      Your welcome!!!!!

  8. The problem is persuasive in this state. on the republican side. Bigotry, hatred of others because they are different in the Mirror than them….. it is a fact of life in the GOP party that they will have to address or become irrelevant. Even Brian our last gov said it plain as day….

    At least once a month I overhear it, and I gotta set in and admonish it….. if it isn’t the N- word , its the “Mexicans” they say or “Asians.” The shit gets old…. an it all comes from white GOP Americans.

    What pisses me off the most is it is taught by the corporations now Fox news, Koch Brothers, Chick Fill a, the list goes on.

    Bigotry is big business to the gun industry, and the industrial defense companies, all so that scared white people buy guns and ammo. The NRA peddles hate everyday, and the right just gobbles it up.

    “Sigh” it is just so said and unnecessary!

      • Trolling is apparently all you have left. You seem to be a sad, angry little person and a perfect fit for the republican idiocracy.

        • I’ve noticed that all non-Democrats are “Republicans” due to the intellectually bankrupt culture we live in. Both parties have identical agendas tailored for different audiences. You fight with each other like cats and dogs, and winning an election is your greatest triumph. When your party wins, it continues with the same agenda as the other party, but because it is now your people doing it, that agenda is the correct one and you support the very things you opposed when the other party was in power, like wars and deficits for instance.

          You’re offended that I am here. I get that. You need to look in the mirror, leave me alone. I’m not the problem. Democrats are the problem. As are Republicans.

  9. Just another Billings bigot who, according to the last sentence in the Gazette story, has been living off taxpayers’ dollars for the past 40 years — and that’s salary and benefits, not food stamps.

  10. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | November 2, 2013 6:57 AM at 6:57 AM |

    The good ol’ GF Spitoon sugar coated it as best they could. They did NOT actually even indicate in any way the use of the word n*gger! Jeebus that paper gets further in the toilet every day! They DID include the words, Indians, gays, Mexicans, etc. Wow, THOSE words are very offensive now, aren’t they?! Bottom line? Once a public official uses the word n*gger, he’s out! It’s a peek inside his soul.

    Now, where in the hell are the Dem equivalents to all these triple R’s, racist, reprobates ReePubbies?? moore? skinner??
    The racism in the ReePube party is disgusting AND thoroughly un-American! Yes, the so called “patriot” party is a bunch-o racist assholes!

  11. Max makes $87,000 a year to basically do nothing – his assistant, a woman, does all the work.

  12. Just as an employee of any business misusing a company credit card to buy personal items can be canned, so should Lenington for using tax payers money and a government computer to spread his personal protest.

  13. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | November 2, 2013 9:34 AM at 9:34 AM |

    Thanks Max Fawkus! Now, would you mind f*cking UP the tax system before you leave office? You can do it, Max Fawkus, I know you can!


  14. And you know the Bad thing about this is they are gonna have to push thus A-hole out of office, because this poop won’t resign.

    See he would have to have American morals and a commitment to law and order, to admit he made a big mistake and step down….. but snowflakes like him don’t think they do anything wrong, or believe they can “pray away what they say” and do..

    After all— Why stop being an asshole when you have Jesus?

    Opps I called someone a N**ger Jesus take away my sin. Wondering how many other hateful things this guy has done????

  15. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | November 2, 2013 8:40 PM at 8:40 PM |

    Which side are you on, Dipshit Daines, which side are you on?>


  16. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | November 3, 2013 6:22 AM at 6:22 AM |

    I think that Mr. Penningscum is having his empty chair moment! HEY, I’m not that far behind Clint in age! So, would someone please tell me when my chair is empty?! Oh you’ll know when that time comes! For when the “age is in, the wit is out”!


  17. AFP will probably Back him for re-election

Comments are closed.