In a race already rife with tension, County Commissioner candidate Chris Barnett finds himself at the center of a growing controversy over his handling of public discourse, transparency, and truthfulness. As the community seeks accountability from its leaders, Barnett’s pattern of evasion, censorship, and manipulation is drawing comparisons to the tactics of current White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre—skilled in spinning narratives to deflect criticism, while gaslighting those who challenge her assertions. Like Jean-Pierre, Barnett seems to present himself as a people’s champion until the narrative no longer serves his interests.
Barnett’s campaign has come under fire for allegedly suppressing free speech, particularly when the questions posed to him challenge his policies or put him in an unfavorable light. One recent incident exemplifies this issue: a local resident reached out to Barnett on social media, seeking clarification on the Michael and Danielle Sellers case—a hot-button issue within the community. Instead of addressing the matter directly, Barnett responded in circles, offering evasive answers that left the resident more confused than before. To make matters worse, Barnett later deleted the entire conversation from his social media page, where he often touts his support for “freedom of speech.” However, critics note that this support seems conditional—only applying when speech aligns with his agenda.
This gaslighting tactic—dodging straightforward questions, manipulating conversations, and controlling the narrative by silencing dissent—draws a sharp comparison to the approach often attributed to Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. Like Barnett, Jean-Pierre is frequently accused of deflecting legitimate questions with vague, rehearsed responses and shifting blame when confronted with uncomfortable truths.
Critics say Barnett’s willingness to shut down dissenting voices on social media is part of a larger pattern of evasion. Reports indicate that he has refused to attend debates, public forums, or any meaningful engagement with the broader community. His refusal to face voters directly has led many to wonder if he is capable of defending his own positions—or if he even has any positions to defend.
Barnett’s evasiveness has only fueled further scrutiny into his potential conflicts of interest, particularly his ties to current County Commissioner John West. Although Barnett has repeatedly denied any business dealings with West, local sources insist otherwise, with an upcoming news report promising to shed more light on the relationship. The prospect of undisclosed financial ties has raised red flags about Barnett’s true intentions and loyalty to the community.
Perhaps one of the most telling aspects of Barnett’s campaign is his antagonistic relationship with local media—another hallmark of his gaslighting strategy. Barnett’s primary outlet of choice has been the Oregon Eagle, a publication known to be financially supported by Commissioners John West, Andreas Blech, and Herman Baertschiger. This cozy relationship has led to accusations that Barnett is using the Oregon Eagle as a propaganda tool to promote his narrative, rather than subjecting himself to balanced, independent coverage.
On the other hand, Barnett has aggressively attacked the Grants Pass Tribune that once allowed him to write favorable articles about himself. Initially, Barnett praised the Tribune for its coverage, but once the publication began digging into his inconsistencies and questionable claims, Barnett changed his tune. He has since labeled the Tribune as “fake news,” attempting to undermine its credibility.
In an editorial, the Tribune’s staff expressed frustration: “If you agree with Chris, you’ll be just fine. But once you disagree, he’ll attack you and label you a conspiracy theorist. It’s worth looking back to when he was singing our praises—right up until we exposed the cracks in his narrative. Then, we became the enemy.”
Beyond his contentious relationship with the press, Barnett has also been criticized for his lack of a clear policy platform. Voters are growing increasingly frustrated by his failure to outline any concrete plans or vision for the county. His refusal to participate in public debates or answer questions has only deepened the sense that his campaign is built more on rhetoric and manipulation than on any real commitment to serve the community.
Many wonder if Barnett, like Karine Jean-Pierre, excels in presenting a polished front but struggles when it comes to answering the hard questions. His critics argue that this lack of transparency is disqualifying for someone seeking public office.
As the race for County Commissioner progresses, Barnett’s behavior has only intensified the divide among voters. His supporters view him as an outsider challenging the political establishment, but even that narrative is starting to crumble in light of his potential ties to sitting Commissioner John West. For many, the growing evidence of censorship, gaslighting, and manipulation makes Barnett appear less like a champion for the people and more like someone who seeks to control the narrative at all costs.
While Barnett attempts to cast himself as the victim of a “fake news” conspiracy, voters are left questioning whether his unwillingness to engage with the public is indicative of how he would govern. In an era when transparency and accountability are more important than ever, Chris Barnett’s strategy of deflection and censorship may ultimately be his undoing. Not to mention the many cease and desist letters he’s received and will continue to receive compounding into a substantial defamation lawsuit.
As election day approaches, the community watches closely. Barnett’s next steps—if he takes any—will be critical in determining whether he can salvage his reputation or if his campaign will be overwhelmed by the growing backlash against his tactics.
