Excerpts from a discussion of David Crowe’s criminal and other dishonest conduct while on the executive board of the Alberta Greens, continuing after he was ejected
The complete Facebook discussion, citing the contributors, is posted at www.tig.org.za/Greens.htm, including a note on how one of Crowe’s friends deleted it from the Greens in Alberta Facebook page, plus links to supporting incriminating documents.
David Crowe: Unconvicted Criminal
(Post to a private forum, 5 August 2009)
Commencing with my ‘tokoloshe letter’ posted a couple of weeks ago and in further posts to this forum since, I have charged RA president David Crowe with gross dishonesty, manipulation, deceitfulness, and compulsive mendacity.
It transpires that much more than this, Crowe is an unconvicted criminal.
Over and above an array of other extraordinarily corrupt behaviour, I call attention to a detailed discussion of Crowe’s criminal conduct, on several counts, as a former member of the executive board of the Albert Greens – all amply established on the available evidence, finely discussed at [www.tig.org.za/Greens.htm].
Since the discussion thread began on 30 July 2009, less than a week ago, the issues raised by Green Party supporters concerning Crowe’s egregiously grave misconduct are still current, and they are highly pertinent to the discussion I commenced about Crowe’s fitness to act as the self-billed political leader, front man and spokesman of the international AIDS dissident community.
Some of Crowe’s responses to the shocking allegations made against him are canvassed in the discussion thread to enable readers to form their own judgements. Crowe’s now thoroughly familiar disingenuous communication style is on display; and speaking for myself I found his responses all wholly unconvincing, which is to say plainly false. The discussion thread includes a post by Crowe announcing that he has deleted a couple of his own posts in his defence (because they contradict his version of events published on his website, a commentator notes); and what is evident from the affair is that in the face of the most serious allegations against him Crowe has resorted to skulking in his corner and refusing to come out and spar, just as he has done in this forum.
Pasted below are some illustrative filets I’ve cut from the lengthy detailed recitation of Crowe’s behaviour mentioned above – reading the whole of which I urge anyone wanting to form a properly informed opinion.
I can’t find any trace of the matter online, but I am aware that Crowe was sued in a major corporate lawsuit a couple of years ago (settled with him); and having regard to what’s emerged in the Green Party Facebook discussion thread, I presume the case was founded on sworn averments of intellectual property theft, devious breach of contract, or some other related species of bad faith. There’s a fair chance that those in the Green Party who are currently discussing Crowe’s criminal and other grossly dishonest behaviour while on their executive board and afterwards, will also share the details of his business dealings with the press, to give us all a really nice name.
RA would obviously be well advised to convene an emergency meeting to pick a new leader before news of the kind of guy President Crowe is hits the papers just as the RA conference begins.
I don’t know why the Americans who own and run RA have a thing for dishonest businessmen running their show for them. Another crook who caused the Rethinking AIDS Group such trouble several years ago, James Trabulse, was arrested at San Francisco International Airport on 11 January this year for running a Ponzi scheme. Crowe looks to be next.
Meanwhile RA’s treasurer might want to keep his eyes open around this guy.
Beginning with the lighter category of routine sleazy misfeasance, the cuts pasted below detail Crowe’s phenomenally dishonest manipulations and lies, and later on his outright criminal behaviour.
Best buckle up for this, camaradas.
Anglin claims he asked for a meeting with George Read in June and July of 2008 and expressed his concerns about George’s leadership. Anglin showed me e-mails to and from Read setting up the meetings and a report later drafted by Read confirming the meetings took place. Anglin claims he made his intentions clear to Read, and just in case his intentions were not conveyed properly, he requested to attend an executive meeting to explain his intentions. I read three e-mails confirming that Anglin request to attend the executive meeting on the Sept 22nd. The e-mails were sent to George Read, David Crowe, and Susan Stratton. In a response to Anglin’s e-mail, Stratton denied Anglin access to the executive meeting, even though the Alberta Greens constitution at the time clearly states all meetings and activities are open to all members.
I listened to a tape recording of the September 22nd executive meeting and in it I identified Susan Stratton and Peter Johnson laughing over the fact that Stratton denied Anglin access to the meeting. Later in the recording Crowe suggested that the motions being submitted to the AGM should be addressed in order. Oldershaw objected to this suggestion because Anglin’s motion arrived approximately three weeks early, which would make his the first motion considered. The conversation that ensued clearly discussed options to prevent both Anglin’s and Erickson’s motions from being presented to the floor of the AGM. In this meeting Oldershaw insisted that only directive motions should be considered and all constitutional motions should be deferred to another time.
On September 29th Sean Maw proposed a general meeting with all members. Crowe e-mailed Sean Maw on September 30th rejecting Sean Maw’s proposal stating “I will not be responding to your emails on this subject. I do not believe that you have a role to play.”
Anglin claims that the former executive selectively communicated with certain members of the Alberta Greens, while excluding other members from notice. Anglin showed me several communications with his constituents that indicated that many of them were being excluded from notice of the November 29th meeting. I also read some e-mails from various individuals who support Anglin, who received notice from David Crowe that their membership had expired, even though they had purchased a membership within the last six months.
Anglin also claims the proposed re-do of the elections of officers was an act of blatant manipulation. He claims members of the former executive were being granted access to the membership list while other candidates (Anglin’s supporters) were going to be denied access to the membership list. I read an e-mail sent by Crowe to Jensen stating that Crowe could not supply her with the membership list due to privacy concerns. Anglin claims that all known organizational elections provide membership list to the candidates, so they can campaign.
Anglin questioned how anyone who attended the September 27th AGM in good faith, could possibly trust Crowe to receive the ballots after what Crowe did to them at the September 27th AGM. Anglin continued on and said that before the ballots were destroyed the new executive noted that ballot envelopes were marked in ink as friendly or unfriendly. Anglin surmises that someone was counting votes based on the return address.
I asked to see the some of the ballots and Anglin told me that all the ballots were destroyed unopened.
Anglin claims that the former executive engaged immediately, on the afternoon of September 27, 2008, in disparaging attacks on him personally. I have read the two e-mails from Read on September 27th and the posting on the Green Party website. In my opinion both Anglin and Read suffered from over sensitivity on that day. However, the personal attacks against Anglin, posted on the Alberta Greens website soon after the AGM, accusing Anglin of spamming pornography is inexcusable, and this in my opinion (and that of many others) is cause for a libel and defamation law suit.
This situation called for maturity and leadership and not one member of the former executive has provided any evidence of either qualities.
In my opinion the dispute concerning whether or not the financial information was properly transferred is a classic example of cognitive dissonance. Anglin says the information was never transferred and Crowe says he gave Anglin the information. For the life of me I cannot see why this discussion continues. The agreement signed between Crowe and Anglin stipulated that Crowe was to have turned over all the financial information and provide a certification that all the information was true and accurate, on the date of execution of the agreement.
I have no explanation for
Crowe’s actions and so called justifications. The burden of proof to
demonstrate good faith is on Crowe. Unless Crowe can produce a receipt
for turning over the information -- no proof exists that the information
has been turned over. The answer is that simple.
The agreement between the both parties in this matter states that Crowe must turn over the financial information on execution of the agreement. In addition Crowe was to have certified that the financial information was true and accurate. Despite Crowe’s claim that he turned over the financial information; all evidence contradicts his statement and the evidence that Crowe relies upon to prove that he complied with the agreement is unacceptable.
The following responses are my response to the statements posted on Crowe’s his website.
• It is important to note that:
• The new executive did in fact access the data I provided but did not provide the essential files, including the actual MYOB financial database, to the accountant.
I cannot find any empirical evidence to substantiate this claim. As a matter of fact I find cogent evidence that the new executive continually claimed they could not access the data files and could not get access to the electronic files.
• The new executive only contacted me once regarding missing information, and that was for the username and password to access a third party credit card processing website (IATS) that I had forgotten to give them. This was provided within a few hours.
This statement is contradicted by numerous documents and records confirming that the new executive’s lawyer contacted Crowe’s lawyer, Jenuth, by e-mail, telephone, and official correspondences several times. The IATS account was finally turned over May 11; five months after the requests for this information became demands. I read copies of the e-mails and of the official correspondence confirming these requests and demands.
I also read two correspondences (December 6th and March 15th) from Crowe where Crowe wrote that he would only assist the new executive for $200 per hour. Both correspondences appear to be in response (or non-response) to at least two separate requests for financial information. I cannot explain why Crowe would claim the new executive only contacted him once when his own correspondence evidences two requests for financial information. That aside, all the correspondence between lawyers certainly is consistent with the fact that Anglin continually claimed the electronic financials were not turned over.
• The new executive did NOT contact me to ask me for any financial files or membership records at any time.
I refer to my previous answer, and in fact, I read a letter sent to Jenuth dated January 6, 2009 noting that the items in the box were not accompanied by any documents confirming the inventory of included files, documents, records, and/or party paraphernalia. Other official letters requesting or demanding that the electronic files and membership list be turned over to the new executive were sent on December 31, 2008; January 13, 2009; February 5, 2009; and March 31, 2009. Demands specifically included a request for the financial data to be delivered to the new Green Party executive on a CD.
• The new executive were given both electronic and paper copies of a letter listing all the physical documents turned over to them, and all passwords, and other information including the existence of a large electronic archive. They were requested to sign and return this letter to me, the former CFO, when they had verified the contents. They never did this.
The new executive claimed they did not receive any letter listing all the physical documents to be turned over to them (see previous statement), and only after three attempts to acquire an inventory list did Jenuth provide an electronic copy. Once the new executive received an electronic copy of an inventory list of what should have been turned over, the new executive’s lawyer, Kurata, wrote Jenuth on February 5, 2009 to inform him that the electronic files had still not been turned over.
• This trial balance PDF file was in the same ZIP archive as the full MYOB file. The only way that the accountant could have obtained this file is if the new executive downloaded the ZIP archive. Possession of the PDF file by the accountant proves that the new executive also possessed the MYOB accounting file.
Evidence suggests this statement is not true. Anglin provided me with a copy of an e-mail dated November 27, 2008 between Anglin and Kurata, confirming the transfer by Jenuth of the trial balance PDF file to Kurata on the 26th of November. I also read several documents dated in the month of December that referenced the trial balance PDF file. All these correspondences are dated before Crowe’s uploaded the ZIP file on December 23rd.
In an e-mail between Kurata and Jenuth dated January 13, 2009; Anglin specifically made a request to set up a face to face meeting for January 15th to facilitate the transfer of the financial information. In subsequent communications following the January 13th e-mail, Jenuth informs Kurata that the trial balance PDF file e-mailed to Kurata on the 26th of November is a copy of the entire ZIP file that Anglin and Kurata claim they cannot access.
Anglin claims that the box containing the documents turned over by Jenuth was inventoried by all the members of the new executive, in the presence of their lawyer. Letters began almost immediately claiming the electronic files were not turned over and demands were made to have the electronic files burned on a CD. Anglin states he did not get the required files, or the certification, as required by the agreement. Nowhere on Crowe’s webpage does Crowe offer any explanation or evidence of certifying the correctness of the files.
In an e-mail dated January 3rd between David Crowe and Susan Stratton, Crowe states in regards to turning over the First Calgary bank account; Crowe said and I quote, “I could turn over signing authority. I’m not doing anything until I’m asked.” This e-mail was written more than a week after Crowe was required and compelled to turn over all financial information according to the signed agreement.
On May 6, 2009 David Crowe telephoned the Alberta Greens’ auditor without disclosing that the conversation was being tape recorded. Crowe then posted the tape recorded conversation on the internet.
After the firm of Meyers Norris Penny was made aware of the tape recorded conversation posted on the internet; a meeting was called with the Alberta Greens’ executive and its lawyer. Meyers Norris Penny found Crowe’s action to be offensive and noted that the recorded conversation could be misrepresented because parts of the conversation were omitted. In response to Crowe’s actions, MNP wrote a letter to Election Alberta withdrawing as the auditor for the Alberta Greens.
On May 11, 2009 Crowe
wrote an e-mail to a member of the Alberta Greens stating that Anglin
lost the financial documents that Crowe turned over, and as result Crowe
was withholding the files until a new executive was elected. This e-mail
is a clear contradiction to claims that Crowe complied with the
Crowe only needed to give the entire file to his lawyer, along with an accompanying letter certifying the accuracy of the information to comply with his agreement, and then demand a receipt. This would have ended this story! I have to believe there would have been less effort required to give MNP the MYOB file than the effort Crowe spent tape recording MNP without their knowledge. The fact that MNP wrote Elections Alberta and claimed Crowe omitted parts of the conversation, constitutes a public condemnation of Crowe’s actions. Crowe’s behaviour is reprehensible. He discredited himself and the party, not to mention that he also displayed a complete lack of integrity when he taped recorded the auditor.
The transfer of the financial information is part of the settlement agreement to bring closure to an existing motion before the Court of the Queen’s Bench. This is a legal matter that is contractual. There has to be a paper trail in place to document each step of the execution of the agreement. Inferring that since Anglin has a copy of the trial balance PDF file, “proves that the new executive also possessed the MYOB accounting file”, is just not acceptable, and certainly not after so many requests and demands were made calling for the delivery of the financial information. Well into April, Jenuth’s own correspondences confirm he was cognizant and aware that Kurata and Anglin did not have access to the information.
The failure to turn over the financial information is Crowe’s responsibility. Even if Crowe turned over the information on December 23rd, as he has declared, it his responsibility to respond to the requests and statements claiming the information was not received. The power and ability to end this controversy was always Crowe’s to exercise. Rather than just call for a face-to-face meeting, as Anglin had already done on January 13th , and turn over the information required; Crowe engaged in series of unexplainable complex actions that required far more energy than if had just turned over the information.
As I stated in the
beginning all Crowe needed to do is was to bring the information to his
lawyer’s office and have it all inventoried, under his supervision. Once
the file was inventoried the file should have been turned over for a
Regarding de-registration of the party, the documents I have reviewed have resulted in some very disturbing matters coming to light.
Anglin says two factors weighed heavily in the executive’s decision to acquiesce to de-registration; the new executive had lost all confidence that Crowe would comply with the agreement and hand-over the financial information so that the party could file an annual financial return.
MNP’s requirement mandating a forensic audit is directly attributed to several other disclosures that discredited the party’s financial record keeping. I was shown documents that indicate that some of these disclosures also subject the party to possible criminal charges.
On February 7, 2009 in a meeting with Elections Alberta, Lorne Gibson’s, the Chief Electoral Officer, legal counsel informed Anglin that two loans, one made by Stratton and the other by Crowe, on February 8, 2008 violated the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act and are cause to recommend prosecution. The loans raised additional concerns after close examination of the loan documents revealed that Crowe approved his own loan by authorizing the contract with altered signatures. Anglin claims this in itself is not illegal but it raises serious questions about motive. Crowe also approved Stratton’s loan.
Statements provided by two former executive members confirm that there was no approval process conducted to approve the loans and neither member was aware that 7% interest was being paid out to Crowe and Stratton. I was specifically asked not to disclose the names of the former two executives.
Anglin says the loans created even further complications for the party when they became the object of a preliminary criminal investigation. I was shown documents that revealed that the loans were not disclosed on the 2008 election’s return and that signed “Statements of Disclosure” by Susan Stratton and David Crowe
Anglin claims this document, the statement of disclosure, was a death sentence to the party. Anglin told me that once it was revealed that information was withheld from the auditor (deliberate or not); no auditor, in his or hers right mind, would undertake to audit the Alberta Greens with anything less than a full forensic audit. Anglin says the party just can’t afford an auditor charging from $150-$400 an hour, to spend hours on end trying to verify $7.50 and $10 entries.
Anglin claims that all the efforts he and other spent trying to obtain the electronic files from Crowe seemed to now be wasted. He says that even if Crowe were to turn the records over now, the possibility that the records would raise more questions than less is highly probable.
On March 25, 2009 Crowe filed a complaint with Elections Alberta and disclosed a list of possible party donors requiring tax receipts. This information was forwarded to the new executive and the list of names revealed that a number of individuals referenced on Crowe’s list of donors could not confirm the accuracy of the amount of their donation recorded. Some people disputed or denied making a donation, some donations were misrepresented and should have been filed as an election donation, and still other individuals claimed that their donation check was never cashed. The party lawyer, Kurata document each case referenced above.
Information transferred to
the new executive (the Nov 23, 2008 PDF trial balance) indicates there
are two accounts identified as “Donated Goods and Services”. One account
shows unexplained or unsupported activity of approximately $14,000 and
the latter shows absolutely no activity.
Current records in the party’s possession reveal that a significant amount of the documentation of receipts necessary (50% +) for reconciling the 2008 expenditures are missing or have not been made available.
Former president Susan Stratton and former leader George Read expended $2546.26 of the Green Party’s funds on legal expenses. There is no accompanying documentation to support the expenditure.
Honorarium representing payments of income to non-executive members of the Green Party are not reconcilable. The individuals involved are unresponsive to inquiries, and requests for supporting documentation have gone unanswered.
Honorarium representing a payment of income in the amount of $13,440 to George Read should have been reversed prior to the transition of the leadership. This accounting entry and execution, agreed upon by all parties, was not completed by Crowe and there is no supporting information available to reconcile the accounting for the $13,440.
Anglin then showed me the corporate documents confirming that the “Alberta Greens” the Green Party of Alberta Society was incorporated on February 25, 2009.
Anglin then produced a document that both shocked and horrified me. Anglin told me that while people such as Lawrence Porter, and other members of the former executive were publically denouncing Anglin about how wrong he is about the necessity to incorporate, some of them must have forgotten that they engaged in the creation of a false document to prove the party was incorporated.
Anglin gave me a copy of a document signed by Oldershaw, Read, Stratton, and Crowe dated June 12, 2008. The document was a corporate resolution designed or constructed to prove the Alberta Greens were incorporated according to “The Business Corporations Act”.
The statement just above the document signature line states, and I will reprint exactly what I am reading on the document, “Resolution passed by all the directors of the Corporation pursuant to the Business Corporations Act (Alberta) as evidence by their signatures.”
After I studied this document I was speechless. Anglin in disgust said, “Can you believe these people?” “They are all over the internet with e-mails and public postings claiming that the party does not need to be incorporated, and all the while they are making this argument as if they are knowledgeable and informed on the subject, when in fact they created and signed this document because it was a requirement to prove they were incorporated.”
The document in question boasts compliance pursuant to the Business Corporations Act and appears to be constructed to misrepresent the party’s status as a corporate entity for the purpose of entering into an agreement with the ING Bank.
Anglin says there are
numerous Legislative Acts that address false documents, forgery, and
fraud in addition to the criminal code, however, the Business
Corporations Act specifically addresses the issue of false and
misleading documents in Sec:251(1) where if a person who makes or
assists in making a report, return, notice or other document is found
guilty of making an untrue statement of a material fact is subject to a
fine of not more than $5000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more
than 6 months or to both.
Anglin said the issue of de-registration became a fore gone conclusion. The people who signed some of these documents may or may not be prosecuted. He says this is now beyond the control of the internal matters of the Green Party. Anglin claims to be cooperating with the authorities, and he says the Alberta Greens may also be charged because of the actions of the former executive do not necessarily absolve or vindicate the organization.
Last but not least Anglin provided me with a tape recorded telephone conversation between Jensen and Crowe dated November 12, 2008 at 11:03 PM. The conversation references an earlier conversation that took place at 7:56 AM from Crowe to Jensen.
The recording I listened to lasted approximately 20 minutes. I am speechless to comment on what I heard and how Crowe so casually explained away the contents of the phone conversation previously on this Facebook page. The conversation I listen to centered on the topic of extortion and blackmail. I did not hear one word discussing any offers for possible negotiations. I listen to this tape recording three different times.
I also listened to a taped recorded executive meeting where Midge Lambert forcible argued with multiple members of the former executive to get Crowe to answer questions about the phone calls. I was struck by how callous some former members handled Lambert’s questions and how easily they carried on after Lambert hung-up on the conference call. The behaviour of the former executive indicates to me that they may have had some previous knowledge of Lambert’s complaint.
I read a copy of a
prepared draft motion and accompanying affidavit that has not been filed
with the Court of the Queen’s Bench. The motion, if filed is going seek
civil action against Crowe for an extortion attempt. Anglin says he has
two years from the date of the offense to file.
I had access to a lot more information than what I have commented on here. As I posted earlier Anglin was polite and quite candid. He answered every questioned I posed and provided me with empirical evidence to support his comments when I asked to see the documents.
In summary, Anglin’s very first communication to Crowe on the morning of the 28th of September could not have been more accurate. Anglin e-mailed Crowe and said,
“We are at a very
important precipice at this very moment in time. There is still time we
can resolve this issue, and create something positive, but that can only
occur if we talk. We must do it sooner than later!” “You are in a very
precarious position as CFO, and I do not want you to be put in a
position that could possibly harm your credibility. We desperately need
to speak to one another! This can be resolved if we talk!”
Anglin begged to talk in nearly two dozen e-mails sent that very first week after the September 27th AGM. He predicted that the longer this went on the worse the situation would get. His offer to resign and hold a leadership race was certainly one of the best offers put forth as a resolution. I can find no counter offer or alternative offer made by the former executive.
What you are choosing to ignore David is that you claim on your website that:
• The new executive did NOT contact me to ask me for any financial files or membership records at any time.
Yet in the communication you just posted it is clear you are responding to a request that Anglin didn’t have the information. You have contradicted yourself!
There are also the
numerous communications after January 13th from Kurata to Jenuth
claiming that they couldn’t get access to the information reaching well
into April. Two of the communications demanded that you turn over the
information on CDs because the passwords you provided did not work.
Again, none of this matters! I refer you to the agreement between yourself and Anglin. It was your responsibility to turn the information over with a certification that the information was true and accurate. It was not Anglin’s responsibility to go get the information. You fail to recognize the obligation you undertook when you signed the agreement.
There is a criminal investigation underway and the Alberta Greens, particularly the former executive, are at the center of the investigation
Forged documents, fraud, embezzlement, attempted extortion, illegal loans, and the party is de-registered, can anyone paint an uglier picture of what went on?
Back room talks are commonly known as secretive meetings, such as the meeting held in the parking lot at the Sept 27th AGM or the executive meeting that excluded Anglin from attending on September 22nd 2008
There are also five liberal candidates and one NDP who can claim damages against a Green party that ran candidates with the use of illegal loans.
It is a hell of a can of worms.
The Green Party ran a campaign with the use of illegal loans. The executive covered up the loans with a false document and then failed to report the loans on the election’s return, falsifying the return. Each offense is a punishable offense, and at least one is a criminal offense. This doesn’t even address the issue of an attempted extortion.
The agreement between Anglin and Crowe specifically states Crowe must turn over the financial data with a letter certifying that the financial information is true and correct? He was supposed to turn it over on the day of execution of the agreement. He didn’t do either. He posted the information on a password protected website that Anglin and his lawyer could not access and Anglin’s lawyer continually communicated that to Crowe’s lawyer.
You so proudly attacked Anglin over the need to incorporate, but there is a document signed by Oldershaw, Stratton, Crowe, and Read. The document falsely claims the party was incorporated according to the “Business Incorporations Act”. If the party was not incorporated this now becomes a forged document.
Crowe approved his own loan, subjecting himself to embezzlement allegations, and two former members of the Executive Board dispute Crowe’s claims the executive approved the loans. The loans were covered up in a false document signed by Crowe and Stratton to the accountant Doyle, and then the loans were not reported (another offense) on the elections return. Crowe taped recorded the new auditor who wrote a letter to Elections Alberta complaining the tape-recorded conversation was posted on the internet omitting part of the conversation. Crowe, Burman, and Oldershaw like to boast Anglin is incompetent, but due to their leadership the party is now being subjected to a criminal investigation to include fraud, forgery, issuing false documents, embezzlement, and extortion.
Having been taken aback by Mr. Crowe’s response regarding a possible threatening telephone call last November to party president Ms. Jensen, I have stayed quiet until I could learn for myself the nature of his telephone call. Mr. Crowe, you said that you called Ms. Jensen to try to negotiate. I have spoken with Ms. Jensen. A five minute call at approximately 8:00 a.m. in which you read to her some wild, defamatory statements about Joe Anglin; in which you threatened to take these statements to the Calgary Herald for them to “research;” in which you gave Ms. Jensen and Joe Anglin 24 hours to withdraw their legal action against Ms. Stratton and George Read in order to avoid your taking that information to the Herald; and finally, which you terminated by hanging up on Ms. Jensen. Please, Mr. Crowe. How is this “negotiation?”
Ms. Jensen, btw, immediately filed a report with the Calgary Police and later that day returned the call to you, acting on advice she received. I have heard that call. Her call to you lasted about 20 minutes, and was not terminated by her hanging up on you. However, it does corroborate the threats you made to her in the morning.
In your response regarding
this issue, you stated something to the effect that you knew your
attempts at “negotiation” would be used against you.
In the business, they probably have several terms for the kind of spin you are attempting here. “Passive aggressive” comes to mind.
The other thing that comes to mind is that if you are willing to play with the truth so blatantly concerning your telephone call, what other truths are you stretching?