Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Wednesday, January 26, 2005

Walter to Councils: "See you in court!"

Walter Moore has filed a lawsuit protesting his exclusion from debates sponsored by the Neighborhood Councils. Despite an opinion from the City Attorney that all candidates must be allowed to participate, the Councils are not inviting Walter.

Here is his latest screed:
Today I filed a lawsuit in L.A. County Superior Court regarding my exclusion from the upcoming televised debates.

As many of you know, the two 90-minute televised mayoral debates are scheduled for February 7 and 28, 2005. One of the sponsors is "the Alliance of Neighborhood Councils." The City Attorney has issued a formal opinion letter, based on federal and state constitutional law, stating that Neighborhood Councils holding a debate must invite all candidates, not just some of them. Despite the letter and the law, "the Alliance of Neighborhood Councils" has invited some of the candidates -- five, to be exact -- and excluded me, Walter Moore.

"The Alliance of Neighborhood Councils" explained its decision to exclude me by claiming, among other things, the following: "The Ethics Commission defines a 'viable' candidate for Mayor as someone who has raised $150,000 in contributions from individuals in amounts of less than $500." In fact, the Ethics Commission does not have a definition of "viable." Rather, "viable" is a matter of opinion, not law.

Through the lawsuit, I am asking the Court, among other things, either to put me in the debate, or to require the sponsors of the debate to disclose on TV: i) that the so-called "Alliance of Neighborhood Councils" is not an alliance of Neighborhood Councils at all, and, indeed, does not include a single Neighborhood Council; ii) that the five candidates participating were selected because they each raised $150,000 from contributors; and iii) that a sixth candidate, Walter Moore, deposited $100,000 of his own money into his campaign, but was excluded because he did not raise $150,000 from third parties.

You should, of course, not jump to any conclusions based on the foregoing information or the filing of a lawsuit. The defendants are entitled to explain their side of the story, and to try to justify their decision to exclude me from the debates. We'll leave it to the Court to decide who's right. In the meantime, however, I wanted you to know that I am taking action to protect my rights as a candidate, and your rights as voters, to a full and fair debate, not a debate limited to candidates who have raised $150,000 from donors.

And, though some of you will doubtless have many questions about the litigation, please don't bombard me with them. I generally never comment on pending litigation. I only made an exception for this e-mail because this particular lawsuit involves the public interest, and because I want you to know I am fighting for what I believe is right. I will keep you posted on the lawsuit as events develop.


Anonymous Anonymous said:

Would somebody please tell me who sits on the board of the Alliance of Neighborhood Councils?

January 26, 2005 4:53 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I want to wish Good Luck to Walter Moore. I look forward to seeing this in the courts. Let the Council explain this, if they can.

January 26, 2005 7:48 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Moore is a goofball who doesn't know the facts, puts together as much negative rhetoric (that he reads about in the papers) on others as possible and spews it to those morons on KABC talk radio. Ignore him, like the rest of LA will.

January 26, 2005 8:01 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Moore may or may not be a goofball. I am annoyed at this Alliance of Neighborhood Councils who doesn't list its self appointed leadership, doesn't represent certifed neighborhood councils, and doesn't have the right to bar any candidates (goofballs included) from the debate. I, too, hope Moore gets his day in court.

January 26, 2005 8:16 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Whatever you think of Walter, he is tenacious.

He just picked up the endorsement of the Southern California Republican Women and Men, one of the oldest and most prestigious GOP clubs in Los Angeles. Since the Democrats are divided- maybe the LA County GOP can get Republicans to rally around Walter and force one of the other candidates into a runoff with him?

January 26, 2005 8:21 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Walter is a goofball and is tenacious. He has no chance to get in a run-off no matter how hard the Republicans work.

However, the actions of the Neighborhood Councils are of far more concern and should be investigated. Though, the CA has already told them they have to let Walter and the others to debate. They should listen to him. I am sure his reasoning is legal as I doubt he personally wants Walter in the debate.

January 27, 2005 8:31 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The City's Neighborhood Councils should let Walter Moore debate. Then the citizens of this city can see him for what he really is: a racist who doesn't know anything about the function city government. Now you may say hey Walter is not racist for talking about the impacts of illegal immigration. Well that true but come on what do you say about a guy who rants about the evils of immigration. If he wants an all white city then he should go create it elswhere. Neverthless, it our duty to allow this candidate to debate. It is only fair (and amusing at the same time).

January 27, 2005 4:21 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

As a proud American whose family legally immigrated to the United States, I become very angry when I read or hear people make statements that cracking down on illegal immigrant is racist. It has nothing to do with race. It has to do with enforcing the immigration laws of the U.S. To make the implication that all illegal immigrants are from south of the U.S. border is itself a racist thought and vicious stereotyping.

The U.S. is full of illegal immigrants from CANADA (yes, Canada!!), Europe, Asia, Africa and everywhere else in the world. Not every illegal immigrant snuck over the border in the dark of night or hid in a shipping container- a good number arrived legally in the United States and then overstayed their visas. Remember the Swiss man who sent a FedEx letter to Kobe Byrant offering to murder the alleged rape victim? The Swiss "hitman"overstayed his visa- yes, he's an illegal immigrant from Europe!!

Let's face facts. Our jails are full of criminals who are illegal aliens. Special Order 40 prohibits the LAPD from turning over illegal immigrants to the Immigration Service for deportation. Los Angeles is in the midst of a budget crisis. Imagine how many more police officers could be put on the streets if money that was being used to house criminal illegal aliens was going towards hiring more cops?

Another thing that irks me is the term, "undocumented alien." It's not undocumented- it's ILLEGAL alien. I don't understand why anyone would defend, condone, or encourage criminal behavior by supporting illegal immigration. If one wants to help people legally immigrate to the U.S., that's okay; however, one's defense of illegal immigration shows illegal immigrants that breaking the law is okay. It's not okay. And if one does not like the laws because the laws can be proven beyond a reasonable belief to be unjust, then one should contact his Representative and Senators in Washington to change those laws.

January 27, 2005 11:32 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Anyone who has the guts to run for Mayor and state that LA has an illegal immigrant problem -- a problem which compounds LA's financial woes would get my vote. Anyone who does not have the B---s to do this would not get my vote. In a perfect world all who run for office would be honorable and speak the truth to the voters but then, alas, career politicians would fade away and the lights to their power would probably go out -- then what would we do! Duh!!

January 28, 2005 8:33 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home