Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098
mayorsam@mayorsam.org

Thursday, September 01, 2005

Open Thread For Thursday

In The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams, the character Arthur Dent says "This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays". A few minutes later the planet Earth is destroyed. Thor, for whom the day was named, also appears later in the Hitchhiker's series and in other Adams books.

15 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said:

.
The Pachuecos have repeatedly claimed that they can refute every single statement of fact made by the LA Times editorial that successfully called for Nick's ouster from the city council. It's a false claim. They try to bury the facts with spin, vituperation and verbiage, but they don't address the facts themselves. Here are the Times' facts, verbatim from the editorial Perfectly Forgetful Pachueco:

(1) Pacheco claims he did not even know of the connection between the nonprofit group and the campaign committee.

(2-5) Between Dec. 30 and Jan. 21, Pacheco gave $36,500 -- on top of $30,000 in recent years -- to Madres del Este de Los Angeles-Santa Isabel, an Eastside nonprofit organization headed by Juana Gutierrez.

(6-10) Mothers for Nick, the political committee that shares Gutierrez's Boyle Heights address, reported to the City Ethics Commission in late January that it was spending $36,085 to campaign independently for Pacheco.

(11- 14) According to the California secretary of state's Web site, Mothers for Nick took over the name La Colectiva, a now-disbanded group that was run by Gutierrez's son, Martin GutieRuiz, a college friend of Pacheco's.

La Colectiva's claim to shame was its role in the 2001 mayoral race, in which (15) Pacheco backed James K. Hahn over Villaraigosa.

(16-18) A woman impersonating county Supervisor Gloria Molina placed recorded phone calls to voters slamming Villaraigosa.

(19-23) The district attorney's office investigated and found that La Colectiva used a phone bank owned by CAL Inc., a nonprofit group formed by Pacheco -- who said he knew nothing about the calls.

(24-26) In November, when Villaraigosa announced that he would run against Pacheco, district voters received particularly nasty mailers attacking him.

(27-29) La Colectiva's former attorney, Ricardo Torres, another college pal of Pacheco's, claimed responsibility.

(30) Pacheco -- you guessed it -- said he knew nothing about the mailers.

These tactics are one reason (31) The Times endorsed Villaraigosa over Pacheco in the City Council race.

Taxpayers... deserve an explanation of the (32-34) $250,000 "discretionary" account that Pacheco tapped for the Madres -- in $5,000 dribs and drabs so as not to have to follow city contracting guidelines.

(35) City Controller Laura Chick...adamantly denies Pacheco's contention that she authorized his expenditures...
.

September 01, 2005 7:16 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Fundraiser Dan Weitzman says “Cindy Montañez wins the 20th Senate District,” because: (1) her history of service in the district gives her the recognition and record she needs to win the primary; (2) she currently represents “nearly 50%” of the primary voters in SD 20, while her opponent, LA City Councilmember Alex Padilla, represents “less than 30%”; (3) she leads the field in fundraising with Padilla “yet to even open a committee as of the last reporting period;” (4) she has the “influential
endorsements in the area,” including incumbent Sen. Richard Alarcon and Speaker Fabian Núñez; and (5) her team includes consultants Parke Skelton, Steve Barkan and Mike Shimpock of SG&A Campaigns, along with fundraisers Weitzman and Rebecca Suter (fundraiser for Bob Hertzberg’s LA Mayoral race). Contact: Weitzman 916 444 1186.

September 01, 2005 7:39 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

7:39:
You can add Laura Chick and Asm. Levine to that one. Some MAJOR ones to follow.

September 01, 2005 8:38 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

7:16 AM

So why aren't these people in jail? Why hasn't the Times followed up on the investigations?

Las Madres used that money to buy turkeys and toys for kids and families from Boyle Height's housing projects. Mothers for Nick and Madres were investigated and audited resulting in a letter by the City Ehtics commission clearing Las Madres.

You mention that this address was used for Mothers for Nick, it was also used for Las Madres scholarship fund, it was the home used by Padilla when he ran Cedillo's campaign, it was also the address used by Lucille Roybal Allard to claim residency in her district- now Lucille and Alex are both endorsing Huizar.

La Colectiva never changed their name, take a look at that website again. The District Attorney's investigation lays blame squarely on Paige Richardson, Xavier Becerra's campaign manager for the "Marina" message, you should read the report. La Colectiva never "used" the phonebank as the Times claims, they rented it to the Becerra campaign.

Martin GutieRuiz never went to college with Pacheco, he went to Princeton, Nick went to Berkeley.

The Torres mailers were a personal attack against Villaraigosa, after Ricardo and Antonio got into an argument, even Skelton claimed this in print - Nick knew nothing of this. If you know Torres, you know he is a loose cannon - but he did take sole responsibility for these mailers.

The public did get a full accounting of the money spent. If Laura Chick didn't authorize these expenditures, why did she sign the checks?

On a side note, Enrique Gasca, Huizar's field consultant for his $350,000 uncontested school board race in 2004 was the recipient of three Madres scholarships while attending Georgetown U. His sister, who also goes to GU, received the largest scholarship in 2001. She would have gotten more but the Madres had to disband. Juana Gutierrez had just turned 70 and with irresponsible editorials like this from the Times, why bother asking people for schoarlship donations when Skelton and Antonio already branded you a crook. Las Madres were giving out $40,000 a year in scholarships to inner city kids - think Skelton or Villaraigosa ever replaced this money? Think Huizar did? NO

September 01, 2005 8:40 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

By my count, you have refuted facts numbered 11, 14 & 20 -- although it is not clear that in the case of #11 the statement that "Mothers for Nick took over the name La Colectiva" is quite the same thing as saying what you deny, that "La Colectiva never changed their name." That's all.

Coulda guessed that you wouldn't resist refuting #14 about Pacheco and GutieRuiz being "college friends." Let's not besmirch the Ivy League.

September 01, 2005 8:58 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

8:58

It's very simple. La Colectiva was a corporation, licensed by the State of California. Mothers for Nick was an independent expenditure committee, registered with the City Ethics Commission. How can a corporation all of a sudden become and IE?

If you want to keep count, keep count on election day.

September 01, 2005 9:30 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

8:58

Isn't the fact that no one named in this editorial was ever charged or jailed or even fined enough refutation. Cooley definitely had good political reason to go after these people, as did Laura Chick. The fact is Parke Skelton lied to promote a candidate and this lie damaged an inner city community. The Times, particularly the late editor Frank Del Olmo, had never been big fans of Nick. In 1999 Nick went against the Latino power establishment and beat them. Del Olmo, a good friend of Gloria Molina, always considered himself to be part of this clique and the editorial by the Times bears that out.

Pacheco was a succesful councilman, the facts cannot be refuted. Unlike Molina and Villaraigosa, Nick succeeded in reducing crime, increasing youth opportunities and cleaning our neighborhoods. So Parke couldn't go after his accomplishments, so they decided to go after Nick's friends, who cares who got injured. This is the type of politics Huizar has bought into.

September 01, 2005 10:01 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

10:01 - You are mistaken about Del Olmo and the Times. However he may have felt about Nick, he hated AV and tried to torpedo his first mayoral candidacy with a signed column. Frank wasn't on the editorial board and had nothing to do with the 2003 editorial that slammed Nick.

September 01, 2005 10:17 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

10:17

I stand corrected. You are right about Del Olmo, I do recall his editorial against Villaraigosa after Antonio thanked President Zedillo of Mexico for defeating Prop. 187. If I recall correctly, he did say Antonio blew his chances of being mayor.

But he was a good friend of Molina. And he did have a position of inluence at the Times. Enough influence to squash an editorial with no factual basis. From what we have been told by Molina's staff (yes they still talk to us), he did call her about this editorial since Las Madres used to be long time supporters of Gloria. I hear he even got a call from Dr. Rudy Acuna and Dr. Mary Pardo, a former professor and fellow student from Northridge, to print Mrs. Gutierrez rebuttal, but he didn't budge on this.

He may not have been responsible for this editorial, but he sure had a hand in the aftermath.

September 01, 2005 10:31 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Anon 8:40's refutation of #20 looks pretty lame. Wasn't La Colectiva part of the Becerra campaign? Its phone bank (automated caller) was part of what it provided, and it billed the campaign for equipment "rent."

Did XB stiff you on that too?

September 01, 2005 11:36 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

It's a lost cause, once a Pacheco-hater, always a Pacheco-hater.

Truth be damned.

There's more truth out there on record that Pacheco had nothing to do with any of these Skelton drivel and lies, than there is proof that the 80 neighbourhood watch organziations that Villaraigosa bragged about for 6-8 months during the mayors campaign have, do, or will ever exist.

HOLD YOURSELF TO THE SAME STANDARD OF PROOF YOU DEMAND OF YOUR ADVERSARIES!

September 01, 2005 11:40 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Yes, yes, where have I (watcho?) been, you missed me, I amuse you, I should take my medicine, I'm smoking something, I'm beating a dead horse, it's "old news" (which it can't be because it was never "news" in the sense that anyone actually bothering to research and check it out).

YAWN!

Beat you to it, now how about some proof of the original $300K valued claim?

September 01, 2005 11:43 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I live in CD14, and I didn't HAVE a city councilmember from 2003-2005, only a mayoral candidate.

September 01, 2005 11:48 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

hey 11:40, or should i say steve: nice spelling on neighbourhood watches.

way to show your hand.

idiot.

September 01, 2005 1:59 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Thanks, you can say steve (or stephan), you can say brian (or byron), you can say mike (or michel), you can say al or alphonse.

Don't make me no nevermind. I don't know any of you city time-wasting hacques.


i WORK for a living.

September 01, 2005 2:35 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

Advertisement

Advertisement