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

Tuesday, November 29, 2005

One Bad Story After Another

Besides many of the recent comment threads (here and here) and a string of bad stories (Here's two we have commented on: 1 & 2), Delgadillo has managed to get yet another headline...

City Atty. Allegedly Failed to Act on Rent Law -- Housing agency says many cases expired in prosecutor's possession. Delgadillo aide contends some were resolved and others lacked proof.

Umm, just a thought here, but someone might want to get something positive out in a press cycle before his campaign falls flat...

24 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Poor Rocky should just give it up. Now Eric Garcetti is asking for city council to have their own attorney. Things don't look good for Rocky and why is the LA Times after him?

November 29, 2005 8:38 AM  

Blogger Walter Moore said:

Patrick McGreevy's article in the times is terrific. It illustrates how pay-to-play works. Donations are made; cases are not prosecuted. Thank goodness there's at least one real journalist in this town!

November 29, 2005 8:55 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The LA Times is not after him. The fact is that Rocky had very little actual legal experience before taking this job. Yes, I know he worked at O'Melvny, but he was there only a year or so. He's not qualified to serve as our City Attorney.

And in case you all don't remember, Rocky was elected because the Latinos came out to vote for Antonio. Otherwise, our City Attorney would be Mike Feurer.

And now he wants to be AG? Please.

November 29, 2005 9:07 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Why is the LA Times after him??? Id say, what took so long?
Rocky has politicized that office more than anyone befor him. He is a DISGRACE! His whole top staff are all political hacks whose mission since day one has been to help this empty suit gain higher office. he stands for NOTHING except to pay back his contributors.
After he loses, will he step down or serve out the rest of his do-nothing term?

November 29, 2005 9:12 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Anon 9:12 - What do you think genius?

November 29, 2005 10:15 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

He's still racking up endoresements and $ from the SAC establishment.

I agree he's made the job more political, but I don't recall caring this much about Hanh early into his second term.

November 29, 2005 10:16 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Walter Moore - Mr I donated $100,000.00 in fake money to my own campaign - People told Nick to go away after his humiliation. In keeping with tradition, get lost.

We get it, you have money to "self fund", more money than brains apparently. Obviously you have alot of time on your hands of late,use it for something constructive like catching stray dogs on the freeway.

November 29, 2005 10:20 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I've always wondered how Rocky could be so incredibly corrupt and nobody ever reports on it. Ever. I'm glad he's running for AG. Maybe it will all come out. It shouldn't take an election for that to happen though.

November 29, 2005 10:23 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Actually according to Mr Moores' filings he never gave $100k. It was actually $92,000.00 he loaned himself and never spent because he wasn't a serious candidate.

He repaid himself $85,000.96 and "forgave" $6,999.04. Those are some screwy numbers.

So Wacky Walter buys credibility? I don't think so and the voters handed him his hat faster then the fruitcakes in CD 14 booted Nick Pacheco so we all know what the public thought of Wacky Walters ideas - They SUCK!


Schedule B Part I - Summary
1. Loans received this period :
(includes unitemized loans less than $100) $0.00
2. Loans paid or forgiven this period
(includes unitemized loans under $100 paid or forgiven.) $92,000.00
3. Net change this period.: ($92,000.00)

November 29, 2005 10:33 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Walter, can you provide a link to this article?

November 29, 2005 11:35 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

We should--every one of us--remain aloof, in heart and in mind, in words and in deeds, from the political affairs and disputes of the Nations and of Governments. Baha'is should be very careful in their public utterance not to mention any political figures...either side with them or denounce them. We should keep ourselves away from such thoughts. Otherwise they will involve the friends in political matters, which is definitely dangerous for the Cause. We should have no political connection with any of the parties. Baha'is are in no way allowed to enter into political affairs under any pretense of excuse; since such an action brings about disastrous results and ends in hurting the Cause of God and its intimate friends.

November 29, 2005 12:02 PM  

Blogger joseph mailander said:

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

November 29, 2005 12:21 PM  

Blogger joseph mailander said:

Patrick McGreevy's article in the times is terrific. It illustrates how pay-to-play works. Donations are made; cases are not prosecuted. Thank goodness there's at least one real journalist in this town!

Did I just hear someone say "ouch"?

November 29, 2005 12:24 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Skelton and Giarrizzo believe "someone," whom they won't name, helped Torres pay for the leaflets."He doesn't appear to have a lot of money," Skelton said. "Last year, he was suspended, so I don't expect he is funding this himself."

November 29, 2005 12:28 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

What do you mean by the comment you made Mailander?

Why ouch?

November 29, 2005 12:40 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I was going to utter the names of some elected officials and make really negative comments about them and the money they took and the lies they told, but now I'm all freaked out about the Cause of God.

Bad karma.

November 29, 2005 1:43 PM  

Blogger Walter Moore said:

FYI, I received 11,409 votes; beat State Senator Alarcon in several districts; and received 38 votes for every $100 I spent, while my opponents received 2-5 votes each for every $100 they spent. Sounds serious to me, especially as opposed to someone who won't even post under his own name....

November 29, 2005 1:46 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

1:43 Are you the same one who said,"I was on my way to vote for Huizar, but..."

November 29, 2005 2:45 PM  

Blogger joseph mailander said:

What do you mean by the comment you made Mailander?

Why ouch?


I just wondered if any other local scribes felt the pain of Walter Moore suggesting that there's only one real journalist in town.

November 29, 2005 4:12 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

You jerks you're just jealous that you could never be as great as THE ROCK!:-)

November 29, 2005 6:22 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

2:45

I didn't say it the first time, but I may have carried it on a couple times and added to it. I thought a lot of people were also since they weren't all from me. I was just having fun like I also did with the 80 N_________ W_______'s.

Why? Did it give you a clue as to my real identity?

November 29, 2005 10:17 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"Rocky Delgadillo . . . if stood up for slum lords, do you really think he'll stand up for you?"

Just testing next year's hit.

November 29, 2005 10:44 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Rocky is done. Good riddance.

November 29, 2005 11:25 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Someone said: Otherwise, our City Attorney would be Mike Feurer.

The best thing that could have happened to us is if Mike Feurer were our City Attorney.

December 03, 2005 10:48 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

Advertisement

Advertisement