Angry Mob 3, Racist LA City Council 0

By Daniel Guss - It looks like the geniuses at LA City Council are in a pickle.

With Nury Martinez finally realizing that she had to resign in disgrace late yesterday, Jamba Juice Mitch O'Farrell, the president pro tem, is running the show, except that his dearth of leadership is now front and center.

As I predicted on Monday, "there is precisely zero percent chance that even a single City Council meeting can move forward with so many voices calling for Martinez, Cedillo, de Leon and Herrera to resign."

To read the rest of my column, jump on over to my Substack.  While you're there, sign-up for my free newsletter and follow me on The Twitters @TheGussReport.

Rejecting Paul Koretz and Ron Galperin, LA Times Regains Some Of Its Marbles

By Daniel Guss

@TheGussReport - Like a rare hybrid eclipse, this column finally aligns with at least the essence of the Los Angeles Times' first two endorsements for the upcoming June primary, which are best summarized as:

• Paul Koretz should not be the next LA City Controller
• Ron Galperin should not be the next California Controller

Considering that the Times repeatedly endorsed locals like convicted felon Mitch Englander; indicted Jose Huizar and Mark Ridley-Thomas; Gavin Newsom, Jerry Brown, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Gray Davis; Eric Garcetti and Antonio Villaraigosa; Nury Martinez and Herb Wesson; Kamala Harris, George Gascon, Mike Bonin, bigamist Curren Price (despite his denials), other fakers and takers, and yes, Koretz and Galperin, it may now see the consequences of those disastrous recommendations.

I don't entirely buy that the Times gets it, yet, and neither should you.  But rejecting Koretz and Galperin in 2022 is a good start.

To read the rest of this column and see earlier ones, go to: https://danielguss.substack.com/ and sign up for the free subscription.

You may also follow me on the Twitters @TheGussReport.

Sigan adelante gente increibles.....

(Daniel Guss, MBA, was runner-up for the 2020 Los Angeles Press Club journalism award for Best Online Political Commentary and was a runner-up in 2021 in the Activist Journalism category.  He has contributed to Mayor Sam, CityWatchLA, KFI AM-640, iHeartMedia, 790-KABC, Cumulus Media, KCRW, Huffington Post, Los Angeles Daily News, Los Angeles Magazine, Movieline Magazine, Emmy Magazine, Los Angeles Business Journal, Pasadena Star News, Los Angeles Downtown News, and the Los Angeles Times in its Sports, Opinion and Entertainment sections and Sunday Magazine, among other publishers.)

"Mike Bonin's Honesty and Intellectual Dishonesty" by Daniel Guss

@TheGussReport - On Wednesday, embattled LA City Councilmember Mike Bonin said he would not run for a third and final term on LA City Council, the City's legislative body, citing life-long mental health issues.

Mike Bonin

But we think something else might be at-play here, as evidenced by his boasting of endorsements from LA County Supervisors Janice Hahn and Holly Mitchell, Congressman Ted Lieu and the Los Angeles League of Conservation Voters.

I explain what that other factors are in my new Substack.

"Say It Ain't So, Rick Caruso"

By Daniel Guss

@TheGussReport - On Monday, the Los Angeles Times reported that billionaire Rick Caruso changed his party affiliation from none to Democrat in anticipation of his joining the race to become the next Mayor of Los Angeles. 

(Rick Caruso - LA Times)

That squanders an exclusive advantage: positioning himself as the second coming of Richard Riordan, a Republican and self-made problem-solver who governed without owing anything to anyone.

Suddenly and cynically listing himself as a Democrat makes Caruso more like the other candidates, who are either known and homogenous or just unknown.

Back in his day as Mayor from 1993-2001, Riordan was a successful alcalde de Los Angeles because he ran and governed as a problem-solving capitalist. That didn't stop him from winning, governing successfully and winning a second term. In contrast to LA’s career politicians, Riordan was also the first mayor to leave office due to term limits.

Do you know who made local term limits a thing?

Richard Riordan.

Why is Caruso not following that same path to the Mayor’s job?

To continue reading, please visit my Substack (and subscribe...its free!) 

LA Must Protect Itself From Itself

By Daniel Guss

@TheGussReport - It's 2022 and Los Angeles has a narrow, approaching window to start fixing its copious political challenges and corruption.

Having watched a few decades of local elections, here is what LA needs to do to save itself from itself.

1. Stop electing candidates based on their last name, skin tone and if they sound like an echo chamber of each other and the media.

2. Take everything the Los Angeles Times says or endorses with a grain of salt…and tequila. Stop relying on its endorsements since it almost entirely serves as a protective public relations unit for liberal and left politicians and their ideas to the total lack of balance of other sides, opinions and candidates. It is worth noting that the Times has endorsed, or even repeatedly endorsed, virtually every candidate currently or recently facing recall.

3. Start electing people from outside of the local political ecosystem. Encourage and elect those who have built something significant in the private sector. People who know what it’s like to make payroll in the face of illogical, oppressive and un-scientific government mandates. Think engineers, teachers (not school board members), healthcare professionals, private sector attorneys and the like. Elect reluctant politicians, not career ones.

Let’s repeat that: elect reluctant politicians, not career ones.

***

All the commotion so far about who is running for Mayor of LA and other offices is just that: chatter. It means nothing until February 7, 2022, when the candidate filing window opens to file a Declaration Of Intention to Become a Candidate. That narrow window closes less than a week later, on February 12. That’ll be the entirety of our options. People who fail to file will not make it onto the primary ballot.

Then there’s the race to gather 500 valid signatures by March 9, a rigged process designed to favor monied candidates. Those who submit at least a thousand votes for verification do not have to pay the $300 fee.

To continue reading this column, please join me on my Substack and sign-up to become a free subscriber.  Also, follow me on The Twitters @TheGussReport. Thanks as always to our friend Scott Johnson for this platform.

How Mike Feuer Illegally Enabled A Nury Martinez Lynch Mob That Came For Mark Ridley-Thomas

By Daniel Guss

@TheGussReport - Two concepts take center stage in today's column: Presumption of Innocence and Due Process.

Momentarily set aside your thoughts on the 20-count federal corruption indictment announced just a few days ago against L.A. City Councilmember Mark Ridley-Thomas, MRT.  This column has its views about it and they are not favorable for the long-time L.A. political icon.  

Mark Ridley-Thomas, Sebastian Ridley-Thomas

Photo Credit: ABC-7

But this column is in rare in agreement with L.A. City Councilmembers Curren Price, Mike Bonin and Marqueece Harris-Dawson, the only names on the 15-member LA City Council who voted to not (at this point) suspend MRT and withhold his salary and health insurance.  

While suspending MRT or putting an overseer in-place to monitor his work and expenditures makes sense, withholding his salary and health insurance (which LA City Controller Ron Galperin stated he would unilaterally do even before Council voted or MRT entered a plea) does not.

MRT is entitled to the Presumption of Innocence and Due Process as is every other American, whether we are Mark Zuckerberg, an addict sleeping on the sidewalk or those of us who exist somewhere in-between them.

But MRT was deprived of both yesterday as a figurative L.A. City Council lynch mob came for him for something which is not yet proven, for which neither they nor he saw the evidence and which he denies.

Way to treat Ridley-Thomas like Emmett Till, L.A. City Council, but especially you Council president Nury Martinez, City Attorney Mike Feuer and Ron Galperin.  To be clear, we are not saying MRT is innocent; we do not know and we are skeptical of his claims of innocence.  Put restrictions in-place to ensure Council District 10 can keep functioning with its chosen representative while the legal process plays out, but don't jump to MRT's penalty phase before he even had a chance to enter a plea, let alone tell his side of the story.

Emmett Till

The severe crimes which Ridley-Thomas stands accused of committing:

1. Have nothing to do with his earlier time on City Council nor his recent return to it; and
2. Do not appear to have personally enriched him; and
3. Are denied by him. 

Martinez, enabled by Feuer's proxy, illegally silenced some who tried to comment during the meeting that Ridley-Thomas should be limited, but that his salary and health insurance should not be withheld.  Further, they ignored multiple "cure and correct" orders received via email, opened and read.  Those are Brown Act violations and further proof of their rigged proceeding. 

Talk about having your thumb weighing down the scale of justice!

Did these Councilmembers or their predecessors breathlessly race to suspend and withhold paychecks and health insurance from then-L.A. City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo who admitted his wife Michelle had an accident while improperly driving his city-funded S.U.V. and hid that fact when they had it repaired at taxpayer expense?  According to the L.A. Times, "(Delgadillo) also acknowledged that he did not realize that he himself had driven as an uninsured motorist for about a year, while his wife had driven without insurance for more than two years."

Does that sound like an admission of insurance fraud and mail or wire fraud, as well as violations of the California Vehicle Code?

How did City Council treat then-Chief Administrative Officer Miguel Santana when busted for D.U.I.?

Has City Council taken measures to restrict Councilmember John Lee, who seems to fit the description of "Staffer B" in the ongoing Jose Huizar investigation?  What about Councilmember Herb Wesson, Huizar's self-described "best friend" whose Chief of Staff Deron Williams appears to be prominently represented in the Huizar indictment?  

While City Council did suspend Huizar shortly after his indictment, it was not an apples-to-apples comparison with the Ridley-Thomas situation.  Among other things, Huizar is accused of crimes that violated his oath to serve on City Council.  Ridley-Thomas is accused of serious crimes in his prior office.

Did Martinez and friends hold any hearings on why Wesson, a swirl of corrupt nepotism himself, suddenly started recusing himself from votes when he hadn't done so in the years beforehand?  Since Wesson was Council president at the time and Williams his right-hand man, he obviously wasn't going to suspend himself yet not-a-one of these officials suggested that they should even be restricted.  

Where was the discussion about whether Feuer should have checks and balances placed on him when the FBI raided his office in 2019 in the still-ongoing LADWP scandal?  Why hasn't it held a discussion about the alleged current investigation by the State Bar of California into his activities?

Where was the hearing, outcry and suspension of pay for Mayor Eric Garcetti for claiming under oath and in the media that he didn't see any sexual harassment by his right-hand pal Rick Jacobs despite photographic evidence of it taking place right under his nose?

Rick Jacobs (left), Eric Garcetti ("thumbs up")

Martinez, Feuer and Galperin may have personal motives for their rush to judgment and it may be born out of a different flavor of their own rigged political proclivities.

In my next column, I dig into what I believe motivates them to treat Mark Ridley-Thomas differently.

Stay tuned.

(Daniel Guss, MBA, was runner-up for the 2020 Los Angeles Press Club journalism award for Best Online Political Commentary and has contributed to CityWatch, KFI AM-640, iHeartMedia, 790-KABC, Cumulus Media, Huffington Post, Los Angeles Daily News, Los Angeles Magazine, Movieline Magazine, Emmy Magazine, Los Angeles Business Journal, Pasadena Star-News, Los Angeles Downtown News, and the Los Angeles Times in its Sports, Opinion and Entertainment sections and Sunday Magazine, and other publishers.)

Presently using mi amigo Scott's sign-in until tech matters are ironed out.

LA Times Silent on Nury Martinez' COVID Hypocrisy, Censorship

By Daniel Guss

@TheGussReport - It was clear early on that when LA City Council chose Nury Martinez to succeed the perpetually self-dealing Herb Wesson as its president, she was disinclined to do the one thing that Wesson did well: Lead.  

(Photo: LA City Council President Nury Martinez pontificates about masking, but needs practice on proper usage, though she did have time to get her name printed on hers.)

While Wesson led through intimidation, it ultimately led to his getting trounced by Holly Mitchell in his subsequent run to become an LA County Supervisor. Martinez' brand of leadership was quickly identified as faulty, as well.

As I wrote in this column at that time:

"Gadfly Patricia McAllister had just about enough with Nury's failure to embrace responsibility, letting it rip with this take: 'I want to say that Ms. Martinez, you brought your mother and everybody here and we gave you a good welcome. You're not woman enough to be up on that podium? (Ryu) is not the president. . . If you want to be with the boys, you got to do your job, okay? You're supposed to be at that podium, ma'am. . . Now you be a woman and stand-up for women and do your job. . . Now you wanna run with the boys, you gotta be like the boys, okay. . . Now you wanna get that kind of respect, you be like the boys. Get that skirt off, put some pants on and do your job.'" 

McAllister made a valid if abrasively colorful point: Being LA City Council president means leadership, including running meetings, agenda management and drinking up criticism rather than being thin-skinned and just embracing the "historic!" title of the first Latina in that role.  Pat Russell was LA's first female Council president from 1983-87.  (Is it still okay for us to use the word "female?")

So let's look closer at Martinez' recent and ongoing heavy-handedness with censorship.

She is now armed with a COVID requirement for most indoor places in LA but continues to use the pandemic to silence the public, especially her critics, who want to attend Council meetings.

Over the past several weeks, Council's in-person meetings have resumed in LA City Hall's John Ferraro Chambers. But "in-person" in this instance means only maskless City Councilmembers and their staff.

Martinez continues to exclude the public from attending in-person, masked or not, even with proof of vaccination and has refused to respond to requests to explain her policy.

Why do you suppose that is?

Most Councilmembers have been maskless at their recent meetings, bellowing within feet of one another, and not just during their turn to speak. Why isn't the public allowed to attend those same meetings maskless, provided they have proof of vaccination?

Maskless Mike Bonin

Maskless Kevin DeLeon

Maskless Paul Koretz

Maskless Mitch O'Farrell

Maskless Mark Ridley-Thomas and Maskless Paul Krekorian

Maskless Gil Cedillo

Maskless Bob Blumenfield

It is because barring even the vaccinated public lets Martinez censor criticism by forcing everyone to attend via Zoom where she and those she assigns can exert control with the push of a button, even though she and her colleagues richly deserve the criticism which is an inherent part of a politician's life.  

In fact, criticizing politicians is an inherently American tradition.

Her unwillingness to face and absorb criticism is another example of Martinez' failed leadership. She and Deputy City Attorney Strefan Fauble pick and choose whose phone numbers get called to speak during Council meetings and at their smaller Committee meetings. 

Strefan Fauble

More importantly, either they or their designees choose which phone numbers do not get chosen to participate.

Further, Fauble, City Hall's School-Marm-in-Residence, feigns not knowing which item the chosen speaker is addressing and consistently talks over callers who are on-topic in order to eat away at their precious one minute to speak. He also randomly disconnects their calls rather than letting people who might not have his law school polish make their own points in their own ways.

That's what we call punching down at the little guy.  

Then there's the retaliation. 

Fauble, who has a forthcoming complaint to the State Bar of California for, among other things, threatening to have this columnist arrested for simply attempting to use his duly issued LAPD press pass at a Council meeting, also drags his feet on responding to public records requests endeavoring to determine which callers called-in first to meetings so they can be compared to callers he allowed to speak who did not call-in as early.

Perhaps Mr. Fauble forgot about a certain 1st Amendment lesson while at the University of Texas Law School. Or perhaps he didn't and feels he has free reign to violate others' rights.

What Fauble doesn't forget to do is continue to maliciously expose this columnist's personal data in public records requests for the umpteenth time. Cue the next claim and lawsuit.

That leads us to the question of the day: Why hasn't the LA Times pointed out Martinez' ongoing censorship by refusing to allow the public to attend Council meetings? That's what its news reporters like David Zahniser, Dakota Smith and Emily Alpert Reyes should have reported months ago.

And why hasn't the El Segundo Times Editorial Board called for Martinez' attendance ban to end so constituents and community stakeholders have the same direct access to the meetings enjoyed by Martinez, her 14 Council colleagues, Fauble and their minions?

That is, after all, the point of a news organization.  

Where are you on this, LA Times? Isn't that "the type of journalism" that you promise when pleading for the public to spend 99-cents for an introductory subscription?

If the Times doesn't give a rat's petard about the public, why should the public feel any better about subscribing to the Times? 

(Presently using mi amigo Scott's sign-in until our new Mayor Sam 2.0 tech matters are ironed out)