Weekend Open Thread: Locking in the Liars’ Leverage on Newman Recall

 Powered by Max Banner Ads 




From our archives:  “The photogenic Newman Cub courts controversy by flashing a Baby Power salute!”  Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association lawyers may doubt that Cicely fully understood the issues at hand in last year’s State Senate election when this photo of her was taken supporting her father’s campaign — so fair is fair!  That’s my best guess, anyway.

[Ed. Note: I had a different WOT in mind for today, but then this press release came in this morning and it is just too hard to pass up.  I’ve masked the last four digits of Derek Humphrey’s phone number to prevent calls from some of our more sociopathic readers, but if you’re among them you’d only have to try no more than 9,999 combinations to find it.  (Hint: it’s not “0000.”  Also, never try dialing the “infinity” sign — it takes forever!)]

For my friends who’d like to defend the switcheroo AND the blocking of a remedy to those who assert that they were in fact bamboozled, I understand the political case for doing so, but I have to say that this motion from an  writ of mandate doesn’t really seem like it’s coming from the moral high ground where many of you try to abide.  This, as wise people have said, looks bad. — GAD]


October 6, 2017

Contact: Derek Humphrey
(951) 805-πζ∞φ


Fullerton, CA—Sacramento attorneys representing the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association filed a petition with the Superior Court of California yesterday to prevent voters who were tricked into signing the recall petition from being able to remove their names. Thousands of voters, who were victims of the fraudulent recall effort, have already signed forms to remove their names from the misleading recall petition.

“I just can’t believe that they’re trying to do this to me twice,” said Shawn Robison, whose withdrawal request is among those that the special interest group is seeking to throw out. “First they tricked me into signing a petition by lying to me about what it said, and now that I submitted the form to get my name back, they are suing to force me to stay on it. What does it say about your cause if you have to lie and sue to get people to support you?”

“They told me that the petition would lower my gas taxes, but all it would do is recall Senator Newman,” said Debra Cembrano, who also asked to have her name removed from the petition. “I voted for Josh Newman, and I do not want him recalled. I would feel terrible if my name was used by these people to recall him.”

The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, one of the special interest groups behind the recall, contends that the new law, which enabled people tricked into signing its petition to have their names removed, requires them to submit their signature withdrawal request in person, rather than by proxy. A copy of the petition for a writ of mandate can be found here.

[Editor’s afterword: I really don’t think that this would have been filed if recall proponents were confident of having enough signatures.  Remember, this is only seeking the removal of people who are declaring for the benefit of the court that they were bamboozled, not seeking to disqualify the entire petition drive due to the fraud.  If the petition could only gain enough signatures by bamboozlery, which sources tell OJB is not an actual word, then it’s hard to feel much sympathy for the proponents.  They had ample opportunity, especially given how much they were paying signature gatherers, to have rendered the signatures of this group of voters moot.]

About Greg Diamond

Somewhat verbose worker's rights and government accountability attorney, residing in northwest Brea. General Counsel of CATER, the Coalition of Anaheim Taxpayers for Economic Responsibility, a non-partisan group of people sick of local corruption. Deposed as Northern Vice Chair of DPOC in April 2014 when his anti-corruption and pro-consumer work in Anaheim infuriated the Building Trades and Teamsters in spring 2014, who then worked with the lawless and power-mad DPOC Chair to eliminate his internal oversight. Occasionally runs for office to challenge some nasty incumbent who would otherwise run unopposed. (Someday he might pick a fight with the intent to win rather than just dent someone. You'll know it when you see it.) He got 45% of the vote against Bob Huff for State Senate in 2012 and in 2014 became the first attorney to challenge OCDA Tony Rackauckas since 2002. None of his pre-putsch writings ever spoke for the Democratic Party at the local, county, state, national, or galactic level, nor do they now. A family member co-owns a business offering campaign treasurer services to Democratic candidates and the odd independent. He is very proud of her. He doesn't directly profit from her work and it doesn't affect his coverage. (He does not always favor her clients, though she might hesitate to take one that he truly hated.) He does advise some local campaigns informally and (so far) without compensation. (If that last bit changes, he will declare the interest.)