Subject: BREAKING NEWS: TOTAL VICTORY IN COURT AGAINST THE UNION!!!
COURT VICTORY!!!
“Judge Dismisses All Three Union-Backed Lawsuits Against CUSD Reform Trustees.
All three cases brought by the so-called “Children First” organization (a front for the public employees’ union in CUSD) were just rejected in their entirety by Orange County Superior Court Judge Michael Brenner on the merits, totally vindicating the truthfulness of the official ballot statements submitted by the reform trustees.”
Trustee Mike Winston personally argued all three cases today.
More to come…
Wasn’t there 5 cases today?
Confused:
The leaders of the so-called “Children First” organization (a front for the public employees’ union in CUSD) and their candidate John Alpay lost the other two lawsuits you’re referring to on Wednesday.
The union puppets went 0-5 in court this week — and the conservative Reform Trustees have been completely vindicated.
STOP THE UNION TAKEOVER ATTEMPT IN CUSD!
Not exactly true on the Alpay suit. He was allowed to say, truthfully, that he is not and has not been supported by UNIONS in this race. He did have to make a couple of minor changes and was allowed to rewrite those two passages in his own suggested words. Not a big defeat for John, more a draw.
Thanks Vern, it doesn’t matter what you say or what happens, these people will spin until it makes them vomit. Alpay won his case. The attorney on the reform boards side wasn’t even properly prepared and Maddox insisted on seeing the transcript afterwards because he couldn’t believe how hard they got trounced.
It doesn’t matter, they will lie at every turn, the reform trustees only have the “union, union, union” lie to carry them through. CUEA had not one thing to do with the lawsuits and have NOTHING to do with Children’s First as an organization.
Doesn’t matter, they will spin every which way they can. They have no shame.
I find it odd that the union can claim victory when their candidate and their YES on H ballot statements had to change AND THEN claim victory when EVERY one of their DOZENS of challenges ALL failed.
Of course, when you demolish the union side, I guess it would be wrong to claim victory in your eyes.
Hypocrites rule in the Union.
I love the idea that the PRESIDING Judge of the court stated that the union’s statements were FALSE and MISLEADING. (it makes me want to giggle)
Today’s judge basically says a candidate can put whatever they want on their statement. And Maddox-Lopez-Maddox or whatever gets to use whatever name he wants. No big deal, it was worth a try.
If that’s the case, then why was Alpay forced to change his statement? Sounds like a double standard to me!
Could be because it was different judges?
O bother are you guys (Vern and Nice Try) Kool Aid Drinkers!
Two of Alpay’s statements were found by the Court to be false and misleading and the Court ordered the Registrar to not print them! If that is not a win for their side what is? Twist and turn all you want but Alpay did not “win” on Wednesday – did he get to keep two of his statements? Yes that is true and good for him. But the Court’s finding that two of his statements as being false and misleading is nothing to crow about.
So how are you spin doctors going spin today’s TOTAL loss by no less than Trustee Mike Winsten!!!???!!!
The campaign should boil down to free-thinking individuals vs. think-alike incumbents. I see a marionette-themed door hanger. Voters will not respond positively to the whole “voting-bloc”, protectionist, Beall-controlled panel of failures.
That statement is a total lie! The judge didn’t decide anything today except that a candidate can put anything they want in their candidate statement.
It has already been proven that that was NO UNION involvement in measure H or the recall.
I was there in court today and I was there when the petitions were collected for both projects. Court observer wasn’t in court. Only the Teamsters supported Winsten was there representing the enemies of public education.
It has already been proven that Measure H and the Recall were not Union efforts
That’s not what the court said. On the union-support issue, there was insufficient proof on both sides to prevent the other from spinning its view in its ballot statement. That’s why the second judge said his ruling on the subject was consistent with the ruling of the first judge. Neither one found sufficient proof on either side. Your “already been proven” claim is just plain wrong.
Well, I say the Children First coalition IS a front for the union. Whether it’s official or not, or whether they admit it or not, all you have to do is look at the union strike photos, union member support during board meetings, statements by union leader vicky Soderberg, past union support ($100,000 in independent expenditures) for Children First’s Kutnick and her former union-backed slate-mates, etc. Add to this the advantage Kutnick & Co’s Measure H will give to the union in future elections, and the circle is complete. If I were running for trustee, I could let the voters know about this sleazy union support in my official ballot statement. The court said I could.
Well, it appears there is confusion about what constitutes FACT and what constitutes OPINION.
The FACT remains, in this election cycle, Children’s First and it’s candidates have not accepted and are not seeking ANY UNION donations regardless of “what you say.” I believe that “what you say” constitutes your OPINION, which you are welcome to as long as you do not try to circulate it as proven FACT.
I also find it interesting some “say” that they welcome the beliefs of individual teachers–but in reality they only welcome beliefs of teachers that align with their own–as soon as an individual teacher expresses a differing view, they become “sleazy” union thugs.
As a district parent who circulated petitions for measure H and the recall, who has never had ANY union affiliation by ANYONE in my family, I can assure you that I am reluctantly spending my time and energy on these issues because I hope to minimize the influence of ALL special interests in MY kids education, whether it be union influence or partisan political influence.
The FACT is, the union, and many of its members have been very supportive of the ChildrenFirst agenda from at least the day the reform trustees took over as a board majority, openly joining them in their mutual declaration of war that has kept the district in chaos. This disruptive and self-serving misconduct has been very flagrant and very public and this self-proclaimed “grassroots” effort would not have gotten this far without it. This alone makes their denials disingenuous. In addition, former union candidate Erin Kutnick and her union-backed slate-mates played these hide-the-ball games over union support in the last election. They vehemently denied it, even though they received more special interest funding ($100,000) than any other candidates by far in the form of “independent” expenditures from the union (and they weren’t that independent at times). Well Kutnick and the same group is behind the current ChildrenFirst effort, as well, and we’ll find out soon enough what dishonest games they’re playing this time as their need to cover, and obligation to report, campaign expenses develops in the coming weeks.
Parent for an even better public school.
You forgot to add the bottom line to your comment.
Simply stated: Vote NO on Measure H
Vote NO on the recall.
No union involvement, except most of the leaders of the recall effort and union members. And no union involvement except that the union circulated an email to its members in February seeking help in gathering signatures on recall petitions. You know, that kind of no union involvement.
hmmmm, not a true rant from poster called children first
Alpay was not able to keep his ballot statement as is, he had parts taken out becuase it was false and mi-leading
union recall vote NO
Yes, and the statements that were struck were especially interesting because the court weighed the evidence and found that, as a matter of law, there was clear and convincing evidence that they were false and misleading and had to be struck from his ballot statement. Another important point is that these false and misleading statements were not minor, as Vern would have us believe. These were statements directly from key smear allegations in ChildrenFirst’s campaign of lies against the reform trustees. Of course no court ruling, even one based on clear and convincing evidence, will deter the likes of ChildrenFirst or their union buddies from using these same old lies to deceive the public. But at least now, it will be easier to expose them.
That is absolutely not true. The first judge was far more particular. If that were the case, then the judge wouldn’t have allowed alternative language that mentioned the money being sucked away from our classrooms. She took issue with “hundreds” of lawyers.
You people are insane. You’ve twisted this week and are going to run with it and make it into anything you want. Both rulings were not what you are making it out to seem but you care so very little for the actual truth it’s insulting.
Actually, the judge agree with Mr. Powers attorney that not only the “hundreds of lawyers” statement was false or misleading, but that Alpay’s statement about the reform trustees being supported by interests “hostile to public education” was false or misleading, as well. So the Alpay’s “no union support” language stays for lack of clear and convincing evidence (not because it’s true, but because the the judge just didn’t know), but both of Alpay’s other statements were prohibited because by clear and convincing evidence they were ruled as false or misleading. Instead, Alpay had to replace them with watered down statements that are a far cry from the same false and misleading statements that still dominate the ChildrenFirst-union talking points.
you guys remind me of that old Monty Python bit:
that’s not an arugment
yes it is
no it isn’t
yes it is
no it isn’t, it’s merely contradiction
no it isn’t
yes it is…
These candidate statements were not written by Children First or by a Union. The advocates of this message are outright and total liars. Do you have any morals? Do you have a conscience? Is your desire to maintain your ownership of a school board so precious to you that you can’t defend your puppets without resorting to repeated lies?
Some of you claim to be Christian too!??!?! how does that work? Are you just skipping over the part that says “thou shalt not lie” or maybe you forgot about the “thou shalt not bear false witness against your neighbor”. Maddox excused all of his lies in an email to a local pastor stating “I am justified in Christ”.
Your blatant attempts to tie Children First to a union or to other actions are putrid vile. I am angry because you, and your bought and paid for trustees, are using this school district as your personal piggy bank at our kid’s expense. City of Bell = CUSD
New You Tube about The Recall
http://www.mikewinsten.com