** Note for readers, there’s currently something of a debate between the author of this post (me) and management (Vern and Greg) concerning the appropriateness of this post’s title.
This is obviously ridiculous. Another blog has challenged DPOC (and other agencies) to investigate allegations as absentee ballots are being cast.
The title is factual and any attempts to change it are blatant attempts at censorship that places partisan identification above honest reporting.
This may be my last post at OJB, which is really just a sad echo of a call to action I thought was news worthy. **
What a crazy week for news in Fullerton. There’s been a lot of media coverage concerning Paulette Marshall-Chaffee’s allegations of stealing political signs (though the OC Register has been curiously absent.)
(There’s lots of Friends for Fullerton’s Future Commentary)
FFFF posted a commentary this afternoon related not to Marshall-Chaffee’s investigation, but to Mayor Doug Chaffee himself.
Fullerton can be a funny town with funny stories.
Earlier this week, we asked you to consider a version of Fullerton where Doug (Chaffee), (Acting Chief) Dunn & (City Manager) Domer had come to an agreement. That agreement included a plan to protect Pilfering Paulette Marshall Chaffee and to minimize damage to Mayor Doug Chaffee’s campaign for Orange County Supervisor.
Shortly after publishing our
leakhypothetical, the City issued a press release stating that the case had been handed over to the District Attorney. A couple things are curiously absent from the City’s Press Release.There’s no indication of who is being investigated, what is being investigated, how it is being investigated, or when the investigation will be completed. No mention of Paulette, Doug, any citation to the penal code, the investigator or department assigned, all missing.
Why is that?
Is Doug Chaffee under investigation for receiving stolen property?
Read the rest of the article here.
Here’s the conclusion:
“We call on the Orange County District Attorney, the City of Fullerton, Doug Chaffee, Paulette Marshall Chaffee, and the Democratic Party of Orange County (DPOC) to immediately disclose what Doug Chaffee knew, when he knew it, and if he is in fact under criminal investigation.”
I’m on the record supporting Tim Shaw for Supervisor. My obvious bias aside, I really do think DPOC owes the voters of District 4 an explanation. Hopefully they’re taking the situation seriously and will force a statement before too many votes are cast this weekend. Were the roles reversed, I have no doubt Vern Nelson and Greg Diamond would be calling for the OCGOP to do the exact same thing if a Republican running in a major county race had this type of cloud hanging over their campaign.
Hopefully honesty, transparency, and responsibility take priority over party identification this weekend.
Ryan, I’m still waiting for all those gleefully promised attacks on Shaw by some of our Dem acquaintances. It’s getting late.
“Gleefully promised attacks on Shaw”? What are you talking about. Can you point to any such thing on this site?
You put up the money for DPOC to investigate whatever it is you want to see investigated and I’ll ask them if they want to do it.
I expect that we could “immediately disclose” what we know about what Doug Chaffee knew, when he knew it, and if he is in fact under criminal investigation” — and it would fit inside this box: []
Does the OCGOP really gather such information about its candidates? If so, I’d like to ask a few questions of its leadership. Maybe we can start with Tyler Diep.
Just to be clear, you want me to pony up funds to clarify the character of an individual your party endorsed?
Yeah, um, no.
If DPOC doesn’t want to assume accountability for the bad behavior of its candidates, that’s your business.
I won’t be surprised if that’s the outcome. DPOC has an abysmal record of putting party identification in front of accountability and honesty.
But hey, here’s an opportunity to prove this critic wrong.
Hey, Ryan — why hasn’t the county Republican Party been investigating Tony Bushala all of these years? How about Kris Murray and the other Pringlings? How about the people who tore down VIRTUALLY ALL of Josh Newman’s signs prior to the recall?
COUNTY PARTIES VERY RARELY INVESTIGATE ENDORSEES AFTER THEY ARE ENDORSED. It happens only in extraordinary circumstances — part because there are only two ways to do it: half-assed or quite expensive. And that’s IF one can expect cooperation — which we could not expect when criminal charges are even possible.
I have never heard of the OC Republican Party doing so at all — and NOT FOR LACK OF REASON. I’ve never heard of the OC GOP doing a decent investigation of Janet Nguyen’s supporters forging signatures of elderly people in nursing homes, nor of Janet and her people running roughshod at polling stations. They just sort of laugh nervously about it.
I am the only person in DPOC who voted against Doug Chaffee, on the basis that he’s a crappy Democrat to the extent he’s a Democrat at all. But we have no basis or means to “investigate him” — and you’re being a demagogue here due to your support of Tim Shaw. I’ve been leaning towards sitting out this race, but given what you’re doing here I’m starting to lean towards voting for Chaffee and hoping that the next (Republican) DA indicts him — if you’re right that there’s any basis in the world to do so.
For now, what you’re doing with this ridiculous demand is making Tim Shaw look WEAK because you need to pull out this sort of crackpot desperate measure to support him. You’ve got enough ammunition from Paulette having done what she did — so run with it. But your trying to drag DPOC into it is equal parts desperate and flat out crazy. Paulette wasn’t our candidate.
Greg,
Ask someone associated with OCGOP.
Concerning the Newman signs, several are still up in Fullerton.
Hard to believe virtually all his signs were taken down.
I sincerely hope you weren’t the one who changed the title of this post.
I was thinking of the CNA’s big and expensive “Newman is a Great Guy” signs, which I should have specified. I had the office direct me to where I could take a photo of one for a story here. Literally ALL gone except one.
As for his normal signs, I found one of them stomped and crusted in the Fullerton Transportation Center. I didn’t know how I could quickly demand and get video evidence of its destruction, if it was available at all. BY FAR most of the signs that I have seen left, every year, are Republican or conservative Democratic signs — and it’s not because the latter have not been put up. Maybe we should have secret cameras watching EVERY sign — it would cost a bit, but cities could still make a net profit given the fines.
Ryan, in addition to the news outlets you mentioned in your post, this story was also published yesterday in the Daily Mail with links to Fullerton’s Future blog.
The headline of the story should be of concern to all Democratics, especially to the California Democratic Party.
Remember, it’s election season. One bad apple in a basket can (and will) spoil other good apples in the basket…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6270807/California-mayors-wife-accused-stealing-campaign-signs-opposing-city-council-candidacy.html
Good for you for having the cameras in place and getting the hits.
Now as to this bullshit end to the story in FFFF”
Since Ryan apparently can’t, can YOU come up with any reason to think that the DPOC should be expected to KNOW “what Doug Chaffee knew, when he knew it, and if he is in fact under criminal investigation”? This is stupid. Come up with evidence that HE (not HER) is under criminal investigation yourself, and then come back to me.
They endorsed him, Greg. They can force a statement or pull their endorsement.
Hey Ryan, are we allowed to suggest that maybe Doug Chaffee knew what was going on in cars registered in his name? That maybe he knew what his spouse of forty million years was doing wandering around Fullerton in the middle of the night?
By the way, a friend of mine got a Paulette Chaffee piece in the mail today. So much for the “suspended” campaign. Don’t waste your time arguing with people who want to parse the Chaffee Crime Family activities into tiny little almost digestible bits.
SHE WHAT?!
You’ve got to be kidding me.
I saw pictures of the piece. I can’t prove when it was delivered.
Has anyone printed out more signs? I think that she may well win due to sharing her husband’s name..
Who changed the title to this post?
Put it back.
I did.
No.
I restored the original post.
Vern, Greg, changing this to alude a candidate was involved was really low.
Don’t do it again
Did it again. Don’t make empty threats.
Your title is bullshit and doesn’t reflect the demand that you made in the FFFF piece. Any “demand” for the DPOC is as pointless and absurd as my demanding that you blow a molten glass out of your butt in the shape of an elephant: you can’t do it and shouldn’t have to. If you want to suggest a headline that accurately reflects a legitimate action that you want the DPOC to take — like, say, “Shaw Advocate Demands DPOC to Revoke Endorsement of Chaffee Based on Logical Possibility That He May Have Done Something Wrong” — you can suggest it, but if it’s true it will probably also be absurd.
Go take a nap, Greg.
See, Ryan? You are not permitted to be pointless and absurd. Those franchises have already been acquired.
I’ve counted no fewer than six attempts to change the title of this post, none of which were even communicated to me in advance.
I don’t exactly have a list of offers, but anyone want a loosely informed political blogger for their website?
Nobody has authority to change titles on this blog but me.
After you and Greg’s quarrel, I tried to change it to “DPOC SHOULD investigate Doug Chaffee.” (I haven’t seen what Greg had tried to change it to.) And I DID communicate that to you, by text, a couple hours before. It just seems more accurate. On the other hand I don’t care that fucking much, about the title.
To DPOC people who want to blame Greg for everything they see on this blog – give it up, this is my blog. I take full responsibility for everything on it, even if I don’t agree with it.
Ryan writes
I’ve probably changed more than 100 titles on this blog over the years to clarify them or correct misconceptions they were presenting. It’s part of the editorial function that I’ve served here for the past six (I thought it was seven, but let’s say six( years. It’s literally part of what a managing editor does — act in the absence of the editor-in-chief and publisher. I’ll stop doing that now and just call writers idiots, if that’s preferable. It may get ugly when Vern is indisposed, but so be it.
Vern, if you check these comments and our text messages, you’ll see that one of my proposed suggestions — not the very first one, which was a tit-for-tat demonstration of how screwed up the original title was — was this: “FFFF Challenges DPOC to Investigate Doug Chaffee” — which would have been factual, less misleading, and fine with me (even if something eliciting an eyeroll once one realizes that FFFF was the one doing the challenging).
I think that that’s not newsworthy, or rather is about as newsworthy as a headline of “Indivisible Challenges Republicans to Investigate Charges of Tim Shaw Racism” (when no such clear charges existed — but if it identifies the source I can live with it. Think of how much worse a headline of “Republicans Challenged to Investigate Charges of Tim Shaw Racism” would be. The source matters.
I note that you say that you “tried to” change it to what would have been a perfectly good opinion (rather than news) post: “DPOC SHOULD investigate Doug Chaffee.” I suggested that (or something essentially like it) too; it’s a perfectly valid opinion to have, but it makes it clear that that opinion belongs to Ryan Cantor. (If it were changed to “DPOC Should Yank Chaffee Endorsement,” which I’d have to accept is a valid opinion to hold. (The headline that “DPOC should investigate” — which Ryan justifies based on the belief that you and I would demand an OCGOP investigation if the situation were reversed (which is wrong at least as applied to me) — is stupid grandstanding because local parties generally don’t have the *capacity* to do a proper investigation.
(I note that regardless of your trying to make a reasonable editorial change to the headline, the original headline is still in place — so maybe Ryan is challenging your control over your blog as well.)
To make clear why this isn’t newsworthy — “is it possible that Doug Chaffee received stolen property — while I’m sure that it warms the hearts of Tim Shaw partisans such as Ryan and the FFFF author (who so far as I know is, as usual there, writing under a pseudonym) — is NOT AN ALLEGATION. It’s a supposition, and you don’t call for investigations based on suppositions. You have to give some basis to believe that something is not only POSSIBLE, but that there’s “evan a scintilla of evidence” to believe that IT MAY ACTUALLY HAVE OCCURRED, before an investigator will consider it worth looking into, let alone a court refusing to kick it out of play. SO WHY EXACTLY SHOULD DPOC INVESTIGATE AN ANONYMOUS UNSUPPORTED CLAIM BY PROPONENTS OF AN OPPONENT? It’s absurd, it doesn’t belong here, and its embarrassing that it’s still up, and doubly embarrassing that the blog’s owner hasn’t been able to change it because of shouts of “‘Elp, I’m being oppressed!”
Elections often bring out the worst in people. I think that I know how badly Ryan wants Shaw to beat Chaffee — and he’s he’s entitled to that view. (I’m still undecided and until this was tilting towards abstaining.) What he is NOT entitled to do, in my view, is to use a post in another blog that he may or may not have had a hand in creating and is certainly trying to take an active hand in publicizing to justify calling for another party to “investigate” it when — by not specifying in the header who is making this demand or that he’s merely expressing his own opinion, EITHER OF WHICH I thought would have been fine — he intentionally makes it seem like this demand has more outside support than it apparently does.
That moves it from using this site as a forum — which I hope that Ryan will continue to do, but if it’s an auto-da-fe he wants then I’m not going to sponge the lighter fluid off of him — to using this site as the way to launch a dirty trick. That’s what it is — just like an anonymous comment on LibOC accusing Tim Shaw of abusing children would be a dirty trick if we didn’t acknowledge its partisan and undependable source.
Now, apparently, my watch on Ryan (and, I suppose, everyone) is ended, so I guess it’s open season on seeing how much y’all can get away with. Damn shame, if you ask me — which Vern pointedly did not.
So enjoy your bullshit dirty trick. I’ll keep an eye out for who links to this and will head there to set the record straight — not because I like Doug Chaffee (I don’t), but because I like and care about OJB.
I don’t get this.
I share a local blog post that I think is interesting and all of a sudden I’m part of some conspiracy?
It seems to have survived the weekend. Hopefully this week is a better one for censorship and intellectual freedom.
Oh, you just grabbed onto a morsel from another blog and tried to flog the hell out of it here because you found it interesting!
Get a grip, man. You’re sounding as disingenuous as Jordan Brandman.
If Vern’s fine with his literally being unable to change the bullshit headline of a bullshit story on his own blog, it can stay as it is. But that choice just invites worse to come as Shaw’s supporters get more desperate.
I didn’t try to flog the hell out if it. Not sure where you’re getting that from.
I see we’re reduced to public insults. Noted.
That last line makes me concerned that Jordan Brandman has actually commandeered your account. I think I may have heard him say that verbatim.
But I retract the very hurtful reference to the Jordan Brandman standard for disingenuity. You simply sound disingenuous and insult the intelligence of readers in suggesting that, as a Tim Shaw proponent, you simply created a whole post to highlight a portion of a comment from your creepily meaning-twisting friend Josh Ferguson’s blog because you thought it was “interesting” despite it being no such thing, and flipped out at not just me but also Vern when we tried to render it into what it should have been — a still silly and dim request BY YOU OR “LONNIE” for the DPOC to investigate something it had no power or basis to do (or even to change it into a more cogent demand for DPOC to yank its endorsement, even though that too would be silly.)
Wow, when you find something “interesting,” it really takes over every fiber of your being!
It seems to take over your being, actually.
I was happy to post and leave it alone.
I conceeded a potential bias issue in the post, Greg. It’s interesting. I think it’s newsworthy.
I don’t understand why you feel a need to take it so personally.