Chumley Deeply Confuses Melahat’s Judge – surprise UPDATE – she gets SIX MONTHS in jail.

I’m reproducing Chumley’s Illiberal OC’s post from yesterday, with my comments in italic, in full for purposes of criticism and rebuttal. Each point gets its own number to facilitate further discussion.

1. “As much as I hate nitpicking,” GAD: Dan does not hate nitpicking at all.
2. “Vern Nelson and Greg Diamond make a lot of mistakes when they write.” GAD: Let’s go to the tape!
3. “But the number one reason there’s so much venom directed by them to Melahat Rafiei boils down to this: she’s getting credit for taking down the Anaheim Cabal and not them.” GAD: Noooo. We are but one of many actors, identified in our stories, who played more of a role while Chumley, his puppeteer, and the best friend he betrayed and left in emotional tatters did. But the point was that Melahat did not earn the great mercy she is “somehow” getting from the always kind and never manipulative and vicious Trump Administration.
4. “So I’m factchecking the Orange Doouche Blog (c) 2025, TheLiberalOC.com.” The name “Orange Douche Blog” would actually be pretty funny and personally I’d happily own it, because who is a douche is in the liquid-filled bag of the beholder. But “Orange Doouche Blog” is just deeply weird. Avoiding the word “Douche” he evokes and thinking that spelling it as “Doouche” gives him some sort of protection both testify to Chumley’s deep insecurity and immaturity: he could not bring himself to spell out “douche” — and he thinks that having avoided it protects him against some loss of credibility (or something.) Padawan, you gotta commit to the bit! No one takes Lib OC seriously enough to “harm its reputation” anyway. Anyway, I am employing the same fake assertion of “copyright” that Chumley uses above and writing “the Orange Douche Blog (c) 2025, Greg Diamond” and if anyone else uses it they will suffer the same consequences, whatever they might be.
5. “The Department of Justice gives her credit.” PAM BONDI’S DOJ gives her credit. That serves her and her Satanic Majesty’s purposes, and if Melahat were not cooperating with them this would be highly unlikely given that previous credible comments cast doubt on her testimony.
6. “The FBI gives her credit (althoguh [sic] they have admitted to reading posts from OJ back in the day).” Yeah, about that. When I noted that someone was going through our entire corpus and copying everything in some automatic process that seemed to threaten a DDOS attack, Chumley downplayed it. It was actually quite a compliment! Notably, they seemingly found nothing in his blog of interest.
7. “The LA Times, OC Register, Voice of OC, LAist all report that the Feds credit Rafiei with taking down the Cabal.” This is precious. Yes, they all reported that Bondi’s Feds said this. That doesn’t make its substance true! This is like saying that they all reported that Trump and Vance said that immigrants in Ohio were eating people’s dogs and cats and trying to use that as proof that it really happened! Crazy!
8. “Diamond says he’s sending two posts to the judge in a move designed to counter 29 letters of support (I trust Irvine Watchdog’s count over Nelson’s).” FWIW I decided not to. Had I finished this piece when I intended to, I’d have conferred with others to see whether it was permissible under ethical standards. In his “profession,” Chumley doesn’t need to worry about ethical standards.
9. “I’ve sent a copy of this post with factchecks documented and a note to the judge that Nelson’s is the proud owner of five DUIs (and has been accused of sexual assault by a former elected official) and Diamond was removed by the local party twice as a vice chair and member for violating party rules” Oh. My. God. He did this? This is … this is so … this is so freaking fantastic! I cannot believe my good fortune! If the Judge (or more likely his clerk, if even that) read this before the sentencing, it might give him pause — and reason to put off sentencing while he can investigate what the hell this gabbling walrus is trying to say! We could pull the fat out of the fire after all!
10. “and he was removed as a state delegate to a party convention for abusive behavior towards women.” This is neither true nor amusing and I shall consult with counsel regarding it. 
11. “If the judge cares about the character of those opposing Rafiei, he’ll take that into consideration along with the 29 letters of support for her.” I think that Chumley should perhaps consult with his cadre of (possibly imaginary) attorney friends to see how likely this is. But for me, the fact that I didn’t send my post after all makes his especially hilarious.
12. “Fact checking Nelson’s post, I offer this:” Brace yourselves!
13. “Nelson implied Rafiei was — in effect — a de facto CEO for the Orange County Power Authority and somehow installed Brian Probolsky as CEO.” “Implies … in effect” is doubly weak, but she wouldn’t have had to be to influence policy and help get Probolsky into place. I’ll leave it to Vern to rebut this if he wishes, but I expect that he has the goods on this, either as a fact or a compelling theory.
14. “The reality is she had zero to do with the OCPA; I’ve done two PRAs with them and her name doesn’t appear in a single email, not on a page of notes, nor in any letters or memos.” Yes, because Melahat would be completely incapable of talking to people over the phone or in person — like she did at the outdoor meeting regarding getting a Republican appointed to Irvine Council that I happened upon and photographed — without leaving a PRA-able trace. Someone please remind me to send my own PRA to OCPA asking for any PRA submitted to them from Dan Chmielewski and/or the Liberal OC; I’d be interested is seeing how well he worded them!
15. “That’s a lie from Kathleen Treseder who’s told it often and publicly, and in front of Nelson at a public event at a church in Anaheim in October 2023; Good story, bro.  Not at all truthful.” This is not, how does one say this, “an argument.” It is simply an assertion from a PR professional who chooses to believe the sources that serves his purposes.
16. “Both Nelson and Diamond insist I’m part of the Anaheim Cabal.” Yes, in the sense that the cheerleader is part of the football team. But in this case, he was Melahat’s megaphone, which counts.
17. “I’ve never met Ament. I met Sidhu once at a debate when he run for Assembly.” Not all members of a conspiracy have to know or be in contact with one another. Ask your defense lawyer about that.
18. I will confess to wanting the Angels to stay in Anaheim and think its high-time for a new stadium and the area around said new stadium should be developed the same way the Patriots developed the Stadium site in Foxboro, Mass.  I also think the city should get out of the stadium business. Any sale of the stadium has to be good for the city and the team.” Oh. My. God. So … just giving them the stadium for $1 after putting in money to bring it up to snuff “had to” be good for the city?! A sale based on worthless reports and negotiated by a self-appointed committee of one “had to” be good for the city? This raises the question of what exactly Chumley thinks that Sidhu did wrong! If Sidhu hadn’t asked the Angels for compensation — would everything else he did have been ok, in Chumley’s view?
19. “As for the “business of baseball” quoe [sic] they love to ridicule, I interned for a NY Penn League Class A club one summer in college and worked for a different NY Penn league fanchise [sic, unless “fanchise” is a fantasy baseball thing in which case ok, fine, but also let me add: “fanchise (c) 2025 Greg Diamond”] one summer in 1988; additionally, I was an SID for a Division I program for two years in college and have lots of interactions with NCAA admnistrators [sic] and Class A front office people.  I also have a few friends who write books about baseball and we’ve had lots of conversations at my house over dinner going on 20 years now.  My knowledge of the business side of the game isn’t super extensive but it’s more than either of these two geniuses.” Ahhhhhh, okaaaaaaay, but it’s telling and strikingly stupid to view this solely or even substantially as a matter of what was good for the Angels. This is about the business of good governance, and while it’s interesting to learn that Chumley did not see it that way, but considered it only from the viewpoint of the party opposed to the Angels in what was supposed to be arms-length negotiations speaks volumes.
20. “On Rafiei’s letters of support; the count is 29.  I was told 40.  And[]like I said before, she got more letters of support than you did for your last DUI tha [sic] resulted in jail time This is actually how his mind works. Sad.
21. “… and more letters of support than Diamond did when he got tossed from the DPOC for endorsing a Republican for DA against Party rules” The question, for anyone interested (which excludes Chumley who jez don’ care), was whether party rules actually did prohibit endorsing a Republican in a non-partisan county race between two Republicans. The language as written in the relevant rules did not encompass that scenario. In its infinite wisdom at at the request of DPOC, the CDP decided that that what the rules said simply didn’t matter and the County Party could do whatever it wanted.
22. “Rafiei was executive director of the DPOC in 2008/9 — when you were in jail so that was easy for you to miss. The feds began their investigation in 2018.” Vern acknowledged this before Chumley’s piece was published. Chumley is stupid, biased, and vindictive, so that was easy for him to miss.
23. “On Diamond’s post, he might be an attorney, but my friends who are defense lawyers wanted to know if he got his law license from a Cracker Jacks [sic] box.  If the DOJ and the Defense are approaching the judge with agreement on sentencing, yes the judge can ignore it, but its almost certain that’s how the sentence will go down.” In other words, by saying that what I hoped for could happen, I was absolutely correct.
24. “The notion that this is a national and internation [sic] story is wrong” On the contrary: if the Trump administration could install a well-connected and persuasive agent of its own into the Democratic Party to serve as both spy and disruptive agent, that could absolutely harm the California Democratic Party and its members’ comparatively effective efforts to constrain Trump — and given what Trump is doing that makes it of both national significance and thus international significance.
25. “and that Bondi will hold this sentence over Rafiei to “blackmail” her is actually laughable.” What you don’t understand can be amusing. Here’s the series: Melahat gets her sentence, which includes a period of probation. If she doesn’t do what Bondi wants, Bondi can generate a pretext about how she has violated her probation. No part of government prevents this. Now, what do you think happens if Melahat violates her probation?
26. “(Don’t worry Greg,” Believe me, I’m not.
27. “I told them about your stroke and how it affects your thinking” You have no idea about how my stroke “affects my thinking.” You’re not my neurologist, you don’t have my medical records, you haven’t seen any of my recent work product, and you’re both obtuse and biased as hell. They really listened to you?
28. “and the comment that came back was “that explains so much).” If this person actually exists, they were either humoring you or by trusting your representation they’re almost as stupid as you are.
29. “Yes, Rafiei accepted responsibility immediately and immediately agreed to wear a wire; it actually is the same thing.” I believe that even you reported her position that she did this voluntarily out of patriotism — which, if plausible (not so much for her, but possibly for others) shows that they are not the same thing. But saying, in effect “let’s just put off the matter of what you think I did, would it be useful to you for me to wear a wire and ask sharp questions to implicate people?” also shows that they are not the same thing.
30. “Jordan Brandman was clearly suffering the affects of mential [sic] illness.” Come off it, you joker. Unless you’re think that his decision to take on Melahat in his LA Times interview with Adam Elmahrek was a sign of “mental illness” — and maybe you do! — that “illness” is not what killed him.
31. “He was a dear friend.  And he was a dear friend to others too.” He was a loyal follower of Melahat and of the Cabal until it was clear that he was expendable. And then all of you “dear friends” abandoned him — and IIRC you in particular jeered him about how he would possible be able to continue to make a cushy living after having pissed off the interest that had hired him. (I’ll look it up if you deny it.) That’s a political ally-cum-tool, not a friendship.
32. “All of us did everything we could to urge him to get the help he really needed; the harder we pushed, the harder he pushed back.” I’d be fascinated to know how the timing of all this fits in with the date of the Elmahrek interview. You wanted him to get the help he needed to STFU after his political career — and thus usefulness to the Cabal — had ended?
33. “This is a case where Diamond is making up stuff he has no insight about but it sure sounds plausible.” That’s a convenient assertion. I can just respond “no I’m not and yes I do” — I talked to Jordan extensively over the years (remember that we had friends in common) publicly and privately and I reported on what I saw happening to him on the dais, as he became increasingly radioactive and closer to being discarded. So people can judge our relative credibility for themselves. At least we can agree that what I’m saying (and was at the time) “sure sounds plausible”; that’s because it was true.
34. “Diamond says the abandonment of Brandman by his friends lead to his suicide.” I’m aware that it wasn’t determined to be a suicide, but the coroner doesn’t look beyond proximate causes. If someone is getting by based on a sinecure (look it up), and then they make a statement that harms their benefactors, and suddenly not only their political career but the extended payoff they had depended on disappear, and their close friends like you start taunting them and browbeating them into repentance and begging for forgiveness and they either start using or intensify their use of meth, then that strikes me as their killing themselves — for which suicide is a synonym, even if it only happens recklessly.
35. “Brandman pushed away friends.” Again, you may mean only by and at time time of the Elmahrek interview. But remembering that you were such a good friend reminds me: How early and for how long did you know that Jordan was abusing meth, Dan. Who else knew? Did you discuss his going into a detox clinic?
36. “He had just moved to a new apartment, spent money decorating and bought a bunch of stuff at Costco” Yeah — and then he found out that he was being kicked off the gravy train for trying to stand up for himself. He wasn’t going to be able to keep that home or all those furnishings. Depressing! Could lead to an accidental (though I’d call in reckless overdose. Could lead to an intentional one. Coroners cannot read minds, just the ambiguous traces left behind.
37. “Diamond writes “As I’ve written here several times and said at political meetings in front of others, I truly wanted to save Jordan Brandman’s soul — not in a religious conversion sense, but in his having the courage to be his best possible self rather than the slickest at self-service.”” No lie detected.
38. “Brandman used to tell me how Diamond would try to bully him to voting on matters Diamond cared about” Wow! Being accused of “bullying to affect votes on issues one cares about” by Dan Chmelewski — that a rare honor and a 9.7 on the Richter scale of irony! “Physician, heal thyself!” No, I didn’t “bully” him. I disagreed with him, argued with him, I criticized him, I asked him about issues he didn’t want to address — all of which is within the scope of citizen journalism and advocacy and none of which is “bullying.” He was canny, we agreed on some (mostly LGBT and feminist) issues, and he was an often-persuasive speaker who was, sadly, politically “owned” by bad people. hoping to put some daylight between him and the selfish interests that were promoting his career. He may have taken that as effrontery, which he may have in turn considered “bullying,” but it was nothing that a politician should not be able to endure.
39. “Threats of negative blog posts were frequent.” I don’t think that I ever once have “threatened” anyone with a negative blog post. This suggests a quid pro quo; people generally knew my views on things and knew that I was likely to write about them. I didn’t need to threaten and I don’t think that I ever did. Is any of this in writing, Dan? From Jordan, from Murray, from Kring, from others? I hope that you will produce it. Otherwise, I think you’re making this up.
40. “But Jordan did not commit suicide.  That’s sloppy.” Suicide is … sloppy? Yeah, usually, I guess so, unless one can feed oneself to a deep ocean shark. But for anyone wondering why Dan keeps coming back to this, it’s because I so believe that Dan and Melahat were responsible for driving Jordan to despair — and perhaps a state of mind where he would accidentally, recklessly, or intentionally take a fatal dose of meth — by deriding his ability to care for himself after he turned on Melahat.
41. “This last point made by [sic] defense lawyer friends laugh:  Diamond writes: “… prosecutors, who have the ability to move to rescind Melahat’s plea agreement for non-cooperation, anytime they think it’s appropriate, are <s>not</s> [was this to be now?] in a position to make someone their political operative and pawn.” They are right that this is absolutely not how the system is supposed to work. It violates legal ethics! It is unpardonable — except, well, literally. Look, this may come as news to Chumley’s possibly imaginary attorney friends, but we are in a brave new world of legal lawlessness and the sort analysis we would have given this a year ago no longer necessarily applies. Melahat has to have been candid in her statement and has to not violate probation. Bondi’s DOJ could, if they wished, easily manufacture evidence that she had violated one or both of these provisions if she did not do what they wanted. Melahat, with approximately triple Pam Bondi’s intelligence, would understand that. And once she took even a single step in that direction — something incriminating within Democratic politics that could be held back for a timely leak if the need arose — then they would own her all the more. That puts her in a bind — and even though they might ask her to do things that would go against everything she has stood for, her primary felt responsibility is to self and family.
42. “And that seems a quite likely way to keep Melahat on a leash and doing her MAGA Master’s bidding.”  If Rafiei pays he [sic] fine and follows probation, she’s fine.  She is not required to cooperate with the government on new requests.  Law license from a Cracker Jacks box.” Maybe Chumley is just unaware of what is going on with our judicial system. Maybe he can’t imaging people trying and getting away with concealed illegal actions. It wouldn’t be his first failure of imagination.

I’ve long thought that Dan C. — friend of Matt Cunningham and Kris Murray that he’s been — would himself flip to save his own expansive bottom if the need arose. (Although frankly, he’s probably more useful to Trump here as a James Carville-style attack dog against the sorts of programs for which voters increasingly seem hungry.) But reasonable people can disagree about such initiatives — and so can the likes of Chumley.

Postscript

To Judge Aenlle-Rocha, if you ever read this:

I’m so sorry that my blustering nincompoop of an OC political blogging rival sent worthless papers to your chambers to sap your precious time. I presume that you’re aware of the maxim “never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty, but the pig likes it.” Good advice, but sadly the maxim doesn’t explain what to do when, as here, the pig jumps out of its muddy gutter and wrestles with you. One might conceivably run, but that goes against my disposition, ethics, and rights. Anyway, I hope that you do a crackerjack — you know, like the caramel popcorn and peanut mix that comes in a box? — job today, and may justice prevail.