(published 11/19, updated 11/24)

So, who are you gonna believe, who has more credibility: the Trump Department of Justice, specifically the (ironically dubbed) Civil Rights Division under Harmeet Dhillon, OR longtime former HB city attorney/demagogue Michael E. Gates? Tough one. In the land of liars, we start by reporting both sides, equip ourselves with a shaker of salt, and go with what feels right.

This – oh, in case you missed it – is regarding the question of whether Mike E. quit his job with the DOJ (as he claims) or whether he was “fired for cause” as forms signed by his boss Harmeet claim. It was a little jolting what a short time this ambitious cad lasted in what seemed to be his dream job – 10 months! Only ten months, since February, attacking voting and civil rights at the highest level! But at least it was longer than the six months Tito Ortiz managed to hang in there as a Huntington Beach Councilman. You could say Mike E. lasted 1.6 Titos.

By Mike’s own telling, he QUIT his dream job just like Tito did, because he couldn’t hack it, claiming now vaguely that the whole civil rights office was “dysfunctional” and “unprofessional.” And he wept, embroidering greatly on the “wanting to spend more time with my family” shtick, that “the months felt like years as I missed my family and their events, and missed being in the most beautiful city in the world.”

Reacting to the DOJ’s claim that no, he was FIRED for cause, Mike responds “They were angry I resigned, and I know this because it was well known throughout the office for months that anybody resigning would make them look bad. When other people resigned, they were so mad. I’ve seen it with my own eyes because they thought it would make them look bad.” (Sort of the reverse of “You can’t fire me, I quit!”)

But the DOJ, in a form signed by Mike’s formerly beloved boss Harmeet (whose butt he used to kiss ritually on social media) says they fired him “for cause.” And since it’s a personnel matter they won’t say why, but a DOJ source told the Register, Mike created “a hostile work environment for multiple women in the office,” consistently “referring to female colleagues by derogatory and demeaning names, and complained about the employment of a woman who was pregnant.“

Which those who’ve known Mike E. Gates over this decade he’s dominated Surf City say, in the jargon of that locale, “Checks out.” The papers mention how HB had to pay out $2.5 million in 2021 to two plaintiffs over Mike’s age and disability discrimination; not mentioned is the many complaints of women who had to work with or for him. And HB’s Democrat firebrand Gina Clayton Tarvin, who was once his friend and neighbor till she somehow incurred Mike’s ire, tells me:

“It’s no surprise to me that Michael Gates has been accused of harassing his female coworkers. Over the years, he has treated numerous women in Huntington Beach, including me, very poorly, using disparaging microaggressions, misogynistic language, and demeaning attacks to cover up for substandard work for HB residents. I believe the report that he created a hostile work environment at the DOJ. There’s no doubt in my mind.”

You think?

(Just the City Attorney taunting his recently divorced political opponent)

The truth will come out. Back in Huntington Beach, Mike E. has applied, and been accepted, to be his old assistant’s assistant until the next election when he’ll return in triumph to embarrass Surf City, and cost it more millions. But his job application, and eventually the reason for his firing, WILL be public record. Till then, you and I will have to sit here on this pier, watching the Clown Show go on. We could do worse.

But hold the phones…

*****UPGATES 11/24*****

Friday the 21st, possibly in response to Gates’ furious threats of litigation (being terminated for cause gave HB a teensy bit of pause about re-hiring tho’ I’m sure they would’ve anyway), the DOJ provided him with a letter confirming that he DID resign voluntarily.

So, we are to believe that Mike E. really, as he claimed, couldn’t hack being away from his family and beautiful town for more than ten months, and so quit his “dysfunctional” job. This doesn’t erase that a DOJ source complained to the Register about his piggish behavior with women, and that that rings true to those who’ve known in in HB, but that source WAS anonymous, and DOJ officially says he wasn’t fired. So he’s back at HB as assistant and soon he’ll be top dog there again soon!

But wait – hold the phone one more time! What if, right as we were mourning our pretext for Gates schadenfreude, we discovered that, acting officially in his dream capacity of suppressing the votes of minorities and Democrats, Mike E. had spectacularly shot himself, Trump, and MAGA in the foot, writing a letter back in July advising the State of Texas how best to effectively gerrymander votes away from Latinos, a letter that became the evidence leading to a high federal court throwing out the Texas plan? (While California’s democratically-approved Prop 50 stays proudly standing?) That would be a REAL Mike E. fuckup. And here’s that letter:

See the signature there? Mike E. along with his beloved ex-boss Harmeet. Yeah, I know, it’s funny that he called Greg Abbott and especially Ken Paxton “honorable,” but that’s not the problem. Let me quote extensively from “Democracy Docket… at least I think that’s where this is from...

***********************************

Background on Texas Redistricting. Texas Republicans, under pressure from President Donald Trump, undertook an unusual mid-decade redistricting effort to redraw congressional maps and potentially gain up to five additional GOP seats in the 2026 midterm elections. This was the first such redraw since 2003 without a court order, aimed at bolstering the party’s slim House majority. The process sparked national controversy, including Democrats fleeing the state to block a quorum and retaliatory redistricting in states like California. The new map targeted Democratic-held districts in urban areas like Houston, Austin, and Dallas, diluting minority voting power (particularly Black and Latino voters) by eliminating several “coalition districts” (where no single racial group holds a majority but combined minority voters influence outcomes).

Civil rights groups, including the NAACP and League of United Latin American Citizens, sued, arguing it violated the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution through racial gerrymandering.

This letter, co-authored by Gates & Dhillon and sent to Texas Governor Greg Abbott and Attorney General Ken Paxton, warns that four of Texas’s congressional districts (specifically coalition districts in the 2021 map) were unconstitutional because they were drawn based on race in violation of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), potentially subjecting them to legal action if not redrawn.

The letter focuses exclusively on the racial makeup of the districts, asserting they lacked a clear ethnic majority and thus failed VRA standards.

It urged Texas to redraw these districts to create more “majority-Hispanic” or otherwise compliant lines, providing a pretext for broader redistricting.

The letter contained what courts later described as “factual, legal, and typographical errors,” including a “legally incorrect assertion” that coalition districts were inherently unlawful.

Texas Republicans seized on this DOJ guidance as justification for their special legislative session. Abbott cited the letter directly when adding redistricting to the agenda, publicly stating his goal was to “eliminate coalition districts” and comply with federal directives, framing it as a racial compliance issue rather than pure partisanship.

Today a three-judge federal panel in El Paso (in a 2-1 ruling led by Trump appointee Judge Jeffrey V. Brown) issued a preliminary injunction blocking the 2025 map for the 2026 elections. The court ordered Texas to revert to its 2021 boundaries, effectively nullifying the GOP’s gains.

The court’s 160-page opinion explicitly tied the failure to the Gates/Dhillon letter. The judges found “substantial evidence” of racial gerrymandering, noting that Abbott “explicitly directed the Legislature to redistrict based on race” in response to the DOJ’s racial-focused demands. Lawmakers’ statements and the map’s design (e.g., eliminating five of nine coalition districts and pairing minority incumbents) reinforced this.

The letter’s flawed legal reasoning, demanding 50% racial thresholds without VRA basis, made the entire process suspect. The court criticized it for imposing unconstitutional racial targets, turning what Republicans claimed was “partisan” redistricting into a provable VRA violation.

While partisan gerrymandering is legal (per Supreme Court precedent), the overt racial framing from the DOJ letter pierced that defense. As Judge Brown wrote: “Politics played a role… But it was much more than just politics.”

Texas immediately appealed to the Supreme Court, where Justice Samuel Alito (circuit shadow justice) could fast-track review. However, the ruling halts the map’s use for now, preserving Democratic seats and upending candidate plans (e.g., Reps. Al Green and Jasmine Crockett retain safer paths).

Broader Impact GOP setback: Trump touted the map as a “Big Beautiful Map” for flipping seats, but it now risks netting zero gains, potentially costing Republicans their House edge.

The Texas effort inspired copycat moves in Missouri and North Carolina (adding one GOP seat each) but also Democratic countermeasures in California, now under DOJ challenge.

The letter is seen as a Trump administration ploy to “reframe” partisan goals around race, but its errors invited scrutiny. Critics, including voting rights advocates, argue it weaponized civil rights enforcement against minorities.

This underscores how overreach in leveraging federal authority can unravel even aggressive partisan strategies. The full trial on the map’s constitutionality continues, with potential Supreme Court intervention looming.

**********************

Vern again: So, thank you Mike E. You may have netted us as much as ten extra Democrat seats there, many of them Latino as well! Maybe they DID fire you for good reason.

P.S. I see that one fight Mike is looking forward to as he gets back to Huntington Beach is against the CVRA, against district elections in Huntington Beach – very soon HB will be the only OC town left without that reform. No town has ever won against the CVRA, and some have spent millions fighting it. Surely Mike E. Gates believes he will be the FIRST! So tighten your belts Surf City, and prepare for a wild ride!