May 152012
 

288. Not to be confused with getting your freak on.

Last night in Amador County there was a candidate forum. It was put on by the Upcountry Community Council, a group that was formed the “represent” the unincorporated rural areas such as Pine Grove, Pioneer, Buckhorn and others.

It should also be noted that no local media was there.

The forum was “moderated” by a Lynn Morgan – who was told to me is a board member of this group. I was also informed that there is some affinity between this group and the tribe (that gave Jeff Seaton $10,000).

It appeared that there was gross bias on the part of Lynn Morgan.  She squashed my audience questions about Jeff Seaton’s character and even let Seaton himself avoid tough questions.

The first question of the night was from Amador County Republican Party member (who vociferously denies being on Jeff Seaton’s Campaign Team) Lois McDonald who accused Seaton’s opponent of child abuse.

Given the way Jeff Seaton behaved in people vs. Vick or the way Mr. Seaton’s current mistress treated her children – it appears once again that the Amador County Republican Party is on a suicide mission to destroy the GOP in Amador County.

Despite the best efforts to the Upcountry Community Council and team Seaton to control the outcome, Jeff Seaton was a buffoon.

His opponent gave excellent, concise answers to questions with confidence and Jeff Seaton appeared to babble and ramble in an attempt to channel Perry Mason.

Case and point – Jeff Seaton went 288 claiming Courtroom experience since Age 24 even though he passed the bar in 1990. Jeff Seaton also pimped his uniform again. As a veteran, I can tell you that someone like Seaton would have been blanket partied in the Navy.

Seaton also went into a major 288 rampage over the Mailer his opponent sent entitled “Justice for Sale”. Apparently, 75% of Amador County (which does not include the Amador County Republican Party) has a problem with the Casino attempting to purchase a Judge.

Jeff Seaton’s campaign PO Box is box 288, something he pointed out which channeling Barack Obama and accusing his opponent of being a racist for pointing out the donation from the tribe.

They were not able to stop all the tough questions – by multiple accounts, Jeff Seaton who performed poorly all night (like he apparently does in court), got nailed about a campaign finance question relating to the $5,000 check from the left-wing law firm in L.A.

Seaton’s defense was as retarded as his handling of the Perdue case (and the Perdues were denied a question by Lynn Morgan as well) – “I don’t know why they sent me the money…”

Excuse me? If I got $5k, I sure in the hell would know why. If a candidate I supported got $5k, I sure in the hell would know why.

But, Jeff Seaton did not stop there – he finished by saying that the check cashed and that he sent them a thank you note.

It is worth noting that the audience gasped when the law firm was described + who they donated to. (aka Steinberg, Tony Cardenas)

Jeff Seaton had as bad an evening as the last 288 case he took. Section 288 of the penal code refers to Child Molestation…

  4 Responses to “Jeff Seaton went 288 on a Candidate Forum?”

  1. Aaron, it was pretty bad and went deeper than that as well. Having met and listened to Seaton for the very first time, I can tell you that he is a slick one. Arguably a top notch defense lawyer when he wants to be. He was able to take two very small items: a Hermanson mailer which wondered why the casino would give 10k to Seaton’s campaign and a You Tube video on Hermanson’s Facebook page where a photo of the court room in session was taken. His strategy for the mailer was too insist that this was an attack directed toward the casino and that Hermanson might have a bias toward the indigenous. Later when asked if Seaton was calling Hermanson racist, Seaton said “yes”. When Hermanson was allowed to rebuttal, he stated that this was not directed toward the casino but that it raised intent and motive. As for the court room photo, it was granted by Richmond and taken by the Ledger.
    It’s funny, but the mediator’s intent to keep the forum questions to that of candidate qualifications and plans for the future fell short right from the beginning when Seaton used his opening statement to briefly tell us of his past accomplishments and the extended remainder of his time to attack Hermanson as previously mentioned without censor.
    What was worse, Seaton was asked if he had a plan for what he would engage himself in if elected. He first said that he had no real or definite plan per say, then switched to helping the veterans with programs. An interesting point came to light in reference to Seaton’s regale of constitutional law, when both candidates were questioned about a judges responsibilities to remain within the guidelines of the law as it is written or a judges use of guidelines that conform to our times and public opinion. (meaning, can a judge use the current “feel” or public opinion of the time time to sway his motion) . Seaton stated that yes, it is within the judges domain to allow current opinion and the times to dictate judgement. Hermanson on the other hand stated no, constitutional and legislative law were to guide the judgement, not the times. Possibly an indication by Seaton of what we might expect when donor’s find the need to return to the wishing well. We’ll see what the next forum will hold, and this time I think we’ll come better prepared to ask questions directed to both candidates that will draw out the intended. Wish us good hunting!

  2. Mr. Park,
    It seems that you are right on the money regarding the Ledger Dispatch being in the Casino’s pocket. After Blogging on the LD website, they have chosen to treat me differently than they treat others who can still blog under their user name. Below is a copy of what I blogged toward the “gentleman” in charge of the Ledger-Dispatch.

    @JackMitchell,
    How is it that others on your blog continue to post using their blog signon but somehow, when I sign on using my blog name, you have started printing my real name?
    I don’t mind, I have nothing to hide, I would however like to be treated fairly and have the same rules applied to me that are applied to others. I have not threatened anybody nor violated your terms of service. As far as I know, all of my blog entries have made it through moderation without problem.
    Is this how you treat loyal subscribers to your print newspaper when they disagree with your politics?
    Is it because your candidate made a complete fool of himself on Tuesday night?
    Whatever the reason, as the man in charge of the newspaper, you should exercise restraint and try to keep your personal/political opinions from clouding your professional decisions.
    Your Old Friend,
    Jeff Oliver

  3. As it turns out, other anti Seaton bloggers are experiencing the same treatment by the Ledger Dispatch blog also.
    Jack Mitchell is behind Seaton and is betting the Ledger Dispatch’s reputation on it.
    It’s no wonder people from the valley make jokes about the politics up here. If it wasn’t so damn true, I could probably see the humor.

  4. Jack Mitchell: Shame on you!!!! I have always been a fan of yours up until now. That Op-Ed diatribe in Friday’s paper is SHAMEFUL!!!! Tell me you didn’t move here to have your family grow up in a safe place…..You came off sounding like a kid with a BIG GRUDGE!!!! Furthermore as EDITOR, it is my opinion that you should have remained neutral in this race for judge!!!!! More people than you realize know about the disingenuous nature of this man whom you have chosed to support!!!!
    I can only hope that the people of Amador County don’t follow your opinion regarding Mr. Seaton and will vote instead to elect an amazingly forth-right man as is Steve Hermanson.
    WOW, Jack, I really am disgusted with you.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.