Jul 252020
 

One correction from my previous post – it was the CAGOP Executive Board that met. This is the senior elected officers of the CAGOP, the political consultant Tom Ross whose presence on the CAGOP board I will be looking in to at length, the Senior Congressman (Doug LaMalfa), and the two permanent minority leaders ( currently Shannon “no endorsements” Grove and Marie “Get out of jail free” Waldron).

I had assumed incorrectly that it was the 115 member CAGOP Executive Committee – because my recollection of the CAGOP By-Laws is that absent a convention endorsements on ballot measures had to be done by them. As such, the 23 member Executive Board had to defer the endorsements on the initiatives to another mail ballot election.

Suffice to say, the only controversial measure is Prop 19. It is my understanding that Tom Ross (or his firm) and people close to him (such as large OC Donors and money people like Howard Hakes) oppose Prop 19. I believe that Ross and company are earning money to oppose Prop 19, yet I have no proof at this time – but will track the connections down as they sometimes use daisy chains of PAC’s to inhibit transparency.

David Stafford Reade, a capo of Jessica Patterson’s was telling people they had the votes to oppose Prop 19. I do not know why these financial conflicts of interest were not discussed. Jessica Patterson should have handed the gavel to Peter Kuo and Tom Ross should have excused himself or clarified his conflict (if any) on Prop 19. David Stafford Reade does not care about a thing until the check clears the bank – I’ve known the man for 20 years and that you can take to the bank (like he has done to a long list of squishes over the years)

Neither Tom Ross nor Howard Hakes have any business being on the California Republican Party’s executive board. I am grateful they are donors and fundraisers – but those roles are inherently conflicted. Note – as an officer of the California Impact Republicans, I have recused myself on endorsement votes more than 50% of the time in order to avoid anything close to a conflict of interest.

Now that I understand the machinations behind the “No Position” recommendation on Prop 19, your intrepid blogger will be forcefully advocating for a Yes Vote on Prop 19. Look for more information on Proposition 19 shortly. The CAGOP should never take a “No Position” on any issue at any time anywhere. It looks smarmy and weak – and insiders understand that position is usually taken when there are grotesque conflicts of interest at work in the shadows.

Jay Obernolte, Harmeet Dhillon and Matt Heath all argued for giving the SD25 Candidate some due process before lynching her. Dhillon rightly pointed out that the CAGOP Board should have a clear standard over what constitutes “hate speech and “racism” on social media before executing candidates. I wish #CA35 nominee Mike Cargile and #CA10 nominee Ted Howze were given the same chance. You will learn soon that the conflicts of interest I keep writing about as it pertains to her majesty and the court of squishes have a direct bearing on what was done to both of those men.

The Los Angeles Times is getting ready to stick their arrogant, liberal, condescending noses in to the CAGOP’s business once again. I like Seema Mehta and have dealt with her in the past, but the article basically deifying Mike Madrid was beyond the pale.

The LA Times was attempting to pre-empt any action against Madrid, Luis Alvarado and Ben Avey (a former staffer to AB32 Yes Vote Shirley Horton) for openly trying to defeat Republican incumbents like Devin Nunes, Cory Gardner, Steve Daines and the President himself. It is this sort of Journalistic Harlotry that reminds me of why I hold reporters in the same esteem as convicted felons.

I have been told by several insiders that the LA Times is going to write a story calling the CAGOP hypocrites because we are doing a mail ballot drill regarding party positions on ballot measures yet paid for and led a successful lawsuit against Gavin Newsom’s attempted mail ballot fraud grab.

Your intrepid blogger is pre-empting the LA Times in a similar manner to how they tried to influence the outcome of pending disciplinary action against hostile anti party members that Her Majesty the Chairwomen and her court of squishes are protecting. At least I am honest about my bias and motives.

It is the opinion of this blogger that Her Majesty and the Court of Squishes are going to ingore and delay any action on the Benedict Lincoln Project mavens until after the November 4th election – then the excuse will be the convention is in Feb and they won’t be reappointed. In the meantime, I endorse the efforts of Carl Brickey, and the other CRA officers to hold these people accountable even as a grossly conflicted party “Chairwoman” stands in the way of enforcing our party’s by-laws.

Prop 19? Conflicts of interest? Oh yeah – stay tuned

P.S. The CAGOP still has an endorsement in effect for a proven nutjob with child support issues and a publicly documented pattern of insane statements. Who am I referring to? Joe Collins in #CA43.

  • The California GOP endorsed former Green Party presidential candidate Joe Collins in his bid to unseat Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters.
  • Collins claimed his bodily fluids were worth $15 million in a lawsuit he filed against San Diego in 2017.
  • Collins has switched political parties four times since entering the arena in late 2016, Federal Election Commission records show.
  • Collins had $22 in his checking account in April 2018, court documents show. Now he’s running a congressional campaign that has raised $761,000.

We were told that Travis Allen would have been a disaster for the CAGOP. There is no way in hell anyone not named Mike Madrid could think the track record of Jessica Patterson is any better than that of an escaped laboratory specimen.

Stay Informed!

Sign up to receive RightOnDaily updates sent to your inbox.

  4 Responses to “CAGOP Board Meeting Follow Up Post: SD25 Candidate Saved from Lynching, the LA Times is preparing to Attack Party for doing mail ballot endorsement election”

  1. Aaron, Prop 19 should be defeated. Here is what the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association says about Prop.19:
    Why we’re against it
    Proposition 19 takes away important taxpayer protections that have
    been enshrined in the State Constitution since 1986. That’s when
    76% of voters approved Proposition 58 to allow parents to transfer
    a home and limited other property to their children without an
    increase in property taxes. Proposition 19 eliminates Proposition 58
    and a similar measure, Proposition 193, which gives the same
    protection to transfers between grandparents and grandchildren if
    the children’s parents are deceased. Proposition 19 would require
    property transferred within families to be reassessed to market
    value as of the date of transfer, resulting in a huge property tax
    increase for long-held family homes. The only exception is if the
    children move into the home within a year and make it their
    principal residence. This is a billion-dollar tax increase on California
    families. Proposition 19 contains other provisions, which HJTA has
    supported in the past to expand the opportunities for older
    homeowners to transfer the base-year value of their home (under
    Prop. 13) to a replacement home. This was on the ballot in
    November 2018 as Proposition 5, but voters rejected it. Now, with
    a massive tax increase added, the price is too high. HJTA opposes
    this measure. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 19.

  2. What happened with John Briscoe – CA47 (sexual harassment claim)?

  3. Gary thanks for your comment I don’t trust Howard Jarvis any further than I could throw them. As far as I’m concerned John Coupal is corrupt and for sale. I will take a good luck at prop 19 however the fact that there’s already money being thrown around and people are doing their usual is a huge red flag for me

  4. I am not comfortable with 19 because it will lead towards middle class and low income people who inherit property will lose their shirts.

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)