As a public service to the OCGOP, your intrepid blogger was sent a copy of an email Leo Naranjo sent to them asking questions about the endorsement process, the attempt to change it and Janet Nguyen. We feel that this email should be responded to and are sad that it bounced back from a bad address…

From Happier Times

Good afternoon, 

 

My name is Leo Naranjo IV and I am writing you about a subject which has been brought up in discussion in the Sacramento area, that you may or may not be aware of. 

 

I wish to thank the OCGOP Board members first, for the time and considerations on this email:

Chairman, Fred Whitaker

First Vice Chair, John Park

Second Vice Chair, Jeff Barke

Treasurer, Erik Weigand

Assistant Treasurer, Anthony Johnson

Secretary, Susan Silvestri, 

Parliamentarian, Kermit Marsh

 

I have omitted the Sergeant at Arms for reasons declared down below.

 

I also wish to thank those individuals not listed above, who make up the membership in the Orange County GOP of California.

 

I am writing this email to you, in response to a topic of interest for this state, and this party. It concerns allegations of improprieties within your organization, that attempts to alter/change/redirect by-laws for the benefit of ONE person above all others, in regards to ‘endorsements from the OCGOP”. Changes that if submitted, discussed and approved by your committees, would enable you to endorse for a candidate, someone who claims to be a Republican party member; who holds office as a Republican, yet entertains the support and encourages endorsing other than, Republican candidates for public office. Someone who would willingly send out campaign flyers with a supposed OCGOP endorsement logo on them, thereby disguising to voters what the TRUE intent is for the other than Republican candidates for office, that they are supporting AND endorsing. 

Clearly, this seems to have been a case back in 2018, which the current OCGOP is attempting to address, by changing or submitting for change, your current By-Laws regarding endorsements from your organization. 

 

These rules, have been described as NOT to be for the benefit of one person, ie. Sen. Janet Nguyen. Through an effort to subvert the process of openness and fairness, it appears that some within your organization are compelling your committees to vote for and adapt, changes to the By-laws to remove the stain of endorsing political candidates NOT supported by GOP groups/organizations. To name a few, these are currently from your organizations own by-laws:

 

Article IV, Section I(Removal from Membership), para. 3 a-b.

Article IV, Section J(Discipline of Elected Members), para. 1, b.

Article VII, Section A(Committees), para.4, (iii) b-e

Article VII, Section 7(Endorsements Committee), a-c

Article X, Amendments, Sections A & B.

Article XIII, Section 1(Endorsements of Non-Partisan Office and Ballot Measures), para. G, H, I, 1-4 & K

Article XIII, Section 2(Endorsement of a Partisan Office),para. E, L & M

 

In a recent email, it is mentioned that Ms Nguyen is barred from being an endorsed candidate for the fact that she endorsed NON-Republican candidates over Republican Candidates running for office. These comments were from assertions, that Ms Nguyen publicly had endorsed candidates such as Cindy Tran, David Penaloza and Mirna Velasquez against OCGOP candidate Ceci Iglesias. While not being allowed to use the direct GOP party emblem, she did feel content to use one which could confuse Republicans to feel/believe that the GOP is endorsing, by using the 2-star Elephant logo on political flyers. It seems, Ms Nguyen is on a path to ensure the GOP within this state, stays in a power flux of losing, insignificance or insolvency. Whether Ms Ngyuen is a political powerhouse or not isn’t the question. Is she, for the GOP or against it? Does she stand for the GOP or doesn’t she? Because it seems as though Ms Nguyen may have registered as a Republican, but does anything other than act like one.

 

Secondly, it appears from your own team, members are intent to ensure Ms Nguyen is treated with special considerations for her position within the party. Mr Whitacre’s name has surfaced, as well as Mr Jon Fleischmans (not listed as an OCGOP Board Member). Have these two engaged in public pronouncements to alter/change the OCGOP By-Laws for the benefit of Ms Nguyen? For Mr Whitacre, the penalties would seem severe, if he were indeed, active in a subversive attempt to provide disinformation, lies, innuendos or falsehoods to the By-Law Committee in order to sway or alter their views on the current By-laws as written. As for Mr Fleishman’s active participation into this process? That is a question. Is he a paid staff member or a ‘person of interest’? How could a person NOT affiliated with the OCGOP have the ability to call the Committee and discuss changes if he’s not a member or affiliated with the OCGOP? Again, Mr Fleischman is either being dishonest, disingenuous or outright lying to the committee membership for his intended purposes of having the By-Laws changed, in favor for Ms Nguyen to be able to acquire OCGOP endorsements for future political purposes. 

A recent email by Mr Fleischman was seen and it appears to substantiate the premise:

 

Jon Fleischman wrote:

” If they are circulating this stuff to the committee, we should be figuring out how to respond. But most importantly right now-we need to get a drill going to make sure you still have all of your supporters, and that they will be able to be there Monday night to vote yes on the by law change. We can tell your supporters that if the by law change goes through it will eliminate with certainty any lingering questions about whether you can be endorsed by the central committee.”

 

Beyond compare. Beyond incredulous. It’s just, disheartening. To see a member/person from this organization, conspire to make changes to standing policies to the benefit of ONE person and the detriment of the entire organization, is beyond me. It would be comical, if not for it’s implications. Should this travesty stand, it would besmirch any and ALL OCGOP endorsements as, irrelevant. It would mean that an OCGOP endorsement would be viewed as being endorsed by Democratic affiliates and discourage Republicans from supporting their nominees. It would damper and lesson the impacts of said endorsements from this organization. It would also put to question: IS the OCGOP a Republican supporting entity or a Democrat supporting entity? 

 

The by-laws make clear, that any written complaints must be in writing, investigated and be promptly evaluated including all relevant date and file a report within 48 hours to the Executive Committee. Article VII, Section 4, (iii) d-g inclusive. 

 

The charges being levied are against the following person(s):

 

1) Tim Whitacre, Sergeant at Arms

2) Jon Fleischman 

For violating Article IV, Sections I (Removal from Membership) para 3, section C which reads in part:

” Gives support or avows a preference for a candidate of another party or a candidate who is opposed to a candidate nominated by this party (California Election Code, Section 7413).;

 

For violating Article IV, Sections J (Discipline of Elected Members), Para. 1, section (b), which reads in part:

” Shall intentionally cause the embarrassment of the Central Committee and/or the Republican Party; “

 

These are charges I am declaring against these members, as they contrive to deceive the organization to alter/change standing By-Laws against the reputation of the Republican Party for the sole benefit of a person who has exhibited traits of endorsing non Republican sponsored candidates to run against sponsored/endorsed Republican candidates, not once but on three separate occasions. To the degree, that the Honorable Fred Whitaker had to acknowledge that Ms Nguyen formally renounced her endorsement via an email for a previous campaign attempt. 

 

It is with regret that I make this request of your elected membership, to make a formal complaint against it’s membership. These allegations are serious. The consequences of those facing the allegations, are serious. The impacts are serious. If, any voting citizen is to believe in anything the Republican party does, says or stands for, it has to be, as an organization, forthcoming and transparent. It has to abide by the rules the GOP issues, administers, and stands by. It cannot survive by saying one thing and doing the exact opposite. It cannot be allowed to be viewed as “the party of irrelevance’, nor be seen to act as the Democratic party does on many occasions. That being: “Good enough for you but not me. Do what I say, not what I do. ” We are not that party. We must stand for something, or we fail at everything. 

 

Thank you for the opportunity to address these concerns and to enlighten you as to their impacts and seriousness. I look forward to hearing back from your organization as to the results of your investigations into these charges. 

 

Regards, 

 

Leo Naranjo IV

US Army (Ret.)