The pattern with Secretaries of State

[genius]

The Republican Secretaries of State (Glenda Hood, J.Kenneth Blackwell) committed major felonies in the 2004 election. No one is prosecuting them. Secretary of State Kevin Shelley, a Democrat has done nothing wrong but he is forced to resign over baseless accusations that have cost him a fortune. In Washington, there is a recall on the Democratic Secretary of State for allowiing the Democratic Governor who won the race to take office.

Unless we draw a line in the sand and say they can't take away Kevin Shelley, they'll keep doing it. We need to get him to rescind his resignation.

[Freddie Stubbs]

1. Actually Washington's Sec of State is a Republican

http://www.wsrp.org

[genius]

18. Sounds like a Jim Jeffords type. It will be interesting to watch to

see if he switches.

[EFerrari]

2. Freddie is right. And notice, no one is calling for a resignation. nt

[Helga Scow Stern]

3. Right, although he had to face hell from his colleagues

for sticking with integrity.

[EFerrari]

5. Exactly. The Repugs stick together no matter what. We don't. nt

[WHAT]

24. They did try a recall...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1240612

[davidinalameda]

4. maybe Democrats just have more integrity on the whole than Republicans

maybe we don't want to be represented by someone who create a hostile work environment and who took questionable campaign contributions and hired unqualified people simply because of who they were related to

Kevin Shelley made his own mess

if he was a Republican, people on here would be calling for his cajones served up on a silver platter

but since he's a Democrat, it's not his fault

give me a freaking break!

[EFerrari]

6. I really don't understand what you're saying.

Why not just post the court transcript?

You can't, because there hasn't been a trial. You're taking every slur that the MSM has put out there as gospel.

Repeating: What happened to the presumption of innocence and due process?

You can have your freaking break. It's certainly more than you're giving someone who is being accused of much and who has not been proven to be guilty of anything.

Who needs enemies.

[CAcyclist]

8. Who are you?

If you were really concerned about integrity, you'd be calling for Gavin Newsom's cajones and Arnold S.s cajones.

[davidinalameda]

14. what did Ahnuld or Gavin do compared to Shelley

while they were in office--name just one thing

[genius]

16. Arnold: Illegal contributions, for one. Televised lies in violation of

court orders telling him to stop lying on TV - for another.

[Capn Sunshine]

20. Name one thing Shelley did

NOT an accusation9n. A documented thing.

You DO know who OWNS the paper whose links you are about to post , don't you? The Hearst Corp. A news company that has been famous throughout our history for innuendo and yellow journalism since before the Spanish-American war. Oh, and they now seem VERY interested in many top ranking national neocon projects. And they are based in New York City these days.

What part of "resign , or you'll go broke fighting these claims , even if they are false, and we'll ruin your family besides " don't you get?

Yeah, Shelley made his own mess all right. He stood up to Diebold and Sequoia, successfully sued them in court , and just after that the "investigations" starts.

So in that sense you are correct.

[mitchtv]

23. if he were a republican, he would still be in office

His mistake was not firing all the appointees of Jones.

[EFerrari]

7. dwickham and Freddie, sorry if I'm heavy handed

I really don't enjoy making anyone uncomfortable.

This is my whole deal: Why is Shelley being pushed to resign on allegations? We don't KNOW anything except this: He decertified Diebold. That's a fact.

Is he an abusive boss? Did he take contributions in his office? Did he hire a contributor's kid? Is he guilty? We DON'T KNOW.

So, why are we so anxious to toss him? Can't we be a little grown up and let the legal system take its course? Can't we hang in with him that long? Apparently not. And this unwillingness WILL be exploited by the Republicans planting Republican voting machines that deliver Republican "wins".

I'm not here to upset anyone, and I apologize if I have.

Beth

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CAcyclist]

10. We can insist they insist on appointing a Democrat to the position

We voted for a Democrat and that's what should replace him. We can't trust *any* Republican at this point.

We can also make a more concerted effort to counter any Chronicle smear campaign while it's happening instead of waiting until the person loses or resigns, since it looks like this is becoming a pattern.

The Chronicle has turned its attention to Eileen Hansen, who is a perfectly reasonable choice for a position on the Ethics Commission. See my other thread here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1577683

[genius]

17. There is no way a Democrat will replace Shelley

It just doesn't work that way. If we want a Democrat, we'll stay with Shelley. Our legislators have no backbone. The only Democrat who didn't vote to put Bush on the ballot in 2004 was Sheila Kuehl.

[EFerrari]

19. You're right , genius.

We either stick with this guy under fire or we get a Repug and the Repug machines.

Sigh. I only hope that months from now we won't regret not supporting due process for this guy.

[Liberty Belle]

21. We need protests in front of the capital. Sacto Duers?

Save Democracy in California should be the theme. NO REPS, NO WAY as Secretary of STate. Dems can stonewall til the cows come home if they want to. Tie up every other measure. Hold press conferences and announce a "recall the Terminator" petition for our next ballot, unless he backs down right now on nominating a Republican and calls off the gerrymandering initiative, too.

Time to draw a line in the sand, Dems!

Meanwhile, e-mail your legislators. Call. Fax. Visit their offices. Hound them all mercilessly!

[CAcyclist]

11. Let's look at some real ethical violations

(edited to fix link)

which the Chronicle doesn't seem to have a problem with - a google search didn't even turn up a story by them on this, although I didn't do an internal Chron search.

http://sfindependent.com/article/index.cfm/i/012104n_ethics


Ethics chief, destroyed docs & allegations
By Adriel Hampton | Staff Writer
Published on Tuesday, January 27, 2004

The director of The City's Ethics Commission demanded that members of the commission staff destroy documents disclosing $185,732 in spending relating to Mayor Gavin Newsom's swearing-in, according to a complaint by two city employees.

Documents included in the complaint show large payments under theheading "San Francisco 2004 Swearing-In Committee" to more than two dozen individuals, most of them salaried employees of Newsom's mayoral campaign and several who now work for the new administration. They also show a $54,000 payment to Newsom's mayoral campaign.

Sutton and Partners, the law office that handles Newsom's financial transactions, said the documents were incomplete invoices accidentally sent to an Ethics Commission staff member who has a name similar to that of an attorney in that office. Upon learning of the mistake, the law office requested that the commission dispose of the document.

According to the complaint -- which was filed Friday with the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force and in which the city workers are claiming whistleblower protections -- Kevin De Liban and Oliver Luby of the Ethics Commission staff believed the documents might have legal significance and "evidence of a violation." Therefore they defied repeated orders to destroy them.

"The Ethics Commission retention policy forbids the destruction of a document with legal significance, even if its legal significance has not been established," the complaint reads.

De Liban and Luby allege that in the period from Jan. 1 to 15, Ethics Commission Executive Director Ginny Vida and Deputy Director Mabel Ng repeatedly ordered staff members to destroy the documents. On Jan. 15, Vida personally deleted copies of the documents from Luby's computer, the complaint alleges.

[EFerrari]

15. A little dizzy from the corruption, but I've a good SF story for you.

Doug and I were putting together a benefit for the SF Homeless Coalition at the Great American Music Hall last October, so I'd been in touch with the media.

So, this reporter at Channel 2 calls me midday and say, they're doing a homeless sweep in the Bayview. Do you have any comment? I just said it seemed contrary to Newsom's announced policy. Hung up and called another reporter I know to make sure she was on it.

Then I called city hall. And got through to Newsom's communications guy. And after I related the situation, he said, "we don't know anything about it." I said, "You do now. It's in progress."

The Mayor's Office was quoted in the Bay Guardian and in the Chronicle as knowing nothing about this event until after the fact.

[CAcyclist]

12. My LTTE regarding real ethics violation

Dear Editor,

In an editorial smearing Eileen Hansen as a candidate for the Ethics Commission in SF, the Chron says that "Mike Garcia served with distinction". "Scandalous" is more appropriate.

The Chron complains about a couple of legal campaign donations by Hansen to fellow Democrats while ignoring controversies concerning Mike Garcia's term, like when he
" demanded that members of the commission staff destroy documents disclosing $185,732 in spending relating to Mayor Gavin Newsom's swearing-in, according to a complaint by two city employees." See the link below for more details.

http://sfindependent.com/article/index.cfm/i/012104n_ethics

Ethics chief, destroyed docs & allegations
By Adriel Hampton | Staff Writer
Published on Tuesday, January 27, 2004

The director of The City's Ethics Commission demanded that members of the commission staff destroy documents disclosing $185,732 in spending relating to Mayor Gavin Newsom's swearing-in, according to a complaint by two city employees.

Documents included in the complaint show large payments under the heading "San Francisco 2004 Swearing-In Committee" to more than two dozen individuals, most of them salaried employees of Newsom's mayoral campaign and several who now work for the new administration. They also show a $54,000 payment to Newsom's mayoral campaign.

Sutton and Partners, the law office that handles Newsom's financial transactions, said the documents were incomplete invoices accidentally sent to an Ethics Commission staff member who has a name similar to that of an attorney in that office. Upon learning of the mistake, the law office requested that the commission dispose of the document.

According to the complaint -- which was filed Friday with the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force and in which the city workers are claiming whistleblower protections -- Kevin De Liban and Oliver Luby of the Ethics Commission staff believed the documents might have legal significance and "evidence of a violation." Therefore they defied repeated orders to destroy them.

"The Ethics Commission retention policy forbids the destruction of a document with legal significance, even if its legal significance has not been established," the complaint reads.

[CAcyclist]

13. We could demand that they do prosecute them

We could show how partisan they are. We could ask Mr. Conyers and the Black Caucus to support a call for the HAVA committee to investigate a misuse of HAVA funds to subvert the democratic process in Ohio and Florida and elsewhere.

[Helga Scow Stern]

22. YES! Except the National Secretaries of State Assn.

just voted to recommend disbanding the EAC, or HAVA committee.