.
The AD-69 race as it currently stands. (Artist's conception.)
Now that’s what I’m talking about. It may or may not be too late for this to have any effect on the race for the 69th Assembly District, but such blatantly deceptive mailers as were put out by JobsPAC on the behalf of Tom Daly this past month, which we first reported on and reproduced here, must not be allowed to be just flushed down the memory hole. At the very least, Tom, who has to be aware of this mailers by now, needs to denounce them if he wants to retain any of our respect. Here’s Joe:
Jose “Joe” Moreno, Candidate the 69th Assembly District
Press Release, For Immediate Release
June 11, 2012
Jose “Joe” Moreno to request an investigation of deceptive mailers that promoted Tom Daly
SANTA ANA – Jose “Joe” Moreno, one of the top two candidates for the 69th Assembly District, is formally requesting that candidate Tom Daly, running for the 69th Assembly District, publicly denounce and disassociate himself from any involvement in a series of campaign literature, paid for by JobsPAC.
Moreno believes these mailers were possibly highly deceptive illegal mailers and thus eventually suppressed and/or influenced many voters’ voting decisions.
Four of the known mailers were all seemingly mailed, delivered or addressed to quite possibly close to 42,946 of the 69th District voters, which would possibly be determined as over 171,784 potentials addressed targets. In addition, given that there are many mixed partisan household within the 69th Assembly district, the potential number of disenfranchised voters could be even greater.
Three of the known mailers listed over ten times the name TOM DALY or Daly, and all of them listed his Orange County designation as a public official, “Orange County Clerk-Recorder.” Three included this information in what appears to look like a official voting ballot, as they state, “Presidential Primary Election, Orange County June 5, 2012, Official Ballot, and Republican.” Below the aforementioned descriptive text is the following “MEMBER OF THE STATE ASSEMBLY 69TH DISTRICT – Vote for One.”
All of these mailers were possibly highly deceptive illegal mailers, using the following text in their mailers:
- “California’s new primary rules allow you to vote for a candidate of either party, but the only Republican running for State Assembly in our district has dropped out of the race.”
- “The only Republican candidate for the State Assembly has dropped out of the race! Don’t waste your vote on a Republican who is not running”
- “The only Republican candidate for the 69th Assembly District dropped out of the race. Don’t waste your vote on a Republican who is not running”
- “The only Republican candidate for the State Assembly has dropped out of the race! Don’t waste your vote on a Republican who is not running” “Don’t waste your vote on a Republican who is not running”
Three out of four of these mailers include a Orange County Register newspaper story titled “Republican tried to quit 69th Assembly race,” dated April 11th 2012, 2:23 pm, posted by Andrew Galvin, that detailed information about a request submitted to the Orange County Registrar, Neal Kelly, seeking to withdraw. Yet, within the story, representing all of paragraph six, is the following response, “This Hatch act has been used as a political weapon to end competitive political campaigns, not to end corruption,” said Moreno, who added he will continue to actively campaign for the Assembly seat”
In California Election code§ 18573, Article 4 Corruption in Voting it cites the following:
Every person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months or two or three years who furnishes any voter wishing to vote, who cannot read, with a ballot, informing or giving that voter to understand that it contains a name written or printed thereon different from the name which is written or printed thereon, or defrauds any voter at any election by deceiving and causing him or her to vote for a different person for any office than he or she intended or desired to vote for.
With the introduction of last year’s United States Congressional Act called Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act of 2011, the following findings were utilized:
“The First Amendment does not preclude the regulation of some intentionally false speech, even if it is political in nature. As the Supreme Court of the United States has recognized, ‘[t]hat speech is used as a tool for political ends does not automatically bring it under the protective mantle of the Constitution. For the use of the known lie as a tool is at once at odds with the premises of democratic government and with the orderly manner in which economic, social, or political change is to be effected . . . . Hence the knowingly false statement and the false statement made with reckless disregard of the truth, do not enjoy constitutional protection.’. Garrison v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 64, 75 (1964).”
Using the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, considering the equal protection clause contained within it, the United States Supreme Court In Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964), found that:
“The right to vote freely for the candidate of one’s choice is of the essence of a democratic society, and any restrictions on that right strike at the heart of representative government. And the right of suffrage can be denied by a debasement or dilution of the weight of a citizen’s vote just as effectively as by wholly prohibiting the free exercise of the franchise.”
Candidate Moreno believes that voters in the 69th Assembly district were deceived by the aforementioned mailers and their rights were violated and as such he will be requesting a full investigation by the Orange County District Attorney’s office, the California State Attorney General’s Office and the United States Attorney General’s office.
###
Jose “Joe” Moreno
Candidate for the 69th Assembly District
http://votejosemoreno.org
*OK then….Republican…gainfully employed in Government…..Good Looking and best of all…….very Hispanic! It’s going to be a reprise of “West Side Story”……and we love it! Go Jose Go! “When you’re a Jet….your a Jet all the way……..” “Only in America…”
Tom Daly….nice guy that likes our High Speed Rail……very nice……but not enough.
Go Jose Go!
It was the Sharks who were the Latinos, ‘Ships.
I’ll have a better sense of things when the next ROV update comes out in a half hour, but I don’t think that Joe is making the runoff. JOBSPAC really did screw him, though.
@ Greg Diamond:
1) It seems that there is a clear violation of the “California Election code§ 18573, Article 4 Corruption in Voting,
“Every person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months or two or three years who . . . defrauds any voter at any election by deceiving and causing him or her to vote for a different person for any office than he or she intended or desired to vote for.”
2) Also there are several elements of fraud that must be proven, since fraud is a legal term.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraud
3) Given the wording of the statute, it seems that the plaintiff(s) bringing the suit should be ideally a voter or set of voters who would allege that the mailers caused them to vote for someone other than Joe Moreno.
4) It also seems clear that the guilty parties are the individual(s) controlling the Independent Expenditures (IEs) who sent out the flyers, which in this case, unless proven otherwise, absolves Tom Daly of legal responsibility because he does NOT control what the IEs sent out.
Thus, contrary to the headline, these are NOT “Tom Daly’s lying mailers”.
5) From your legal professional judgment, how likely is it that a criminal action would be sustained against the IEs that sent out the mailers?
Paco Barragan
Haha, it’s the “Cool, cool class act, Paco Barragan!” Kidding…
Oh. That was MY headline. I call it “Tom Daly’s lying mailer” because they’re done for his benefit, I called him on it a month ago or so, and he still hasn’t denounced or disassociated himself from them. So I say they’re his, even if he’s not legally culpable.
Hey Vern,
It was good to see you at the US Flag Day Ceremony.
Two viewpoints:
1) Legal. As Greg Diamond points out “Tom Daly is not likely to be liable.”
2) Pragmatic / Ethical.
I think that if Tom Daly “denounces” or disassociates himself from the mailers as you ask that he do, then Tom Daly WILL WIN in two ways (especially if he “denounces” in GENERAL terms).
Firstly) He will win because he will appear to be ABOVE the fray because he will have taken the “moral” high-ground in a public manner.
(And so far it appears that Tom Daly has managed a well-run campaign, although the voting public still needs to hear or learn what his ideas or solutions are including knowing the details.)
Secondly) If the IE’s continue sending similar stuff, he will continue to benefit, because they are under no obligation to “listen or follow” Tom Daly’s request, since he in fact does not and can not control them.
And a segment of the voting public may be left with the impression that the subsequent IE mailers are “more” accurate than before because Tom Daly has “asked them” to ensure that they send out only truthful material.
Paco Barragan
The elements of fraud (working here quickly from memory) require knowingly telling a relevant lie with the intent that the recipient of the message understand it and act upon it in a desired fashion. I am not sure how it would apply to a PAC like JOBSPAC, which cannot be put in jail, and whose directors can claim that they didn’t have the requisite intent to deceive. Allowing for the diffusion of responsiblity and liabity that way is one of the problems with allowing corporate committees to donate to campaign advertising.
I’d say that Joe Moreno has standing. You’re right that Daly is not likely to be liable.
I’d probably have called them “the lying Tom Daly mailers,” but I think that your pointing this out in comments is sufficient. “Tom Daly’s mailers” is not exactly incorrect; they were part of the effort to elect him, on which he was depending. (He would not have won without massive IEs — and he fundraised accordingly.)
“Plausible Deniability”? Sorry dude…..that doesn’t pass muster….
Somebody “firebombs” the headquarters of an opponent….and then says…”we
don’t know those guys……MUCH”…..
A Full Denunciation must follow by the Daly Camp…..and public apology…..ya think?
What else might be right and proper on this occasio?. Without those things Daly is Guilty as charged and everyone knows it. .
That’s Tom Daly for you folks.
But he’ll get away just like he gets away from all the corruption, sexual harassment and gift wrapping $100+K positions for friends at the County Clerk-Recorder Agency.