Dave Gilliard‘s California Homeowners Association funnels dark money into local races. Let’s turn on the lights.
Republican “strategist” Dave Gilliard’s client list includes Janet Nguyen, Sherriff Sandra Hutchens, Pat Bates, and other local luminaries. But what makes Dave special is his talent for obscuring the money sources of ugly attack ads. One of the vehicles Dave uses for political money laundering is the California Homeowners Association (CAHOA). CAHOA has long been involved with Irvine, for example. Scott Moxley reported how CAHOA supported Larry Agran and arranged funding for Katherine Daigle in 2012.
This year is different. See if you can spot the patterns in CAHOA’s activity this year. Here’s a hint: three of the largest known contributors to CAHOA are the lobbying firm associated with Lennar’s Great Park developments, Poseidon, and the San Manuel Band of Indians.
| Race | support | oppose | amount |
| Anaheim, Council | Gail Eastman | $35,000 | |
| Anaheim, Council | Kris Murray | $16,000 | |
| Brea, City Council | Cecilia Hupp | $6,500 | |
| Brea, City Council | Marc Harris | $2,100 | |
| Brea, City Council | Steve Vargas | $8,400 | |
| Brea, Mayor | Brett Murdock | $16,500 | |
| Irvine City Council | Ann Gaido | $14,750 | |
| Irvine City Council | Melissa Fox | $28,500 | |
| Irvine City Council | Larry Agran | $26,000 | |
| Irvine, City Council | Choi, Lalloway, Schott | $48,000 | |
| Irvine, School Board | Ira Glasky | $12,000 | |
| OC Water District | Stephen Sheldon | $3,000 | |
| OC Water District | Shawn Dewayne | $21,000 | |
| Redlands City Council | Neil Derry | $20,000 | |
| San Bernardino, Mayor | Chas Kelly | $6,000 | |
| State Assembly District 21 | Adam Gray | $42,800 | |
| State Assembly District 44 | Jacqui Irwin | $32,500 | |
| State Assembly District 44 | Mario De La Peidra | $12,100 | |
| State Assembly District 44 | Rob McCoy | $14,200 |
Lennar is spending to keep the Great Park in politically friendly hands. That includes Ira Glassky – – there is a simmering fight over the “fifth” high school. Poseidon clearly wants to keep a grip on the OC Water District. The San Manuel Indians presumably care about the city councils around their casino. And Anaheim and Brea?
| NAME OF CONTRIBUTOR | CITY | EMPLOYER | |
| FRIENDS OF GREAT PARK PAC | SACRAMENTO | 65000 | |
| POSEIDON RESOURCES(SURFSIDE) LLC | BOSTON | 24900 | |
| REGGIE KING | RANCHO CUCAMONGA | YOUNG HOMES | 20000 |
| COMPETITIVE POWER VENTURES INC. | SILVER SPRING | 15000 | |
| DWIGHT MANLEY | BREA | MIMCO | 10500 |
| SKY & SEA CORP | COMPTON | 9000 | |
| OCPAC (FEDERAL PAC) | WILLOWS | 5000 | |
| VANESSA M. RAMOS | HIGHLAND | VANESSA RAMOS – SELF EMPLOYED | 5000 |
| THERESA RAMOS | HIGHLAND | THERESA RAMOS – SELF EMPLOYED | 5000 |
| SMITH LIVING TRUST DTD 7-15-82 | NEWPORT BEACH | 5000 | |
| BENGARD FAMILY TRUST | SAN CLEMENTE | 5000 | |
| POSEIDON RESOURCES(SURFSIDE) LLC | BOSTON | 5000 | |
| ALAINA MATHEWS | HIGHLAND | SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS | 5000 |
| SCOTIA ALVES | CAMARILLO | SCOSCHE INDUSTRIES | 4000 |
| RCI BUILDERS INC. | THOUSAND OAKS | 3000 | |
| PETER C. FOY & ASSOCIATES INSURANCE SERVICES INC. | WOODLAND HILLS | 2500 | |
| PREMEDIA INC. | VAN NUYS | 2500 | |
| SHANNON GROVE FOR ASSEMBLY 2014 | BAKERSFIELD | 2500 | |
| DENNIS WEINBERG | CAMARILLO | SKYVIEW DEVELOPMENT LLC | 2000 |
| MCV INVESTMENTS | HUNTINGTON BEACH | 1500 | |
| MICHAEL A. HEFNER | ANAHEIM | VOIT REAL ESTATE SERVICES | 1500 |
| THERESA RAMOS | HIGHLAND | N.A. | 1000 |
| DESIREE RAMOS | HIGHLAND | N.A. | 1000 |
| KENNETH R. RAMIREZ | REDLANDS | KENNETH RAMIREZ | 1000 |
| JAMES R. RAMOS | HIGHLAND | N.A. | 1000 |
| ROBERT CHAGOLLA CONSTRUCTION | YUCAIPA | 1000 | |
| VANESSA M. RAMOS | HIGHLAND | VANESSA RAMOS – SELF EMPLOYED | 1000 |
| JERRY KOLB | BREA | N.A. | 500 |
| TAXPAYERS FOR ETHICAL GOVERNMENT | ELK GROVE | 250 | |
| RICHARD GIOVANELLO | IRVINE | 250 | |
| ALAINA MATHEWS | HIGHLAND | SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS | 250 |
| LAURENA A. TAMAYO | HIGHLAND | SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS | 200 |
| LAURA MORALES | COLTON | LEAGUE OF CA CITIES | 100 |
| DAVID C. JIMENEZ | CALIMESA | SAN MANUAL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS | 100 |
I all ready voted, why wait until the last minute?
Why wait?
For two excellent reasons:
1) You keep getting the political mailers that are so much fun; and,
2) Your boy (or girl) may do something titanically stupid, or have some hideous secret revealed after you have voted.
I don’t like lobbyist money at all, but, in the end, isn’t the real problem the laziness of voters who make decisions based on these stupid ads?
Did any of you donate to the funeral fund for the girl killed in Anaheim? I did so I am more qualified to trash Latinos in Anaheim than you.
I gotta get my bud Matt to mock them again. What a hoot!!
In a surprise move late Friday, a key Democrat on the Federal Election Commission called for burdensome new rules on Internet-based campaigning, prompting the Republican chairman to warn that Democrats want to regulate online political sites and even news media like Drudge Report.
Democratic FEC Vice Chair Ann M. Ravel announced plans to begin the process to win regulations on Internet-based campaigns and videos, currently free from most of the FEC’s rules. “A reexamination of the commission’s approach to the internet and other emerging technologies is long over due,” she said.
The power play followed a deadlocked 3-3 vote on whether an Ohio anti-President Obama Internet campaign featuring two videos violated FEC rules when it did not report its finances or offer a disclosure on the ads. The ads were placed for free on YouTube and were not paid advertising.
Under a 2006 FEC rule, free political videos and advocacy sites have been free of regulation in a bid to boost voter participation in politics. Only Internet videos that are placed for a fee on websites, such as the Washington Examiner, are regulated just like normal TV ads.
Ravel’s statement suggests that she would regulate right-leaning groups like America Rising that posts anti-Democrat YouTube videos on its website.
FEC Chairman Lee E. Goodman, a Republican, said if regulation extends that far, then anybody who writes a political blog, runs a politically active news site or even chat room could be regulated. He added that funny internet campaigns like “Obama Girl,” and “Jib Jab” would also face regulations.
http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/dems-on-fec-move-to-regulate-internet-campaigns-blogs-drudge/article/2555270
“could be regulated” is such a scary sounding tag line.
But as I read the article, it’s about disclosure. If you put up political speech, you’ve got to disclosed who paid for it. Sounds healthy to me.
We are already scrupulous about such disclosures around here. Even Master of the Dark Arts Dave Gilliard discloses, as you can see from the “Published on” box of this hit video against Melissa Fox.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5bin_t_X9k
We work hard to “Follow the money” around here. Any regulation that helps reveal who is paying for whom is okay by this Republican.
“.. anybody who writes a political blog, runs a politically active news site or even chat room could be regulated ..”
How does Vern feel about that?
I dunno. Is it true?
It’s dems pushing more freedom strangulating regulations – as usual.
If it’s a freedom-stranglin regulation, THIS Dem is agin’ it!
I’m confident that you don’t know what you’re talking about. My response is: depends on the regulation.
Does that apply to me too Skally?
As a journalist, expert on everything and political contributor extraordinaire I am opposed. This could be bad for our bud Matt too. We don’t want him exposed.
Hey Vern, how about “freedom strangulating regulations” placed on financial institutions that control the kinds of exotic investment instruments that may harm the stability of financial markets? Are you “agin'” those?
Actually no. I was thinking about ones that might stifle freedom of speech, and THOSE kind DO sometimes come from Dems unfortunately.
“Some of my colleagues seem to believe that the same political message that would require disclosure if run on television should be categorically exempt from the same requirements when placed in the Internet alone,” said FEC Vice Chair Ann M. Ravel in a statement. “As a matter of policy, this simply does not make sense.”
She said the FEC should no longer “turn a blind eye to the Internet’s growing force in the political arena,” and she vowed to force a conversation next year on what changes to make.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/24/fec-democrat-pushes-controls-internet-political-sp/#ixzz3HGzxm38Y
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
The Republican chairman of the Federal Election Commission warned Monday that his colleagues are flirting with the creation of a “government review board” to regulate videos posted on the Internet, and urged the government to keep its “hands off.”
The warning comes after the commission revealed late Friday that it had come close to pursuing a case against a group for posting free YouTube videos before the 2012 election without filing financial forms. The top Democrat on the commission, Vice Chairwoman Ann Ravel, also called for looking at possibly regulating political Internet videos next year.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/10/27/fec-chairman-warns-govt-flirting-with-regulatory-review-board-for-internet/
Get ready to debate federal regulation of political speech online… again
With their decisions in Citizens United and McCutcheon, the United States Supreme Court expanded protections on political speech in the last half-decade. With a vote this summer, Senate Democrats promised their constituents that they will attempt to rewrite the First Amendment to the Constitution to reverse those decisions. While most Americans would almost certainly be appalled by the notion that the Bill of Rights must be curtailed in order to appease progressives incensed by free and accessible dissent, congressional Democrats have had their eye on the short-term gains that proposed regulations on free speech might yield in November.
“The top Democrat on the Federal Election Commission strongly suggested Friday that regulators look at extending their authority to election-themed Internet videos – an area that for years has been largely hands-off for the government,”
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/10/27/get-ready-to-debate-federal-regulation-of-political-speech-online-again/
Ebola? Domestic Terror? White House Security? Do you WONDER what the Department of “Homeland Security” is up to, on our (TAX) payroll?
http://www.kansas.com/news/state/article3222737.html
NOW we can all sleep better tonight, right??
OOH! Another little stumble-on, reminding me of the Vet Cemetary-vs- Chinese Investor Housing Dilemma, recently on many of these pages-
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-10-22/united-states-china-which-states-your-landlord-most-likely-be-chinese
And for you (fellow) Monty Python fans-
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-10-23/parrot-finally-dead-economist-does-it-again
NO humor like those Brits!
The Hillary files, she really said this –
“Don’t let anybody tell you that it’s corporations and businesses that create jobs,”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/10/26/hillary-clinton-corporations-and-businesses-dont-create-jobs/
Will Big Box stores be one LESS employment refuge for the dwindling middle class?
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2014/10/28/lowes-robots-improve-customer-service/