This is part 2 of my series on Dan Chmielewski’s lawsuit — Civil case number 30-2020-01156399-CU-WM-CJC (or “1156399” for short) against Newgent, about which I was alerted by a friend who thought I’d be interested in it. And I am — but my interest is less prurient than that friend may have thought. This would have been Part 1 had Mike Fox not scooped me on it on his Facebook page — picture my shaking my fist at his picture, Jon Stewart-style — as you can read about in what ended up as Part 1. (I considered including the complaints in both the original lawsuit and the Anti-SLAPP motion up here, but I can’t find them right now and it’s unlikely you’ll read them anyway. Perhaps I’ll do it if I see a polite request from someone with a real name.)
On the surface, it’s bizarre that this case against Irvine-based, independent-minded Republican (and sometimes NPP), political candidate and citizen-journalist Mark Newgent was brought by longtime fan of this blog Dan Chmielewski at all. (I won’t call him “Chumley” in this context, due to the seriousness of the matter — and I’m not just referring to the $18,000 in attorney fees that he’s had to pay so far, before the City of Irvine can file its own motion or suit against him.) The case was challenging Newgent’s ballot designation — he asked to be referred to as a Retired Army Captain, which he in fact is, and he derives the bulk of his income from his pension — to have brought in the first place. One doesn’t generally challenge the ballot designation of someone whom one wants to see on the ballot — even a dolt like Chmiewlewski presumably understands that — but Newgent’s presence on the ballot was not taking away votes from any Democrats in Irvine’s cattle-call 2020 City Council election, but from Republicans, thus splitting their vote. As a self-proclaimed Democrat, Dan C. (my fingers already hurt from typing “Chmielewski” so many times) is supposed to like that — right?
So why file the complaint? That’s where this matter gets deeper — and far more significant!
Information is now coming out that suggests that Dan C. did not file the complaint on his own behalf, but on behalf of someone else. (The source of this information, according to multiple sources, is Dan C. himself.) He’s not saying this flat-out: what he’s saying is that the $18,000 that he’s had to pay (so far!) for his opponents’ legal fees did not come from him — why he cares enough about not being its source to convey this to people is between him and what I imagine would be a beleaguered platoon of therapists. Well, if there are people out there who are willing to bail out randos who lose meritless lawsuits, I’ve yet to hear of them. (Then again, I haven’t needed to.) That’s only happening because Dan C. lost the lawsuit and an “anti-SLAPP motion” — which allows the victim of a case brought to suppress someone else’s political participation to punish them financially by forcing them to pay their attorney fees — and was ordered to pay Newgent and his attorney $18,000. (Did I mention that it was $18,000? Let me spell that out for you: “eighteen thousand dollars.”)
Now, how do we know that Dan C. is telling the truth that he didn’t pay for it himself? It can be fairly inferred from the fact that Dan was simply refusing to pony up as required after the judgment — note to readers, don’t ever do this — leading him to the brink of what’s called a “debtor’s examination.” This is a nasty “bring your tax returns and all of your financial records” business for the person in the hot seat. (I’ve only conducted one once, and if I were a sadist I would have been in heaven; I literally had to stop for a break due to feeling a wash of pity. Then I sharpened my teeth again and went back in.) The day before the scheduled examination, a full payment from Dan C.’s second attorney, and my occasional antagonist and friend Mark Rosen (also Miguel Pulido’s attorney!) materialized. (If you click at the link up top and read Part 1, you can read Rosen’s letter demanding that, given delivery of the check, his client would not be showing up for the examination.)
Dan’s first attorney was my old colleague from the CATER days, Chad Morgan — an activist Republican — which raises the question of “why did Dan choose to be represented in the original matter by an activist, party regular, Republican attorney — especially one who had worked with me?” (It feels like I was in the middle of this despite that I knew nothing of it! Hold on, this gets even better!)
I have not asked Morgan about this case (and probably won’t, as I doubt he’d talk me about it), but I think that it’s reasonably certain that the meeting between Morgan and Dan C. was set up by a Republican individual or entity that wanted to employ someone they could trust. Did they come to Dan C. before that or afterwards? So far, I don’t know.
The [Strader/Carroll/Khan/Melahat?] Connections
My sources say that Dan has apparently implied to (or outright told) people that the payment to Newgent through Dan C.’s attorney came from Patrick Strader — the lobbyist for the developer FivePoint, which is headed by Emil Haddad. FivePoint, for those who don’t know, is the developer whose guts Councilmember Larry Agran hates because they dislodged him and his crew from office. Strader, readers may recall, was prominently featured in this blog as the dining partner of Democratic Party bigwig Melahat Rafiei (of whom I’ll refer, following her branding, simply as “Melahat”) when they (she has claimed) just casually ran into Irvine Mayor Farrah Khan at the next table, at an outdoor bistro where she was interviewing Mike Carroll about his application for a City Council vacancy being filled the following day.) After a real or feigned internal struggle, Khan would eventually vote to appoint him, rather allow the matter to go to a special election that Lauren Johnson-Norris, another applicant and the protégé of her political enemy and then-fellow Council member Melissa Fox, was widely seen to have a decent chance to win.
(Reports at the time suggested that she was telling Carroll that he had to switch from Republican party registration to No Party Preference registration in order for him to vote for him, so she could legitimately claim that she had not voted to appoint a Republican. Carroll complied, got appointed, and then — shocked-shocked shockingly! — quickly switched back to being a Republican. This led Khan to quit her seat on the DPOC before it could either expel her or censure her, or both — whichever, I’m not looking it up. One of the anonymous commenters sitting in our trash bin has blames us for that episode, to which I can only say “Yeah, I wish!”)
Dan C.’s avoiding the apparently ego-crushing ignominy of having been forced to pay out a five-figure damage reward may backfire even worse than his leaving on the table the $5400 discount Newgent’s lawyer offered for a quick settlement — which, by the way, I’d bet is the moment that Morgan decided to withdraw from the case — because this is legally his debt, so if he got it from someone else this is a “signed confession that” (to adopt a phrase Dan C. likes to use) that he owes gift taxes on it. Here, I’ll make Dan’s life easier by giving him the link to the IRS site where they discuss this. (Realizing this may change his tune. If it does, I’d love to hear from those people to whom he has been saying this!)
Apparently, Dan has literally blocked me from even being able to read his website from my home I.P. address — which, frankly, is the sort of neat trick that I wouldn’t mind learning! — so I don’t know if he’s still a tireless promoter of Larry Agran and his interests — but one has to admit that, given that relationship, his possibly doing the bidding of Patrick Strader and/or FivePoint seems completely bizarre. Why would he do this? Well, it seems like it has to do with the fact that Newgent was running against Khan’s chum Mike Carroll. (Chummy Carroll is also good friends with another Republican City Councilmember, Anthony Kuo, which gives Khan a chummy Council majority no matter what Democrats Agran and Tammy Kim do, so long as she does what Carroll and Kuo want her to do, which she does.)
Carroll was running against Newgent in that 2020 election. As a fellow Republican, Newgent would likely take votes from Carroll. Taking away Newgent’s ballot designation — he was listed as a “Retired Army Captain,” to which he was entitled despite being only 38, given his 20 years of service, having enlisted at 17 — would clearly harm his candidacy. FivePoint, which loves Carroll and likes Khan — and, I suspect, has business dealings with Melahat, who admits to being an adviser to Khan and was meeting with Strader for some reason — would have a motive to see Newgent’s candidacy harmed. (Newgent was aligned with Christina Shea in opposing the power grabs surrounding and suffusing the OC Power Authority — Khan, as an OCPA Board member, would later appoint Strader’s miserably unqualified pal Brian Probolsky to be the OCPA’s CEO, which she and Carroll had been instrumental in planning.) So, if Strader did pick up Dan C’s debt, that suggests that it was because he had in effect retained him (with or without payment) to do FivePoint’s (and/or OCPA’s, and/or another client’s) dirty work.
Did it work? See for yourself — here are the top seven of the fourteen candidates in the race — and you’ll discover Dan C.’s other (or even prime?) motivation:
| TAMMY KIM | 43,744 | 14.81% |
| *MIKE CARROLL | 38,615 | 13.07% |
| LARRY AGRAN | 38,156 | 12.92% |
| LAUREN JOHNSON-NORRIS | 37,931 | 12.84% |
| JOHN PARK | 32,521 | 11.01% |
| CARRIE O’MALLEY | 27,440 | 9.29% |
| MARK NEWGENT | 15,894 | 5.38% |
The fourth-place candidate — by a whisker! — was Lauren Johnson-Norris, mentioned above as the protégé of Melissa Fox, Khan’s — and Dan C’s — long-term nemesis! Johnson-Norris finished 674 votes behind Carroll and only 229 votes behind Agran — whom FivePoint would have loved to see lose. In foresight, Newgent was clearly a threat to Carroll — and undercutting his candidacy was a smart move for FivePoint. (Ironically, if he did participate, Dan C easily might have ended up by knocking off Agran rather than Johnson-Norris — but I think it’s safe to say that he did not keep Agran in the loop about any nefarious hidden dealings with FivePoint.)
The obvious question is: why would Five Point enlist a untrustworthy (based on his ratting them out now) chucklehead like Dan C. to file a lawsuit on its behalf? And if it didn’t do so, why is he seemingly claiming that they did? (Part of me really wants this to end up being about OCPA, a ripe target for a Grand Jury investigation, instead, so maybe one day this will come out.) Perhaps FivePoint or its representative appealed to Dan C. by making it seem that he had to help Carroll by making it seem like — given Agran’s expected second-place finish — he would just be helping Carroll beat Johnson-Norris — which, given his burning Fox-hate, would surely appeal to him!
But does FivePoint, or even Strader, really follow the twisty passages of Dan C.’s limbic system well enough to suss this out? Doubtful! Who could pull something like this off? Maybe … Farrah Khan’s advisor — and Strader’s lunch partner on that fateful day before Carroll’s appointment, who may be working with or for Five Point, and who has access to all sorts of money: Melahat Rafiei. She knows enough about Dan C. and everyone else around to know why to choose this otherwise unlikely source for them. So the question arises: was Dan C. really working at the behest of FivePoint — or was he working at the behest of Melahat to make it more likely (wherever Agran finished) that Farrah’s very good friend Carroll was re-elected. (And yes, DPOC readers, undermining Newgent could have been what prevented a Dem sweep!)
Let’s presume that whoever sent the check as Dan C. was quivering about his debtor’s exam did commission the suit. We’re left with four theories about whence came the money for the check that Mark Rosen sent to Newgent’s lawyer:
- Dan is lying: it actually was his own money after all!
- Dan is (reportedly) telling the truth: it did come from FivePoint, through Strader
- Dan is telling the truth and it was Strader — but he was acting not for Five Point but in one of his other roles, as the lobbyist for OC Power Authority — protecting his friends and collaborators Khan and Carroll
- Dan is lying when he says it came from FivePoint, so as to protect Melahat (and, indirectly and less importantly, Farrah)
(It could also be something else, or some combination of 2, 3, & 4.)
I don’t think that it was Dan’s own money. I also don’t think that this was Dan C’s own idea — although he aggravated things by falsely claiming that Newgent had threatened his children — because Dan C. isn’t that sort of risk-taker, and I doubt if he would have come up with the idea that Newgent’s status as a veteran could be challenged. (But if it were Dan’s own money, would he have waited until the last day before the terrifying debtor’s exam to pony up?)
I don’t think that it came from FivePoint — although FivePoint might take credit for it, because it gives them great insurance over Khan ever straying from their control, even if she goes on to higher office — though it might’ve.
It’s possible that it came from Strader without FivePoint — most likely about Khan and Carroll’s baby (relax, it’s just a metaphor) the OCPA — but that will require more investigation. (Sources — that’s your cue!)
Personally, I think that he most likely filed the suit at Melahat’s request, who wanted both to boost Carroll and harm Johnson-Norris on Khan’s behalf — although she may well (as part of an arrangement with FivePoint?) have consulted with Strader and/or FivePoint about it and perhaps won their moral or financial support.
Again, someone let Dan C. dangle until almost the last moment before saving his ample bacon. Does that sound like FivePoint? Not to me. It sounds like something that a prodigious and prolific professional fundraiser might do — with the stipulation that he place the responsibility on someone else. (Hmmm, does Melahat do any work with OCPA?)
If and when Larry Agran reads this, he will likely realize that if someone provides funds for someone else to file a meritless lawsuit — and yes, the lawsuit was officially deemed meritless, by virtue of the anti-SLAPP suit — in order to interfere with a political candidacy (and possibly knock him off of council as a result!), it may warrant investigation by the city, and possibly the county and the state. The City has a financial interest here, you see. When it decided to let Newgent run using his challenged-but-accurate ballot designation, it too had to spend money defending itself — and it would presumably like to get that money back! If it has not yet filed a suit to regain its money but would like to, it may have options to make some or all of the boldfaced names above go on the record, perhaps even with sworn statements, to get at these facts (which are after all capable of repetition.) Such an city investigation might not take place, of course — Khan and Carroll have at least one steadfast ally on the council in Kuo (and I don’t know where Tammy Kim fits in there) — but Agran is, ahem, not without resources of his own.
Khan, Kuo, and Agran are both up for re-election in one year. While Melahat is reportedly tight with Ada Briceno, Briceno is a politically ambitious survivor who will know that defending people who wanted to keep a Republican-controlled majority on the Irvine City Council is not good for her business. (Yes, I said “Republican-controlled”: it is not likely that Farrah gets to call her own shots in dealing with her faction-mates Republicans Carroll and Kuo.) So if no investigation of who funded Dan C’s legal bill takes place — bills, plural, if the city does sue for its fees — it is likely to be a big election issue next year. (And Dan C. might not be well-positioned to write about it this time!)
(Special message to Councilmember Tammy Kim: if Agran puts forth a motion for the city to investigate and/or file an anti-SLAPP, and you don’t second it and vote for it, it is quite seriously the end of your political career. The City leaving that money on the table to protect FivePoint, OCPA, or Carroll/Khan will be an outsized issue in the future. This is not a cover-up you want to be involved in, no matter what Strader or Melahat or anyone in DPOC says!) Now: would Dan C. commit perjury on behalf of FivePoint and/or Strader and/or Rafiei — given that FivePoint might at some point get pissed off at Rafiei for making them look bad (if theory #4 is true) and put him in a bind? I’d like to think that he’s not that stupid, but I’ve been wrong about things before!
I’ll be seeking comment from many of those in boldface above, as well as from others, and will be following up.
Afterword: For Dan Chmielewski’s Eyes Only! Everyone Else Skip This!
As I’ve gone from being barred from commenting on your blog to not even being able to read it — thank God for screenshots, huh? — this may be the only way I can reach you. Before you write anything about this, Dan: yes, Mark Daniels and I did file a ballot designation challenge against your friend Lenore Albert a while ago — but I believed that it was valid, I explained the writ‘s filing (and any possible dangers for him) to Mark and he believed that it was valid as well, and we won the most important part of the case in court, involving whether the designation was accurate (it wasn’t!) and it was upheld when Lenore appealed. Your case is not like that one — did you even read the code section in question, Cal. Elec Code Sec. 13107(e)(4), which says that you can use the word “retired” if it applies to a present status? — and, while you’d be smart to come clean about who bailed you out, a part of me hopes that you don’t, and have to endure the consequences. (Does that sound mean of me? I’m only wishing for you to get to do things your way!) Note also that, unlike in your case, Lenore was representing herself, so we didn’t have to worry about a fee award! Will you really sit still for being played for a chump in this dumb meritless suit by people who almost let you twist in the wind? Again, part of me really hopes so — but it will really undercut your reputation for vengeance-taking if you do!) || Well, drop me another pseudonymous line sometime! Most sincerely, G.
Might want to give the FPPC a call.
Expenditures of this type have already been ruled campaign contributions or contributions in kind. See Trump’s case for details.
I doubt that an after-the-fact legal bill would be considered a campaign donation, given that Dan was not a candidate, but my guess is that if there is a complaint to be made here Agran would be happy to file it.
Someone just sent me this. Thank you for telling the story. Time to stand up the bullies. On top of who paid him/me. I would like to know who gave Dan all that personal information on my minor children to attempt to intimidate me with…
Did your PPE company make money or not?
I have asked him about that in the course of writing this story, intrepid anonymous commenter who is not necessarily Dan C.!
His primary source of income is his military pension. (Well, at least it was until this $18,000 windfall.) So it doesn’t matter when his company makes money or not; it would not automatically supplant his status as a Retired Army Captain as his ballot designation.
Given that you’re pseudonymous, don’t comment here again slagging someone unless it’s under your real name.
Hi Dan C.
What should I spend this $18,000 on? I already took my son to get ice cream and explained his adult bully paid for it.
Maybe I will get a nice Rolex so every time I look at it I am reminded of the feel of getting justice. Maybe a classic submariner?
What does that have to do with anything?
That was the brilliant argument Dan C made: that because Newgent had started a business that HAD to be his ballot designation. Doubtful in the best of times; pitiful when he makes more from his pension than from his infant start-up.
I doubt that that not-quite-right notion came from Morgan; maybe from Strader? Or Melahat?
David,
Exactly, and the judge seemed to agree.
As you know, Melahat Rafiei was the advisor and close friend of our former, disgraced, DINO Councilman Jordan Brandman here in Anaheim. She wrote his apology letters, he appointed her to the Culture and Heritage Commission in District 2 though she claims to live in District 6, passing over actual District 2 residents.
With her history of Dino-handling, and conspiring to install Republicans to replace Democrats on City Councils, wouldn’t you say it’s completely plausible she too, had a hand in arranging Brandman’s Republican replacement before also penning his resignation letter giving way to the non-transparent, un-inclusive, pre-ordained, sham Council appointment process that took place here late last month?
At what point does DPOC act to remove her if not after being caught out to lunch with Republicans engaging in such egregious behavior?
Very little about Melahat’s political machinations would surprise me.
DPOC is effectively Ada now, and I don’t think that Ada would do anything about her. (Remember, the Building Trades in OC are happy to support and work with Republicans against Democrats when it suits them, and the party won’t even clear it’s throat to criticize them.
Melahat is now both a federal party official (DNC member) and a State one (California Democratic Party Secretary, one of only five statewide officers), so while those positions give her power they also give her vulnerabilities. But we’re getting ahead of ourself if we conclude that Melahat was definitely involved in paying off Dan’s debt. Dan presumably knows who it was, but I think that he’d be more afraid to tell the truth about her, if she did it, than to lie about someone else. (Maybe not under oath, but who knows?)
I don’t think that either the CDP or DNC would move against her on this, in part because she can wield (bogus) threats of racism, sexism, and religious bigotry against her. But at some point, if the story gets big enough — bigger than I could make it from this blog — who knows what could happen? If Haddad is such good friends with Gavin Newsom he might be able to capture the State party’s interest, but he is probably more likely to cover for her in exchange for future benefits, if he’s so disposed.
It’s a mess — but frankly it’s been a mess for many years. Anyone who reads Lib OC can fill us in on Dan C’s thoughts, if he has any.
You wouldn’t know any of this had happened, from Dan’s blog or his Facebook wall either.
Interesting. But he’s still publishing about other things? Anything Farrah or Agran or FivePoint related?
I wonder if “don’t get out ahead of the problem; just pretend it isn’t happening” is the advice he’d give a client.
1. He actually has been posting a lot the last couple of weeks, but not getting any comments…. EXCEPT when he gratuitously attacked HB’s progressive Gina Clayton-Tarvin, and all the usual anonymous trolls came out of the woodworks to pile on.
2. Our mutual friend had pointed out to me that he had stopped posting about Irvine… UNTIL…last week when he penned a fulsome defense of Farrah’s trip to Baku!
3. It’s rare that we learn anything from Dan’s blog, but here’s some nauseating news he put out this week – the OCGOP has decided to back financial crook and elder abuser Diane Harkey for 5th District Supe, over Mayor Raths. (So most likely this will end up Kerr vs Harkey, how inspiring.)
I wouldn’t be too sure about that, Vern. Harkey has a lot of stink on her and her “I was a victim, too” routine is about as believable as snow on Maui.
I wouldn’t discount Harkey Fatigue, especially after she’s lost. It’s amazing how many folks quickly forget about second place finishers.
P.S. The practical difference between Harkey and Kerr would be negligible.
Hi Vern,
He won’t advertise that he was finally held accountable for his actions. He is probably trying to figure out how he can play the victim role somehow.
It’s probbaly best for him if he says nothing. I wonder how long he will be able to stay silent?
Whats your opinion? Is he going to be able to stay silent?
Mark
What is there for Chemical Lewinski to say? Dumb is best left dumb.
He’s never before been noted for self-control. One of us may need to provoke him further, in his own environment. Then he will rush to his whataboutism.
I could go over and “touch the pink toad” myself, but I promised my wife I wouldn’t.
“Toucheth ye not the Pink Toad.”
It’s in Leviticus, somewhere.
What is Jerbal saying?
Why would Jerbal be saying anything about this? Even Dan is acting like nothing happened. Plus, I doubt Newgent knows who Jerbal is. How blissful if that’s true, to lack knowledge of the Jerb!
Vern wrote: “he gratuitously attacked HB’s progressive Gina Clayton-Tarvin”.
Except what he wrote was true. I find it amazing that you would condone Gina (or anyone) lying about dead children. Let alone standing by someone who would BLATANTLY LIE about being a victim of a mass shooting. Tells me alot about you.
Also, isn’t John Horner III the alter ego of Mike Fox, who created fake profiles pretending to be a war veteran to attack five point in tyhe cemetary battle. Again I suppose that only matters to you guys if it’s Harry Sidhu playing in the “Stolen Valor” sandbox.
Except Dan’s story is bullshit. Not only was it three and a half years ago, but Gina wasn’t lying – anyone who doesn’t remember what a war zone Hawaiian Gardens was in the 90’s, well, that’s on you. And she is not going to jump through hoops for Dan Chmielewski, nobody cares what he thinks.
There are so many stupid things about his publishing this again three and a half years later:
– Dan’s “cute” disingenuousness pretending he’s not doubting or criticizing Gina, he just wants more details so he can CELEBRATE her properly!
– All the anonymous jackals jumping on acting like this is some new outrage to get all excited about!
– The jackals’ certainty that all HB voters are going to be SO outraged once they find out what she said in 2018 about her time in Hawaiian Gardens in the 90’s that it’ll tank her campaign next year!
– This is how Dan marks the guilty plea of the Parkland shooter, by gratuitously sliming a good, effective Democrat. WHY AND FOR WHOSE BENEFIT?
– Fortunately the universe of anyone who gives a shit what Dan writes is in the low double digits and most of them are here on this thread; the universe of HB voters who give a shit what Dan writes is probably in the single digits.
– He actually did put a little bit of news at the end of the story, which is Gina’s statement against vaccine mandates for kids. Of course none of the anonymous commenters responded to that, because none of them read that far.
– Dan is happy though because it’s his first story in over a month to get more than one or two comments, because he’s going back to his fan base in the HB alt-right.
“CHANNELING THE RIGHT-WING NOISE MACHINE” – that’s Dan’s Liberal OC!
I don’t know who Mike Fox is. I don’t care about Mike Fox. Hide-and-Seek Sidhu is the Mayor of the city where I live. The end.
Talking about Dan demanding people jump through his hoops reminds me of a really cringe-inducing episode in 2014. A little girl named Ximena was accidentally shot and killed in a gang drive-by in Anaheim.
So Dan issued a demand that THREE PEOPLE – Gabriel San Roman, Gustavo Arellano, and my wife Donna – write statements condemning what had happened.
Or else… what? Or else, I guess, they would be complicit in the tragedy. Why them? I guess, because they’re Anaheim Latinos. And maybe to different degrees they’d been outspoken on police violence against Latinos (although none of them are “pro-gang.”) And to different degrees, understandably, they all told Dan to piss off.
I guess we don’t notice so much when he habitually demands that various OC Republicans denounce various fucked up things other Republicans do. But it’s a funny habit for someone who habitually says “I’m not your monkey.” (Jeez, how do I know so much about this mudslide? I really need some worthier rivals.)
“John Horner III” is, as I recall, a pseudonym that Mike Fox was accused of using at one time. One problem with using a pseudonym is that other people can adopt it as an attempt to make you look bad — we have no way of knowing who it really is without asking them. So my guess is that it is not Mike Fox, given that he is commenting here and elsewhere under his own name, but trying to use the handle to put words inly Mike Fox’s mouth.
I haven’t asked Fox about it, but he’ll see this and can clarify if he wants.
Fred,
I was told by an insider Melahat Rafiei used to handle the money transfer from Disney to Jordan. It also had to do with someone named “AJ” or goes through “AJ” too, or so I was told. I don’t know who “AJ” is. Seems like this is common knowledge how the money flows, so probably not new info for you guys.
I never met Melahat Rafiei, Jordan “AJ” or any of the Anaheim people. That swamp usually doesn’t spill over into the Irvine Swamp.
Mark
Oh, you might be surprised how kleptocratic tentacles slither from swamp to swamp.
There are lots of puppet strings in OC but they invariably lead back to the same handful of fixers and bagmen(women).
Apologies for the mixed metaphors.
$18,000. is what Dan spends at the Swinging Door Saloon each month. i don’t think he’s to worried about chump change. Hat Tip to Mandy! Bartender of the decade!
Our policy against anonymous attacks against people applies even to Dan and even in this situation. Respond to the email I send you this afternoon to verify your identity or this has to come down. Sorry, but the comments section works better that way.
[comment moved]
[comment moved]
[comment moved]
https://theliberaloc.com/2021/10/13/debunking-claims-on-farrah-khans-ties-to-baku/
Notice how Dan overlooks Farrakhan’s Turkish money connection or that Turkish language is prominently displayed on We are Irvine propaganda??? Hello?!?
That piece by Dan is amazing. Who wrote it?
See, this one is on topic and so it gets to stay here!
Your comments are being moved to this post:
https://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2021/10/eric-neshanians-armenian-grievances-post/
[comment moved]
There is no indication on Google or Wikipedia that what you’re saying is true, although it is apparently used as slang among the older generation of South African Jews for what we in this country would once have called a “Jewish American Princess.”
Eric, what you’re doing is called “hijacking a post,” and I’m done with it. I’ll create a new post for you to put all of your Armenian patriotic commentary on Turkey, Azerbaijan, etc, and you can post it there, along with your mangling of Yiddish. But I’m going to start deleting everything you have to say that detracts from the topic at hand. If I’m in a good mood I’ll move it to that post.
[comment moved]
She’s Iranian. There is some mixing of surnames in that region, as you probably know, with the apparent exception of Armenians, whose names I’m told always end in “-ian.” So if someone’s surname is “Iranian,” that would seem to mean that they’re Armenian. Not sure about this, though. But we’re off topic now.
https://www.mauiticketsforless.com/snow-in-maui/ It snows on Maui Dave
Interesting. And yet still, Harkey’s protestations of innocence are as as farfetched as ever.
I’m betting that Raths can win even without that endorsement. Or maybe Kerr will — despite his heinous vote on Poseidon.
Okay. Lanai.
A muted Chemical Lewinsky would be a nice early holiday present. You would have thought the racist tropes about Asian women he was using in a text exchange with Irvine Councilmember Tammy Kim would have brought him down. Especially since they occured in the aftermath of the Atlanta shootings.Speaking of which, is that definitely a current photo of him? He looks like hell.
And you would have thought that billing the public $200 an hour to have lunch with Steve Greenhut, publishing the names of priest sex abuse victims and making fun of dead Latinos killed by Anaheim cops would have been the end of Jerbal Cunningham.
P.S. I’ve had dinner and smokes with Steve Greenhut for free.
I haven’t even thought about Jerbal in relation to this. Is he defending his blood brother?
I think Dave is saying that folks like Matt and Dan are startlingly impervious to shame, and indeed, like Celine Dion’s heart, just go on and on and on.
Correct. Chem has a few people he’s willing to prostitute himself for – perhaps for free. Jerbal actually has an employer, which if you think about it, reflects even worse on the Anaheim Chamber of Crony Capitalism.
I think that it’s from June 25, 2018. I expect that he looks about the same.
I didn’t see that text exchange. You should post it here.
Jerbal and Chumley. What a pair!
Art. Remember that “debate” that was supposed to settle things in the 2008 Blog War? And Marty Wisckol was the moderator? And Chumley and Jerbal were on one side, and you, Sean and Bushala on the other? Those two have always had a deep mutual respect based on their shared trade of “turd polishing.”
I missed that. But I remember Wisckol. He was a stooge for the repuglican kleptocracy. Almost as bad as the other Ragister turd who quit and went to law school.
He’s still writing the occasional Register piece and promoting them on Facebook, and not very friendly to me, as though Matt and Dan told him I’m a “gadfly” or something.
Is the other one that cigar-chomping courtier-columnist Frank Mickadeit?
That’s it. The little fly speck that liked to hang out with Ackerman & Co. at some repug watering hole in Newport Beach so he could rub elbows with the grifters.
And that would be the Gulfstream. Dave Ellis’ trough.
Mickeadit was at Greenberg and Gross (the latter an Enron federal prosecutor). He is an attorney now. I don’t think he is on partner track though.