May 172021
 

Please note: The URL is changing to www.rightondailyblog.com soon. rightondaily.com will still point here for a while longer.

In a disasterous interview with the San Diego Union Tribune in the days leading up to her equally as disasterous Congressional Campaign, Harkey snapped back at the San Diego Union Tribune, “That Dog Don’t Hunt’ when they were asking her about the Harkey family scandal. It does hunt. I believe I had laid out sufficient evidence to demonstrate that Diane Harkey had knowledge of her husband’s business dealings, benefitted from them, participated in financial and legal transactions to protect money for herself and the lynchpin is the sham divorce.

The divorce was filed on 12-12-2014 Case 14D010906 and was final 5-1-2015. There is no evidence anywhere that there was a legal separation filed, ever. For a divorce between spouses married nearly 30 years with a ton of assets to take a paltry 4.5 months is absurd. There is no rational person that would look at that as anything other than abusing the legal system, therefore I am calling their divorce a sham.

Note the date of the divorce filing – after they dumped $4.5 Million in property. She filed the divorce AFTER she moved property in to an LLC. None of this is illegal, but it is immoral and unethical. By moving the property in to the LLC, it simplified the divorce further and appears to have been done to avoid any collection activity from Dan Harkey’s Lawsuit.

That dog does hunt. There is a trail of real estate transactions in 2014 that tell the whole story. I am still unsure as to where the DCCC, the SDUT and others were. It did not take much effort to find this information and connect the dots.

In 2018 she raged on the San Diego Union Tribune:

Conservative Mugs 970×250

Union-Tribune: Do you want to answer conclusively where your money came from that built your career?

HARKEY: My money came from my income, okay? Check the court records. I don’t really think we have to go into where my money came from. I don’t… I don’t ask you where your money came from. I think it’s more important to people to know that I was cleared and I don’t expect the U-T to ever report anything kindly about me, but you know, I have a long record of serving the community.

I have won elections through this litigation and I won elections after, and the reason being is because the people who know me and the people that have worked with me and the reason I get endorsed all the time is because they know the truth. I know the truth and I know who I am and I think that’s very important because in politics you never know what’s coming at you, but if you’re clear in your conscience and you know the truth and you know who you are it… it says a lot. I never got really terribly depressed because I knew that somehow this would… this would end, but it was… it was a very long situation.

She gave this answer to the SDUT 3 1/2 years after the above transactions knowing she had also filed a sham divorce. Similar to when she lied to John Chiang, at least about filing a legal separation, she appears to have lied outright to the SDUT. It also looks like your intrepid blogger has done the job the SDUT never finished.

Note that in 2009, Harkey said this to the LA Times:

“I’ve been married for 25 years to my husband,” said the Dana Point Republican. “We have personal income. He has income. I have income. Sometimes it was my income. Sometimes it was his income. Sometimes it’s both of our incomes. And I’ve saved him financially many years. So I’m not going to get into whose, yours, mine, ours. Who knows after 25 years?”

Um, Diane what changed?

About the sham divorce? Dan Harkey still lives in the same house as Diane Harkey. It took some digging to prove with a private investigator friend, but it is true to the best of our knowledge. In 2017, The IRS slammed Dan Harkey with a $1,000,000 Tax Lien, but the address on that is a commercial property. I am also sure that Dan Harkey’s assets are equally as hidden as Diane’s are.

The original charge was did Diane Harkey’s $2.1 million worth of self-funding come from her husband’s business dealings? I believe we have proven that. I believe I have enough evidence to call her a liar when she denies that no part of it came from Dan Harkey’s business dealings.

Is Diane Harkey a victim? Absolutely not. All the way down to the sham divorce, dumping property, moving property, her own statements, court records, public records and her own conduct show the absolute truth. There is no way a reasonable person could conclude that she did not have some knowledge and some benefit from her husband’s businesses.

Good Lord, she still lives with him! I also can not believe that Dan Harkey still lives with Diane, given that she threw him under the bus repeatedly – or perhaps that was also part of the game to hide the assets from the plaintiffs just like the sham divorce.

People in the Orange County political establishment need a serious dose of reality. I am not surprised to have caught Diane Harkey in several lies, this comes with the territory when you have someone that constantly blames others for their own maladies.

I am also not surprised at discovering a long string of what I believe to be unethical, yet legal abuses of the court system in her life as well.

Now I understand the mentality behind a woman who was reputed to stay at home rather than attend campaign meetings, would not reach out to donors, was known to drink heavily on the campaign trail, was prone to angry outbursts and when it all came crashing down – there was Darrell Issa to take the blame for it all. Just like the mean newspapers, Mark Wyland, and Lord knows your intrepid blogger too…

Diane Harkey needs to be retired from Public Life. Too much drama, too many questions, too many ethical issues and zero personal ownership of anything. You can not rely on a person like that or trust them to lead or govern.

Stay Informed!

Sign up to receive RightOnDaily updates sent to your inbox.

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)