Jul 232021
 

EMBEDDED HERE IS A COPY OF THE CAGOP By-Laws. They have been hidden from the website in light of the scrutiny.

I have written that the CAGOP is corrupt and overrun with consultants. Today – the CAGOP’s “By-Laws” committee, packed with consultants threw out the other three bylaw amendments with little or no discussion showing that the meeting was only about Kevin Faulconer and the anticipated pay-day that the CAGOP was going to get from mortgaging the party to him.

In the meantime, my friend and CAGOP Treasurer Greg Gandrud was bragging about the $1.8 Million Warchest the CAGOP has. Omitted from Greg’s glowing report was that the consultants that have rigged the process in the CAGOP are coveting that money to support Kevin Faulconer and of course that the Democrats have something like 20 Million of their own. (And Gavino Newsolini has 30 Million)

Well, they did do something. They still rigged the by-laws

Did you know that David Stafford Reade is on the By-Laws Committee? Yup. He actually abstained on the final vote, but that did not prevent him from influencing the process on the final Faulconer Jam Down By-Law Amendment. There were three other paid consultants for Faulconer on the committee as well! IN total, 4 people had to abstain including the crazed Frances Barrazza as well.

I was sent a robotic phone call cut by Doug Ose.

There was another email from “Delegate Dialogue” that was devastatingly effective.

I was told that John Cox was going to do some sort of publicity stunt – he did – right at the front door of the CAGOP Headquarters.

The CAGOP’s antics have garnered media attention and Her Majesty ran and hid in her spider hole rather than talk to the media.

The divisive potential of such a move was on display Thursday when Republican candidate John Cox, a businessman who lost to Newsom in 2018, accused the party of rigging the nomination process in favor of one of his rivals, Kevin Faulconer, the former San Diego mayor. Faulconer had been seeking the nomination but his campaign now says Faulconer no longer believes it’s in the party’s interest to back a single candidate.

Party Chair Jessica Millan Patterson has previously said the party should get behind one candidate, but a spokeswoman didn’t comment Thursday on whether that’s still her position. One of her allies, U.S. House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy, wants the party to unite but is largely staying out of the process, according to an aide who was not authorized to discuss his thinking publicly.

Anne Dunsmore, the campaign manager for the pro-recall group Rescue California, opposes a nomination and believes the best way to win the recall is to allow multiple candidates to motivate different swaths of voters to remove Newsom. Plus, the party could make the wrong bet.

Do not forget that the CAGOP has a lot of money riding on rigging an endorsement of Kevin Faulconer. I’ve laid out the reasons why I am of that opinion several times, but in short it gives the handful of donors Faulconer has a vehicle to pump millions through the party while the consultants and the party take their cuts.

Stephen Puetz, Faulconer’s campaign manager, told The Associated Press an endorsement would only divide the party at a critical time. With no other prominent Democrat on the replacement ballot, Republicans have less of a need to unite behind one person, he said. Still, Faulconer will still seek the party’s support if the executive committee allows a nomination vote at a state convention in August, Puetz said.

Faulconer’s campaign team is starting to sweat. Perhaps they recognize the toxic situation.

The CAGOP’s executive committee in violation of the by-laws has been put up to ratifying the Rules Committee Report. The Rules committee has basically said you need 200 delegate signatures to qualify and of the handful of candidates that can get 200 signatures, you need 60% of the delegates present on 8-7 to get endorsed. Note: there are 1400 delegates and the control agents, by ramming down this by-law effectively limited the number of eligible candidates to no more than 7.

Will “No Endorsement” be an option on the upcoming ballot?

Why is there no link to register for the 8-7-2021 convention on the CAGOP’s Website?

Where is the link to the “delegate signature” form and the “unique link” for a delegate to sign a candidate’s request paperwork?

Kevin Kiley, John Cox and/or Doug Ose need to get qualified for the CAGOP endorsement so that Faulconer can be stopped.

We will continue tracking the actions of the consultants and control agents seeking to mortgage the CAGOP to Faulconer.

Jul 192021
 

Calling David Reade a volunteer is like drinking lite beer and claiming to be sober. It is absurd.

Apparently, team Faulconer was short on squishes so Mr. Reade was pressed in to service.

I see that they try to address Faulconer’s far-left positions such as Abortion on Demand (probably why Krick likes him), open borders, several local tax increase measures, gay rights, gun grabbing, trump-hate and the list goes on.

Cynthia Teasdale is part of the ham-fisted rule of Betsy Graves Mahan in Sacramento County and is part of the donor/lobbyist crowd down there.

Krick is a reliable far-left Republican that never met a live birth he liked.

Faroon-Buhler is the wife of Luis Buhler, moderate overlord and the one time handler of Charles T Munger, Jr.

David Stafford Reade is a regular feature on Right on Daily.

This would be like me sending a mailer with myself, Tim Rosales, Matt Rexroad and Arthur Schaper signing as volunteers for Larry Elder.

Remember, Kevin Faulconer is desperate for the CAGOP endorsement and information I have indicates that the far-left Faulconer is corrupt as hell. It appears that the CAGOP leadership want to whore out the good name of the party for money to someone whose opposition research file is like threemile island.

Under a new law signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2019, gubernatorial candidates are required to provide five years of tax returns to the state in order to run. Earlier this year, the governor released his own returns, showing he and his wife, First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom, earned about $1.7 million in 2019.

The highest earner among the recall candidates was Anthony Trimino, an Irvine Republican who is CEO and president of Traffik advertising. Trimino and his wife, Jennifer, reported making more than $4.3 million in 2020, most of it from the advertising agency.

Former San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer and his wife Katherine Stuart reported a total income of $358,119 in 2019, most of it from Restaurant Events, Inc., the San Diego company controlled by Stuart that organizes events with restaurants, including parties that have been known to shut down several city blocks.

Former Congressman Doug Ose, a Republican, paid $193,086 in federal taxes on an income of $717,183 in 2019.

Ose’s company, GRP 2011 LLC, operates Gibson Ranch Regional Park under a lease deal with Sacramento County. Ose agreed to take the park over about a decade ago when the county could no longer afford to maintain it.

Tax filings from 2016 show Ose’s company lost $28,358 on the park. In 2017, the former lawmaker negotiated a better deal with the county, and the company made $76,186 from the deal. In 2018, the company made $20,331 from the park, and in 2019, he lost $3,281.

John Cox and his wife Sarah Hall Cox reported an income of $278,928 in 2019. He reported zero taxable income after deducting huge losses on investment partnerships, but still paid $1,099 in taxes. Much of Cox’s income came from rents on the residential properties he owns.

Reality TV star Caitlyn Jenner reported earning $558,774 in 2019, paying $143,076 in federal income taxes. A sizable portion of her income, about $365,000, came from a business called CJ Memoires LLC, likely connected to sales from Jenner’s book, “The Secrets of My Life,” which published in 2017.

Assemblyman Kevin Kiley, R-Rocklin, earned $113,311 in 2020, which included $1,436 in income from the Ose-Kiley Cattle Co., a business he co-owns with rival Ose.

(The blockquote was lifted from a Sacramento Bee article 7-19-2021)

So has Kevin Faulconer been doing the same thing as Newsom? That is leveraging his office to enrich his wife’s business? Not only are Faulconer and Newsolini a pair of democrats, they appear to be a pair of corrupt politicians. Lovely… more to come for Faulconer and his crew.

Jul 162021
 

Your intrepid blogger is hard at work tracking the actions of political insiders…

The CAGOP is operating with a slew of By-Law Violations. If someone wanted to pierce the corporate veil and take down the CAGOP – they could easily. Let’s list them on the way to laying out the jam-down of a Faulconer endorsement that is rigged and set up to happen in early August.

  1. The LAGOP unilaterally filled 22 vacant districts with nominees in violation of the CAGOP By-Laws that have a clear system for doing so. The 22 illegal delegates voted for Jessica Patterson for Chair and will all vote to endorse Kevin Faulconer.
  2. The Tehama GOP did not meet and did not organize. Jessica Patterson put its’ chair on the CAGOP Proxies and Credentials Committee after the voracity of the Tehama GOP was challenged. The Tehama Treasurer was seated in violation of state election law and CAGOP By-Laws. Only the Chair of a Defunct committee carries forward.
  3. The Glenn GOP did not meet, but did have three people elected. Tehama had none. Not meeting to organize is a violation of election law. The CAGOP allowed the 6 delegates to be seated – all voted for Jessica Patterson. Then Patterson appointed the Chair of the Fake Glenn GOP to the Proxies and Credentials Committee
  4. Jessica Patterson appointed Scott Winn (who has been a regular feature on this blog), Corey Uhden and other paid political consultants with a direct financial interest in the outcome of CAGOP elections to the proxies and credentials committee. Winn and Uhden were both paid to harvest proxies and were then put in charge of validating the very proxies they harvested.
  5. The Yuba GOP was taken over by the good guys after the exposure of David Stafford Reade staffer Stephen Reynoso Heter was exposed repeatedly. Note to worry though, the 5 delegates (none of whom live in Yuba County) will all vote for Faulconer and did vote for Jessica Patterson.
  6. Rumors indicate that the CAGOP’s staff are attempting to negotiate the Modoc Situation as they stripped Modoc of their delegates, not because Modoc did anything different than Glenn or Tehama – but because Modoc would have supported the opponents to the regime. The CAGOP’s staff broke the law once again when they stripped the Chair of Modoc of his delegate status, yet allowed Heter, Ryan Edson and Michael Holdsclaw to remain as chairs of their bogus and defunct committees.
  7. Several Counties submitted paperwork for “bonus delegates”. These include Glenn, Santa Cruz and Alameda (there were many others, but I am focusing on these) Alameda and Santa Cruz whose committees are moribund got 3 bonus delegates each. Even after calling the FBI on me, the CAGOP’s staff refused to answer questions about these dubious delegates, finally admitting they take the counties’ word for it. Given that Luis Buhler, David Stafford Reade and others have reputations for bending the rules (whatever happened to law and order or election integrity?) I told Steve Frank there were at least 20 fraudulent delegates from Counties that submitted garbage paperwork without the actual items in place they were claiming. The most obvious example is Glenn County who did not meet, and had only 3 people file for election – getting a 6th delegate.

So there are a built in 50-60 fraudulent delegates prepared to vote for Kevin Faulconer once David Reade, Tom Ross, Jeff Randle and the others filching thousands off of the machine get their way with the jam-down. Given that no more than 1200 will vote – this fraud stakes Faulconer to 4-5% of the vote right out of the gate.

What is the Jam-Down? This is sidestepping the CAGOP’s By-Laws once again to amend them in violation of the by-laws in order to facilitate a 50% threshold endorsement. But wait, there’s more – every candidate HAS TO GET 200 DELEGATE SIGNATURES just to be eligible. This is the provision of the feckless Fred Whitaker by-law amendment that is not getting attention. Since a delegate can only sign for one candidate, this effectively limits the universe to 7 candidates maximum for a potential endorsement.

We started covering the jam down email from the CAGOP here

The CAGOP Rules Committee is meeting on 7-23 to address the Faulconer Jam-Down By-Law Amendment with three other proposals. They are not addressing the illegal delegates and the numerous violations of the CAGOP By-Laws.

Well, there is a problem – 3 of the By-Law amendments were sat on by her majesty in violation of the 3 day notice provision in the by-laws.

There is a second problem – the Faulconer Jam-Down By-Law and the other three whose time had expired the three day mandate were only sent to a portion of the rules committee and not the entire rules committee.

So, there are two more blatant By-Law violations to go along with the corruption of the proxies and credentials committee and at least 50 delegates whose presence is attributable to fraud. (fraud is a violation of the by-laws of the CRP)

So, on 7-23 the rules committee will “meet” but the peasants will not be allowed to comment during the proceedings. Also note that the rules committee is populated with country clubbers and squishes, 100% appointed by her majesty.

Then once the Rules Committee rubber stamps the wishes of David Stafford Reade (who works for both CAGOP Chair Jessica Patterson AND Faulconer), then the next day the CAGOP Executive Committee 50% of whose members are appointed by the corrupt CAGOP Chair Jessica Patterson will meet to codify these by-law amendments. Thomas Hiltack, Chuck Bell and Ashlee Titus all work for the CAGOP’s law firm. Ashlee is paid by the CAGOP and Hiltack has been fingered as the partner to David Stafford Reade on the Executive Director Project that was formed to control or neutralize county parties. How relying on a law-firm with this sort of conflict of interest passes any legitimacy test is beyond me as one of the three attorneys mentioned said that their interpretation of the bylaws allows the executive committee to usurp the entire body to modify the by-laws.

That is kind of like giving Jesse James the keys to the bank or asking Jack the Ripper to babysit.

In addition, when her majesty called the executive committee meeting people had 34 minutes notice (she called it at 11:26PM on the exact day to have 40 days elapse on 7-24).

I have some theories why the CAGOP’s leadership are whoring out the CAGOP to Faulconer and they all lead back to money. The CAGOP will get kickbacks from the money the handful of donors Faulconer has will run through the party. These donors will be able to donate 3-4 additional times direct to the party.

Kevin Faulconer can not win without the CAGOP endorsement because he needs the cut rate advertising that is allowed with such an arrangement and it will also allow those donors to pour money in.

There is also what I believe to be a sinister angle. The CAGOP leadership that are whoring out the CAGOP to Faulconer did not support the recall and came kicking and screaming only when it appeared to be eminent to qualify. I believe they want the recall to fail. By flipping off the grassroots and telling them to get lost, then jamming down the CAGOP endorsement they accomplish two goals: money to make up for Patterson’s failure to raise enough money to pay the CAGOP’s basic bills and they get to kill the pesky recall that upset their plans for 2022.

So when the Consultants and Insiders have rigged the process next weekend – the next step is a meeting on 8-7 via zoom where they use the same corrupted, unreliable electronic voting that disenfranchised dozens of delegates.

Here’s the summary:

Hire staff with personal connections to Kevin Faulconer
Enable Delegate Fraud on a Large Scale
Hide Behind a Law Firm with a 20 year relationship with the CAGOP to make a by-law judgement you want them to
Rig the process
Layer on more By-Law Violations
Vote Electronically

Then Kevin Faulconer gets endorsed.

And don’t you dare tell them how upset you are or the FBI will show up at your door.

P.S.

Jul 152021
 
  • Jason Roe, the longtime San Diego-based GOP political consultant who was for years a key strategist for former Mayor Kevin Faulconer, has left his role as the executive director of the Michigan Republican Party, where he has feuded since taking the job with Trump loyalists who took exception to critical comments he made of the former president. (Detroit Free Press)

It looks like Jason Roe has the Faulconer Disease well. According to the following article:

In 2013, Kevin Faulconer ran for Mayor of San Diego—against Nathan Fletcher, the husband of the infamous Assemblywoman Lorena Fletcher—she authored AB 5, to kill California jobs.  During that campaign he noted he started life as a Democrat, then proceeded to run on a Democrat Platform—open borders, amnesty, pro-choice,

In 2016 this is what Kevin Faulconer said to a San Diego TV station, ““I could never vote for Trump,” said Faulconer on Election Night. “His divisive rhetoric is unacceptable and I just could never support him.”

As for being a real Republican, his communications person said this, “After a KPBS profile of Faulconer’s background was published, Manolatos sent an email expressing his displeasure with it for linking Faulconer with the Republican Party.

“If you think Kevin is a conservative, toe-the-line Republican—and it appears you do based on the multiple GOP references and lack of balance—please show me the evidence,” he wrote.

This is the prototypical candidate for the corrupt CAGOP establishment to promote.

Jason Roe worked for Faulconer for years before he and Duane Dichara split their partnership and went their separate ways. My guess is he is headed back to San Diego.

Then there is this about recent Recall entry Ted Gaines: Article here

CURIOUS ADDITION TO CANDIDATES FOR GOVERNOR.

I understand it when rich people have too much money, so they run for Governor.  And< I accept famous people running for Governor, who have no knowledge or experience in California policy, politics or issues, like e Schwarzenegger think being known equates to being a leader.

But Board of Equalization member Ted Gaines, a former Supervisor, Assemblyman and State Senator announced he is running for Governor.  If you never hear of him that is because you do not come from the Placer part of the State.  He has no statewide support, hard time raising money, comes into the race with less than 70 days before the election.  He has no team, has raised no money for the race—and sat on the sidelines while the grassroots statewide got the petitions signed.  I could not find a quote from him asking people to get involved in the Recall—or he actively supported it.

So why get in the race?  Assemblyman Kevin Kiley. Unlike the other candidates, Kiley KNOWS Sacramento policy and politics, has statewide grassroot support, cannot be bought and is building momentum to be the front runner against Faulconer. he took on the Governor in speeches, books and lawsuits–while the others sat back–or were not even paying attention to the Recall, until the volunteers made it happen. Kiley is not parachuting into this race–he has been on the front lines from the beginning.

The goal, it appears is to take votes from Kiley, to help the open borders candidate, Kevin Faulconer.  Divide the conservatives, and help the Schwarzenegger/Whitman wing of the Republican Party.  For someone who has prided himself on being a conservative, this makes no sense.  But, these are the games played. This is why people are disgusted with politics and the Republican Party in California.

In my next HOTT, I will explain how the CRP is skimming money from the REAL Recall, to build staff and finance the Faulconer campaign.  Did you receive TWO snail mail pieces, like I did on Monday from the CRP begging for money, implying the money was going toward the Recall—but instead is going into the General Fund?

It appears I was not alone in my perception of Gaines’ entry. David Stafford Reade has his fingers in everything, with all this stuff to control it is no surprise he still drinks heavily despite getting three DUI in his past. (Reade is Jessica Patterson’s campaign manager and Kevin Faulconer’s “grassroots” coordinator)

Jul 102021
 

Allow me to remind you dear readers, your intrepid blogger NEVER does anything anonymously. However the anonymous author of todays delegate email gets a serious hat tip.

I’ve added emphasis to this long email because it makes salient points across the board.

The email follows and it shreds Her Majesty and the Oligarchy of Controlled Failure. Perhaps this and other issues are why I am getting reports that her majesty has been raging on people…

Dear CAGOP Delegate,

Recently a communication was sent by the CAGOP Chair regarding some upcoming activity on matters to be taken by the Rules Committee, the Executive Committee, and possibly the delegate body. In response to this communication there are a few concerns.

Current Process

The second sentence in the aforementioned correspondence reads as follows:

“As I’m sure you’re aware, our bylaws currently do not outline how we can endorse a candidate in a recall election for a statewide office.”

However, this claim is not entirely accurate. The current CAGOP bylaws include Section 3.02.03 Endorsements for Partisan Elective Office in a Top Two, Special, Election or Recall Election. Under this section, “the Committee shall not endorse, support or oppose any candidate for the Republican nomination or election to any partisan elective office in such a special or top two election, or in a recall or recall replacement election, except candidates for statewide office as provided in 3.02.03(B) below.”

While there is a slight language change to state Primary Election in section (B) with the clarified introductory language referenced above, the plain-letter meaning of this section is to allow the Committee to have a procedure for endorsing candidates, including statewide candidates, in a partisan elective office in such a special or top two election, or in a recall or recall replacement election.

As such, to suggest otherwise is a rather disingenuous way to try to change the rules and lower the threshold for this endorsement, which after articulating numerous other criteria that must be met, is seen in section (7) to be stated as “achieving the sixty (60) percent threshold of votes present and voting at the commencement of any given endorsement voting sessions.”

Suggested Process

If one were to take a different interpretation to the existing bylaws and assert that some necessity of clarification was essential to the process, then why not make this process as simple as possible with a minor addition to clearly identify special and recall elections as being governed by the same process already in place for receiving an endorsement for statewide office (which is already the plain sense understanding of what this section entails)? Why create a whole new section of the bylaws for requirements and a threshold specific only to recall elections? Perhaps, this could be a requested change to the Rules Committee when they meet and do the work of the committee for their recommendation to the Executive Committee?

Which does lead to the question of the scheduling of this Executive Committee meeting.  Article V of the bylaws require that “proposed amendments to the standing rules and bylaws shall be submitted in writing to the Chairman no fewer than forty days prior to a meeting or convention of the Committee, who shall submit them to the Board of Directors within three business days. The Chairman shall refer proposed amendments to the Rules Committee for consideration.”

With this in mind, it would seem that calling for a meeting 40 days and 34 minutes before the scheduled meeting date makes it nearly impossible for anyone to have submitted matters to the Chair for forwarding to the committee if they had been presuming the next scheduled meeting of the Committee to be at the September Fall Convention. While technically there is nothing that precludes this action from being taken, it does just seem to lack full transparency or enabling of involvement by the full delegate body to be a part of the governing process.

While on the subject of involvement by the full delegate body, this raises the most logically inconsistent part of the correspondence. If the Executive Committee ends up acting on the Rules Committee recommendation (which realistically is almost a foregone conclusion), then an endorsement convention will be convened on August 7th for the full delegate body to vote on the gubernatorial candidate endorsement for the September 14th Recall Election. If a full delegate convention can be called to vote on the gubernatorial candidate endorsement, then why are they not being convened to vote on the proposed bylaw changes being recommended by the Rules Committee, particularly in light of the fact that there was almost no opportunity to respond with bylaw proposal submissions on this expeditiously scheduled meeting.

Furthermore, what is the precedent being set by the Executive Committee changing the bylaws without the involvement and vote of the delegate body? What other bylaw changes could be made in the future under a model such as this? Just because a body has the potential authority to take an action, that doesn’t always mean they should. Furthermore, this power entrusted to the Executive Committee was intended for the purpose of action when the full delegate body was unable to meet or make quorum, not with the intent to circumvent their involvement. If the new interpretation of “The Executive Committee is hereby granted all powers and duties of the Committee as provided by law” is to be taken to mean that there is no need for the delegates to make decisions if those decisions do not align with or may contradict the will of the Executive Committee, that could be deeply troubling.

Goal Implications

Beyond the questions of the current bylaw intent and peculiarities surrounding the procedural calendar, the final issue that must be raised is that this action is just entirely self-defeating and a waste of time for the stated and desired goal. The ultimate goal is to see Newsom successfully recalled and replaced by a Republican governor.

The absolute most primary focus should be on the first question of the recall election ballot — Should Governor Gavin Newsom be recalled? While it is not what we want to hear, at present, it is an unmistakable reality that recalling Newsom is a huge hurdle and tremendous longshot to achieve. Newsom’s popularity numbers are not even remotely close to being as low as Governor Davis’s were when his 2003 recall was successful. Every ounce of time, talent, treasure, energy and effort should be on trying to broaden the number of supporters who will submit a ballot voting yes to that first question (and trying to discourage the need for any ballots to even bother to be submitted that would vote no on the question). Without 50%+1 voting yes on the first question, the 2nd question (and who should be endorsed to replace him) is entirely irrelevant (unless you are consultant looking to make money on sending out expensive, glossy mailers touting an absolutely worthless CAGOP endorsement if the first question isn’t successful).

To that end, as Republicans we should learn to stop raining unnecessarily on the parades of our fellow Republicans — while pragmatic realities should be discussed and acknowledged when necessary for the achievement of bigger picture goals — in this case if by some miracle the first question is successful, then there is absolutely no need for majority consensus on the replacement. The top vote-getter is the next governor and to that end, good capitalist principles tell us to let the candidates compete. The harder they work to turn out voters to support them the more voters should turn out to vote yes on the top question. How many times must the CAGOP support a less-than-desirable candidate or withhold support from a candidate they don’t deem worthy to drive down and suppress voter turnout and result in even more dismal results than if they just had stayed out of it?

With that in mind, in this particular race, the best thing delegates can do is vote No Endorsement and let’s drive the turnout up by not alienating multiple sections of the party before they even get their ballots turned in to vote yes for the Recall of the worst governor in California’s history.


This is one of the best anonymous emails I’ve ever seen sent in all my years around the CAGOP.