The Other Casualty at DPOC Last Night

Last night’s DPOC meeting was not a death knell for the party and nor was it a shining moment of leadership. The party’s decision to allow Hoa Van Tran to retain the party’s endorsement is not quite a victory for the campaign, but more of a stay of execution when the voters have their say next week. Perhaps Hoa Van Tran makes it to the run off; perhaps Janet Nguyen makes it going away. Time will tell.

But in times of great concern, friends emerge and imposters expose themselves. In failing to take the concerns of Misha Houser seriously, the Party did a a great injustice to Ms. Houser. But it was her own attorney who threw her under the bus.

Steve Young, the Democratic candidate for Congress in CD-48 against John Campbell, offered the “kumbaya” motion last night that gave the Hoa campaign reason to celebrate.

But Steve is Misha Houser’s lawyer. He had no business getting involved whatsoever on conflict of interest grounds. In offering the motion, Steve not only disappointed many but left many wondering about his ethics. I have to wonder if this is the sort of judgement Steve would display in DC as our Congressman.

Steve owes Misha — and many of us in who are Democrats — an explanation and an apology.

  37 comments for “The Other Casualty at DPOC Last Night

  1. May 28, 2008 at 1:21 pm

    I have known Steve Young for two years, and have had the highest regard for him. His actions last night only increased my regard. He reached out to Hoa to straighten out his campaign, and he reached out to the party to lower the level of acrimony. You can call it “kumbaya politics” if you want. I would call it good politics and good people skills. Lindy and I talked to him after the vote, and while I don’t want to put words in his mouth, I do believe he was very disappointed with Hoa.
    Frank Barbaro has made clear in the past that he is a Hoa supporter. His actions last night were also the proper ones, striving for party unity, and to convince Hoa to mend his ways.
    As a newcomer to this blog, I would really like to know who some of you are. I have been active in the party for five years. I am a member of DNOC, President of the Anaheim Democratic Club, a member of the State Central Committe, and a member of the County Central Committe. I’ve never heard of any of you except Gila, one of the hardest working Democrats in Orange County. Are you active useful people, or do you just blog?

  2. Dan Chmielewski
    May 28, 2008 at 1:27 pm

    Ken — I’ve never heard of you either, but thanks for the bio. http://www.theliberaloc.com/about-us/

    And I think you missed the point of this post. Steve is Misha’s lawyer. There’sa clear conflict of interest in his placing this matter on the agenda. He threw his own client under the bus. If this were me, I’d file charges against Steve with the state bar.

  3. Paul Lucas
    May 28, 2008 at 2:23 pm

    Dan,
    On the point of Conflict of Interest, I would suggest that the Chair of the DPOC endorsement commitee also has a conflct of interest. The fact that the Endorsement Committee Chair works for an organization that endofrsed Janet Nguyen for re-election is clarly a conflict of interest.

    I certainly hope that on June 4th, the party can get together as a group and as individuals to put aside all the bitterness and lfames that this 1st supervisorial race has created.

  4. Dan Chmielewski
    May 28, 2008 at 2:30 pm

    Paul —
    with due respect, I could care less if the Chair of the DPOC endorsement committee sells Botox injections in Newport.

    Steve Young was Misha’s atty: her advocate. She made a great speech and he instead offered aid and comfort to those who hurt her.

    So now that the endorsement vote is behind him, what exactly is yoru role with the Hoa Van Tran campaign?

  5. Paul Lucas
    May 28, 2008 at 2:43 pm

    Dan,
    I do not have any official role in the Hoa Van Tran Campaign. I have an offical role in DPOC Central Committee. While some were working on one side of the issue, I wored on the other side of the issue. I did my very best to keep it civil which was hard at times.

    In retrospect, I do believe that this type of discourse in an organization such as the DPOC is healthy in th elong run, because questions have been raised about our process of endorsement and withdrawl of such. So in the end, I think that the DPOC will be a better organization as the result ofthis dust up.

    Early on in the hurly burly of the BOS 1st District, I got caught up in the emotional aspect of it all and made some comments that I regret now. I belive that in recent weeks many of those including myslef on oppositesides of the issue have begun to use reason and the by laws and the process in place to make out arguements and advance our perspective on the issue. Im glad for it. Because I think that our by laws will eveolve from this to clarify some of the questions and issues that have arisen as a result of this donnybrook.

    In summary, I have no official role in the Hoa Van Tran Campaign. But I do have a role in the 1st Sup District as a resident and as a memeber of the DPOC. My role in that is to see that all parties are dealt with fairly by adding my voice to the discussion as a concerned individual.

  6. V an
    May 28, 2008 at 2:49 pm

    His official role is doing exactly what myself and Mike Schroeder tell him to do. And last night proved once and for all, we own both parties!

  7. May 28, 2008 at 2:52 pm

    Hi Ken, we’ve met once or twice, I’m a frequent commenter here, and a blogger at the OTHER BLOG that Dan doesn’t like mentioned here. Anyway I appreciated your confronting Hoa last night, you said what most of us there were thinking, and I have now hewn last night’s events into allegorical prose (which you will have to find on your own) linking to your Red White and Burke site!

  8. Dan Chmielewski
    May 28, 2008 at 3:36 pm

    To clarify Vern; I don’t like other blog posts to other sites promoted here.

  9. Liar Liar!
    May 28, 2008 at 3:57 pm

    Paul, there is no chair of the endorsement committee of the DPOC. Frank misspoke in April. The incoming chair has never been named. Please check your facts before you speak. In fact, please stop speaking altogether. You have hurt a lot of people with your mischaracterizations in order to defend yourself. You have spread lies that are indefencible.

    You certainly do not act like a leader and a candidate for City Council. Your lack of judgement and leadership will lead to your crushing loss in November. All those who used to call you a friend can no longer depend on you for support. I don’t think you truly realize how much damage you have done to yourself. Your reputation is in shambles. You have attacked Carina Pantone and her husband of all people. People who used to be in your corner. Keep it up Paul. Your actions will lead to dried up endorsements, donations and volunteers. Leaders lead and prosper. Losers accuse and lose. Stop being a loser.

  10. Paul Lucas
    May 28, 2008 at 4:27 pm

    How in th heck did Carina and Jim Pantone get dragged into this?

  11. May 28, 2008 at 5:15 pm

    Dan, did you think to call Steve Young and ask him personally what his intentions were? Or how about calling Misha to find out if she has an issue with what Steve did?

    I’d like to think that Steve deserves the benefit of the doubt and that none of us should jump to conclusion.

    It sounds like I was better off with my food poisoning last night than attending this meeting.

  12. Dan Chmielewski
    May 28, 2008 at 5:18 pm

    Steve has gotten wonderful coverage from this site for some time. I did speak with Misha this morning. She knows nothing of this post. I don’t care if Steve agrees with me or not; Misha spoke her piece and Steve is Misha’s lawyer. He threw her under the bus to sing kumbaya with Hoa Van Tran. I still won’t vote for John Campbell, but Steve only hurt himself here.

  13. Northcountystorm
    May 28, 2008 at 6:03 pm

    I’m with Heather. Dan, before you make a serious charge about someones livlihood and encouraging a client to file an administrative complaint against her lawyer you might want to ask Steve why he did what he did. It’s not like he’s a stranger. This is more Art’s style than yours.

    Does this mean you’re going to be encouraging the Party not to endorse Young?

    I didn’t realize that Steve was Ms. Houser’s attorney. I am not sure what he is representing her for. I see the facts a little diferently than you do. Ms. House spoke in favor of a motion to rescind the endorsement. There was no reasons expressed in the motion that might be favorable to Ms. Houser in future litigation that Mr. Young may be representing her on. In fact, had it passed it might be excluded from a future case or at least the fact would be accompanied by a cautionary instruction from a judge because people might have had different reasons for voting for the rescission. Some may have done it because of the hostile environemnt alleged by Ms. Houser. but others might have voted for it because of the campaign report shortcomings–after all, some were upset that the endorsement wasn’t yanked earlier because of the campaign reporting. In other words, speaking or voting for or against the recission motion does not in itself create a legal conflict with Ms. Houser IMHO. Its unlikely passage might have made her feel better but would do her no good in court.

    Further, the recission motion was D.O.A. It was voted down. Had Steve not only made the motion but spoken persuasively for it the only action taken by the Committee may well have been to reject the recission and reaffirm the endorsement. Hoa comes out totally ahead on that.

    Instead, Steve makes the motion, argues persuasively and the Committee adopts the motion. The motion includes language indicating there was a need to clean up the hostile work environment. In addition I understand that under prodding from Chairman Barbaro, Hoa at the meeting verbally agreed to comply with the Committees resolution. Arguably, Hoa uttered an admission against interest in that the clear inference was that he was acknowledging that a hostile work enviroment existed.

    Now, I don’t know if a) Steve is representing her with regard to the Hoa campaign situation or b) if he was, whether a judge would agree with Steve that hoa’s agreement expressed in the meeting was an admission. But it certainly would give something for Steve to talk about in front of the judge and possibly the jury if there was some litigation. At the very least it puts Hoa on the defensive.Also, it puts the Committee being critical of the conduct of the Hoa campaign instead of just having reaffirmed its support of Hoa.

    I would rather Steve spoke or wrote for himself but the above scenario is at least as valid an inference from the facts of last night as yours. And it doesn’t involve encouraging someone to file an administrative complaint against their lawyer. One could argue that the person who most enjoyed your post was Congressman John Campbell who might know just what to do with a post like yours. With all due respect, I think you’re the one who owes an apology, to Steve. I don’t know all the facts and may change my viewpoint if and when they come forth but until then I won’t be labeling anyone an imposter.

  14. Dan Chmielewski
    May 28, 2008 at 6:24 pm

    Steve is welcome to explain himself here anytime, unedited. And I didn’t say Misha should do that, I said that’s what would do. I am not telling anyone not to vote for Steve. I still plan to. But I won’t be writing him any checks. Heather, could Gary use another one from me? I will send him what I would have sent Steve.

  15. DPOC Member
    May 28, 2008 at 6:44 pm

    Paul, you dragged Carina Pantone in it when you brought up her involvement in Judge Nguyen’s campaign. You accused her of conflict interest. Or did you conveniently forget that? Please stop bringing people down. You are a bad candidate for City Council.

  16. May 28, 2008 at 6:47 pm

    NCS, you weren’t there last night and are operating on hearsay. You’re so convinced that your opinion is the correct one that you’re not paying attention to facts. You insist that others hear your point of view and you repeat it ad nauseum but have no interest in that of others.

    I’ve never in my life known anyone as intellectually stubborn as you. And as you know, in my case that’s saying a LOT.

    If you want to participate in the central committee, run for it. Or at least come to meetings regularly before you spout off about what you think goes on there. Oh, wait, I forgot: you can’t be bothered.

  17. May 28, 2008 at 7:10 pm

    My bad Dan and I have to admit I’m extremely disappointed the DPOC didn’t revoke their endorsement of Tran and it’s unfortunate that Democrats didn’t come out in droves to support Ms. Houser.

    I understand where you are coming from and I’m glad you shared this here. Steve did quite a disservice to his client.

    I heard Misha did an amazing job. It takes a lot courage to stand up against bullies and I admire her for doing the right thing, even if it was a really hard thing to do.

    Thanks Dan

  18. alabaster lentes
    May 28, 2008 at 7:56 pm

    gila

    me thinks you protest to much…you hate in others what you hate in yourself…..you have ablind spot the size of your control freak facist ego….

  19. Carl Weibel
    May 28, 2008 at 7:57 pm

    When are Democrats going to stop eating their own, both nationally and locally? I am not a member of the OC Central Committee, but I went to the meeting last night to see for myself what was going on and why some of my friends were on the internet verbally beating the hell out of each other. In my opinion, Steve Young was a voice of reason last night. He stood up for Democratic unity while at the same time calling on Hoa Van Tran to take control of his campaign and make sure it met certain standards (which sounded exactly like the standards Van Tran’s harshest critics were asking for), which Van Tran agreed to do and the DPOC voted in favor of.

    If Democrats would stick together for once, we would have a pretty good shot in November of winning the Presidency and expanding our lead in both the House and Senate. But I keep hearing about Democrats threatening not to vote for the Democratic nominee if it isn’t their primary candidate. I suspect that mentality is what led to Phil Angelides losing to Arnold Schwarzenegger so badly in 2006. There is nothing wrong with a competitive primary, constructive criticism of Democrats and holding Democrats accountable. However, when it gets to the point where Democrats are smearing fellow Democrats more brutally than any Republican, something is terribly wrong in my opinion.

  20. May 28, 2008 at 8:07 pm

    Carl – I don’t think any party should tolerate the intimidation and harassment of campaign workers. There has to be a line and this is one of those issues where the DPOC should have zero tolerance.

  21. Carl Weibel
    May 28, 2008 at 8:13 pm

    Heather-My impression last night was that Steve Young feels the same way, which is why he called on Hoa Van Tran to agree to those standards. If the allegations made against the people in Van Tran’s campaign are proven to be true, then the people responsible should be prosecuted. I don’t think any of us disagree on that.

  22. May 28, 2008 at 8:14 pm

    Heather,

    I agree that intimidation and harassment have no place in our society. However with that being said you have already convicted Hoa and his campaign of this without even having a trial. You have chosen to side with the Hoa bashing brigade after only hearing one side of the issue.

    If this is true I certainly hope Misha follows through with a lawsuit. If it is not true I hope Hoa and his campaign do the same. Just because a mob says something is true doesn’t automatically make it so.

    What has become of certain folks around here. They have taken on the tactics of the right wing. Union bashing, race baiting and presumed guilt are becoming the norm around here. Too bad they didn’t show this side earlier and perhaps we could have purged the central committee of this element.

  23. May 28, 2008 at 9:40 pm

    Dan,

    Were you at the meeting last night? I don’t recall seeing you there. I know Chris was there. And Gila. But I did NOT see you there.

    At any rate, it is really annoying when you play at being a lawyer. You are not an attorney. Steve is and I am sure that he would not do anything to jeopardize his license.

    Steve knew that the motion to pull the endorsement was going to fail. Hell we all knew that. There are too many crazies in your party for a common sense motion to succeed. And it made sense to pull the endorsement.

    So Steve submitted a motion that put handcuffs on the out of control Hoa Van Tran. Now he cannot hire criminals. And he has promised to file his financial reports accurately and on time.

    How does this undermine Steve’s role in helping Misha? Steve stepped up and made sure his party accomplished something, instead of having nothing to show for the night.

    BTW, it was pretty damn obvious that Steve was carrying water for Barbaro. The clearly cut a deal in advance. Perhaps Barbaro offered to throw his support to Obama? It makes sense to cut and run, far away, from Hillary Clinton now that she has foot in mouth disease.

  24. Northcountystorm
    May 28, 2008 at 9:49 pm

    Gila- Did you go to the same bar that Chris went to Tuesday night? You folks lose a fair fight and you start lashing out at people instead of accepting the fact that the majority did not agree with your position. GET OVER IT.

    And by the way, I did see some of the meeting, coming over after my meeting adjourned. I also saw some of the video footage and I talked to a few people about what happened. As for hearsay, you mean like the information you heard about from Ms. Houser about what happened in the Hoa campaign? Or is hearsay acceptable if it fits into your particular point of view and for no other? I’m always open to facts but most of what I’ve been hearing since the vote are personal attacks.

    Stubborn? Let me see, I raked Sean over the coals for the language he used describing you and Chris(you’re welcome by the way), gave Chris credit for his work but told him he shouldn’t be attacking others for having a different point of view and told Dan he should have picked up the phone and called Steve Young before sending an in-kind contribution to Rep. John Campbell in the form of his post. if that’s intellectually stubborn, I plead guilty. And none of the above was repetitive .

    Finally, let me remind you something about the Central Committee. It’s not a south Orange County Democratic club. You don’t run it. It represents a broad spectrum of views, a lot broader than what is represented in the LOC blogpen. I know it’s easy to tell people who just want to express an opinion to either run for the committee or shut up. But the fact is that this is an elected body and all of the almost 500,000 Orange County Democrats have a right to participate by criticising, supporting, suggesting , contributing or otherwise make their opinions known. Who died and made you queen to say otherwise. And what’s worse, you know that I have meetings that conflict with the Central Committee but you threw that line out anyway. And you know that the Chair and the Executive Director seek my advice and counsel, as have you. What you did is best described as a cheap shot.

    Your folks come accross as sore losers. You are all, especially you, much better than that.

  25. May 28, 2008 at 10:19 pm

    On the matter of Steve Young making the motion…

    It seems that he has to only person willing to make the motion. This was in an effort to have some admonition of Hoa Van Tran and his failure to take control and responsibility for his campaign. In the end even that was watered down by those who preferred that aboslutely nothing be done. Seems to me NCS, you may be in that court of people.

    Oh well. Hoa will be toast in a few days and everyone will soon forget that only 17 people on the central committee gave a crap to do anythin at all.

  26. WTF?
    May 28, 2008 at 11:03 pm

    Geez. When did the DPOC central committee become a bunch of women bashers? Truly appalling. But just to clarify a couple of things. Steve Young is not Misha’s lawyer, at least not anymore. She is looking for representation when Loser Hoa Van Tran sues her. (Good luck with that one, you moron.)

    The unions, which include Patrick Kelly and Florice Hoffman brokered a compromise last night with Frank on the motion Steve Young brought forward. What’s sad is that Florice was too much of a coward to bring it to the floor. Steve Young was the only one who would take a stand. Florice has no cajones. She doesn’t deserve to be on school board and is a very weak candidate.

  27. May 28, 2008 at 11:28 pm

    ncs,

    The fact remains that Hoa’s campaign mistreated several female staffers and one of them cried last night as she talked about the abuse she suffered. I thought you Dems valued women and did not treat them this way? Perhaps I was wrong?

    Gila and Alicia were awesome last night. They don’t deserve to be slammed. They stood up for what is right. You on the other hand seem to be saying that everything is OK and the crazies who run your party should continue to do so.

    You people need to take your party back. What I saw last night was a dysfunctional organization full of tired cluelass hacks with just a few brave people standing against a rising tide of ignorance.

    The OC GOP, by comparison, is full of evil people, but they are not nuts, for the most part. Just evil and wrong. What I saw last night resembled the crazies at the California Coalition for Immigration Reform.

    At least the OCYDs were smart enough to take away Hoa’s endorsement. They need to take over your party and boot the babosos…

  28. Dan Chmielewski
    May 29, 2008 at 12:03 am

    Art. I was not there last night. I was taking care of the kids and getting updates from Chris. I watched video of the event last night. You do not have to be a lawyer to note conflict of interest. You don’t like me playing lawyer? I am not trying to. But I won’t be lectured to by someone trying to play journalist. NCS, I would have written the same thing about Steve even if I bothered to call him. I’m not trying to play sore loser here, but his motion has no teeth and is not enforceable. I have spoken with Edgardo and Misha. I believe Misha.

  29. May 29, 2008 at 8:02 am

    I guess, that I am willing to agree that it would have been better for someone other than Steve Young to make the motion to pet puppies, but not hug them. However, that was better than having no motion at all rebuking the alleged actions of Reynoso, the clear failure of the campaign to report contributions and expenditures in a timely and accurate manner, and Hoa’ obvious inability to take personal control of his campaign.

    In the end, the people who opposed any action watered that motion down to nothing, since they wanted NOTHING to be done. Thank you Charlie La Chance, Florice Hoffman, and Diane Singer (to name a few) for your position that NO action should be taken at all. You make me so proud to be a Democrat (snark!).

  30. liberalocdem
    May 29, 2008 at 8:49 am

    respect for women needs to come from within the party. Somebody should ask former interns at the dpoc how they felt being bossed around by now executive director melahat rafiei. Respect for everyone needs to come from all levels and party leadership should give that example.

  31. To Clarify
    May 29, 2008 at 9:45 am

    Respect for women needs to come from the candidates as well. (Are you paying attention Mr. Lucas and Mr. Reynoso?) I would rather have Ms. Rafiei bossing me around than have Mr. Reynoso throwing chairs at people in the DPOC office. The guy is a freaking psycho!

  32. May 29, 2008 at 10:02 am

    I’m at a complete loss. I don’t see how one is to gain anything by making up claims, especially with a gaggle of witnesses. I really am glad that the Young Democrats stepped up and revoked their endorsement. That is what DPOC should have done.

  33. May 29, 2008 at 10:29 am

    I am really disgusted by the above comment by “liberalocdem.”

    I was speaking this morning to a wise and non-political friend on the subject of nasty jabs posted anonymously on blogs and the internet in general. She had an interesting explanation for it, remarking that people say nasty things anonymously either to get rumors started or to hurt people’s feelings. Or both.

    Clearly that’s the only intent of the above comment, which has absolutely no basis in fact.

  34. Sean H. Mill
    May 29, 2008 at 10:38 am

    “with a gaggle of witnesses”

    Heather,

    If this is the case Misha should have no problem winning in a court of law. She has been proclaimed the winner in the “court of public opinion” by a biased jury. We shall see what happens in the “real” courts.

    I say if the truth and the facts are on her side then she should produce them in a court of law and not cherry pick information to give to a partisan Republican blogger.

    The same goes for Hoa and his campaign. They need to follow thru with the legal action they threatened. If the truth and the facts are on their side then they should prevail at trial.

    Just because Misha says its so doesn’t make it true and just because Hoa and Edgardo says its so doesn’t make it true. Let the courts decide not a bunch of biased over excited bloggers.

  35. Heather Pritchard
    May 29, 2008 at 12:04 pm

    Sean – Let the courts decide not a bunch of biased over excited bloggers.

    I’m sorry Sean, you have no case for being objective here, you are one of the most excited bloggers about this issue.

  36. Northcountystorm
    May 29, 2008 at 12:30 pm

    Art–I know nothing besides the DPOC coming out and endorsing Janet would please you but for once you didn’t need to stir the pot–plenty of that going on before you joined the thread. First let me observe as has already been pointed out not so gently that I am not a member of the Committee. I might have come up with a different solution but there were not many good options for the Committee Tuesday night. The one they chose IMHO was the best of the 3 offerered(although Chris please note that I would not have supported the amendment that included other contests at the end). I never said nor will I pobably ever say that everything was ok. But the sun rose Wednesday. People are going on with their lives. People got angry and some of them will cool down. Some won’t. Life goes on. A political decision was made by a political body. As Heather would say ” End of story.”

    I don’t accept your premise that the “crazies” whom you don’t identify run the party and it needs to be taken back. or that women somehow aren’t valued. 3 of the 4 officers are women, including Gila. A substantial number of the members are women. Some members of the Committee felt the best response in light of Ms. Houser’s complaint and other complaints was to rescind the endorsement. More members felt that the best response in light of Ms. Houser’s complaint and other complaints was to be critical of an endorsed Democrat a week before an election and in your words ” put the handcuffs on the out of control Hoa.”

    It is unprecedented for the Democratic Party of Orange County to be so critical of an endorsed Democrat in a district critical to the Democratic Party(or for that matter probably any district). I don’t know if Janet’s campaign will send another nuclear-tipped torpedo Hoa’s way(apologies to Jubal) since they may believe the SS Hoa Van tran is listing so badly it might go down before the torpedo hits the target. I don’t think this was a toothless response at all. The only effective enforcement of any one of these resolutions would be by Janet’s campaign so she has enough to mail out if she wants to. I would further add that the Party’s own bylaws encourage the financial support of the Party to its endorsed non-partisan candidates. That has not happened here and in defense of the DPOC I would submit that it was the actions of the Hoa campaign that led to that decision. Again, hardly a toothless decision when accompanied by no financial support, not even a fraction of the funds dumped into the same district for Tom Umberg.

    You may dismiss the members who solidly defeated the motion to rescind and call them names; that’s what you do Art with people whom you disagree with. I respect the people who voted to pull the endorsement–I just understand that this was not a court of law but a political body which made a political decision–that while it would register its disapproval based on the criticisms heretofore discussed it was not going to abandon a Vietnamese Democrat on standards that had never been applied to any other Democrat.

    Like I said, it wasn’t a great night for anybody but I think the DPOC did the least harm which is sometimes all one can expect from a quasi-legislative body.

    Dan–see my comments about toothless and enforcability above. You of course are entitled to your opinion and I’m not sure I would have gotten up there myself if I was in Steve’s shoes but I’d like to hear his take before I second guess him for the reasons expressed in an earlier comment. I do think its unfortunate you didn’t call Steve and unfortunate that you would prejudge what your opinion would be had you made the call. You made some very serious charges about Steve. I believe fairness would necessitate you at least attempt to get his side of the story before pushing the button.

  37. May 29, 2008 at 5:10 pm

    ncs,

    Excuse me but how many of the crazies LIVE IN SANTA ANA? You people don’t know what it is like to live in a town that has been in a state of gang warfare for years. You don’t have to deal with the graffiti, the shootings, the murders, the violence, etc. But WE do.

    To make matters worse, the public now knows that your party doesn’t give a sh*t about women, or at least that is the message your party sent out at this meeting. The bottom line is, Reynoso should have been fired. He wasn’t. Instead Hoa and his thuggish boss Do Phu BLAMED THE VICTIMS. It was incredible.

    Your party certainly had the right to be stupid and not pull the endorsement. I can assure you that the OC GOP is very happy about that.

    The working people of Santa Ana do NOT like gangs. And now they know that the DPOC does. Or at least that appears to be the message…

Comments are closed.