Powered by Max Banner Ads 

VOC report target should have been Novack, not Brandman

Jordan Brandman

Jordan Brandman

The Voice of OC reported a story on a confidential report commissioned by the Anaheim Union High School District on Friday that seems to go overboard on accusations that Brandman used a district office to do campaign work; a closer read of the report shows that the VOC buried the lede and the real target of the December 2014 report was Superintendent Elizabeth Novack and her alleged mistreatment of employees at the District’s office.

The VOC story doesn’t mention this in the lede paragraph and offers no photos of Novack while using a picture of Brandman to lead the piece off.  Reporter Adam Elmarek also fails to disclose the author of the report, Daniel Shinoff, of the Los Angeles Law Firm Stutz Artiano Shinoff and Holtz, had been suspended from further legal work for the San Diego School Districts in March according to a report by the San Diego Union Tribune and would be the subject of a malpractice lawsuit by the San Ysidro School District .

From the Union Tribune story:

A law firm that does legal work for school districts across San Diego County has been suspended from new assignments by the agency at the Office of Education that taps attorneys for certain liability cases.

In suspending the Stutz Artiano Shinoff and Holtz firm, the office cited a decision by the San Ysidro School District last week to sue the firm for malpractice and file a complaint with the California State Bar.

“Given the seriousness of the allegations against Mr. Shinoff… staff felt it best to suspend assignment of new lawsuits to the Stutz firm until the malpractice suit and bar complaint are resolved,” said Music Watson, spokeswoman for the Office of Education.

The San Ysidro school board accused law firm partner Dan Shinoff of failing to bring the board a settlement offer in a case that eventually resulted in a $12 million judgment in a breach-of-contract complaint by a solar panel company.

To read the actual report posted by VOC versus the actual story has led sources to speculate VOC is unduly attacking Brandman because former State Senator Joe Dunn, an early financial backer for the Voice of OC, is rumored to be making a run for Congress.  I’m not buying that because of the high ethical standards of VOC publisher Norberto Santana, but that hasn’t stopped the gossip machine that Voice broke the story of a December 2014 report now to go after Brandman.  Elmarek’s story offers no explanation as to how they acquired the report or when.

But the report on Brandman’s activities are not solid proof anything improper was done.  Brandman was a member of the AUHSD at the time and had every legal right to use the office.  In addition, of the items he asked staff to print out, there is absolutely no specifics about what documents they were.  Unless those documents were related to rules about running for city council, any documents pertaining to anything in the city of Anaheim would be completely in context with Brandman’s work for the district.  Very little of the current report has to do with Brandman with most of the references from witnesses acknowledging he was in the office and his presence was known.

Asking IT staff to help stream the Pandora music service is about as serious a “wrongdoing” as the report gets. Especially if you prefer Spotify (and if your IT staff can’t figure out streaming, time to find new people).


  66 comments for “VOC report target should have been Novack, not Brandman

  1. David Vasquez
    August 2, 2015 at 8:46 pm

    The “unnamed”, “protected”, “anonymous” sources too often used by Adam have become reason to question his credibility and motives.

    It seems every sensational story there relies on uncorroborated comments or “off the record” remarks.

    I can’t even understand what this piece was to be, other than a hit against a probable front runner in a congressional race.

  2. Gustavo Arellano
    August 3, 2015 at 5:14 pm

    This “blog” has turned into a relay race between Dan and his good friend, Matt Cunningham—you can look it up!

    • August 4, 2015 at 11:56 pm

      Any buyers for your paper yet? I hear $1.5 million is all it takes. But there’s all that debt you carry right?

  3. Cynthia mae Curran
    August 4, 2015 at 8:46 am

    Never liked Matt Cunningham he is the no tax republican that complains about illegal immigration but supports industries that are more likely to hire them like Disneyland and Hotels. For example, maids, cooks, janitors and so forth are more likely to be here illegality. Construction at the lower levels too but the biggest occupation group is Leisure and Hospitality that Mr Cunningham always supports giving tax breaks to. Anaheim has almost zero high tech, almost zero financial district thanks to the resort district that Mr Cunningham supports and he complains that Anaheim has a lot of low wage workers. On the Eastside of Anaheim there are warehouses, Factories, Call Centers and so forth not just Hotels and restaurants.

  4. Randy Roddy
    August 4, 2015 at 2:53 pm

    Yeah, too bad Novack isn’t running for Congress in Orange County.

    Poor little Jordan is going to be receiving a lot of unflattering attention soon, especially when voters learn Daly paid him for an unfinished, completely plagiarized “report.”

    • Greg Diamond
      August 4, 2015 at 3:03 pm

      What??? Daly did WHAT???

      Did you hear what he said, proprietor? Are you going to let him say that here?

      (Steps back, waits for reaction — or, better yet, lack of one.)

      • August 4, 2015 at 11:50 pm

        My record on free speech is better than yours counselor. It takes a lot to ban someone here

        • junior
          August 6, 2015 at 7:03 am

          I was banned by Diamond at the Orange Juice blog because I referred him to a website which suggested several reasons why people hate people like him. That must have hit too close to home – real tough cookie that Diamond.

          • Greg Diamond
            August 6, 2015 at 11:36 am

            Nope, that’s not why.

            • junior
              August 6, 2015 at 2:56 pm

              Bullshit – that is exactly why & you know it tough guy.

              • Rick Clark
                August 6, 2015 at 5:42 pm

                Amen Junior! He dishes it out but can’t take it. When I challenged him on his new, half-assed blog about Brea… banned! When I challenged him on his buddy’s pulp-laden juice blog… banned again.

                He baits folks into pissing contests that drag on so long I’m surprised there is a drought left in California. He’s always good for a couple thousand words, which is quite an accomplishment given the complete aversion he has to using facts.

                • Greg Diamond
                  August 7, 2015 at 1:27 pm

                  You have driven me to extreme lengths, sir: I’m going to call our host by his real name.

                  Dan, would you please solidly embrace the sentiments of this “liberal” commenter (for whom, if I’m not mistaken, you have also served as a source)? It would make it that much easier to discredit you among those people who haven’t yet caught on to your game.

                  Yes, as anyone can tell from here and the Anaheim Blog and OC Weekly and the old FFFF blog, I immediately fold up and run whenever I’m challenged. You’re ridiculous.

                  I can go look it up, but as I recall the last post you were allowed on my blog was one in which you baselessly defamed my daughter. Going after one’s kids, as our host can tell you, is generally considered out of bounds — but maybe he’s going to rewrite the rules here to your benefit. I can’t recall what our host’s rules are regarding profanity — he clearly doesn’t mind insults — so I’ll just say that I have no obligation to respect a walking sack of congealed excrement like you.

                • August 7, 2015 at 5:21 pm

                  Greg, I’m not your monkey… people make up their own opinions about you with little help from me. As far as Mr. Clark’s source, source of what exactly? There’s plenty of stuff about you online.

                  You are quick to ban those whose speech you don’t like on your blog. You are quick to shout out “defamation” when you excel at defaming people yourself. If the blogosphere is about debate, you fail miserably.

                  Mr. Clark needs no help from me to make up his mind about you. He and I had a couple of brief phone calls to discuss link exchanges on our respective blogs.

              • Greg Diamond
                August 7, 2015 at 1:19 pm

                How typical of you to claim that you know better what was in my mind than I do.

                It was a long accretion of bad behavior that finally came to a head. That wasn’t one of them, because I found that particular jab to be pathetic enough to be funny.

                I’d post your “please let me back” emails (followed by your “sour grapes” email when I wouldn’t), but I really don’t feel the any need to embarrass you beyond what you do yourself.

                Enjoy your time here on the “Liberal OC,” which seems to endorse your “liberal” viewpoints.

                • Junior
                  August 7, 2015 at 6:12 pm

                  Mr. Diamond – You sir are a liar – a pathetic excuse for a human being liar.

                • August 7, 2015 at 11:44 pm

                  What we endorse here Greg is a comments section that allows readers a chance to voice their opinions. Unlike you who bans those he doesn’t like or screams defamation while carrying on defamation. Junior and I disagree about many things but we agree on big things like family, friends, and faith and how that shapes us as people.

                • Greg Diamond
                  August 8, 2015 at 1:29 am

                  Michael Tardif Jr. (he says that I can out him anytime, by the way): given that you take pride in playing “head games” with people no one (at least of good faith and sense) is going to believe you when you call someone a liar.

                  I’m not going to bother with our host’s delusional portrayal of what he thinks he has here. The sort of “nanny-nanny boo-boo” that pervades this place hardly counts as “opinions.”

  5. Anton Marc
    August 5, 2015 at 6:19 pm

    Misdirection much?
    The report clearly investigates Mr. Brandman’s conduct and finds he was misappropriating public resources of the School District. Whether there was a second, and perhaps larger, target to investigation is largely irrelevant.
    It is also past for the course that Dan attacks the attorney who conducted the investigation based upon another school district contending the attorney committed malpractice. First, that is an allegation of wrongdoing. So, in essence, Dan is attacking the results of an in depth investigative report and its conclusions by saying “someone totally unrelated to the matter is alleging that the attorney who conducted the investigation committed malpractice on an entirely differrent matter.” Or, in other words, allegations of incompetence in another matter, by a different client, are being used to attack documented evidence that Mr. Brandman did, in fact, commit the act of which he is accused. Alleged wrongdoing used to prove the allegations in one case disprove the allegations in an entirely different matter. Unspecified allegations at that. Whew. Dan. You bring Ad Hominem to a new level. Classy.
    One would like to think that you would at least be concerned about the obvious, repeated, and verified misconduct by Mr Brandman as a public servant. No, I am km of referring to disputes regarding (bad) policy decisions he has made, or whether he is is barman for Disney and big corporate interests. Those are at least issues of values we can politically disagree on. What I am referring to is (1) using school resources for his private purposes ( misappropriating public resources) as a sitting School Board Trustee; (2) taking public funds for a study and report he never completed until caught (theft of county tax payer funds); (3) Overt plagiarism in a submitted partial initial draft of said report, said plagiarism being committed while an elected trustee of the school board (plagiarism as an elected EDUCATIONAL TRUSTEE); (4) appointing a openly bigoted, anti-Latino minuteman to as his appointed representative on a committee to study whether Latinos are being disenfranchised by the city of Anaheim and whether the existing districts should be changed to ensure Latinos are not disenfranchised (kind of like asking Benjamin Neten-yahoo if Palestinians are disenfranchised) . . . we could go on, but the point is made.
    At some point, allegations are not simply allegations. They are a pattern and practice of corrupt practices that reveal a rotten core. Sure, you can look at the surface and shine it up, and deflect people attention by saying “I hear rumor the bananas are green,” but eventually, Dan don’t you want to at least acknowledge the apple isn’t what it is painting itself to be? If you are a grocer, do you want to put that apple out in the “fresh fruit” display? More apt, as you hold yourself out as an ostensible food critic of the democratic political world of OC, if you see all this evidence of cockroach and vermin infestation at Chez Brandman, does it enhance your credibility to attack the Public Health Inspector who wrote up the cockroach infestation by claiming someone alleges he missed a cockroach infestation somewhere else?
    While I am positive you will simply respond with nothing more than ad hominem attacks on me to deflect from these points, as you do with all others who comment on your blog and disagree with you, why dont you aspire for more? Why not address each of these points? Say why they make him your candidate for Loretta Sanchez’s seat?
    C’mon, Dan. Defy expectations.

    • Anton Marc
      August 5, 2015 at 8:16 pm

      I KNEW you had a sense of humor!

      • Anton Marc
        August 6, 2015 at 8:24 am

        THat is just SO WEIRD! Yesterday when I posted the above comment, Dan had posted a reply telling me to “Learn how to spell Netanyahu.” Today, his post is removed, leaving the above post dangling, inexplicable. Dan, when did you become self-editing?

    • Ryan Cantor
      August 5, 2015 at 10:41 pm



    • August 6, 2015 at 10:41 am

      Bravo, you encapsulated the problem of the Amanda Edinger appointment better than me and Jason did when we broke the story. For years now, Dan has been promising (partly at Ricardo Toro’s insistence) to confront Jordan on that question, but we’ve NEVER heard back on that and had started to forget. Thanks for the reminder.

      By the way don’t you know how to spell Netanyahu? LOL kidding…

      • Anton Marc
        August 10, 2015 at 8:46 pm

        Well, seriously, what can he say?
        Excuse No. 1: “She wasn’t my appointment. ” WHY IT FAILS: So obviously does not fly, won’t bother.
        Excuse No. 2. “I did not know about her views. How could I? Do you really think I would do that? ” (Sprinkle liberally with “some of my best friends are Latino!” and feigned indignation at the suggestion that he appointed her knowing her views). WHY IT FAILS: Seriously, does this really need explanation? Either (a) He was so disinterested, or placed so little importance in the Citizen’s Review Committee that he completely failed to perform even the most cursory review of his appointee, or (b) he knew the Citizens Review Committee was a joke (so doesn’t even bother to pretend it matters), or (c) He literally entrusted his appointees to GOP members known for their anti-Latino sentiments, or (d) he knew all along, and just did not care.
        He loses either way. The bottom line is that he either knew, or was so politically stupid as to fail to vet his appointee to a high profile, ethnically sensitive, latino/anti-latino charged issues committee literally created to evaluate whether Latinos were disenfranchised by the existing Anaheim voting districts.
        Which is really more likely? Do either really say anything positive about him? Can you really defend him either way?
        That is why NO ONE who supports him addresses or defends this.
        One more cockroach at Chez Brandman.

        • August 10, 2015 at 10:22 pm

          Again, the post is about the investigation and report, not a political appointment. Brandman’s reference in the report is not its focus. There will be districts in Anaheim, and anyone who doesn’t come out to vote is disenfranchised. There were two Latinos on the ballot in 2014. Where were the votes?

    • August 9, 2015 at 3:18 pm

      I wanted to give a thoughtful response to your comment but was out of town on business all last week. My post was about the report commissioned by the school district. Period.

      Brandman’s record on the city council has nothing to do with the report. Brandman’s consulting work for the County of Orange and the report he was paid to complete have nothing to do with the report by the School District. Brandman’s appointments as a city council member have nothing to do with the report by the school district.

      The report itself is inconclusive of evidence Brandman is alleged to have done that proves anything. Again, he had a compete right to use that office. If you want to dig him for anything, it’s using IT staff to stream a music service.

      All of this came out to voters prior to the election; nothing new in this report. Brandman was the highest vote getting in the 2012 election. Brandman’s record on the school board was pretty impressive.

      • In less than 10 years, AUHSD Academic Performance has grown 112 points, the second-highest gain in Orange County
      • He votd for five straight balanced budgets
      • Oxford Academy became the number one school in California
      • Several schools achieved California Distinguished schools status and national acclaim
      • AUHSD is the first district in California to defer developer impact fees for residential development – a move that both created jobs and helped local businesses
      • Voted refinance bonds obligation commitments that saved taxpayers millions
      • Dramatic improvement for AUHSD’s flag ship school, Anaheim High School; State Academic Performance Index achievement by 230 point in the last decade.
      • First district in Orange County to allow students to earn the State Seal of Biliteracy – a priority for the Chambers of Commerce. Hundreds of seniors each year are earning the Seal of Biliteracy for attaining a high level of proficiency in speaking, reading, and writing in one or more languages in addition to English
      • Re-designated thousands of students from limited English proficient to fluent English proficient

      As for projection, I think you’re confusing me with the people at CATER who lose court cases but still insist on some moral victory or that the judge was loopy and ignored their righteous arguments. The law firm that authored this report is under fire from another district for possible malpractice; it’s worth noting as much as its worth noting that frequen CATER “friend” Cory Briggs is losing cases in San Diego.

      Brandman’s record outside of his school district job and the limitations of the report are irrelevant to your argument. The school district report offers no opinion or evidence about anything Brandman did on the city council or for work done on behalf of Tom Daly’s office.

      • Anton Marc
        August 9, 2015 at 11:07 pm

        Wow. Where do I start?
        1. Brandman served on the AUHSD from 2008-2012. 4 years, not 10. so, all this talk of 10 year achievements is a little illogical and far fetched.
        2. Oxford Academy wasn’t created during Brandman’s time on AUHSD. Nor did it achieve its taking because of anything Brandman did. It was ranked 4th by U.S. News and World Reports in 2009, within one year of Brandman first being sworn as an AUHSD trustee. Crediting him for Oxford Academy’s achievement is an offense to Superintendent Mike Matsuda and all the dedicated teachers and administrators that actually worked for years to build and achieve that success. OVERALL OFFENSIVENESS RATING: 9.5.

        3. It is equally offensive to credit Brandman with 10 year arcs in improvement, especially when his was limited at best to 4 of the 10 years, and the middle of as well. Again, an insult to the e teachers and administrators who made the achievements. At best, be can be credited with not derailing an ongoing improvement, and maybe being 1 in 5 making the votes to financially keep the schools on track. Similarly, voting for balanced budgets isn’t so hard when they ask are, and he certainly couldn’t have had a whole lot to do with 5 in 4 years, so passing on the first (he had just arrived) and the last (what with the whole running for city council, campaigning for Tom Daly as well, writing that tax payer funded study (wait . . . Ok, that did not take any real time)), again, overstating actual achievements attributable to him.

        • August 10, 2015 at 2:12 pm

          well, I agree with the premise the education system takes more than one individual. But a principal can’t do it without a great staff and teachers can’t do it without broad support and the school board needs to manage it all; Brandman was certainly there and deserves his share of the credit. Brandman was better respected among the teachers than you give him credit for; he was a steady attendee at many community events. Just try to get him on the phone when the football teams are playing….

      • Anton Marc
        August 9, 2015 at 11:19 pm

        Overall, Dan, your points sound like someone trying to take a lot of credit for things they didn’t personally do, or basking in the glow of other’s glories. As Brandman has little no humility, my guess is that these are his talking points. They are beneath you. And that is actually meant as a compliment.

        Talk to the teachers in the district, you well find he was not that fondly thought of. Certain political members (gullible ones) thought he was fine, but the masses thought little of him then, even less now.

        And you can’t seriously be crediting him for Measure Z . . .

        • August 10, 2015 at 12:51 am

          My research, not his talking points…but nice projection on your part. You don’t like Jordan. I get that. But the point of the piece is there’s little actual evidence he did anything wrong by using that office and the bulk of the report is focused elsewhere. That isn’t reflective of Adam’s story. I invite you to read the report again and tell me how many paragraphs are written before Brandman is even named?

      • Anton Marc
        August 10, 2015 at 8:52 pm

        I am totally unfamiliar with CATER (whether that is good or bad, I do not know). I cannot project that of which I am largely unaware. By way of clarification, I obviously have seen reference to them in this blog, but have had no interest our inventive to really read up on them. I do not see the relevant to this discussion, however.

  6. Anton Marc
    August 5, 2015 at 6:55 pm

    And, Dan, your “Sources” (unnamed, of course)- Jordan? His Campaign people? Why the mystery?
    Of course. Jordan.
    Paranoia will destroy ya. . .

  7. Marc Shoban
    August 6, 2015 at 8:12 pm

    Is this the same Greg Diamond who has NEVER had a job for longer than four (4) years?
    I suppose if you count his latest run as an “workers rights attorney”/”blogger”/”community activist”/”journalist”/”good government whatever” thats true.

    However, looking back over Gregs life (according his Linkndin, FB, google) past he is really unremarkable. He spent his formative years (20’s) in school. He worked breifly in his thirties (rode some elephants in India or some BS). Greg has no real experience save a three year stint at a NYC Law Office. He worked for Jimmy Carters kid in his LOSING campaign for Senate (LOSING AGAIN).

    GREG HAS A PH.d a Columbia Law degree and can’t seemingly make ends meet in ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA????? WTF? This guy is like Rick says “looking for a plaintiff”. Or his is just a BIG FAT LOSER. Greg of course,along with Vern will always say they are “”working for the people”.
    As they say on AMERICAN AIRLINES: Put your mask on before helping others”
    Thats good advice GD. Get your own house in order. Then start bullying others.

    Play hopscotch with your life and up in a Brea apartment with no job and PH.d !!

    • August 7, 2015 at 5:31 pm

      Ah, go take a short walk on a long pier, Shoban.

      Yes, that’s right, I did not malaprope, Mr. Chmielewski, a short walk on a long pier. So that you end up stuck halfway down the pier for months and get all grizzled and weathered and have to learn to fish and beg for smokes.

      • August 7, 2015 at 7:19 pm

        Of course, you’re speaking from experience Vern.

    • August 7, 2015 at 7:21 pm

      Marc, you’ve sent Greg to check the “who’s looking at my profile” link on LinkedIn to determine if you’re real or not. He’s becoming unhinged about commenters and will more than likel cry “defamation”

      • Greg Diamond
        August 8, 2015 at 1:45 am

        Nah, I don’t care enough to check LinkedIn. But I was curious about the name, so I Googled it. “Marc Shoban” yielded seven results, all of which were to the same text with comments to this blog (attached to stories going back to 2010 or so, which just confuses me.)

        Mark Shoban: 5 people by that name in the U.S., 3 in Arizona (seemingly the same person) and 2 in Florida. My bet is that if this were a real person, it would be an Arizonan.

        No one named “Marcus Shoban.” At that point I got bored. Just another anonymous poster, although better disguised than most.

        While doing the first search, I did find this, though, with some profound thoughts on anonymity: http://www.theliberaloc.com/2010/05/27/anonymous-bloggers-for-nelson/

    • Greg Diamond
      August 8, 2015 at 1:50 am

      No, that’s not me. I worked a lot in my 30s. Keep on researching! Your time is not valuable!

  8. junior
    August 8, 2015 at 3:49 pm

    Nelson & Diamond – Why do you two idiots bother the good people on the LOC blog with your blathering? Did you run out of commenters due to Diamond banning all those with differing opinions? Go back to your circle jerk at the OJ blog.

    • Greg Diamond
      August 8, 2015 at 4:24 pm

      I’ve banned you, Fiala, and Dick Clark. Maybe a few others long ago. Thanks, but we’re doing fine for commenters. It’s the “Broken Windows” approach.

      • junior
        August 9, 2015 at 7:28 am

        “O” circle – “J” jerk – the Circle Jerk Blog.

        • Greg Diamond
          August 9, 2015 at 11:56 am

          “Circle jerk”? You wear your homosexual panic well. Dan, discipline your reactionary disciple.

          • August 9, 2015 at 2:08 pm

            Greg — I am not your monkey and you cannot tell me what to do here. And for the record, there is a band called “The Circle Jerks” and there’s this definition from Urban Dictionary.com which I believe Junior is applying to you and Vern and your merry band of commenters who you haven’t banned:

            “When a bunch of blowhards – usually politicians – get together for a debate but usually end up agreeing with each other’s viewpoints to the point of redundancy, stroking each other’s egos as if they were extensions of their genitals (ergo, the mastubatory insinuation). Basically, it’s what happens when the choir preaches to itself.”

            • Greg Diamond
              August 10, 2015 at 6:05 pm

              I love that you keep on defending Reactionary Mike Tardis. And even more, I love that you trace Tardis’s usage of this term back to … a band name! That’s so precious! You Googled a bit too well there.

              I certainly can’t accuse your blog of being a “circle jerk.” To be that, one first needs to have a circle.

              • August 10, 2015 at 6:50 pm

                You have teenage daughters and don’t know the band? Really? I believe Mike’s reference stems from Urban Dictionary which was pointed out to him when there was a discussion about where the term TeaBagger came from. It’s an apt description of your merry little band of professional losers.

                • junior
                  August 10, 2015 at 6:59 pm

                  I have no need to defend myself to Diamond – he is “reaching.”

                • August 10, 2015 at 10:58 pm

                  “Teenaged daughters” would not know the Circle Jerks unless they are students of early-80’s Orange County punk rock. My band used to practice in the studio next to them. It’s people the age of me and Dan and Greg that should know that band … if we were punk rockers.

                  In any case they named themselves after some alleged activity or custom that I’ve never actually known anyone to do, of a group of people sitting in a circle and masturbating. Hence, the eloquent Urban Dictionary definition quoted above.

                  All blogs should strive to NOT be circle jerks. We do our best not to be, but it is a good handy insult when it sounds like everybody on a blog agrees with each other.

                • August 11, 2015 at 7:24 am

                  My kids (and their friends) are quite immersed in music that originated here in OC. Except for the Righteous Brothers, which they think is too old.

        • August 9, 2015 at 2:11 pm

          from Urban Dictionary: definition of “Circle Jerk” : When a bunch of blowhards – usually politicians – get together for a debate but usually end up agreeing with each other’s viewpoints to the point of redundancy, stroking each other’s egos as if they were extensions of their genitals (ergo, the mastubatory insinuation). Basically, it’s what happens when the choir preaches to itself.

      • Rick Clark
        August 9, 2015 at 6:15 pm

        Well GD, you raise an interesting point. Since you’re incapable of coping with even the slightest challenge and ban anyone with an opposing view… we’re left with little choice but to put the truth out there wherever we can.

        So let me take this opportunity to ask again, where exactly did you get that big email list you used to promote your flagging Brea blog? After fielding numerous inquiries from friends and neighbor, all roughly saying, “Who is this (derogatory epithet) and how did he get my email address?” a little research was in order.

        As you seemed obviously too broke to pay full boat for a high propensity email list, the next best thing would be to beg, borrow or steal one. It became quickly apparent that your having a familial connection with Brett Murdock’s campaign treasurer might be the smoking gun. Did you hack her computer? Did you sweet talk her into giving you a copy or just mope and whine until she gave in?

        Since you’re such a stalwart proponent of transparency and full disclosure, and given your track record for hounding folks incessantly when you’re convinced there has been hanky panky going on… you’ll understand why (besides getting banned the first time I broached the subject) I bring the matter up again.

        • Fair Question
          August 10, 2015 at 1:41 pm


          I love it. Which constitutional right is he going to hide behind this time. The right not to be a hypocryte?

          • August 10, 2015 at 2:07 pm

            Actually Greg, I’ll call you out on this too. Did you send email to Breans informing them of your new Brean blog? Several of the people on that list don’t know you at all nor how you got ahold of their names. There are several possibilities. Did your borrow and email list from one of your step-daughters clients? Or, did she willingly provide it to you? Did Mr. Murdock give you the list from his campaign? Where did the list come from?

            Here’s what I predict: Greg won’t answer, despite the fact he calls on both me and Matt Cunningham to do things all the time.

            • Greg Diamond
              August 10, 2015 at 6:33 pm

              Despite that I should simply spit on the question for seeking a trade secret, I’ll confirm that neither my daughter or her computer (or other electronic records) had anything to do with the publicizing of my blog. If you think that I’ve done anything wrong, you have access to recourse.

              My turn, now — right?

              • August 10, 2015 at 6:53 pm

                I don’t believe you for a moment. The only questions I really have is did you take the file or did she give it to you? I don’t think anything illegal happened either way. Unethical perhaps. So where did the email list come from?

  9. First-Time Commenter
    August 8, 2015 at 10:13 pm

    Why are you guys always blasting each other instead of facilitating constructive conversation? I enjoy reading both of your blogs, along with many other news sources, which allows me to see all sides of the issues at hand. I appreciate the insights both of you provide.

    • August 9, 2015 at 8:38 am

      Thanks for comment.

    • Greg Diamond
      August 9, 2015 at 12:05 pm

      Thanks. Sometimes I think that our host does a good job too — and I generally say so.

      I have no problem being in a party with both a strong left and a strong “Business Democrat / moderate” wing. We can generally agree on social issues; we can usually — not always — agree on foreign policy. We tend to disagree on “domestic security” issues and on economics. My sense is that the “Business Democrat and Public Safety” wing of the party can tolerate my wing only so long as we are wasting our time with symbolic issues and pose no threat to take power. When we do, they will do what they can — illegal, immoral, ideologically incoherent, no problem — to suppress us. Hell, just read this blog to see examples of their track record.

      If you have good ideas as to how to compromise with that, in a circumstance where the party’s leaders and benefactors literally care more about promoting a few pliable and skeevy candidates than the rest of the Democratic Party agenda, I’d be happy to hear them. You’re welcome to post your thoughts on OJB as well.

      • August 9, 2015 at 2:05 pm

        however, your idea of “compromise” is “everyone must agree with Greg.”

      • Humble as ever
        August 9, 2015 at 4:19 pm

        A simple “thank you” or “agreed” would have sufficed. But instead GD must give a follow up explaining the who, what and why as if we couldn’t understand without his help!

        I would expect him to finish peoples sentences in routine conversation. An incredibly BAD habit.

      • First-Time Commenter
        August 10, 2015 at 8:33 am

        I don’t have any easy or overnight solutions. Maybe agree to disagree and avoid commenting when it will likely end up in circles and get nowhere. Although, reading the comments can be amusing… =)

        • August 10, 2015 at 11:48 am

          I don’t think there are any easy solutions and reading comments are amusing. I love reading stuff about me that’s not true

          • First-Time Commenter
            August 10, 2015 at 12:14 pm

            Sorry, I just meant that after so much back and forth, I start thinking “Wow this is getting crazy…”

    • August 9, 2015 at 5:47 pm

      Thank you, First-Timer, for your good taste in reading. We would love to conduct ourselves civil gentlemen, but as you can see, these guys are dicks! 😛

      • August 9, 2015 at 5:56 pm

        You lost me at “conduct (y)ourselves civil gentlemen.” You’re not civil and the sentence is grammatically incorrect

        • August 9, 2015 at 7:39 pm

          … says the blogger who leaves typos in his HEADLINES for days.

          conduct ourselves AS civil gentlemen of course.

          • Dan Chmielewski
            August 10, 2015 at 11:26 am

            copy edit your own blog while you’re at it.

Comments are closed.