I am sick and tired of hearing that anyone needs a message that has to resonate with a community based on ethnicity. Isn’t this racism of the first order?
In early September, the illegal Diaz turned to a friend who knew a member of the powerful, Oakland-based California Nurses Association, The Chronicle newspaper learned. The union called in two lawyers for Diaz: Marc Van Der Hout, a longtime immigration attorney in San Francisco, and celebrity feminist attorney Gloria Allred, a fierce workplace rights litigator who arranged for Diaz to tell her story in a live-webcast news conference.
Naturally the union had been big supporters of re-Governor Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown and once they found Diaz they were more than happy to use the woman to destroy the better gubernatorial candidate, Whitman. Once again we see unions serving as the worst influence possible on our electoral system.
=================================
The California Nurses Association (TCNA) was suspected of colluding to conspire to interfere in US elections after TCNA spokesman, Chuck Idelson, turned up at a Diaz news conference - and refused comment. Now, several sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, have confirmed the union's role in Diaz's emergence--- a move that could evolve into a criminal charge to collude and conspire, to interfere with, and to destabilize US elections.
ACTION NOW
(A) Officials and insiders of The California Nurses Association shoud be interrogated by the FBI to determine whether tax-exempt monies were used illegally WRT to interference with US elections.
(B) TCNA should be asked to produce records on how they spent tax-exempt money.
(C) If the TCNA refuses, the IRS, SEC, FBI, Congress and the GAO can easily review the TCNA's paper trail to determine whether TCNA submitted falsified documents to govt agencies (a felony).
AIDING AND ABETTING TCNA may also be charged with being an accessory after the fact----for aiding and abetting lawbreaking. A significant clue is that Allred is NOT bringing this case to court, an acknowledgement of wrongdoing------b/c a litigant must approach the court with "clean hands"---that they broke no laws in the quest for US justice.
OTHER POSSIBLE CHARGES Criminal complaints might be lodged against TCNA Staff and Executive Board members for fraud, conspiracy and concealment, and criminal civil rights violations. Since there has already been the public admission that a possible felony was committed, it is also possible that other federal offenses have also been committed including but not limited to;
<><>Title 18 U.S.C. §1341,
<><> Mail Fraud, 18 U.S.C.§1001, Presenting a False Document to an Agent of the US Govt;
<><>18 U.S.C.§1027 False statements and concealment of facts in relation to documents required by ERISA of 1974, including civil and RICO violations.
<><>18 U.S.C. §§1961-68 (RICO Act),
<><>18 U.S.C. §1341 (Mail Fraud),18 U.S.C. §1027 (ERISA Violations), and,
<><>18 U.S.C. §241 (Conspiracy Against Civil Rights).
A full investigation of a RICO conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. §1962(c) is warranted because (1) several persons (2) were employed by or associated with an enterprise (TCNA), (3) that engaged in or affected social and financial enterprises (elections) , and that (4) the persons (TCNA) operated or managed the enterprise (5) through a pattern (6) of racketeering activity, and, (7) person(s) were injured in its enterprises and financial interests by reason of the (TCNA) pattern of racketeering activity.
Thus, a formal RICO investigation is also warranted b/c the alleged violation of Title 18 U.S.C. §241 – Conspiracy Against Constitutional Rights – prohibits in relevant part, “two or more persons (from conspiring) to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person (Whitman) in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same . . .” See, 18 U.S.C. §241.
REPORT POSSIBLE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY: Conspiracy, collusion, government fraud; mishandling public property, falsifying official records, tax fraud, computer trespass to destroy data (a Class C felony), US Postal and electronic fraud.
IRS TOLL-FREE 1-800-829-0433----(you may remain anonymous).
EMAIL .......OAAG.Tax@tax.USDOJ.gov
FBI TIP PAGE http://tips.fbi.gov/ (you may remain anonymous)
Lost in all of this is the fact that in 2008, BHO carried CA with a whopping 61% of the vote. Not even Ronald Reagan ever won by such a huge margin.
GOP registration in CA is now at 30%. Whites make up 40% of the population. Not even a self-financed billionare can make up for these huge discrepancies.
It was also recently reported on FNC that the radical left nurse’s union was all behind the maid scandal. The Whitmans were not at fault. They instructed the agency that they were only interested in hiring people who were here legally. Not the Whitmans’ fault the maid forged a driver’s license and faked a social security number.
Besides every single Republican running for state wide office lost—not just Meg.
Skelton misses one basic point: The voters of CA have their heads firmly embedded up their rectums.
I listened to a debate between her and Brown that was hosted by Univision. It was broadcast in Spanish, held in Fresno, and the audience was mostly hispanic.
They kept hitting her, again and again, with sob stories about illegals who were facing some kind of unfairness or other, some in the audience rose to describe their particular plight.
In other words, it was designed to embarrass her. Governors don’t actually have any say over immigration policy, but they didn’t let that stop them. Brown just pandered, promising nothing but emoting and calling for immigration reform.
Whitman, to her credit, refused to pander, and kept saying to a hostile audience that we needed to enforce the law, and that California couldn’t afford to fulfill its responsibilities to its citizens if it also had to carry everyone else.
I wasn’t a fan of Whitman, but after that I had to give her credit for not pandering when any normal person would have been sorely tempted. She was pretty blunt considering the circumstances.
The Mexicans who vote in California elections are sheeple with about four years of education. The unions have thier names and addresses and bus them to the polls to vote straight “D” in all races. They will only vote for handouts and raising other peoples taxes. The GOP and Michael Steele were stupid to waste money trying to win anything in California. They should have given the money to the GOP candidate who narrowly lost in Colorado.
Conservative nominee loses = too right-wing, scared away minorities and women (especially those "moderate suburban mom", who apparently love partial birth abortion)
Moderate, "electable" nominee loses = too right-wing, scared away minorities and women (especially those "moderate suburban mom", who apparently love partial birth abortion)
So it's the same old song and dance, no matter who we run. If the party stands for limiting abortions, upholding traditional and supporting border security render a candidate "unelectable", even if the nominee is a RINO who apologizes for the party platform and throws those issues under the bus.
Meg Whitman and Bill Jones were the kind of candidate they said could "win", but when their "moderate" crashed and burned, it seems even those candidates were "too right wing". Apparently anyone to the right of Stalin is in that category.
How do they account for the "unelectable, scary" conservatives winning more votes than the "electable moderates" in "deep blue states"? Compare Bill Brady's numbers for Governor of Illinois this year vs. our ultra-liberal RINO state treasurer when she ran for Governor in Illinois in 2006. He won all but three counties, she got slaughtered by one of the least popular Governors (Blago) in the country.
Never heard the "we need RINOs to WIN in blue states" explain those facts.
Conservative nominee loses = too right-wing, scared away minorities and women (especially those "moderate suburban mom", who apparently love partial birth abortion)
Moderate, "electable" nominee loses = too right-wing, scared away minorities and women (especially those "moderate suburban mom", who apparently love partial birth abortion)
So it's the same old song and dance, no matter who we run. If the party stands for limiting abortions, upholding traditional marriage and supporting border security, it renders their candidate "unelectable", even if the nominee is a RINO who apologizes for the party platform and throws those issues under the bus.
Meg Whitman and Bill Jones were the kind of candidate they said could "win", but when their "moderate" crashed and burned, it seems even those candidates were "too right wing". Apparently anyone to the right of Stalin is in that category.
How do they account for the "unelectable, scary" conservatives winning more votes than the "electable moderates" in "deep blue states"? Compare Bill Brady's numbers for Governor of Illinois this year vs. our ultra-liberal RINO state treasurer when she ran for Governor in Illinois in 2006. He won all but three counties, she got slaughtered by one of the least popular Governors (Blago) in the country.
Never heard the "we need RINOs to WIN in blue states" explain those facts.
btt
btt
Let Kawleefawneeya slide into leftist oblivion.
She might have done better had she concentrated on wooing e-e-e-evil White males rather than Mexican nationals here illegally.
And the illegal is still in-country, and still not in jail...