Simon's attack on Davis backfires 'Evidence' photo isn't clear proof of illegal donation

SF Chronicle ^ | 10/9/02 | Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer

[GraniteStateConservative]

Simon's campaign shouldn't have gone forward with this until they could verify it.

[Yaelle]

Simon came on local L.A. radio after the debate (the John and Ken show) and showed them a letter he had written by the COPS organization to a CA law firm explaining that they had given the $10,000 to the leutenant gov in the Capitol building but had not known at the time that it was illegal. A sort of coming clean letter. John and Ken saw the letter and it seemed authentic to them.

Why don't we hear anything about this letter?

[Congressman Billybob]

There is yet another way, other than photos of Girl Scouts with Davis in his office, in 1998, to establish the legitimacy of the $10,000 photo. Here it is:

California probably has a private insurance policy covering the personal possessions of individuals in their cars and offices on state property. On such policies, it is normal to include a "special endorsement" for big-ticket items like jewelry and artwork. Do the endorsements on that policy, in 1998, show that this particular painting was in the office of then-Lt. Gov. Davis?

If the policy -- an "official record" as far as the California government is concerned -- shows that painting was in that office in that year, then Davis is caught in four cover-up lies. 1) His own lie that the photo was taken in L.A. 2) His press secretary's lie. 3) His chief political advisor's lie. And 4) the forgery of his "official log" of where he was, to support the other lies.

You say that Simon has "shot himself in the foot again." More accurately, the Chronicle is trying to make it look that way. T'ain't necessarily so.

Congressman Billybob

Click for "Oedipus and the Democrats"

Click for "Til Death Do Us Part."

Click for "to Restore Trust in America"

[GraniteStateConservative]

Now Simon should kidnap someone from Davis' family and hold her hostage until Davis withdraws from the race.

[/sarcasm]

Making shit up about your opponent to win at any cost isn't honorable. Simon can do what he wants running as an independent. I don't want him in my party if that's how he is going to represent us.

[GraniteStateConservative]

Simon should have had conclusive proof of this. They didn't and so they are retreating from the claim.

[boris]

"a rogue law enforcement group"

I.e., one that isn't in the Dems' pocket...or alternatively one that truly and accurately represents the views of rank-and-file police officers, rather than the pampered princes of their "Leadership"...

--Boris

[dalereed]

The majority of law enforcment officers in California won't have anything to do with that rotten socialist outfit.

Unless something has changed, and I doubt it, in 1980 they had a total membership of 6.

[Hildy]

Simon's going to lose, he might as well go out gracefully. Cailfornia is a gone State. Can't wait to get out.

[TheSpottedOwl]

Lol if Arnold ever runs for anything, I'll vote for him. I'm sticking with Simon for this election. I read through the thread before I replied to you. If the picture turns out to be fake, then Simon was set up, imo. The Democrats know that the best lie has a grain of truth in it, and Davis' moral outrage on this issue is wearing thin. Has he himself not used every low smear tactic in the book against Simon?

[dalereed]

Simon Statement Concerning Davis Fundraising Charges

Two days ago at the only debate Gray Davis has agreed to participate in,
I asked the governor a simple yes or no question: Has he ever accepted
campaign contributions in a government office building. Governor Davis
failed to answer the question.

I asked Governor Davis this simple question because for the past year,
we have seen a series of ethical and fundraising scandals that have
plagued his administration. Gray Davis has a history of using public
facilities for campaign purposes. The Fair Political Practices
Commission (FPPC) has even fined him for failing to disclose his donors
adequately. And the media has repeatedly exposed that Mr. Davis'
positions on matters of public policy are closely tied to the source of
his campaign contributions. Nothing, however, speaks more clearly to
these statements than his record itself.

During the energy crisis, Gray Davis raised campaign cash from Enron and
other energy providers even though he had declared a self-imposed
fundraising moratorium. More recently, a $25,000 campaign check changed
hands in a dark bar in exchange for a $100 million computer software
contract that state employees did not want and did not need.

Within the past couple of weeks, we have seen the latest installment of
the governor selling out the environment and endangering the lives of
Californians for campaign contributions. In this scandal, Tosco gave
Davis more than $50,000 so they could increase their dumping of the
cancer-causing chemical dioxin into San Francisco Bay by more than 400
percent.

As we have seen on many occasions, individuals who give Gray Davis money
receive appointments to boards and commissions. And once they are in
positions of power, they repay the favor by using the associations that
stem from their appointments to raise money for the governor's campaign
war chest. Just weeks ago, in fact, the chairman of the High Speed Rail
Authority organized a fundraiser with the very contractors benefiting
from a $10 billion bond signed by Gray Davis only a day before.

And let us not forget when representatives of the California Teachers
Association visited Gray Davis, from within the governor's office, he
solicited a $1 million contribution. Perhaps more than any other
example, this speaks to the tactics Gray Davis is willing to employ for
political contributions. It's also why it did not seem far-fetched that
Gray Davis would accept a $10,000 contribution from within the
lieutenant governor's office.

Recently, the California Organization of Police & Sheriffs advised my
campaign that they believed the governor had received, in violation of
state law, a campaign contribution in his state office from their
organization. They informed my campaign that they intended to report
their belief to the government agency charged with enforcing the state
campaign laws - the FPPC - and subject themselves to an investigation.

I had no reason to question the California Organization of Police &
Sheriffs' good faith belief in their charge against the governor: They
were confessing error; they were reporting the charge directly to the
government enforcement agency; and they claimed that they had documented
proof of their charge.


In light of the seriousness of their allegation, during the debate I
gave Gray Davis an opportunity to reject it definitively. But he did
not do so.

I made the decision to urge the FPPC to investigate the circumstances of
this donation only after Governor Davis issued a "non-denial denial" and
a respected group of police officers and sheriffs repeated their charge
-- this time producing a photo that they said supported their claim.


The location where the governor received this campaign contribution is
now in question.

However, even if the specific claims made by the California Organization
of
Police and Sheriffs are not sustained, this outcome should not deter the
FPPC, other law enforcement agencies, and the media from investigating
Gray Davis' aggressive and shady fundraising practices.

###
__________________________
BILL SIMON FOR GOVERNOR
1020 H STREET, SUITE 100
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
WWW.SIMONFORGOVERNOR.COM

[TheSpottedOwl]

Good find, thanks for the "heads up". The problem with politicians like Simon is that they are lambs among the wolves. He's an honest, decent man. Davis otoh, is a sociopath.

[TheSpottedOwl]

Pathetic. If this is the best Simon can do as a candidate, then I don't want him to be governor.

Then don't vote for him.

[steve-b]

Hmmm... I wonder if Davis' dirty tricks department set this up so that all evidence of Davis' corruption would be suppressed by the boy-who-cried-wolf effect....