« AD71 Watch: Neil Blais Announces "Influential" Campaign Finance Team | Main | Red County/OC Blog News Roundup -- June 8, 2007 »

June 07, 2007

Comments

Tom Lee

Janet Nguyen and Paris Hilton are the same. Not obey the law and above the law.

We don't trust her.

Recall, recall and recall

Nesta

http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/local/westminster/article_1722775.php

Either they really are a bunch of amateurs over there or Janet believes that any publicity is good publicity.

Don't buy it

Gimmie a break! 53 days to "find out" it was vanilla, plain yogurt and soda crakers? Yeah, right!!!

1. Too little, too late.
There's absolutley no excuse for Janet Nguyen to have taken so long to disclose the donors. To openly flaunt established county law as a newly sworn-in supervisor reeks of pride, arrogance and an above-the-law mentality.

2. Doesn't pass the smell test.
Jubal is right when he said, "...It's not as if a supervisor has never received contributions from a developer, a lobbyist and a company that would like to do business with the county."
I have a real hard time believing these were the "real" donors. With tricksters like Probolsky and others on her team, nothing she says or does can be trusted without the utmost scrunity. All of this is way too Caronaesque.

Janet Nguyen needs to go. Real Republicans should have nothing to do with her.

Note to Matt Harper: Run away, real fast!

Hawk

Yeah, I bet Janet freaked out when bloggers were beating the Recall drum. However she did violate county laws and Neal Kelley should give Janet a hefty fine, even if she is his boss.

Unlike his boss, Matthew Harper is not politically tone deft but whether or not Janet will listen to him over Tony Lam is another matter.

Poor JN


LATimes:
O.C. supervisor discloses hidden donations
Janet Nguyen, who won a seat by seven votes in February, solicited the funds to pay legal bills stemming from the court fight to protect the victory.
By Christian Berthelsen, Times Staff Writer
June 8, 2007


A developer, a lobbyist and a company that does business with the county gave undisclosed donations above the legal contribution limit to newly elected Orange County Supervisor Janet Nguyen earlier this year, her campaign disclosed Thursday.

The developer of Rancho Mission Viejo, a planned community in southern Orange County, and lobbyist Chris Townsend, whose firm represents four county agencies, gave $5,000 each. Parking Concepts Inc., an Irvine company that holds contracts for parking services at county facilities, gave $2,500. The legal donation limit is $1,600 per election.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/orange/la-me-nguyen8jun08,1,3319606.story?coll=la-editions-orange

FLowerszzz

I agree - those companies are certainly not controversial nor unexpected (although the amounts are high) so what was the big deal about filing it?

Long-time politico

'Much ado about nothing.'

Let's try on this scenario: Supervisor Nguyen and her team need to raise money for the legal challenges, so they set up an account that they believe to be proper. Then they discover that they have made a mistake; a misreading of the law. So they return the money.

But someone files a complaint with the DA asking for a criminal investigation. Once that process is begun, it becomes impossible to make public disclosures or leaks regarding names and other data pertinent to the investigation.

The revelations of yesterday might be timed merely to coincide with permission from the investigators to release the names.

Just my guess, but this is a plausible explaination. I would say that Supervisor Nguyen's opponents have played this one well. I commend them for their hardball tactics; cleverly executed. Nothing improper, just great use of the law and the process. I am impressed if this is the case.

While I would expect the Honorable Janet Nguyen's opponents to decry my speculation, I wonder what the rest of you think?

OCFunk

This is becoming more of the norm in OC politics. From large donations from developers and service providers with large lucrative contracts at the city level to politicians buying endorsements from those mostly phony "slate mailers" to brighten up a tarnished image - it stinks.

It is obvious that voters need to get educated about voting for highly qualified candidates. Some of the shmucks that end up in office have literally been soda jerks, handing out ice cream cones at the local drugstore six months prior to being elected!

Janet should have had a basic understanding of campaign law. Candidates for office receive large informational packets when they file their candidate paper work. Every law pertaining to contributions and reporting is clearly stated. So, either she willfully delayed reporting or she is ignorant. Time will tell.

RECALL RECALL RECALL

Long-Time Politico-

That's a good try but I don't buy it. One call to the AG can take care of that speculative scenario you just presented.

Oh and this disclosure will definitely not stop the recall effort.

Hawk

You know what, I dont get it. If these were the 3 donors that donated to Janet's illegal defense fund then why didn't she just release their names sooner?

She could have prevented all the negative publicity. What an idiot...

Paul Lucas

OC Funk,
Who was a soda jerk just before getting elected?

Hyrdrangea

Hawk -

I think OC Funk is referring to La Habra City Council Person Jim Gomez.

Paul Lucas

11:03AM:
Mark Leyes was not a soda jerk, he was a Democrat. Everyone knows that.

Enough-time politico

Long-time politico,

I bet you that you haven\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t seen such an arrogant, immature and disobeying politican like Janet Nguyen. She was supposed to follow the law (ordinance) her board passed but she chose to ignore it.

Your point of \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Once that process is begun, it becomes impossible to make public disclosures or leaks regarding names and other data pertinent to the investigation\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" is a lot of BULLS. The investigation, if occurs, does not foreclose her to disclose three or more donors. Who would stop her to disclose let alone to leak it?

Did she really need a permission from the investigators to release the name? Did she get it? Do you imply there is a pending investigation?

Your explanation is not a plausible but an attempt to cover her ass.

This is a much ado about everything.

The comments to this entry are closed.


Categories