In an article at their censored Fullerton Observer “blog,” the Kennedy Sisters, Sharon and Skaskia, have posted a story about misleading political advertising in the past election, to wit: political mailers aimed at their darling, Vivian Jaramillo by Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform. Tellingly, they didn’t use their names, but rolled out their favorite “staff” byline, when clearly there was an author. Journalism at its best. The theme is “Is there truth behind negative ads?”
Lies, lies, lies. And facts.
This effort is clearly meant to reinforce their position that Fullerton Taxpayers For Reform did indeed engage in “lies” about Jaramillo, and that they, therefore, are not subject to legal rebuke for saying so in print.
Giving honesty the middle finger…
The only problem is that the sisters didn’t address their basic problem. Their assertions that lies were told requires some sort of effort to show it. But they didn’t. Can’t, or didn’t want to. They do want their gullible, low IQ readers to believe that Jaramillo’s “team,” a team that clearly included Jaramillo endorser Diane Vena, was not a participant in creating the fraudulent candidacy of Scott Markowitz, the fake Trumpy, newly minted Republican, dredged up by one or more Jaramillo supporter to draw votes away from presumed threat, Linda Whitaker. And that/those someone(s) wanted Jaramillo to win; and wanted it so badly that they suborned patsy Markowitz’s perjury.
Yes, I was a phony from Day 1. And it was obvious…
Comically, the Kennedy Sisters claim that Vivian Jaramillo knows nothing about the Markowitz scam and it must be true because Jaramillo is honest! And that’s funny, too, because some of her supporters were in on it; Diane Vena, also a writer for the Fullerton Observer, signed Markowitz’s nomination papers, she supposedly told Sharon Kennedy, at the behest of a “friend.” A friend Kennedy later described as a “conservative friend.” And we’ve said it before: Diane Vena was either in on the fraud it or is the stupidest person in Fullerton.
There is no doubt that some member(s) in the team Jaramillo circle large or small, created the Scott Markowitz candidacy, and the assertion is therefore true.
The shoe fit…
Then the Kennedy Sisters turn the problem of Jaramillo as a running dog for the marijuana dispensary cartel that has been tryin to get its hooks into Fullerton via Ahmad Zahra for years.
Claims were made by FTFR that Jaramillo supported the short-lived ordinance pushed through at the end of 2020. She did. And she also supported its reinstatement the following year. And that ordinance would have allowed a dispensary 100 feet from a residential zone. The Sisters try to explain that away by reminding us that the ordinance was a whopping 32 pages long, presumably excusing accountability for having supporting all parts of it. Whatever. There’s a reason the dispensary cartel laundered $60,000 through the national grocery store union to pay for an “independent” committee dedicated to electing Jaramillo, a situation the Observer Sisterhood still hasn’t mentioned.
The Kennedy Sistren doesn’t seem to get it. They are still peddling the same dodges, misdirection, and disingenuous (or dumb) arguments they made during the campaign on their stupid blog. If you’re going to call somebody a liar, the burden of proof is on you to show it. Relying on the alleged moral fiber of your friends Vena and Jaramillo doesn’t cut it. You may believe gentle and kind Diane Vena; you may hold up Jaramillo as a pillar of probity. But that doesn’t entitle you to call anybody else a liar, in print. That could well be libelous.
I’m not talking…
Lots of truths can be ferreted out under oath by aggressive lawyers from people like Ajay Mohan, the Democrat operative who helped create the newly MAGA-tized Markowitz. Good Old Ajay knows where lots of bodies are buried.
I don’t know how serious FTFR really is in pursuing its demand for retractions and apologies. Is it just a little inexpensive irritation aimed at the Kennedy’s at this point? Maybe, but If I were the Kennedy sisters I’d be inclined not to say anymore.
When not disrupting City Council meetings Skaskia Kennedy is the editor of the still Yellowing Fullerton Observer. A few days ago she published a piece, which I reproduce below, verbatim. See if you can tell what immediately jumps out to me.
The City of Fullerton is working to establish limited inclement weather shelter options for families and seniors (62+) as temperatures drop below 40 degrees or during heavy rainfall. According to City Manager Eric Levitt, efforts have been made to collaborate with various agencies, but securing a provider to operate a dedicated shelter for this winter has proven challenging.
“Unfortunately, there are no similar shelters in Orange County due to the high costs and complexities involved,” Levitt stated. In response to these difficulties, Levitt and his colleague Housing Manager Daniel Valdez have developed alternative options following directives from recent City Council meetings.
The city plans to work with two local hotels to offer shelter specifically for families and individuals aged 62 and older when weather conditions reach critical levels. However, Levitt acknowledged that the initiative will have limited scope due to resource constraints. “We currently have approximately $5,000 allocated from the Housing Fund to assess the effectiveness of this program,” he added.
Council Member Ahmad Zahra sent an email thanking Levitt and Valdez for the update on cold weather shelter for the unhoused and agreed that this is a good alternative option. He wrote, “How would families or individuals over 62 know about this program? Also curious, why 62 specifically?”
In response to Council Member Zahra’s inquiry, Housing Manager Valdez emphasized the importance of prioritizing seniors, who are often among the most vulnerable populations. Citing federal guidelines, Valdez explained that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) defines seniors as those aged 62 and over. “While we will continue to utilize our local shelter whenever available, this initiative offers an additional option for those in need,” he said.
To facilitate outreach, the city will rely on the efforts of Community Outreach Specialists, HOPE Center personnel, and Homeless Liaison Officers, all of whom maintain ongoing communication with unsheltered residents.
As the winter months approach, Fullerton’s initiative aims to address the urgent needs of its most vulnerable citizens despite the limitations presented by funding and provider availability.
Thoughts and prayers…
First, we know this isn’t even newsworthy because nothing has happened. The City Manager Eric Levitt and his hard-working Housing Manager Daniel Valdez are thinking about doing something, somewhere to help homeless somebodies. They haven’t actually accomplished anything worthy of alerting the public.
I will get what I want, one way or another…
But hold on a second. How and why is the email correspondence between Ahmad Zahra and the City Manager included in this nothing waste of space? The answers to both questions are easy. The “why” is: a free opportunity for Zahra to posture for his Observer followers – ever active, thoughtful, hands-on – even though his involvement is with…nothing! The “how” is just as easy. It is the ever self-promoting Zahra who has forwarded his correspondence to Skaskia Kennedy to make him look good and to give the Kennedy Sisters another opportunity to promote Zahra in a “news” story.
Legitimate journalism operations don’t let politicians promote themselves, especially when the vehicle is, as yet, a non-story.
On a clear day you can see forever…
Now this can be seen as beating a dead horse, since anybody paying attention already knows that the Fullerton Observer is not a legitimate journalistic endeavor, and the Kennedy Sisters are not purveyors of objective news. Still, we have yet another example of how the they gladly aid and abet Zahra under the cover of journalism – just like they did when they published water articles Zahra plagiarized from an OCWD PR flack.
One thing you can always count on in Fullerton elections is that concrete, real issues will never be discussed. You’ll hear mostly generalities about this or that topic. Even roads and taxes melt away in general promises and vague hand-wringing. But, when it comes to specific projects with all sorts of facts and figures involved, you can forget it. A charming characteristic of all local elections, and especially in Fullerton, is that people aren’t elected on their knowledge of anything, but, rather on their acceptability as wise people who will do the right thing given the opportunity.
This is all nonsense, of course. The electeds, knowing nothing are in no intellectual position to push back on the lamest of lame ideas that percolate through the “experts” in the bureaucracy. Not knowing and not learning and not working are the natural siblings of the councilmember’s natural tendency to acquiesce to City Hall staff anyhow. It’s easier just to attend ribbon cuttings and golden shovel ceremonies, I suppose.
Enhanced with genuine brick veneer!
And so it is that zero attention has been given by anybody (except FFFF) to various nonsense projects, the worst of which is the so-called boutique hotel project that started out as an idiotic scheme and naturally morphed into the worst kind of Redevelopment boondoggle. It even has a stupid name: It’s called The Tracks at Fullerton Station.
I’m not telling the truth and you can’t make me…
You may recall that the hare-brained idea was hatched by your former Mayor-for-Hire, Jennifer Fitzgerald who pushed a non-competitive agreement with some local dude who couldn’t build a birdhouse. Because the City had to declare the land on which the thing was supposed to sit as “surplus property” a deadline had to met to dodge a State law requiring first right of refusal to low-income housing “developers.”
Rather than shit-canning the whole thing, boobs Bruce Whitaker, Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles approved of the project and the City actually deeded over the land before any agreements were in place. Pretty amazing, huh? Their convoluted reasoning was so dumb it doesn’t even deserve a description. That was December 2022.
They had me at boutique…
The even bigger problem was that by then the original guy (now deceased) had been pushed out and a whole new partnership had taken over. The new players were a pair of bums – Johnny Lu and Larry Liu who had a record of fraud, embezzlement, and bankruptcies in their wake, and creditors foreclosing on them. Why Fullerton’s crack economic development team and City Attorney failed to pursue even the slightest investigation of Lu/Liu’s record like FFFF did, has never been discussed. And it never will be, Fullerton being Fullerton.
I don’t know the current situation with this project. Two years have passed. Johnny Lu and Larry Liu had many milestones to accomplish certain actions per the agreement they finally signed. Did they? Who knows? Not the public, that’s for sure. Obviously, no one in City Hall wants to talk about this vast embarrassment, and an insecure council isn’t making them. And naturally, the Fullerton electoral process doesn’t discuss such things – bad form to discuss City failures, you see.
But the public has a right to know the whole story, because in the end, the entitlements granted to Lu and Liu are worth a fortune; even worse, the sales price of 1.4 million, less site clearance, is a tenth of the market value the City created with those entitlements. And the new density with hotel and with the new apartments Liu suckered the City into approving, just to keep the mess alive, is two and a half times the density the Transportation Center Specific Plan allows for housing. Go figure.
The mileage is terrible and the wheels are bald…
It’s also critical to remember that in Fullerton projects take on a life of their own through institutional inertia and the human instinct to dodge responsibility whenever possible. The Fullerton Clown Car has never had a rear-view mirror.
The on-line version of the Fullerton Observer is now available to those inclined to be misinformed, or as in my case, to be entertained.
In the lastest version I discovered a lachrymose rewind of the November District 4 campaign by the loser, one Vivian “Kitty” Jaramillo.
Poor Kitty thought she had a lock on it, so no wonder her outrage that the plans went askew. She sued the City to make a district for her. She sat on the committee that endorsed her district. She had all the endorsements, a pile of money, the county party, and even a fake, perjuring candidate to help take votes away from her obvious competition: Linda Whitaker. She also had an $85,000 Independent Expenditure Committee mostly funded by out-of-town marijuana lobbyists, laundered through the grocery store workers union.
Why write about news when you can try to make your own! (Photo by Julie Leopo/Voice of OC)
Jaramillo had the undying love of her pals, the Kennedy Sisters at the Fullerton Observer, who could be counted on to whisk away her problems and drop innuendo on Linda Whitaker, when called upon to do so.
How could she lose?
Not really that agile…
What Poor Kitty and her Team Jaramillo failed to take into account was the arrival of a new face on the scene who raised lots of money and got the police and fire union support. And she didn’t figure on Fullerton Taxpayers For Reform, a political action committee with the means and issues to beat her.
Yes, I was a phony from Day 1. And it was obvious…
And she didn’t count on the Scott Markowitz scam to backfire badly on her as it became apparent that her own supporters were involved in the fraud.
Smart and willing to learn…
Jaramillo takes the time to swipe at her old pals in the police and fire unions, and of course her unnamed opponent, a smart professional, who, alas, doesn’t seem to know anything about Fullerton, unlike herself who has spent her whole life, yadda, yadda. Pathetic.
But I checked all the right boxes!
It would never occur to a self-entitled person like Jaramillo that her entire, adipose campaign was something right out of the year 2000 playbook: lots of endorsements, clunky mailers, paid precinct walkers, tons of money wasted on political “consultants,” etc. She had the agility of a canal barge. And the product itself was flawed: elderly, otiose, statist, whiny, self-righteous, “good guys” to the end. And for Miss Kitty, the end has finally come to her political aspirations.
Where’s the lie”
Kitty was undone, she says, by the wave of “lies” about her, but she never says what they are and why they are not true. Neither have her sisterhood at the Fullerton Observer who certainly would have had the journalists’ ethic to enquire, had they been journalists, so of course never did.
In the end, Kitty says she is grateful. And so are a lot of other people in Fullerton. And the Observer “editor” has thoughtfully provided the names of contributors to Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform so we know who to thank.
In a typical display of childish petulance, Fullerton City Councilman Ahmad Zahra displayed why he is unfit to be our Mayor last Tuesday.
At the December 10th Special Meeting, Zahra just couldn’t help himself at one point from interrupting Mayor Nick Dunlap who was trying to talk – before letting Zahra speak his piece.
Zahra demanded to be heard on some footling “point of order” or something and refused to shut up, so the Mayor did it for him.
What to do? Zahra got up yammering and sulked into the room behind the dais. Here’s the video:
From everything we’ve heard about Zahra this sort of behavior is typical when the cameras aren’t rolling. In one instance he went so far as to file an hysterical and fraudulent police report on one of his fellow councilmembers. Comically, his devoted claque continually fails to understand why his colleagues refuse to make him Mayor.
For 50 years California has enjoyed/suffered the benefits of CEQA – the California Environmental Quality Act. The intent of the law was to assess the environmental impacts of various projects proposed by private developers and even the government itself – be it dams, roads, civic projects, etc. Some projects, mostly the big ones, required EIRs – Environmental Impact Reports, that cited impacts and measures of mitigation.
If the paper fits, push it!
Now, I don’t pretend to be an expert on CEQA, but I’ve been told that all too often it is just a bungling paper chase that enriches “consultants,” and instead of addressing impacts, coughs up lots of gobbledygook and ginned up “studies” to talk around the problem. And this is just as true for governments’ reports as for those of developers.
Last night I listened to Fullerton’s beloved City Council vote for a new zoning law – the Housing Incentive Overlay Zone (HIOZ), including an explanation of why it was exempt from CEQA even though over 13,000 new units were being incentivized. The excuse was that no specific building was being proposed. You might think that is reasonable enough given that specific location has a lot to do with environmental impacts on thing like roads and street lights and traffic, etc.
And yet the new mandates from Sacramento dictate that because there is some sort of housing “crisis” new developments may be built “by-right” that is to say, without local controls over specific aspects of projects that would normally be comprehensively addressed in Conditions of Approval. Which means that those 13,000 units may not be attached to amelioration of the impacts they create.
And of course 20% of the new units must be reserved for low income tenants, another philanthropic mandate with unknown repercussions on the community.
Here’s the summation: the single-party legislature has serially made such a mess of California over the past 30 years that the fixes for the problems require that they jettison other mandates previously deemed critical, such as CEQA.
Locally, cities have been threatened with legal action by the State’s Governor and Attorney General if they don’t comply; and they are threatened by deprivation of State funding and grants by the Housing and Community Development Department, run by faceless bureaucrats. If cities try to fight back, like Huntington Beach has, the legal results are costly and a foregone conclusion.
And so Fullerton’s City Council went along with the inevitable, acquiescing to the demands of Sacramento in a sad 4-1 vote. Only Bruce Whitaker voted no in what is his last official vote.
I’ve heard it said that government spends half its time trying to fix problems it created during the other half. Sounds about right.
A special meeting of Fullerton’s City Council is taking place tonight. Why? To address the so-called 6th Cycle of the Housing Element of the General Plan and the concomitant Housing Incentive Overlay Zone, or HIOZ, for those who prefer government acronyms.
Where’s the Class 2 Bikeway?
The City Council has already postponed rubber stamping this twice which is odd, because they usually clean their plates like good little boys and girl.
People who need people…
Friends may recall that City staff proposed the opportunity overlay to construct as many as 30,000 new units with almost zero City control. This, even though the Sacramento houseacrats only demanded 13,000. I say “only” even though this lower number would still add twenty to thirty thousand new residents to Fullerton with new, massive apartment blocks on re-zoned commercial and industrial property.
I previously opined that the 30,000 number was just a dodge, to give the City Council the appearance of having fought a tough fight to “save” Fullerton, while quietly acquiescing on the destructive 13,000 mandate. This would be of particular benefit to the 2026 re-election chances of Shana Charles and Ahmad Zahra, both of whom are ardent lefties and both of whom would love to see those 13,000 units without regard for the damage dome to the City’s schools, roads, infrastructure and neighborhood cohesion.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see a roll-out of the usual suspects singing hosannas to the Council for acceding to the 13,000 units.
Somebody’s gotta suck it up…
And that hypothesis seems right on. The Council has already directed staff to remove the Chapman and Commonwealth “corridors” from the HIOZ plan where the application would have been the most damaging and controversial. And paring back the scale of the disingenuous plan gives a victory to the Save Fullerton crowd who may have actually believed the 30,000 units was an authentic proposal. That group includes some our friends at the Fullerton Observer who will happily embrace the 13,000 as a wonderful compromise.
Pantomime…
Why all these meetings? Maybe it’s a necessary part of this Kabuki to give the façade of public review to something that was always a foregone conclusion – satisfying the knuckle headed legislators and the faceless bureaucrats in Sacramento; and their running buddies in the Southern California Association of Governments, and the California League of Cities.
And why a Special Meeting, other than to instill a sense of Heap Big Emergency about bowing to the diktats of an out-of-control legislature?
I have to admit I haven’t been paying much attention to the development of Fullerton’s “6th Cycle” General Plan Housing Element. I figured it to be a fruitless paper chase in which a consultant got paid a bunch of money to produce umpteen pages of incomprehensible gobbledygook. Turns out I was right about that.
If the paper fits, push it!
The other thing that caused indifferent resignation on my part was the housing mandate decreed by the State Housing and Community Development Department, often referred to as “State HCD.” It so happens that their mandate for Fullerton was to create the opportunity for 13,000 new residential units, as determined by yet another faceless bureaucracy, Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), whose mission is to do whatever the State wants, regardless of what is good for its constituent members. The 13,000 units are part of SCAG’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA, pronounced ree-nuh). These people sure love them some acronyms.
Where these 13,000 unit opportunities are supposed to go in a built out city is no mystery. It will require re-zoning commercial, office professional, and industrially zoned property to admit new residential use. Lots of it.
Well, that’s bad enough, but our crack Community Development Department saw fit to propose a new zoning overlay that could accommodate 30,000 new units. You read that right. 30,000 units, a sum that could increase Fullerton’s population to near the quarter million mark. Their justification? It’s so they won’t have to do anymore bowing and scraping to State HCD. At least not for a while. Or so they say.
The whole thing is ludicrous. First, the rationale for giving the Sacramento boneheads more than they demand is crazy. It’s like paying a million bucks in ransom when the kidnapers only asked for half a mil with no guarantee they won’t do it again. Then there’s the practical side of this. There would be no new roads, no new sewer and water superstructure added, no new schools built, and sixty thousand new auto trips daily. And don’t forget the inadequate parking. It’s a farce piled on top of another farce. But somehow everything will work out, our six-figure experts tell us..
The mechanism to perform this new housing miracle is the called the Housing Incentive Overlay Zone (you guessed it, there’s an acronym – HIOZ). Staff and their consultants have identified hundreds and hundreds of real estate parcels that would receive the new overlay zone, but they don’t seem to be unduly concerned about the effect to the City of Fullerton of losing land for commercial and industrial purposes. It seems that in the grand bureaucratic scheme of things, satisfying other bureaucrats in Sacramento is even more important than losing that sales tax revenue they’re always hunting around for like rabid wolverines.
Pantomime…
Well, fear not, Friends. In reality the 30,000 units was likely just Kabuki theater meant to look like a good faith effort to outdo even the demands of anonymous paper-pushers at SCAG. The City Council discussed this issue last week and there’s no way any of them are going to give the State more than it wants.
Of course, there’s another possibility, too. A political one. The utterly incompetent Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles, Fullerton City Council’s two ultra-liberals, are up for re-election in 2026, and, cynic that I am, I have to wonder if they both won’t use this silver-platter opportunity to campaign on how they defended Fullerton’s quality of life by fighting hard against 17,000 apartments that were never going to happen anyway. Now that would be cynical, wouldn’t it?
Here’s a fun snippet harvested from Vivian Jaramillo’s facebook page. It seems she is unsettled that neither she nor her acquaintances know “her opponent,” Jamie Valencia.
This is the age-old Fullerton establishment deprecation: “no one knows him/her/them.”
Gee, Kitty, it’s too bad you and your pals don’t know your opponent, especially since she’s getting more votes than you. Maybe many of your would-be constituents don’t know who you are. And, as is likely the case, maybe many of them do know you and decided to vote for someone else, maybe even Scott Markowitz, the phony candidate and confessed perjurer your supporters created to help you win. And you’re “good?” Wow. Talk about delusional.
And that’s Team Jaramillo – the ones we can see and the ones who are trying to remain hidden.
Pray all you want for the Almighty to alter ballots after the fact. But God doesn’t like liars and cheaters and thieves. Or so I’ve heard.
Why write about news when you can try to make your own! (Photo by Julie Leopo/Voice of OC)
Right on cue, the Fullerton Observer has begun to bitch about the Fullerton’s 4th District election, as their favored candidate, Vivian Jaramillo, tool of the Marijuana Cartel, slips farther behind Jamie Valencia. The target of their irritation is Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform. The author? “Staff.”
Staff.
Once again Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform sent out fliers to homes filled with disinformation and outright lies this election targeting District 4 City Council candidate Kitty Jaramillo. In past elections, the same group made outrageous and false claims against candidates Ahmad Zahra, Shana Charles, and Ruthi Hanchett – all won their races.
The US Supreme Court has ruled that the Free Speech Clause protects false speech when viewed as a broad category, but the government may restrict limited subcategories of false speech such as defamation and fraud. A very good discussion of deception in political advertising is available by visiting https://www.freedomforum.org/lie-political-ads/
Hoo boy, whataloada bullshit. The rest of the article is a recitation of money collected and money spent, derived from public documents. What is completely missing is a single example of an untruth told about Vivian Jaramillo. Dispensing legal advice is not the Kennedy Sisters’ strong suit, obviously. And the reference to fraud is positively comical, given their diligent effort to ignore the fake candidacy of Scott Markowitz created by Jaramillo’s supporters to help her win.
See my badge? I’m a reporter!!
The Kennedy who seems responsible for this diatribe is most likely Sharon, the elder sister. She had been engaging the public in the effort to peddle the “Markowitz acted alone” narrative, and “anyhow none of it matters cuz we say so.” By her own admission she consulted with one of the key participants in the fraud, namely Diane Vena – who “willingly”signed the Markowitz nomination papers even though she had endorsed Jaramillo. Team Jaramillo. Jesus H., Vena’s name was on Jaramillo’s website!
“Sharon K.” actually replied to one person on her blog who questioned the Observer assertion:
BradyRhoades
Are there examples of what’s being called “disinformation and outright lies”? That would be helpful, thanks.
Sharon KBrady – the “Team Jaramillo Busted “ mailer sent out by Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform shown at the beginning of this article is a good example of outright lies. Kitty and her team had nothing to do with the candidate who was charged with falsely signing his nomination papers.
Now how on Earth does Sharon Kennedy know that Kitty and her team had “nothing to do” with Markowitz? Because they told her? The fact that Jaramillo’s active supporters were involved in the creation of the Markowitz candidacy is more than sufficient evidence that her “team” knew about it and at the very least failed to report what they knew after a crime had been committed.
But now the Observer Sisters have sunk to a new low. Not only using “staff” as a byline, but also responding to comments by inserting an “edit” into the comment itself. Check it out.
Sharon K
Brady – the “Team Jaramillo Busted “ mailer sent out by Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform shown at the beginning of this article is a good example of outright lies. Kitty and her team had nothing to do with the candidate who was charged with falsely signing his nomination papers.
BenjaminHow do you know that? Did you investigate the matter? Or did you ask Kitty and her team? Just because you believe something doesn’t make it fact or truth or journalism. It is just opinion right?
(Reply to Benjamin – Happily we know who putout the disinfo negative mailers claiming “Team Jaramillo Busted” because of the required disclosure on the mailer clearly naming Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform. The OCDA investigated the candidate who falsely claimed he had witnessed the signatures on his nomination papers and found no connection to Jaramillo campaign.)
This is another another way to make up stuff and be non-responsive without using her name. Notice how Sharon answers a question that nobody asked. Benjamin wants to know what about the fliers is untrue. She responds by saying who created the fliers (there’s nothing mysterious about the origin). What sort of fool would be satisfied by that sad misdirection?
But then it gets even worse. Kennedy the Elder is still pretending that Markowitz acted alone (really only a minor clerical error), but she asserts without a shred of evidence that the Orange County District Attorney found no connection to the Jaramillo campaign. The DA has said nothing of the kind and most certainly would not have confided in either of the Weird Sisters.
Here’s another example of the response embedded in comment technique:
Marian
I do not appreciate that the clickbait title and the story supports only 1 side. There was another group supporting Vivian Jamarillo that spent much more money. Why are you not citing that?
Answer to Marian – because the group that supported Jaramillo did not use dirty deceptive campaign tactics which is what this article is about. There are a few more in this Dirty Politics series coming up.
Sharon will not talk about the massive infusion of pro-marijuana money supporting Jaramillo. Oops. That would be bad. So the issue is brushed aside because they didn’t deploy what she considers “dirty deceptive tactics” although she hasn’t shared any of those with her readers. She does promise more of these undocumented claims in a breathtaking “Dirty Politics” series that will no doubt knock the wind out of contemporary journalism as we know it.
A comment by “Jeff” suffers the same fate as poor Marian’s:
Jeff
Wasn’t the other candidate in District 4 running so the Latino votes can be taken away so Kitty could win? That’s dirty campaigning!
Also, I would like to know what false claims were made against Zahra?
===== Response to Jeff: please remember that one comment from you is enough. If you continue with the various pen names you will be blocked. You are mistaken about the District 4 issues. Search for “Markowitz” or “Zahra” to come up to speed on either of those stories that we printed quite some time ago. All the character assassination hit pieces put out by Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform are totally false and meant to lower the bar for their favorite candidate to win – which, by the way, is not Whitaker.
Jeff’s remark about “Latino votes” is off, but he wasn’t going to get a honest answer anyhow. His point about the Markowitz candidacy being “dirty campaigning” is right on the mark, so naturally it must be ignored. He asks for examples of false claims made against Zahra, too, a perfectly reasonable request. He is admonished to do his own Observer searches which would of course, only discover more Kennedy unsubstantiated claims, but no concrete examples.
Sharon isn’t done. No. There has been “character assassination” (oh Lordy!) by “totally false” hit pieces meant to “lower the bar” so the favored candidate would win. Her description sounds a lot more apt for the Markowitz caper, doesn’t it? Finally, the mind reader Kennedy interjects that the favored candidate was not Linda Whitaker, a bit of information meant to be meaningful, somehow, but that is irrelevant to any topic at hand.
Let’s give this some more thought…
Finally, one of Kennedy’s commenters who seems to think journalism is going on there, explurts:
P.D.
Great article, but why don’t you unmask the membership of this libelous outfit?
I think Kitty SHOULD sue for libel!
Well, P.D. I agree. I think Jaramillo should sue for libel, too. I’m not sure what the cause would be, or what damages have been incurred, but it sure would be fun to get Jaramillo, Markowitz, Dem operative Ajay Mohan, Diane Vena, and even Sharon Kennedy deposed under oath.
