Friday, August 12, 2011

Friday Free For All


District Attorney candidate Jackie Lacey gave an exclusive interview
to one of LA's sharpest critics The Los Angeles Wave's Betty Pleasant
District Attorney candidate Jackie Lacey surprised her opponents by giving an exclusive interview to one of LA's sharpest critics, and emerging unscathed and maybe even with a former doubter now turned supporter.

The Los Angeles Wave's Contributing Editor, Betty Pleasant, has something of a reputation for being pretty unpleasant on occasions, sorry but there's no easy way to say it. However, it's a badge of honor Pleasant wears with pride; she's nobody's fool and not afraid to say it the way she sees it. Apparently her readers appreciate her writing style and value her opinions.

Pleasant has been a harsh critic of decisions made by DA Steve Cooley and his administration, so it must have surprised Pleasant when Jackie Lacey, now Cooley's second in command, agreed to be interviewed by Pleasant. The interview itself, published this week in The Wave, must have surprised Pleasant who clearly found herself impressed by Lacey's candor and preparedness. Pleasant's report of the interview was not dismissive of Lacey's candidacy, and Lacey herself said she thought it was "very fair." That's quite a turnaround from what might have otherwise been expected.

Of all the DA candidates to break into six-figure fundraising, Lacey has been the quietest. But don't be mislead by the lack of headlines and press releases; she is slowly and steadily building a support base and gaining the respect in the community that will propel her candidacy forward in the nine and half months between now and the primary election. That's no surprise to those who know Lacey, but apparently it is a "Pleasant" surprise to those who had doubts.

Lacey's campaign website is


If City Attorney Carmen Trutanich was hoping for a little respite from the slew of criticism heaped on him this week for his birthday present, he will be disappointed.

With the scandal surrounding his bungled and and in-artful attempt to misappropriate a $2M check still resonating around the media, the last thing he needed was more doubts about his fitness for office.

Those doubts were raised by former candidate for Council District 4, Steven Box who published an article entitled "A Tale of Two Friends, Justice and Mercy" at CityWatch.

Box reveals Trutanich as a "selective prosecutor" who declines to prosecute cases where cyclists were threatened by aggressive motorists, but eagerly prosecutes hapless homeowners  with high yard fences. Box's article could not come at a worse time for Trutanich; his over-reaching ACE Program is due to come before the City Council for a vote in the near future.

Most councilmembers will have received briefings on the dangers of allowing Trutanich to control the prosecution of code violators, and Box's article could be the ammunition they need to either finally kill this Orwellian program, or send it back to committee to be neutered.


Nuff said? Now go and vote NO on Ipsen's Agency Shop.

Here's a link to the popular flyer giving our reasons for saying NO to Ipsen's Agency Shop, and our previous article with more information.

Happy Weekend!



Anonymous said...

I sent in my ballot earlier this week. I voted NO and hope most of my co-workers do the same. I cannot afford $960 a year. It is a as simple as that.

Anonymous said...

What?! Betty Pleasant's interview ripped Jackie Lacey a new one! You guys are either blind or you are spinning the interview to support Jackie.

Anonymous said...

Betty Pleasant's interview was very fair to Lacey. Most of you folks don't know the kind of person Betty is. She takes shit from nobody, so for her to have spent so long with Lacey and not crucify her, is like getting an Oscar!

Anonymous said...

While it was apparent that Betty certainly had no intention of making a new friend when she met with Lacey ("are you in love with him?") where was the "gotcha" or "smoking gun" moment?

Anonymous said...

Ipsen and his turds must be bitterly disappointed that Lacey's interview went so well. It would have helped with the federal lawsuit to have Lacey trashed, but I guess Pleasant saw through all the Ipsen craziness and published a good review of Lacey.

Anonymous said...

12:55 You must have been reading a different interview of Jackie Lacey - she was being ridiculed in that interview by Betty who outed her as nothing more than another Cooley lover. And to everyone who reads The Wave, that is NOT a good thing.

Anonymous said...

I'd like to know who Trutanich has hired since he took office, what their salaries are, and whether or not the positions they were hired into existed prior to Trutanich. Did Trutanich really create positions for his friends? Isn't that illegal? Is he really paying six figure salaries to non-attorneys? I'm assuming there are no women in the old boys club? This guy is despicable and should be indicted.

Someone please give more details as to the next hit piece that is going to come out on this thug. I can hardly wait. Thank you Dragnet for exposing Trutanich for the scum that he is.

Anonymous said...

How was Jackie's blood sugar? Did she have to revise her answers in the days after the interview took place?

Anonymous said...

Typical ADDA troll. They shout out a bombastic claim. You ask them to back up thier silly comments, and they reply with yet another bombastic claim.


Anonymous said...

Ipsen is very, very nervous so don't be surprised if the bitter comments on anything that does not go along with his plans gets even more insane. Lacey getting approval from a prominent member of the south LA community was not in the Ipsen plan. neither was him being outed as a defender of a white supremacist skinhead, that must have made Betty Pleasant think twice about everything she's been fed about Ipsen's union.

Anonymous said...

If Hyatt Seligman is so concerned about "greater participation," why do all the union guys spend gobs of time complaining about this website and advocating its demise?

Anonymous said...

If the ADDA thinks that Betty ripped Jackie a new one, what did the Met News do to Ipsen? There wasn't a single negative in Betty's article, but the Met News said Ipsen was "grossly irresponsible" and "wholly unsuitable." Now that's ripping Ipsen a new one!