Pages

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Another day, another Trutanich lie ...

The Trutanich campaign, reeling from virtually uninterrupted media attacks slamming the former ambulance chaser slip and fall lawyer turned lying career politician for reneging on his sworn 'Pledge to Serve,' lashed out at District Attorney candidate Alan Jackson for exposing Trutanich's record of lies and deception. Not surprisingly, Trutanich's response was yet another lie.


The Trutanich campaign likely orchestrated the announcement of Los Angeles City Councilmember Dennis Zine's endorsement of Trutanich to appear to be because of Jackson's admirable attacks on Trutanich's horrible record of deceit and deception. In fact, Zine has been a long-time supporter of Trutanich who was going to endorse Trutanich anyway, and was just waiting for Trutanich to come clean with his intention to run for District Attorney.

Zine was believed to be scheduled to appear alongside Trutanich outside the Criminal Courts Building for a 'media event' announcement of the launch of Trutanich's campaign on Tuesday, February 7, 2012, however the event had to be canceled. It is understood that the media event was cancelled because Trutanich was afraid that he would be 'hijacked' by having to publicly answer embarrassing questions concerning his lies about non-existent police endorsements. Lies that the Jackson campaign had exposed.

Zine, a former police officer with strong ties to LAPD, was probably horrified at the prospect of having to defend the indefensible, and most likely backed out of the media event. Instead, two days later, Trutanich sheepishly launched his DA campaign by issuing an email that did not mention the Zine endorsement.

That Zine was ready, willing and able to endorse Trutanich's DA campaign was never in doubt. Zine has been a long-time supporter of Trutanich. Zine was the only LA City Councilmember to endorse Trutanich during his 2009 campaign for City Attorney. Zine stood on the steps of City Hall to call for an investigation into Trutanich's then opponent Councilmember Jack Weiss.

May 13, 2009: LA City Councilmember Dennis Zine publicly shows his support
for then City Attorney candidate Carmen Trutanich
But while virtually everyone else who supported Trutanich has since chosen to dissociate themselves from the self-proclaimed liar, Zine has remained a steadfast supporter. Indeed, Zine, who is termed-out as Councilmember and now running for City Controller, was a named co-chair at a fundraiser for Trutanich's DA campaign in April 2011, hosted by City Hall lobbyist John Ek.

Councilmember Dennis Zine was supporting Trutanich's DA ambition
in April 2011, so his decision to switch endorsements defies belief

So let's get a bit of a reality check here. Zine was raising money for Trutanich's DA campaign almost a year ago, and he was not endorsing him? Zine's decision to withdraw his endorsement was caused by Jackson's negative comments? No. No way. No how. The spin put on Zine's belated endorsement of Trutanich is a sign of desperation from the Trutanich campaign that has been completely derailed and demoralized by the public expression of dismay and disgust at Trutanich.

Los Angeles Metropolitan News-Enterprise blasts Trutanich



If you missed Friday's editorial in the Los Angeles Metropolitan News-Enterprise, the message was clear; No on Trutanich. Not just because he has shown no shame at labeling himself a liar, but for the slew of lies, failures and disappointments that are skilfully and convincingly reported at the Met News.

The Met News editorial curiously escaped Google News Alerts, something that has caused media observers to wonder whether articles particularly damaging to Trutanich are being 'filtered' in some way. Regardless, we thoroughly recommend reading the Met News editorial on Trutanich's utter unsuitability for any elected office, let alone the DA's Office.


LA Times excoriates Trutanich as a 'LIAR.' Again.


Monday, the fifth day since City Attorney Carmen 'the Clown' Trutanich announced his narcissistic campaign to betray the millions of Los Angelenos who were foolish enough to believe his claims not to be a politician 'looking for the next rung up the political ladder,' saw the LA Times editorial board doing their job. They called Trutanich a liar, and backed it up ably with well-reasoned argument.

The Trutanich campaign does not seem to have a convincing response to the allegations of duplicity and deception leveled against it. It is understood that Trutanich believes that the fuss will all die down soon, and he can waltz his way into higher elected office. The man is a fool.

.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

The only good thing about Trutanich's running for DA is that he would not be the City Attorney anymore. What we need is a way to get this creep out of any elected office -- or appointed office --

Lying however is rampant in Los Angeles. Look at the new Hollywood Community Plan which represented that there were 235,000 people in Hollywood, where there were only 198,228. Why the on-going lie about the zooming population which was really decreasing? In order to justify Garcetti and his hordes lavishing tax dollars on Crony capitalist developers.

Anonymous said...

Thanks to the LA Times and the Met News for refuting John Shallman's claim that only "Trutanich's opponents and gang members" are disappointed that Trutanich lied to everyone about his true intentions. A lot of people in this county voted for Trutanich because they (naively) expected him to keep his promise and do the job he was elected to do, instead of immediately running for DA. Good to see the press is fulfilling the role they are supposed to play in a democracy by holding elected officials accountable.

Anonymous said...

Nuch's only hope is to keep this whole process as series of private deals: him and Zine, him and Seligman, etc. Someone needs to force him to answer the public in a debate.

Anonymous said...

Per met-news Alan Jackson tapped to address state Republicans. Isn't Nuch supposed to have republican clout?

Marc Debbaudt said...

I am a little surprised by some information I received today. After reading this blog site on a regular basis, you all convinced me that Trutanich was anti-labor and that there was little liklihood that he would get the labor endorsement. Well, I am informed that today COPE, the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor's Committee On Political Endorsements, met and heard from the candidates for DA, Mario Trujillo, Steve Ipsen, Danette Meyers, Bobby Grace and TRUTANICH. The LA County Fed is the union of unions. Not present, I am told, we're Jackie Lacey and Alan Jackson' though I am not certain of that. I am told that every candidate was given ten minutes, except Trutanich, who was given a half an hour. Why Trutanich was given more time was not explained to the candidates who, at least one, felt short changed. For what it is worth, I am told that Trutanich has the endorsement of some unions and was invited by them to speak, so you can blame ADDA all you want, but his presence there was inevitable. Also Trujillo, who did not received an invitation to speak from the ADDA, was there, too, because of his other labor endorsements. In any event, I am told that after this meeting COPE has decided to recommend to the LA County Fed to endorse Trutanich. So, final approval or ultimate endorsement has not been cast in stone yet. However, today Trutanich moved closer to that reality.

The LA County Fed meets on 2/27/12 at which time it will affirm or reject COPE's, their committee's, recommendation. Given what most anonymous posters on this website appear to feel about Trutanich, I thought it was important to share this information because it is not too late to affect the LA County Fed's decision. There is 11 days to take some action if you so desire.

One opinion communicated to me is that the ADDA Board's failure to endorse, or to choose to wait to endorse, after conducting interviews, was a mistake. Why hold interviews and then NOT endorse? I agree with this opinion. We are a union. We should endorse someone.

Two things are still possible. One involves the ADDA and the other involves AFSCME.

DDAs who feel there should be an endorsement must inform the ADDA President that the Board should/must endorse and must do so immediately, that is, before 2/27/12 in order to attempt to influence the LA County Fed's decision. The ADDA Board is meeting at AFSCME (Union and Shatto) on Tuesday 2/21/12. This item can be agendized if you demand it.

The opposite is also possible. If the will of the DDAs is to NOT endorse Trutanich, then a negative repudiation of Trutanich by the ADDA may be a corollary way to affect the LA County Fed's decision. I don't understand why we are a union yet don't act like one and are afraid to endorse or condemn.

As to AFSCME, AFSCME has yet to endorse in the DA's race. I believe they are waiting on the ADDA, since the ADDA is the affiliate of AFSCME most affected by the DA race. So, a powerful union voice has not yet attempted to influence COPE or the LA County Federation of Labor. I could be wrong on that, because I have no direct insight into what AFSCME is doing, but I believe it is true that AFSCME is awaiting the ADDA and has taken no action yet.

If the anti-Trutanich sentiment is real then you all need to try to influence the ADDA Board immediately to take action against Trutanich, or to support one of our own DDA candidates, as well as insist that the ADDA do what is possible to influence AFSCME.

Anonymous said...

What DDAs need AND what the voters need is definitely NOT to hear what some board somewhere wants them to hear. This county is being wrecked by competing groups of elites telling us what our opinion should be.

What is needed is a vote by all rank and file DDAs. The rank and file DDAs are entitled to have their voices heard and their perspective is one that would be of some value or - at least - some interest to the informed voter.

Anonymous said...

Wouldn't any vote now by the ADDA board be impeached by their prior vote?

Marc Debbaudt said...

I support a pebescite where the rank and file DDAs choose who they support. That process, of course, especially given that the Board thus far is opposed to endorsing before March, the filing deadline, takes some effort. It takes some work to conduct a plebescite and it most likely won't be done by 2/27/12, if ever. So it's really nice for the person who made the last post to volunteer to help get it done and attend the meeting of the ADDA on 2/21/12. What are the chances of that?

When we finally do a pebescite, no doubt it will be criticized for some reason, and I'm sure we will hear from the ones who volunteer their opinions but not their time. By then, the influence of the plebescite, if any, will be too late to affect the County Federation of Labor.

So, perhaps the only thing that can be done right now is for you all to impress upon the ADDA the need to endorse someone right away, before 2/27/12, if for no reason other than to stop Trutanich receiving the County Fed Endorsement, if that is something you want to try to stop.

Anonymous said...

AMAZING! The ADDA board creates a problem, and then tells us that the only way to solve it is for all us slugs in the trenches to shut up, let them make some sort of crony deal, then consecrate it by parading as the will of the rank and file.

With this attitude, is it any wonder they cultivate apathy instead of enthusiasm?

Marc Debbaudt said...

Amazing! What problem did the ADDA create? And who told you to shut-up? I suggested you get involved, show up at a Board meeting, and contact and put pressure on the ADDA president. Can you read? What crony deal? Do you KNOW something or just like to speculate about conspiracies?

It is 10:54's attitude which is the embodiment of apathy which he blames on the ADDA. What exactly has 10:54 done but bitch anonymously? Sorry that the ADDA Has failed to bestow enthusiasm upon you. It is clear that you are unhappy with the ADDA, but it is impossible to figure out why. I guess the Board just can't read your mind and do what pleases you, so perhaps you should let us know what is wrong and help us out. Or is it much simpler to just complain about the ADDA after they do something without the benefit of your brilliant wisdom?