Rock FIX the VOTE

the least shocking news in the world, acorn under investigation for voter fraud.
ACORN office in Vegas raided in voter-fraud probe
ACORN office raided in Las Vegas in voter-fraud probe
County rejects large number of invalid voter registrations Indiana October 02, 2008
Bad voter applications found - Clerks see fraudulent, duplicate forms from group Michigan September 14, 2008,
ACORN In The News Again For Workers Registering Dead Voters And Others Milwaukee. August/08
Wikipedia (has current busts as well)
LOTS MORE...

Another Orwellian euphemistic title... the word Reform should be a clue that they are anything but... And those are just the ones that got caught.

Anyone checking what goes on here? Konkler?

Planting Seeds of Disaster
...ACORN, far more than we’ve recognized up to now, had a major role in precipitating the subprime crisis...

Wonder what will happen this time...

Humboldt Democratic Central Committee invites candidates to request endorsements

True, now they have a new head - Milt Boyd instead of the vociferous Patrick Riggs. Salzman's puppet group "Local Solutions" is no longer operating out of their office, far as I can tell - they served their purpose and are no longer needed. Salzman and Twombly are not longer pulling the strings...

"You can call or email me anytime, and I will meet with you..."

Again, this is excerpted from Lisa LaDeRoute's CourtTV Message Board. It chronicles her quest for justice in the death of her sister. To date, she cannot get an answer from Paul Gallegos as to whether or not her sister's case will ever be adjudicated.

I remember this debate (Gallegos and Dikeman on KHSU), and I remember the call. It seemed to be one of those staged to give Gallegos the advantage as he so artfully took advantage of it. But apparently it was not staged at all:

06-02-2006 Finally confronted DA and Deputy DA
Dear Readers, just thought I would share; last night they had a debate aired on a local radio talk show; not thinking that I would actually get a chance to ask a question, I went ahead and made the call anyway.

This is what I sent to a friend afterward:

I am still shaking from all the adrenaline, I tell you. I taped the show, and I even turned the tape over when it look like it was getting to close to the end, but I'm shaking so bad, when I tried to rewind it to play it for Sandy I couldn't get it to work.

It went something like this:

"Well, uh, (as soon as they said, you're on the air) So I said, I'm the sister of a homicide case, and the facilitator said, wait, we don't...........

And I said, "It's ok I won't give any specific information, about the case, then I said, I sent a letter to Worth oh about a year or so, and I'm still waiting for a response, which is why I've taken such drastic measures to make this call."

You could feel the air went really still, so I jumped in, and said, "In 1980 charges were filed against a suspect, the DA said that charges would be refiled, but not immediately, so my question is will charges ever be refiled, and if not will the family ever receive Andrea's remains.

The facilitator said, "I'm not sure we can ask that question, but I think I'll address it to Paul, unless you prefer Mr. Dikeman respond first."

Oh, my gosh, for just a moment, I felt like a little kid making a bully be accountable it was wonderful! I answered probably with too much enjoyment in my voice, and very matter of factly, "Oh, I think I'd like Worth to respond first, I'd like him to tell me why he hasn't responded to my letter yet." Oh it was a moment, I'll never forget.

Worth responded with, "Lisa I know that Mike Losey for the District Attorney's homicide case has spoken to you." (Completely dismissed my letter, or his accountability).

Then Worth says "I only have one active homicide case, and I don't know what ever happened after it was reassigned to someone else."

Anyway, the facilitator started to direct the question to Paul, and he just jumped in and said, "Lisa, haven't you and I talked?" And I said, "Yes, and I really appreciated you meeting with me and my family, he started to say something, and I was still talking, and I continued with "You were the only one that would give me the time of day".

Paul, paused for a moment, as to absorb as much of that PR as he could. Then he relaxed a bit, and said, "I know it's been a while since we spoke, but you can email me, do you have email access? (He knows I do) I said, "Yes" so Paul proceeds to give me his personal email address, and says "You can call or email me anytime, and I will meet with you, I recall now that there was an issue about your sisters' remains, but call and I'll schedule an appointment."

Then the facilitator immediately followed that last word, and said, "Ok, thank you Lisa, we'll take the next caller."

Oh, my gosh, I was shaking so bad, I know it wasn't nerves, because I really felt for the very first time, that I was as confident as I could be about anything, and I had the opportunity to finally confront them. All I know is for those brief seconds, I was basking in the moment, for all the sunshine I could.

Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, even though nothing was actually addressed, the true colors are beginning to shine through.

And this time they shined right through a radio, for all the listeners to come to their own conclusions.

YES!
****
06-18-2006 Deadfall

Well, I don't know why I should be surprised! I mean I took Mr. Gallegos up on his offer, I emailed him right after the radio show, when he said to contact him by email, and he would schedule a time to meet with me.

I emailed him read receipt, and I know he recieved my email the next day. A couple days later Mr. Gallegos won the DA election.

Wanting to make sure that Mr. Gallegos actually received my email, I printed a copy and mailed it to him personally certified return receipt. I received the receipt more than a week ago. Here it is now 6-18, and I still have not received a response to my email, which simply stated let me know when you will be available and I will work around your schedule to review Andrea's case. I did mention however, that I wanted to make sure he had a chance to review the case, so that we didn't repeat the same meeting we had in Oct. 2003, where he stated he wasn't familiar with the case.

So in my email I just said, lets go ahead and schedule a meeting at his earliest convenience, and hopefully by then he will have had a chance to get familiar with the case.

I guess that was asking to much, I just don't understand!

The good news is I just ordered several copies of the book "Deadfall" and I should receive them by Tuesday 6-20.

Yey!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm not sure what I expect from the book, if anything, but somehow I feel blessed that the story will finally be exposed!

Thank You Everyone for all your well wishes and continued support through out this past year, for that I will always be grateful!

Lisa
****

07-09-2006 No Subject
Well, another 4th of July come and gone already, hard to believe that it's been 23 years since Terry Lynn was murdered, bless her heart. Terry Lynn, Angh's and I grew up together, she was always protecting us, since she was so much bigger than most of the kids in school. Funny though, everyone was afraid of her and not only did she have a heart of gold, but she had the most gentle spirit of most people I've known.

Though Terry Lynn was found many years after she disappeared, they too only recovered her skull, her murderer was never apprehended.

I think this afternoon, I'll stop by and see her family. I've stayed in contact with her little sister, Lorri, throughout the years. It's sad but true, we have a pretty odd commonality that has kept us bonded throughout the years.

I'm curious to hear if anyone has read the book, what they think of it. I like to think that no news is good news, but my curiousity, gets the best of me sometimes.

And for any of you, who have been following, remember that email that I later sent by certified mail to the District Attorney recently, at his own invitation? Well, it's been well over a month now, since he's received both of my requests, to schedule a time to meet, like he said he would do on the live radio debate; and of course, I haven't heard a peep from the District Attorney's office.

I just don't get it! Why would someone string me on like that after all these years, and to get my hopes up that he really wanted to sit down and meet with me again, and to even go so far as to invite me to contact him on live radio, during a public debate, and then absolutely shut the door in my face, that's just unforgivable!

Ok, I've vented enough for one day!

Take Care!

Lisa

P.S. does anyone know anything about that unexpected Hero award, I'd really like to find out. I have a Hero in mind, "Harris" who really derserves the award!
****
7-23-2006 Well it's Affirmative!
Well, it's affirmative, that District Attorney had no intention of meeting with me as he stated he would do so on the live radio debate. It's now been over 6 weeks since I submitted my email request, as he instructed me to do; and of course to be sure he got it, I even sent it certified mail. But as usual I received absolutely no response, not even an acknowledgement, accept for the card that was returned documenting that my letter had been received.

I tell you, each time this situation repeats itself, where they tell me one thing and do another, or just completely ignore me, it's just another slap in the face, or rather another punch in the stomach.

I guess they, meaning the D.A.'s office, don't think I've suffered enough. Why else would they just keep making false promises? Do they really believe that I will just go away, without making them accountable? Huh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If they believe that then they are the ones who are being naive.

On a more positive note, I found on the web page about a week ago that "Deadfall" was rated 7 of Walmarts top ten new releases. That was real exciting, until I realized that's just Walmart's ranking. But still that's a good sign, I think.

Some of the people who have read the book have approached me about a petition, and to be honest, I haven't any idea how to go about circulating or developing a petition. Unfortunately, Kent seems to be too busy.

Does anyone else have any ideas, or good sources, i.e. links on how to develop? I'd be very appreciative for any suggestions at this point.

Thank you for your continued support
****
10-11-2006 I'm mad as Heck!
Hi Amenia,

You are very insightful, that's a special gift that not many people realize they have.

But you know just over a week ago, my husband and I attended a public gathering, honoring a public official who had just passed away, and to my surprise Paul Gallegos was there.

But what I still can't get over, is that this guy, Gallegos, went out of his way a few times, to let me know he was there, but not once did he approach me to even attempt to explain why he has not responded to my last letter, in which he publically requested that I send.

At one point, I actually had to walk around him, so not to bump into him, even though there was at least 2 feet distance all the way around him, if I didn't move in a different direction, I'm sure I would have stepped on his shoe, maybe I should have.

We had discussed approaching him, asside from the fact that we didn't want to make a big spectacle at a memorial service, if Paul really wanted to address the issues, he would have. And to confront him in a public place, he would have side stepped the real issue, just like he did on the radio, "Send me an email, and I'll sit down and talk to you', Yeah Right! I mailed him right away, that was June 7th and here it isanother birthday only a few days away, and all I want for my birthday is my sister!

Sorry, but I just had to vent, I've had it bottled in ever since I saw Gallegos.

Lisa
****

Here's INFORMED decision making for you

James Faulk starts out talking about local hairdressers being excited about the opportunity to give presidential candidate John Edwards a cheap haircut to help him shake off the criticism for his expensive habits (or were they hoping he'd pay THEM $400, that's not clear.)

Then, he branches off: Many local lock snippers, embittered by recent Humboldt County elections, pointed to the rifts created in their industry in last race for district attorney.

Paul Gallegos, flush with a full head of hair, seemed an obvious choice for the local beauty industry. But Worth Dikeman, man of the charming flesh-colored dome, had friends at least who needed haircuts, and many of those have been known to drop generous tips.

So the bloodbath ensued -- hairdresser versus stylist, sister versus sister, mother versus daughter, stylish man versus talkative woman.

In the end, youth and beauty won the day...

I guess that's why, despite all evidence of his incompetence, the Times Standard chose to endorse Gallegos in the last go-round, saying "He deserves an uninterrupted four-year term to show what he can do."

Just - lovely.

Last April...

Last April the Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee Member Greg Conners argued in favor of endorsing Paul Gallegos for District Attorney, portraying "the D.A. as an anti-corruption crusader who deserves another term.

A former Eureka city planning commissioner, Conners said he's "seen corruption at the local level as if it were a sewer I was walking through up to my waist" and "you couldn't get the local district attorney to touch those issues with a ten-foot pole."

But it's different now, Conners continued. "Paul Gallegos is the first district attorney that I know of, in my lifetime - and this a courthouse brat who's been involved in local politics talking - who's had the balls to go after corporate corruption and political corruption," he said.

Think about that.

We agree wholeheartedly on this one w/update

"As we approach the first anniversary of Moore's death, many questions still await answers, but there has been silence from the district attorney's office.

Silence will not make the questions go away, and the citizens of this city and this county -- as well as Moore's family -- deserve closure.
TS - Silence deafening as shooting anniversary nears

I'll go one step further, though, and say that Gallegos has no business making a decsion in this case. He should have kicked it up to the Attorney General long ago. He cannot be trusted to make the right decsion with regards to law enforcement. His attitude towards law enforcement was made quite clear during the recent election.

UPDATE:
Ahhh, the Dandy's take:
"Last week, we asked the question: What ever became of that? Specifically, we wondered what had become of several riveting events and controversies that dominated the headlines approximately 12 months ago, one of them the possibility of criminal charges being filed against members of the Eureka Police Department in connection with the shooting of Cheri Lyn Moore last April.

What, we wondered, was the hold-up? Either District Attorney Paul Gallegos will charge the officers with a crime, or he will not. He has yet to definitively do either. He has not charged, and he has not said he will not charge. And this is more than a little puzzling. The police stand-off with Moore, which ended with her death, lasted a little longer than two hours. There was a thorough, inter-agency investigation into the shooting, the results of which are on Gallegos' desk. There was a public inquest into the matter six months ago, at which nearly all the officers concerned, as well as others connected to the incident, testified under oath.

There are two matters for a prosecutor to consider when charging a crime, I'm told -- the facts and the law. It truly stretches one's credulity to imagine that either would take a year to research. In the case of the facts, the great bulk of the work has already been done -- forensic reports completed, witnesses interviewed, sworn testimony taken. It's not inconceivable that there would be a follow-up question or three, but it should hardly take six months to ask them. You'd think. The law, then? But this is an attorney's office. Great bound books detailing all the relevant statutory and case law lay at Gallegos' fingertips, and the DA bears a certificate from the state bar association which assures us that he knows how to read them.

We sought answers in an e-mail to Gallegos last week. We didn't hear back until after deadline. Here's his response, in toto: "All I can tell you is that we are evaluating the evidence that we have and will render an opinion on it as soon as we are able to."

The charitable onlooker might focus on the final phrase -- "as soon as we are able to." Having fired or otherwise driven off most of his experienced staff, Gallegos' office now suffers from terminal short-handedness, and what hands there are are mostly green. Therefore, perhaps even a case with as high a public profile as this one must sit on the backburner, waiting for ... something.

The onlooker not inclined to charity might say that Gallegos is a political creature first and foremost, and is simply sitting on the thing because he's unwilling to make a decision one way or the other for fear that it might piss off either a) his left-of-center base or b) the police. That's what an uncharitable onlooker might say."
***
(read the full column in this week's Journal.)

Hank reiterates on Eric's post: "Every person involved with the shooting has been interviewed by the Critical Incident Response Team, the inter-agency investigative squad lead by the District Attorney's Office. The CIRT report has been complete for over six months -- it was complete before the inquest and before the election, contrary to what you might have been led to believe.

Every single officer involved that day with the exception of one testified under oath during the coroner's inquest. All the information and the testimony from that proceeding has been on Gallegos' desk since September."
***

Well, I definitely qualify as an uncharitable onlooker, and my take is that anyone who watches Paul knows exactly what is going on - he always hesitates when he is being pushed to do something he knows is wrong and indefensible - and he doesn't have Stoen here to help him make this one fly. He can't come up with the equivalent of "the right to lie" rhetoric. So he drags his feet until he is pushed into a corner, and then he'll do as he was told.

If he had all the courage all his devotees gave him credit for, he would buck Ken Miller and say, "Look, Ken, I'm sorry, but there's just nothing there. It's tragic. It is sad. And there's nothing there for you to gnash your teeth on anymore."

It'll be interesting to see what he chooses. Most likely, as others have said, he will take the Grand Jury "out."

Four more years

link