[cincinnati65]

My thinking regarding this statement is this: Someone, somewhere knew EXACTLY where this donation took place. Others know EXACTLY where that picture in the background is located. Yet, no one has provided this information to any media outlet?

Methinks the media is trying to spin the Simon-blunder angle hot and heavy, before ultimately reporting the truth on the location, showing Simon was right all along.

You can bet someone in the media knows where this exchange took place. Why hasn't it been reported?

[GraniteStateConservative]

Simon was hoaxed and stupidly went forward with the pic before verifying its veracity.

He's got idiots running his campaign.

[Congressman Billybob]

As I said on numerous threads on this $10,000 photo op, the key was to locate that huge modern artwork on the wall behind Angele. That was unique, expensive, and known.

Now the painting has been located. It was and is on private property. And receipt of a campaign donation on private property is legal in California. So the charge based on the photograph is false.

But the general charge, that Davis runs a "cash-and-carry" Administration, remains and is true. Bribery of public officials is usually proved through "kickbacks." Official steers contract to company. Company kicks back part of the contract price to official.

Davis is more subtle than that. He deals in "kickfronts." (I invented that word, so please give credit where credit is due.) Company donates money to official's campaign, not to him personally. Board or administrator appointed by official then gives valuable benefits to company. The payment to the official comes before the act, not after.

Of course, the kickfront requires the company to believe that the official will keep his part of the bargain. It requires that the official be an "honest politician." That is using the Maryland-New Jersey definition of an honest politician, "Once he's bought, he stays bought."

Unless someone turns states' evidence and squeals, the kickfront pattern is legal on its face. Nathanson did turn states' evidence. That's why Davis has fought for two years to keep the courts from releasing that document. Now that the US Supreme Court declined to act on that case on Monday of this week, the Nathanson letter will probably hit the papers before the Simon-Davis election.

It might have a similar impact as the Chang Memorandum did on Senator Robert ("the Public Official") Torricelli. Governor Gray ("high public official") Davis should then be referred to that way, because that's the code phrase used for Davis in the Nathanson letter.

Congressman Billybob

Click for "Oedipus and the Democrats"

Click for "Til Death Do Us Part."

Click for "to Restore Trust in America"

[ladyinred]

I have been thinking the very same thing! Why aren't they reporting where this picture was taken? Why aren't they reporting many things about the most corrupt governor California has ever had?