Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Pondering Litigation

If any of you follow the local news, a very important story broke yesterday about a financial donor to the 2009 Villaraigosa re-election campaign being nailed with charges of fraud.

I was a candidate for Mayor in that election, which Villaraigosa won by carrying about 55% of a very small turnout of the vote. Only 15% of the voters showed up in that election, because Mayor Villaraigosa was being challenged by nine other men who combined didn't have 10% of the Mayors campaign funds.

The media pretty much refused to even cover the event, writing it off as a non-story.

I ran in that election because I despised Villaraigosa and everything he stood for.
I was offended that no powerful political figure had the guts to challenge him.
At a minimum, Villaraigosa is a grudge-driven racist. At his worst, he is a dangerous sociopath who may have crippled the city for decades with his widespread corruption and looting of public funds.
The other local, elected city officials were gutless for not trying to remove him from power.

Villaraigosa was unpopular, and even though he bought the election, he barely won.

I have to admit I am considering litigation against this developer Alexander Hugh and all his associates that participated in this campaign finance fraud.

Maybe we can hit Villaraigosa with some subpoenas also.

It would be interesting to see how deep this corruption goes.

Could these financial donors be held financially responsible for the nine other candidates losing the election? I'm not sure.

I have never heard of any political candidate taking legal action against financial donors of their opponent. I think it would be a precedent-setting case. It might even have to go to the Supreme Court.