Mayor Miguel Pulido should join those asking Bustamante to resign now

View Comments

• The Appointed Incumbent ballot designation will get whoever has it elected in November and even the person who swears he/she will not run in November will figure that out and run in November. Alderete needs to nail down his 4th vote (He has Tinajero, Martinez, and Sarmiento), get appointed, and then he might as well measure his Council Office for curtains because the seat will be his. Pulido, Benavides, and Alvarez understand this and will not be that 4th vote unless they figure out what's in it for them. This isn't Ward 4, there are LOTS of great well educated people in Ward 3 (home to Loretta Sanchez, Lou Correa, 3 Rancho Board members, former State Sen. Dunn, two former CEOS of OCTA, former head of the San. District, and many others) who are well qualified to serve and Pulido/Alvarez/Benavides will not vote for the first guy/gal who steps up and says they want it just because Vince, Sal, and Michele want control of the Council. Wishful thinking on their part, and I think Alderete is one of a hundred or so in Ward 3 who would do a fine job.

  • So where were all these great candidates in 2008?

• "I do believe that someone should be appointed"...... Hmmmmm

  You are changing Mill!....... is that good or bad?

  In the case of Sarmiento you have venomously opposed an appointment and I was the only one arguing before the council that the appointment is proper way to go.

  Based on my brilliant argument the council took a vote and I have prevail.

  So here you have it forgetful Mill.

• I can't help but wonder why anyone would allow their letter to a public official be posted on a blog for everyone to see. Entertainment value? Bragging rights? This seems rather bizarre to me.

  • I asked Sean for permission to post it. It is a well drafted letter that I hope will inspire others to also contact Pulido.

• "This seems rather bizarre to me"....... Hmmmmmm

  What is bizarre me Connie is your confusion.

  I have nothing to say to a public official what it can't be said publicly, therefore, when I will then you should be concerned.

• Mr Mill’s letter is just a partisan attack. This is from a person who believes the democrat councilmembers and candidates that were in fact convicted of felony political corruption and were removed from office because they refused to resign and then sent to prison are really innocent. But has no problem with demanding a republican councilmember resign because of some alleged and so far unproven crimes.

  We will have to wait and see if any council member decides to join the lynch mob or keeps a civil decorum expected of elected leaders.

  • Ted Moreno was set up by a police informant who previously tried to entrap my friend Lou López, A Republican Councilman in Anaheim. Lou was a cop and he rejected the bait.

    What Ted did was a victimless crime that in no way compares to they charges Bustamante is facing. And it is his fellow Republicans who are slamming him the most - Rackauckas, Moorlach, and Nelson.

    Mill clearly outlined why Bustamante should resign, which really comes down to the fact that his problems are holding up city business.

    The Council majority is already in record that Bustamante should resign. His only defenders are the Usual Suspects he has carried water for for years. They see they writing on the wall. Soon there will only be one Councilman who has them on speed dial, and Benavides better wake up to reality. The Usual Suspects no longer matter in our city.

• Admin says: July 9, 2012 at 6:04 am “The Council majority is already in record that Bustamante should resign”

  Posted by Admin on July 6th, 2012 “Santa Ana Mayor Miguel Pulido has been silent thus far on the matter … My sources tell me though that he is standing by Bustamante.”

  So what is it? Is the council on the “record” to lynch him first and then wait for a trial, or are they on the side “of due process”?

  At least Mr Mill has the common courtesy to put “ “alleged” crimes” in his letter, some other posters/blogger have not and may face issues themselves when the criminal case falls apart.

  If I recall, the councilwoman MPT asked the city attorney to check and see if the ones who have recused themselves, in fact have a conflict. So if there is a question on “holding up city business” you are looking in the wrong direction.

  “T M was set up by a police informant” “What T(M) did was a victimless crime”
  Come on, that victimless crime was a felony that bought him 6 years in prison.

• "So what is it? Is the council on the 'record' to lynch him first and then wait for a trial, or are they on the side 'of due process'?"......... Hmmmmmmm

  cook,

  You are very smart person and usually very well informed on the issues, however, time to time you come up with a really bovine ideas.

  Carlos resignation is not about the doe process, guilt nor innocents.

  It is about removing the bad spotlight, a form of defamation cast on the entire council and the city.

  You know very well that defamation is about how others interpret the defamatory statement and not about its truthfulness.

  Example: You stop on your tricycle next to a hooker on the Harbor and will talk about how beautiful day it is. Your wife and neighbor drives by and see you talking to a hooker. There is no way to disapprove to them that you are not trying pickup a hooker but you put a bad spotlight on yourself and your family in light of your neighbors.

  Your wife will never forgive you and your neighbors will think bad about her more than about you. See Clinton and Hilary! She is still paying for protecting Bill but Bill is not.

  If however if same happen where you would be talking to a COP, over your ticket, you would be a OK with your wife and neighbors because a ticket will not put you in the bad spotlight.

  Probably the best example is so laced honer killing of a family member practiced by the Muslims. It is only way how to remove bad spotlight brought on your family because of one members alleged wrong doing.

  THEREFORE, by removing Carlos from the council we will cleanse the council and city of bad spotlight -- that is not a trial

  However, Carlos innocents will be tried as provided by the constitution in the court of law, proving him innocent or guilty but it will never remove the bad spotlight which he will carry with him for ever!

  Same like Ted Moreno who paid to the society for his crime but it always will be bad dud regardless of how much lipstick admin and Mill will put on him.

  Rozumíš?