I accept your statement as true. That still does not answer the questions posed.

Let’s start with an easy one. Have you discussed the payment of legal bills involved in this case with your attorney?

At the same time, you have written a log response to questions this blog isn’t asking and accusations not being made. No one is claiming you are personally benefitting from this suit or that anyone is paying you, so there is no need to keep denying that you are.

Please, at long last, provide a simple yes or no answer to these questions: are you paying for Woocher’s legal services with your own funds? Are you the only person/entity paying for Woocher’s services?

A simple “yes” or “no” will suffice. Why you refuse to give a clear simple answer to these very relevant questions is amazing.

Ooops. looks like I got scooped on my own story.

CW

I will dutifully report any increase in income on my next set of disclosure forms, and you will have to wait for those, because I am not sharing info here. I do not know how to be any clearer than I have been, without sharing personal information that is none of anyone’s business. I have no conflict; I have done nothing illegal, immoral, or unethical.

But then, I do not think the Lodge camp is particularly interested in the truth. I fact, I suspect they KNOW that this is an effective tool to use against me. There are those around Lodge who have their own knowledge of my family’s situation, and they know that I only worked part-time last year because I was dealing with these family issues with the estate. They also know I find it too painful to discuss, (especially online with strangers) and I cannot imagine a scenario in which they did not tell Lodge he is taking on a pitbull (or porcupine) with the resources to back it up. So one has to wonder, did Lodge and his team throw around accusations knowing survivor’s guilt ensures I will not defend myself? What an example of the milk of human kindness the Lodge team seems to present. This is the leadership Anaheim needs?

Rather, I suspect the goal of these constant hit-pieces questioning my integrity is not about getting to the truth, I think it is about discrediting me as quickly as possible, lest anyone actually listen to what I have to share after the lawsuit is decided. I DID do quite a lot of my own research, which my legal team was able to use, in combination with some excellent information that their office came up with. The result is a clearer picture of the candidate, and how he appears to have conducted himself over the years, discovered in an attempt to document what he called himself prior to becoming a candidate. Someone is working very hard to ensure my credibility is tainted, possibly before I share what I have learned.

While Mr. Woocher’s name may be on the door, these smaller cases are passed along to others on staff, I have yet to encounter Mr. Woocher and his $500 an hour Invoice that everyone is so excited about. I think that may be where Vern misunderstood what I said about the nature of my payment arrangements with the lawyers. On the other hand, I do know that at least MY attorney can spell, check a document for typos before sending, complete a sentence, and cite relevant and current case law, so I believe I am getting the better bargain. I guess you do get what you pay for.

My resources are not the issue here, the lawsuit is, and Vern at OrangeJuice did what others failed at. He asked for, and posted, the (public records) documents that show both Lodge’s arguments and mine. I would encourage anyone genuinely interested in the facts of the case to check the OJ blog and read the primary source information. Decide for yourselves if Steve Lodge appears to have met the legal standard for describing himself to voters as he has requested . If it turns out that Lodge does not meet that standard, then why am I portrayed as evil for demanding that the law be applied equally to all candidates? That is not petty or frivolous, it is fair and just.

Ultimately what you and I think does not matter, it is up to the Judge, but I feel very strongly that I have done the right thing, and for the right reasons, and win or lose I will never regret having taken the chance.

As far as reporting of gifts…if Judge Charles Margines rules in my favor Tuesday, and I believe he will or I would not have bet my family’s stability on it, and if Lodge is ordered to cover attorney’s fees and expenses, then have I accepted a reportable gift from Lodge? And if so, must I report the original source of those funds, namely the deluge of outside special interest money that comprises his warchest? I did ask about that, and as it turns out, no, paying the legal bills is not a gift. I do not personally or financially benefit from this case in any way. I have asked for no damages, when I leave the courtroom my circumstances are exactly as they were before I began the case, I am essentially acting in the public interest as a voter. None of the parties are related to the Cemetery District in any way, so there is no opportunity for influence peddling, which is what the FPPC is looking for. There is no reportable gift.
What is especially troubling is that “OC Insider” writes under a pen name, and then demands transparency from me. “OC Insider” could easily be Lodge’s campaign manager, attorney, Lodge himself, or Lodge’s sister. They certainly appear to have an axe to grind, or an agenda to promote.

OCPolitical enjoys a reputation for accuracy and credibility, and I like and respect those individuals who are maintaining the site. But if anonymous bloggers are permitted to create posts more appropriate to a gossip column than a political site, that reputation is unlikely to last.

Great investigative journalism there, “OC Insider.”

http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2012/09/it-just-gets-better-steve-chavez-lodge-vs-cynthia-ward-showdown/

Not that any of this has anything to do with what Steve’s gonna have to face on Tuesday.

Wrong.

Cynthia Ward is not doing the legwork on her own. How do I know? Because Cynthia said so herself in one of her comments on Voice of OC on Thursday:

“Because Lodge appears to have failed to send my attorney a single independent document showing he had not abandoned the Chavez name decades ago, my attorney went digging. And digging.”

Here’s how it works: Woocher has teams of lawyers who do the research. He charges hundreds of dollars for their time. Plus expenses. Lawyers bill back everything. It’s a safe bet Woocher’s bill will be in at least the $15,000-$20,000 range. That’s more than 10% of Ward’s maximum stated annual income.

Is dat so? What are these resources that Ward left off of her Form 700?