In 10 years covering San Diego politics, including the one where Bob Filner was mayor, I have never seen a more bizarre political scandal than the one surrounding Carl DeMaio’s congressional campaign over the last few weeks.

We decided to pull back and lay out everything we know — and don’t — about what has happened.

Here’s how different perspectives on the scandal evolved over time. First, we have to start with a minor media controversy nobody could have imagined we’d still be talking about.

May 12, 2014: The Plagiarized Report

On the morning of May 12, DeMaio blasted out this report he said he wrote  about members of Congress receiving a pension and a congressional salary:


This was a classic DeMaio media play, complete with a villain, eye-popping facts and his preferred typeface.

We Stand Up for You. Will You Stand Up for Us?

But National Journal quickly protested. It looked like the report was cut and pasted from the Washington D.C. publication.

By the end of the day, DeMaio apologized to the magazine. He said staffers had produced the report, and he wasn’t aware of the plagiarism. But he also took responsibility.

“I don’t throw my staff under the bus,” he said.

That did not last long.

May 14, 2014: The Staffer

On May 14, two days after the plagiarism mess erupted, U-T San Diego ran a letter to the editor about the disputed report from a Del Mar resident named Todd Bosnich.

Bosnich is this guy (pic via Twitter):


He was the political director of the campaign, known to fight with liberals and the media on Twitter. His letter to the editor was a mistake — the product of the campaign trying to put on a public opinion show about its preferred topics. Staffers are supposed to find supporters in the community to sign their names to letters to the editor — not have their own names appear.

More importantly for this exercise, the letter is evidence that Bosnich was still on DeMaio’s team after the plagiarism incident.

According to emails obtained by the Washington Examiner, Bosnich was getting assignments as late as May 15. And Bosnich’s lawyer says he was fired on May 19, a week after the plagiarism incident.

Yet DeMaio’s team remains firm that he was fired for the plagiarism incident alone.

DeMaio’s spokesman Dave McCulloch said the letter to the editor wasn’t something Bosnich was supposed to do, but it was not the reason he was fired.

“As we have been very clear, Todd Bosnich was terminated for plagiarism,” McCulloch said.

That’s a crucial part of DeMaio’s story.

May 28, 2014: The Break-In


The DeMaio campaign reported a break-in at its campaign headquarters only days before the primary election on May 28.

DeMaio’s spokesperson clarified that it was mostly very damaging vandalism.

Here’s how McCulloch described the damange to NBC 7 San Diego: “Almost every cord inside the entire office – phone cords, communications, network cords, power cords – appears to have been cut.”

He also said the perpetrator poured water on laptops, printers and copiers and stole gas cards. Gas cards, in fact, were the only thing McCulloch or anyone from the campaign said was stolen.

DeMaio went on Fox News three days after the break-in and described his suspicions (emphasis added):

I don’t want to speculate but the San Diego police believe that this is politically motivated. The intruders didn’t take anything of economic value. They didn’t take computers out. What they did was they cut every single cord in the office. In this day and age, campaigns have become very technology-dependent. We have a sophisticated data system, a computer system that tracks every voter, whether they’re supporting, what issue is important to them. Of course, we have our entire communications system that is based on computerized phones. They came in and destroyed everything. They wiped us out entirely, took us off the internet. It was designed to silence the campaign very clearly.

Note the bolded line. Two things: They did report that several hundred dollars of gas cards were stolen. Perhaps he meant “significant economic value.” But secondly, this seems intended to both drive home that it wasn’t a property crime but a political one, while leaving open the door to another type of theft.

That explanation would later evolve.

The Fox News anchor asked DeMaio whether the break-in happened because he is a gay man. “Who knows?” DeMaio responded.

10News’ Steve Fiorina reported that the entry point came from an adjoining office. A file cabinet, with files inside, was untouched, while another was stripped of several hundred dollars worth of gasoline debit cards.

“Whoever broke in had some knowledge about the office,” Fiorina said.

Again, nothing other than the gas cards were reported stolen to the public.

Many months later, in front of TV cameras during a debate, DeMaio would claim that something else — something sacred to the campaign — was stolen as well. We’ll get to that in a minute.

June 2, 2014: The Silent Interview

Bosnich gave a 27-minute interview to Mike Slater, a conservative radio host for KFMB.

He detailed how, over several months, he said DeMaio would pressure him sexually, touch him inappropriately and then how the behavior peaked in one terrible encounter April 30 when DeMaio called him to his office and Bosnich found him masturbating.

He also described how the campaign manager, Tommy Knepper, had offered him $50,000 if he would sign a non-disclosure agreement and leave quietly. Bosnich also described one incident that helped him decide to come forward: His mother, he said, had received an anonymous, threatening email.

The interview did not air.

But CNN got a hold of it. (And it’s posted here thanks to CityBeat.)

Aug. 29, 2014: The Inside Job Theory

After a relatively quiet summer, the break-in breaks back into the news.

The police began to let some information out about their investigation.

Kevin Mayer, the San Diego Police Department’s spokesman, sent several news organizations a statement: “Based upon our investigation, it appears that a burglary of the DeMaio campaign office did occur.”

And he included this: “Two former staff members were identified by the victim as potential suspects early in the investigation. Both staff members are cooperating with our investigation.”

NBC 7 San Diego was the first to mention that the campaign believed something of value beyond gas cards was taken, citing an unnamed source: “The source says before the burglary and vandalism, two DeMaio staffers were terminated for taking proprietary information from the campaign.”

This is bizarre. Either NBC was wrong, or someone close to the campaign was alleging sensitive campaign information was stolen before the break-in.

Oct. 8, 2014: The Press Conference

Tony Perry, the longtime San Diego beat writer for the Los Angeles Times, showed up to a DeMaio press conference and had a remarkable exchange with the candidate. Here’s the transcript, courtesy of Wendy Fry, from NBC 7.

We had heard rumors but this was the first time many of us heard about Bosnich’s story.

Perry asked DeMaio about an allegation that he had sexually harassed a staffer. And this is where, for the first time, DeMaio blamed that staffer (who we now know is Bosnich) for the burglary of his office.

You know, an individual who is the prime suspect to the break-in in our campaign office would manufacture such an outrageous lie, but again, all the evidence that was collected by the police department clearly indicated this individual was the prime suspect and it’s unfortunate but we will continue to allow the District Attorney to proceed with her case and weighing the case to prosecute for the break-in of our office.

Another reporter at the press conference asked DeMaio to clarify something he had said earlier: Had the police chief called him to assure him the investigation into the break-in and possible criminal sexual harassment charges against him had been closed and he was cleared? This is direct from Fry’s transcript:

DEMAIO: Yes. And she informed me of this in August. And I do know that the case against this individual is has (sic) been proffered to the district attorney and again I do not want to comment on any evidence that was collected and provided regarding the break-in into our office but this is, again, par for the course in politics. If an individual does something wrong, they will continue to make up something. And I think that’s pretty shameful. Our campaign has been very, very confident that this individual will be held accountable for their actions.

That was misplaced confidence.

And the police chief refused to confirm that she called DeMaio.

Oct. 10, 2014: The Bombshell

CNN reporter Chris Frates somehow obtained the interview KFMB’s Mike Slater had done with Bosnich.

In lurid detail, on national TV, Bosnich’s allegations against DeMaio were laid out. Bosnich cooperated with the reporter and went on camera.

Once again, DeMaio said unequivocally that Bosnich had broken into the office, and the harassment allegations were just a story the former staffer made up when confronted about that crime.

This was also the first time DeMaio alleged that Bosnich was the one who had plagiarized the report in May. And it’s the first time that the campaign had informed anyone that he had fired a staffer for the plagiarism incident.

“He was terminated. He admitted that he plagiarized. He apologized for plagiarizing and when we told him he was no longer welcome in the staff and in the campaign office, even as a volunteer, he left. Days later, he broke in,” DeMaio told CNN. His campaign manager, Knepper, repeated the same charge: Bosnich’s claims were completely fabricated to somehow distract from the burglary.

Suddenly this mystery of deceit and violence was a national story.

DeMaio denied the sexual harassment allegations. Bosnich was equally adamant that he did not break in to the office. Someone was lying.

Then DeMaio decided it was time to bring up something else about the break-in.

Oct. 17, 2014: The Bible

Just when we thought the mystery couldn’t get any weirder, it did. During a taping of NBC 7 San Diego’s weekly series “Politically Speaking,” DeMaio endured a series of questions from host Gene Cubbison about whether he would take a lie-detector test about the ordeal. After all, he had done one before, when a nasty allegation surfaced from his former colleague on the City Council, Ben Hueso.

DeMaio demurred but then turned to his rival, Scott Peters, who was standing next to him. Here’s how NBC 7 described what he said:

“And Mr. Peters, I just want to ask a very simple question. Did your campaign come into possession of our strategy book, all of our direct mail pieces in the last five months?” asked DeMaio.

Peters responded with: “In early June, information was forwarded to our campaign, which we immediately turned over to the police.”

What? For the first time since the break-in in May, we learned about a missing “strategy book.” Peters would later refuse to disclose in what form it came to him or who sent it.

The playbook grew in legend. Here’s how DeMaio spokesman McCulloch described it to KUSI (emphasis mine):

“This campaign document, or binder or playbook, is our, we call it our campaign bible because it shows our strategy internally for what we want to do throughout the campaign, and it was shocking, it was outrageous to find out this morning that Mr. Peters had this binder,” said McCulloch.

This seems a little odd. First, to see it described as a bible. But more interesting was McCulloch’s claim that DeMaio only found out that morning, during the show, that Peters had received it. Seems like he knew pretty well when he turned to ask Peters about it in front of cameras.

But back to the bible. The Republican Party of San Diego’s leader, Tony Krvaric, chimed in on Twitter, claiming he had seen it.

Five inches with draft mail pieces, polling and budgets? Would mail pieces for the election in November be done in May, when this was supposedly stolen?

Krvaric and Republican activists began demanding that Peters reveal how he got a hold of this bible.

DeMaio’s campaign also went on the offensive against Peters. In this U-T San Diego piece, they claimed he and his campaign were actively promoting Bosnich’s accusations.

“While Carl is trying to focus on fixing Washington’s broken political system, Scott Peters continues to use push polls, buy ads, and pitch reporters on this vile and unsubstantiated smear that straight politicians seldom have to endure,” McCulloch said. “Peters is resorting to no less than a 1950s homophobic campaign to imply a gay man is a sexual deviant.”

Peters’ team responded that it was DeMaio’s own former staffer, the accuser himself, fueling the story.

Bosnich also held that this wasn’t about helping Peters:

“I am, and have always been, a proud gay man and Republican. It was a dream to have the opportunity to help seat the first gay Republican to the United States Congress. I wanted to be a part of that. Unfortunately, I have since learned that dream was naïve,” he said in a press release.

Now, undoubtedly originating from Bosnich, extremely embarrassing internal emails from DeMaio’s campaign began appearing in the media. One, from the campaign manager Tommy Knepper, outlined how campaign workers might spot spies in their midst. If a person was black, he said, it was a “red flag.” He apologized.

Oct. 20, 2014: The Authorities

Almost five months after a break-in at DeMaio’s campaign headquarters and almost two weeks after news broke that a former staffer was alleging DeMaio sexually harassed him, District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis announced that she was declining to prosecute in both cases because of insufficient evidence.

Sexual harassment is usually a workplace and civil issue. Criminal harassment or battery is a higher bar, which we explained last year.

DeMaio had said he was certain of Bosnich’s guilt in the burglary.

What’s more, the chief of police, Shelley Zimmerman, refused to clarify whether she had, as DeMaio claimed, called to tell him charges against him were put to rest.

Instead, she issued this statement.

Both the alleged burglary to Carl DeMaio’s campaign office and the allegations of sexual misconduct against Carl DeMaio were taken seriously and investigated thoroughly by the San Diego Police Department. The highest level of confidentially was maintained during the entire investigative process, and will continue to be maintained, to protect the integrity of each investigation.

The police department spokesman had earlier said that it appeared a burglary had, indeed, occurred. But now, Zimmerman was calling it an “alleged” burglary.

The spokesman told NBC 7’s Fry, when she asked for clarification, to read the statement closely line by line.

Present: The Outstanding Questions

Only more questions have arisen now that the DA and police have indicated they can’t press charges. Here are the big ones:

I. If police aren’t going to charge Bosnich, who broke into DeMaio’s office? It seems like, had it been really been him, and had they confronted him, they’d have squeezed it out of him easily. And if it really was an inside job, as it seems to have been, then who did it?

II. What the heck is this campaign bible? I’ve surveyed many local campaigners. Some say it’s common, others say it’s absurd to imagine: A campaign printing out all its strategy, budgets, direct mail pieces, voter universes and polls into one five-inch binder? And this is all relevant strategy even many months before the final contest with the incumbent?

And how did Peters’ campaign obtain this sacred little book? Was it delivered in person? Sent by mail? Put inside a birthday cake on their doorstep? Why won’t Peters say?

And why did DeMaio wait until now to reveal it had been stolen, especially since he was making the case in May that the burglary was a political attack? Wouldn’t this have helped prove that? How did he know Peters had obtained it? Why did his campaign say they only found out when Peters responded to DeMaio’s question that day?

III. Why is the chief of police being so coy about DeMaio’s claim that she called him and told him he was in the clear? She’s obviously trying to communicate that’s not the full story. Why can’t she just say, “No, I didn’t call him”? Or  “Yes, but it wasn’t how he put it”?

And what’s the deal with “alleged” burglary in the chief’s statement? Is there some doubt a burglary occurred?

IV. DeMaio’s team claims Bosnich was fired for authoring the plagiarized report and no other reason. If so, why was he kept on staff for a week after the controversy?

V: The big question is simpler. Bosnich says he was harassed, fired and offered money to stay quiet. He didn’t take it and started talking, first to KFMB and then to CNN. DeMaio says he’s the victim of a disgruntled ex-employee who has fabricated an elaborate tale after being investigated for a burglary.

But the DA decided not to prosecute the break-in and we’re back to the basics of the mystery: One of them is lying, profusely. Who?

Liam Dillon contributed to this report.

    This article relates to: 52nd Congressional District Race, Government, News, Politics

    Written by Scott Lewis

    Scott Lewis oversees Voice of San Diego’s operations, website and daily functions as Editor in Chief. He also writes about local politics, where he frequently breaks news and goes back and forth with local political figures. Contact Scott at or 619.325.0527, and follow him on Twitter at @vosdscott.

    Joe Point
    Joe Point subscriber

    Let's review....allegations from his peers at City Hall, and now 2 former staff me...that's at least three people that can confirm Carl is very creepy to have around.  Sounds like a "Filner" situation and look at all the people that denied there was a problem with that situation.  Carl is just a scandal bomb waiting to go off.  I just hope it won't be associated with San Diego....remember the history of this district??

    obboy13 subscriber

    Scott, here's an interesting quote from Alison Rentschler, who worked as DeMaio's deputy campaign manager for several weeks this past spring—before leaving to work for the San Diego County Republican Party:

    "I worked at the Carl DeMaio campaign as the Deputy Campaign Manager in May 2014 and can confirm Todd was not fired for plagiarism. Carl was very involved with the report and referred to it as his 'baby.' I know Todd, he is an honest and trustworthy person."

    Her statement may help you to answer questions IV and V in your article.  I admit I already believed DeMaio was the one spouting all the lies.  Ms Rentschler's statement should seal the deal for everyone else.

    ZachW subscriber

    I can't stand DeMaio, his politics, his policies, he is a vindictive, immature person.  BUT, a plus to electing him would be the fodder for late night comedians.  Can you imagine what John Oliver or Stephen Colbert could do with this guy?  It's pure platinum.  They will just have to work quick if/when he is elected to get all the bits in before DeMaio is hauled off to prison.

    Mark Giffin
    Mark Giffin subscribermember

    'Like sands through the hourglass so are the Days of our Lives.' 

    We sure like our drama in this town.

    obboy13 subscriber

    Nice timeline Scott, and very helpful in trying to determine who's lying.  Toward that end, let's distill it even more.  The timeline begins with Demaio blasting out a " report he said he wrote about members of Congress receiving a pension and a congressional salary."  Lie number 1, even at that time, Carl must have known he was just taking credit for someone else's work he just didn't know who it really was.  Scoreboard: DeMaio 1 - Bosnich 0.  Next Carl says, “I don’t throw my staff under the bus.”  Unless he was referring to a single specific bus, we all know that's lie number 2.  Scoreboard: DeMaio 2 - Bosnich 0. 

    Next comes the firing of Todd Bosnich for plagarism, a full week after the plagarism was revealed.  DeMaio's people insist he was fired for plagarism, however, Bosnich, says he was fired the day after he confronted Carl about his behavior.  We're left to wonder who is telling the truth here; was Todd Bosnich fired for confronting Carl and made the scapegoat for the plagarized report, or was DeMaio's campaign just a little slow to get around to letting him go?  So which side seems more believable, Carl DeMaio the self-professed reformer, whose main defense has been "no I didn't," or the long-time republican staffer who sacrificed his career and passed a couple of lie detector tests?  Let me answer that question: Scoreboard: DeMaio 3 - Bosnich 0.

    Then we have the break in/burglary where Carl and his team really begin to put points up on the scoreboard in an attempt to spin it as a politically motivated event:

    "I don’t want to speculate but the San Diego police believe that this is politically motivated."  It seems that           whenever Carl "doesn't want" to do something sooner or later he does.  He's not the spokesperson for the SDPD and while Carl might have believed it was all politically motivated, nobody from the SDPD was saying that to the public that early in their invewstigation.  Lie # 4

    "Nothing of value was taken" Lie #5 as hundreds of dollars worth of gas cards were taken.

    Later, after the allegations of sexual improprieties were made public, Carl countered with "but again, all the evidence that was collected by the police department clearly indicated this individual (Bosnich) was the prime suspect.  Again, Carl doesn't speak for the SDPD, and a PD spokesperson had said "“two former staff members were identified by the victim as potential suspects early in the investigation. Both staff members are cooperating with our investigation.”  Lie # 6, no evidence, and no prime suspect except in Carl's mind.  Scoreboard: DeMaio 6 - Bosnich 0.

    Sexual harassment, did it happen or not?  Because this, as with most sexual predation, happened in private it is essentially a he said - he said situation.  While it's obvious that one of the players is lying, since there's no evidence one way or the other here, it goes up on the scoreboard as a 0 - 0 tie.  Scoreboard: DeMaio 6 - Bosnich 0.  (That being said, on a personal note I believe the guy who sacrificed his future career and passed two lie detector tests over Carl DeMaio.)

    The "Bible."  More than four months after the break-in/burglary, and less than a month prior to the election, Carl ambushes Scott Peters with an accusation that Peters had somehow participated in something nefarious by receiving DeMaio's playbook, and worst of all reading it.  Peters for his part acknowledged that his campaign received the book three months earlier, and within 24 hours turned it in to the SDPD.  This is political theater at it's best/worst.  Did Peters and/or his staff read the book?  Of course they did.  Had the roles been reversed, Carl and his staff would have read Peter's book.  On further review though Carl had said nothing of value was taken from his office, and since the playbook was now being described as very valuable Carl scores lie #7 either for his original omission or for suddenly ascribing great value to an item that had previously had none.  Additionally, DeMaio's spokesman chimes in with "we just found out about Peters having the book this morning."  Are we to believe the police held on to a piece of evidence in a high profile case and Chief Zimmerman, who according to Carl kept him apprised on the investigation, never let DeMaio or his campaign know about it; and since Carl has previously stated he's responsible for what comes out of his campaign, the spokesman's statement becomes lie #8.  Scoreboard: DeMaio 8 - Bosnich 0.

    Finally in a last minute attempt to make his opponent out to be the bad guy in all this, Carl, his staff, and now joined by Tony Krvaric accuse Peters of pushing the Bosnich story, lie #9, and resorting to a 1950's style homophobic campaign, lie #10.  Final score for this series of episodes: DeMaio 10 - Bosnich 0.

    Additionally on the periphery, some are worried about the actions of the Chief of Police and the District Attorney.  Would it have been better if both had been a bit more transparent regarding the activities of their Departments?  Sure.  Chief Zimmerman could certainly put to rest some suspicions by opening up about her communications (if any) directly with Carl.  However at the end of the day there was not enough physical evidence for a provable prosecution of either allegation.   

    Finally Scott, don't get too worked up about the use of "alleged" burglary.  In this age of attorneys on every street corner, public officials are admonished by their own attorneys to speak in in public only about allegations until such time as a conviction has been won.  As far fetched as it seems, there's a slim chance no burglary occurred and the whole thing was orchestrated by the DeMaio campaign.  So until thgere's a conviction let's cut our Chief a little slack.

    Once again, a great compilation by you and the VOSD.  Thanks.    

    Gregor subscriber

    Carl DeMaio took it upon himself to publicly announce as fact what (he alleges) the SDPD "believes" and who are "prime suspects" in its criminal cases. It is glaringly obvious to me that the SDPD, when asked to speak for itself, has said nothing of the sort.  

    "I don’t want to speculate but the San Diego police believe that this is politically motivated."  Carl DeMaio

     ". . . all the evidence that was collected by the police department clearly indicated this individual (Bosnich) was the prime suspect . . ."  Carl DeMaio

    Compare those statements with:

    “Two former staff members were identified by the victim (Carl DeMaio) as potential suspects early in the investigation. Both staff members are cooperating with our investigation.” Kevin Mayer, SDPD Spokesman

    Chris Brewster
    Chris Brewster subscribermember

    Thank you for this thorough piece. Much needed to inform your readers and well done.

    My greatest concern in all this has to do with the Police Chief. The DA is an elected official, but by law the Police Chief is required to be completely apolitical.

    There are two possibilities with respect to Mr. DeMaio’s repeated claims that the Police Chief gave him confidential information regarding the pending cases. The first is that he is telling the truth. In that case I would note the following from the San Diego Municipal Code: “It is unlawful for any current or former City Official to use or disclose to any person any confidential information he or she acquired in the course of his or her official duties, except when such disclosure is a necessary function of his or her official duties.” The second is that he is not telling the truth and has been falsely using the Police Chief in an effort to publicly exonerate himself.

    The Police Chief’s failure to be forthcoming about this undermines my confidence in her integrity. She should either acknowledge that she did contact him and what she said, or she should state clearly that she did not. There is no middle. Silence, in this instance, is complicity.

    Jim Abbott
    Jim Abbott subscribermember

    In predictable Carl DeMaio fashion, just as victory seems within grasp, he runs smack dab into his old, fierce nemesis - Carl DeMaio. Mr. DeMaio, with the "you-can't-make-this-stuff-up" orphan childhood, vast success in business at a young age and rare political acumen presents a compelling story - that is until you scratch the surface. What one finds below the glossy veneer is a gay man desperate for acceptance in a Republican party that still sports a "hate" plank in its platform. 

    Those of us in the LGBT community have a duty to question anyone standing for public office for their positions on issues important to us. DeMaio, in what seemed to belie a lack of self-esteem, often stood with those denying LGBT rights more for the shock value and to support his contrarian nature than for any moral attachments to his anti-gay  positions (as evidenced by his proclivity to abandon positions when wind directions suggested change.)

    The DeMaio campaign is eerily beginning to smell like the Filner debacle. Former allies coming forward to warn the electorate against a candidate. The image of self-coated Teflon pol whose ego won't allow him to see himself accurately. And worst of all, a completely compromised law-enforcement system whose only action has been to circle wagons, avoid investigation and wait it all out. 

    I would point out that no serious investigation of DeMaio's mis-direction of Prop B campaign funds to his life-partner Jonathan Hale's "web news service" ever took place. More importantly, DeMaio was never charged in the suicide death of Gay and Lesbian TImes publisher Michael Portantino. Portantino, a frequent critic of DeMaio and a legendary LGBT advocate, jumped to his death after DeMaio and Hale systematically destroyed his business, his reputation and ultimately his life. That may not rise to the level of manslaughter in the eyes of DA Bonnie Dumanis or SDPD, but to me it disqualifies Carl DeMaio as a man so hell-bent on winning elections that he does not know right from wrong.

    ZachW subscriber

    @Jim Abbott Well stated.  As a gay person myself, it makes me cringe to think how a Carl DeMaio victory will reflect poorly on our community.  DeMaio will get media attention for being the first openly gay Republican member of Congress but it won't be good attention.  DeMaio, unfortunately, embodies many of the crude stereo types.  As LGBT people grow our presence in political office, we need to make sure we are represented by honest, transparent people, not scandal-ridden drama magnets like DeMaio and his partner.

    Steven Greer
    Steven Greer subscriber

    Thank you very much for digging in deep on this.

    Nicole Larson
    Nicole Larson subscriber

    DeMaio  represents one scandal after another, particularly of the unsavory sexual variety. (And friends tell me there's a lot more swirling around him, just waiting to emerge from his murky past.)  Lord help us if voters are dumb enough to elect DeMaio, despite his divisive personality, disruptive behavior and so many scandals, the known and the unknown.

    Yet Republicans haven't disavowed him, as Dems did Filner.  And now DeMaio is poised to make Bob Filner look good.  Does San Diego really want to become a laughingstock again?

    Mr. Roboto
    Mr. Roboto subscriber

    Ah yes, revisionist history at its finest. I'm not sure what alternate reality you were living in during the Filner debacle but the "due process" crowd stood by Bob well through victims 8, 9, 10, 40018372947. In fact aside from the original three who called him out, most stood by him so long it was disgusting.

    It was also very clear with Bob that the Dem establishment knew about his behavior for years (Fink case) and did nothing about it, choosing to tolerate it instead because he was still a champion for the causes. So please don't try to tell people the Dems stood up for the victims.

    In the case of DeMaio you have one, I repeat, one accuser who was fired from his staff and an absurd accusation by Mr. Hueso who has demonstrated his moral boundaries are hazy at best time and time again. VOSD can probably tell you his record on Fact Checks lends himself to the huckster propaganda category all too often. Real credible account there.

    ZachW subscriber

    @Mr. Roboto There were Democrats like Donna Fry who were calling for Filner to resign before we even had a name or face to an accuser.

    With DeMaio, not a single Republican has come out to condemn his laundry list of accusations and scandals.

    Robert Cohen
    Robert Cohen subscriber

    And now there is the "email" scandal being reported today including UT San Diego's website.  The fun seems to never end.

    Bill Bradshaw
    Bill Bradshaw subscribermember

    Who’s lying? Well, Peters for sure when he claims he never looked at the playbook.  And, he would have the public believe someone tossed it over the transom?  Come on.  When did he get it, how did it arrive and why did DeMaio act as though he’d just found out Peters’ campaign got the book?  Lots of questions here, but how does this constitute a scandal?  How about “alleged” scandal?  After all, this IS a political campaign.

    Scott Lewis
    Scott Lewis moderator administratormember

    @Bill Bradshaw Even if you took out the sexual harassment allegations, I think the plagiarism, fired staffer, burglary and playbook charges justify "scandal."

    Bill Bradshaw
    Bill Bradshaw subscribermember

    @Scott Lewis @Bill Bradshaw Scott, You're too young to have lost your sense of humor.  In the several weeks leading up to any election, anything goes, and those who take this stuff seriously probably account for much of the degraded quality of elected officials nationwide.  

    David Benz
    David Benz subscriber

    @Bill Bradshaw Ha, you actually take this "Bible/playbook" nonsense seriously?  As if there was something to gain.

    DeMaio only has one play, it's to self destruct and expose himself as a psychopath.  Good job Carl.

    dave stutz
    dave stutz subscribermember

    The women of the law enforcement community leave a lot to be desired. AG Harris declares Dumanis has no conflict because she endorsed DeMaio but of course Harris has endorsed Dumanis. US Attorney Duffy declares a conflict but won't say why and she endorsed DeMaio also. Chief Zimmerman won't say if she called DeMaio and seems to be hiding something. The ladies aren't taking care of business and aren't covering our back.

    David Benz
    David Benz subscriber

    @dave stutz San Diego is a joke, this is right up there with Jan Goldsmith trying to imprison that guy for his chalk writings.

    Who votes for these idiots?

    Anthony Wagner
    Anthony Wagner subscribermember

    With regard to 'alleged burglary' - my guess would be a burglary could be defined as breaking and entering.  By all accounts, the side door was unlocked so there wasn't anything to break in order to enter.  The 'walk through the unlocked door method' is probably more accurately defined as a robbery.  Semantics could be the cover to use words like 'alleged.'

    Tony Harvell
    Tony Harvell subscriber

    Thanks Scott for laying this out clearly in chronological order.  You are asking the right questions.  I do have concerns about the impartiality a of the DA's office, in light of Dumanis' endorsement of DeMaio in 2012,  as well as questions about her integrity given her role in the Susumo Azano campaign finance scandal .  I am also concerned by the lack of transparency in Chief Zimmerman regarding the phone call to DeMaio.   What is she hiding? It is very troubling that local politics have stooped to such a new low.  

    La Playa Heritage
    La Playa Heritage subscribermember

    Please add more information on May 18 and 19, 2014.

    May 18, 2014.  "Bosnich, who was 28 at the time of the radio interview, said he approached DeMaio on May 18 and told him he needed to quit the race or stop his behavior."

    May 19, 2014.  " The next day, Bosnich said, the campaign manager called him into his office and told him that DeMaio had lost his trust in him. He also said he was offered him $50,000 to sign a nondisclosure agreement. He said he rejected the offer."

    Read more: