Right on Point Scott! BBH and company will blast the facts out of the water and replace them with spin. Let it be said here and now: This is the beginning of the end for Michael Aguirre!

Posted by Ron Weiss | reply to this comment
August 24, 2007 9:11 am

This is a non story. Everyone should get behind Mike and help him take care of the City's business. That business is wiping off the2 billion in illegal benefits to the welfare queens. I know the majority of San Diego supports Mike, if not here where there is a skewed population of our City workers.

Posted by Billy Bob Henry | reply to this comment
August 24, 2007 9:14 am

Classic absolutely Classic I love it when a politician hangs themselves. I think it just goes to show that there isn't one politician in San Diego City that isn't completely full of doo doo... well I have to exclude Donna who is clearly neurotic but I would never say she isn't almost 100% genuine (jury's still out on whether the wall mart flip was a campaign move). Where was this ethics lawyer on the story case? How about on the council authorization of lawsuits? It is amazing that we have such a nack for producing hacks in this town. Or maybe it is because all the real good people just know better. Hmmm... where could they be hiding? Anyway, good job on finding that story deep in the bowels of the UT Scott.

Posted by Basic Civics | reply to this comment
August 24, 2007 9:56 am

Aguirre further proves that his hypocrisy knows no bounds. While he loudly accuses every public official that disagrees with him of corruption, he is quietly collecting tens of thousands of dollars from people doing business with him as the City Attorney. Tens of thousands of dollars, mind you, that go straight into his personal bank account. This is not money that goes into his campaign account for next year, it's money that quite simply he is collecting for his own personal use because he is the City Attorney, from people who are doing business with him as the City Attorney. It's not quite a Duke Cunningham bribe menu, but it's pretty darn close! Thank you VOSD for bringing this to light.

Posted by Simple Guy | reply to this comment
August 24, 2007 11:29 am

Watch out Scott..you might get sued!!

Posted by DM | reply to this comment
August 24, 2007 11:49 am

Shocking, I tell you! Let's see, Businessman X gives Aguirre money, and Aguirre then gives Businessman X the city's money, and alot more than Businessman X gave to Aguirre. Everybody wins! Except the taxpayers, and except BBH, the now-embarrassed Aguirre apologist. Well, at least he WOULD be embarrassed, were he not blinded by his deep, abiding love for all things Aguirre.

Posted by Shocking! | reply to this comment
August 24, 2007 12:03 pm

The taxpayers are LOSING form the welfare queen pensions, not Mike, and all the money the queens are sucking this City dry from. We need a new prop onthe baoot that forces the welfare queens into Social Security. That will cure the 3% @ 50 scam.

Posted by Billy Bob Henry | reply to this comment
August 24, 2007 1:17 pm

Thank you VOSD for both this comment in SLOP and the main article. This is not a "non-story", this is the tip of the iceberg in terms of the hyprocrisy of Aguirre's reign as CA. I think one of the key quotes in McLaughlin's article is this one: "he said he fundamentally agrees with Briggs' clients that the environmental decisions made by the city's development services staff are faulty". If that is the case, Aguirre should be recusing his office from any legal work (advice to and defense of departments) because he is not representing his client, but has clearly sided with those oppposed to any environmental action by DSD. He is unable to be an advocate for his client as he has already decided they are wrong.

Posted by Posted | reply to this comment
August 24, 2007 1:40 pm

Scott, Let's get back to the Mayor. The's suppose to be the dude in charge. Where has Jerry been since he's been in office? Every see him at any community meetings? Every hear him bring up ideas on where to lead our city? Does he care about the homeless or the elderly? It's easy to pick on Aguirre. He's the only guy out there looking after the people of San Diego. Yea, he's a little goofy but he'd have to be to want the job of City Attorney. Let's get back to Jerry! What's he up to and who's giving Jerry money. Follow the money!!!!

Posted by Norman | reply to this comment
August 24, 2007 3:21 pm

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA....sorry, let me wipe the tears of laughter out of my eyes. BBH, if you EVER had ANY credibility (which you didn't, by the way), it's ALL gone now!!! I think Walmart has a sale on Tarnex...cause, honey, your knight's armour is lookin' a little tarnished, whether you have the character to admit it or not! HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Man, did I need THAT belly laugh!

Posted by Pension Welfare Queen | reply to this comment
August 25, 2007 1:15 am

Aguirre recuse himself from a dispute with DSD? He represents me--City of San Diego taxpayer, citizen, and voter. I don't know who the DSD has been representing!

Posted by Steve K | reply to this comment
August 25, 2007 3:21 am

I have been telling this story all along: AGHguirre is an unethical & corrupt politician. How long must we taxpayers put up with this crook who thinks he's above the law? But stay tuned when the City Council is back in session. Watch AGHguirre spin his B.S. on why the taxpayers should pay for the appeals he filed without Council authorization while Council was on recess! What a low-life sneak! It's one rip off after another of our taxpayers'money. The Council better not give him one red cent, afterall, he says he's independent, so he should use the money he collects to pay for his own frivolous losing lawsuits.

Posted by Sunny | reply to this comment
August 25, 2007 3:24 am

Steve K - according to Charter Section 40, the City Attorney is the attorney for all city departments, including DSD. Since he disagrees on the work of DSD (and other departments) he should not pretend to represent those departments, as he is clearly conflicted and unable to proide adequate legal services to his client. Especially when he produces reports and sends them out to the public saying he sees flaws in the work done by his client (city departments), then goes and says he can 'defend' the city depts. when lawsuits are filed - when item number one in those lawsuits are the reports produced by the CA's office! If an attorney goes out and says that person is clearly guilty, how can that attorney then represent the person they have publicly accused? Your tax dollars at work!

Posted by Posted | reply to this comment
August 25, 2007 4:09 am

OMG Look....The emperor has no clothes. Aguirre is a joke and an embarassment to this city. He should be run out of town on a rail. What an embicile and a hypocrite.

Posted by Jim | reply to this comment
August 25, 2007 5:30 am

Dear Mr. Billy Bob Henry, If you are interested in welfare queens, you might want to recall the S&L crisis during the 1980s, when the Reagan Administration spent millions of taxpayers' dollars baling out the likes of the Bush boys. Then, of course, there are the government subsidies and tax breaks that go to defense contractors. And how about the no-bid contracts that have garnered obscene wealth for Cheney's Halliburton, which has decided to move its headquarters to Dubai, where it can save millions in taxes that it would otherwise have paid on the billions that American taxpayers have paid them. And how about Bernacke lowering the discount rate but not the fed funds rate? What a way to bail out Wall Street with money borrowed from China, Saudi Arabia, and Japan while ignoring the problems of the middle class! Locally we

Posted by Marnie | reply to this comment
August 25, 2007 6:16 am

An interesting statistic would be: of the deputy city attorneys that gave Aguirre money, how many has he fired, compared with those who have not given money?

Posted by LC | reply to this comment
August 25, 2007 6:36 am

You gotta love the link Read 8/264 for some interesting investigate reporting "So, in the interest of balancing the U-T article Scott Lewis "dug up" from 2004, I dug up this U-T article from October 28, 2006, making it crystal clear how the system works: "On Oct. 13, Manchester Resorts gave $50,000 to a fundraising committee of the Lincoln Club of San Diego County, a Republican business organization that has long been active in politics. It was Manchester's second large contribution to the committee this year, after a $10,000 donation a month earlier, and it was the largest contribution to the club in 2006 by far. Then on Oct. 17, the Lincoln Club contributed $70,000 to Sanders' campaign for Propositions B and C. Two days later, one of Sanders' development services directors issued a report that concluded ...."

Posted by Norman | reply to this comment
August 26, 2007 2:31 pm

Good work, Norman! Now could you please answer a question that has long been puzzling me? Why did Aguirre, who styles himself a progressive Democrat, join the likes of Sanders and DeMaio in supporting Propositions B and C? Thank you, or anyone else, for insights that you might provide.

Posted by Marnie | reply to this comment
August 26, 2007 4:16 pm

Let me get this right. Aguirre is supposed to represent all city departments according to the Charter. Instead he issues reports against those departments, ultimately causing them to hire outside attorneys just to have legal help. All I can say is thank goodness he was not my divorce lawyer.

Posted by JJ | reply to this comment
August 26, 2007 11:40 pm

And, yes LC, I too would be interested to learn how many City Attorneys who contributed to Aguirre's campaign, ie. his personal wallet, have been fired vs those who did not give. We will certainly see when the contributors' lists are published. That is, if the contributor gave more than $99.

Posted by JJ | reply to this comment
August 26, 2007 11:40 pm

Good article, Scott. I hope you and other journalists will ask Aguirre some hard questions about this at his next press conference. I somewhat understand those who continue to think that Aguirre is the only one 'representing the little guy against the establishment.' But, my God, how can Aguirre's supporter overlook Aguirre's hypocrisy, his habit of calling (without proof) those who disagree with him 'corrupt' and his legal incompetence?

Posted by Richard | reply to this comment
August 26, 2007 11:58 pm

Billy Bob Henry is so right. I... er ah, Mike is a good guy and wants to save San Diego for myself..., er ah, I mean, from the sleazy politicians and political hacks that are so prevalent here. No, BBH is not a sobriquet for me..., Er ah, Mike either.

Posted by I_am_not_ Mike_ Aguirre | reply to this comment
August 27, 2007 12:49 am

Billy Bob, I mean Aguirre, I mean Sanders, please, make it all stop. All these people are saying mean things about glass houses. For a while, we were happy when Jerry and Mike cast stones at everyone else. It felt better when they pelted the city workers. I was starting to understand that guys driving the trash trucks were in charge of everything. Now I'm supposed to believe that lawyers and developers get special treatment at City Hall!!! OMG, please help. I want to believe again. Arrrrgh, information...hurtin brain...help...

Posted by Please make it stop!!! | reply to this comment
August 27, 2007 4:41 am

First off, I am not Mike, everyone knows that, Mike can also type much better than me. Second, I am Anti-Col. Sanders. Sanders has been a disaster for San Diego. Don't act like I support the Colonel. But the fact is, the MAJORITY of San Diegans support Mike-for those mathematically challenged, MAJORITY means OVER 50%.

Posted by Billy! Bob!! Henry!!! | reply to this comment
August 27, 2007 9:44 am

So where's the internal ethics committee for the City Attorney's Office as promised?

Posted by JQ Public | reply to this comment
August 27, 2007 10:13 am

Well BBH I believe this is the first time you actually got your numbers right. Aguirre has an approval rating of 52% and falling fast, so fast it has taken BBH's breath away in many of these posts.

Posted by RW | reply to this comment
August 27, 2007 12:33 pm

Let's see...Aguirre is accepting cash contributions from lawyers who have lawsuits against the city. That's a MAJOR conflict of interest. And he is taking cash from his deputy city attorneys (who probably pay up in order to keep their jobs). But what really stinks is that Aguirre is outsourcing legal work to outside law firms, apparently in exchange for their support of him politically in the next city attorney's race. That sounds EXACTLY like Sanders and the developers' quid pro quo. You just can't rationalize this behavior...it's corrupt, hypocritical, and should be investigated by the outside Ethics Committee. I hope Dan Coffey is listening.

Posted by Cheeky | reply to this comment
August 28, 2007 2:13 am

Dear, dear, Mr. B!B!!H!!! You got your knickers in such a twist defending the reprehensible Mr. A. that you forgot to tell us what the second off is. (And you also slipped into grammatical hell.) Please do calm down and continue. I find you so amusing.

Posted by Marnie | reply to this comment
August 28, 2007 3:59 pm

Marnie-get those eye glasses out!""""""Second I am Anti-Col. Sanders. Sanders has been a disaster for San Diego. Don't act like I support the Colonel. """"""

Posted by bbh | reply to this comment
September 2, 2007 3:23 pm

• Users may post more than one comment, but should not pose as multiple users. Multiple posts from the same IP address but with a different user name on each will be reviewed to determine whether abuse has occurred.
• Posts with overly personal attacks or unsubstantiated allegations may be edited or deleted.
• Please be patient with the posts -- there may be a delay before they appear on the site -- and make sure to enter the code in the "image verification" box.