SAN FRANCISCO, CA ---- The pile on continues. In my questioning of Steve Gruel, it's clear the Mayor overstepped in suspending Supervisor Ed Jew. First the Mayor used the FBI complaint (Only a Complaint), then resorted to the Residency question. BOTH are allegations. BOTH are in legal proceedings. There have been no trials, no convictions. So where's the basis for removing a sitting supervisor elected by his district? Not the Mayor, not the DA or City Attorney has the power to decide the truth of the allegations. Juries do that in this society, and even in this city.
Other questions: In the Federal complaint, they deliberately leave undisclosed, who went to the FBI? And how could a supervisor's aide go down the hall and tell Ed Jew's supervisorial aide, "your boss is going to jail"... weeks before the sting. Who knew what and when?
More important why the pile on? Could it be that Ed Jew was getting too popular. And he had some serious questions about the monster projects at Hunters Point, which has links to the highest elected and formerly elected officials, here and in D.C.? That Jack Davis, the city's most powerful political consultant supposingly suggested to Ed Jew to consider a run for mayor?
I didn't read the Federal "complaint" prior to the Gruel interview. I Wish I had. It's more ambiguous than reported. And the FBI is basically saying this: Since the Planning Department MAILED notices to owners where Quickly wanted to lease, Ed Jew is liable for Mail Fraud. As if, Ed Jew could have stopped the Planning Department from MAILING what they were required to mail.
My thoughts...
Recent Comments