Democratic Party Endorsement Hopeful John Bauters Hides $2500 from Police PAC
"I Have Not Taken Any Money" He Falsely Asserts
Emeryville City Council member John Bauters has upped the ante in his push to win a seat on the Alameda County Board of Supervisors by deceiving the Alameda County Democratic Party about his campaign’s funding sources the Tattler has learned. Mr Bauters and his rival for the 5th District Board of Supervisor’s seat, Oakland City Council member Nikki Fortunato Bas, both attended the County Democratic Party’s September 14th endorsement meeting and both responded to the same question about police funding the same way. They both said NO, they had not received any such funding. Using Councilman Bauters’ own FPPC Form 497, the Tattler learned his answer can only be described as deceitful.
The meeting featured many prospective candidates vying for a coveted Dem endorsement in the heavily Democratic Alameda County and ultimately, neither Ms Bas nor Mr Bauters received an endorsement. Perhaps Ms Bas might have gotten an endorsement had the selection committee known at the time the candidate from Emeryville had not told them the truth. The committee has been informed about this matter in the interim we learned but they have issued no statement about it we know of.
The straight question from the Democratic Party of Alameda County put to both candidates at the September 14th meeting was, “Are you endorsed by or taken any money from law enforcement?” Ms Bas stated she had not and Mr Bauters said unequivocally, “The answer is NO, I have not taken any money.” What Bauters failed to report was the $2500 taken from the Oakland Police Officer’s Association PAC on August 13th, payable to the FPPC registered committee, ’Bauters for a Safer East Bay’.
The Tattler reached out to the Councilman for comment but he did not return our multiple requests.
Please go to 26:00 to 26:35 to hear candidate Bauters' incriminating claim.
From candidate Bauters' Form 497 file, registered with the State of California:
"I have not taken any money. I am not a crook."
ReplyDeleteYeah, he just out and out lied.
ReplyDeletewhere was the tattler's FPPC vigilance when emeryville city council kalimah priforce mishandled his own campaign finances, lost oversight of his campaign's financial accounts and contributions, and a firm had to be called in to address the issues?
ReplyDeleteWas it bungling? Or was it intent to deceive? If the former, that's not really newsworthy. Many, if not most Council candidates slip up on the labyrinthine FPPC filings, especially first timers. Mistakes are not going to be reported on unless it can be shown to display an intent to deceive either voters or the regulators, then it becomes a story. Send me what you have and if it turns into something the people would need to know, I will investigate, verify and report.
DeleteWith regard to Council member Bauters, when he told the Dems he had not received any money from police, my BS alarm went off and I checked into the claim. All his tough talk of locking up criminals made me think the police were behind the scenes, probably giving him money. Sure enough, his FPPC filings show he had taken money and was attempting to deceive the County Dems. 15 years into this, I'm pretty good at sensing when officials are not being truthful.
This appears to be an independent expenditure campaign committee. This isn't Bauters campaign. Independent committees by law are run by people who don't work with the candidate. He didn't lie here, he legally isn't involved in whatever they're doing. I looked up his campaign committee which he controls and its called John Bauters for County Supervisor and there are no donations from any police groups there. In fact, most of his donors appear to be people who work in social service sector jobs.
ReplyDeleteI see….it’s an independent expenditure campaign committee! ….How nice for you. Aren’t arguments of convenience nice? They’re nice for those making them but for everyone else, it’s just warmed over cynicism. We don’t promulgate propaganda here at the Tattler; we expose it. Here we report the truth: Council member Bauters lied to the Alameda County Democrats. Like all (obvious) propaganda, the public is not fooled by this canard. He knows he lied, we know it, the Dems now know it and even you know it.
DeleteThere is no argument. It was reported and it is a FACT Bauters for a Safer East Bay is an independent expenditure campaign committee. These committees operate independently of candidates and are not allowed to contribute directly to a candidate or coordinate with them. https://oaklandside.org/2024/08/07/john-bauters-nikki-bas-alameda-county-supervisor-election-finance/
DeleteDo you not do any basic fact check before publishing your opinions as truth and propaganda?
You're the one lying. The hypocrisy of this post.
DeleteThis story is irresponsible. You should publish an amendment. You've inaccurate stated it is Councilman John Bauters' own FPPC Form 497.
Bauters for a Safer East Bay is an independent expenditure committee formed earlier this year. These committees operate independently of candidates and are not allowed to contribute directly to a candidate or coordinate with them. It was reported and it is a fact. https://oaklandside.org/2024/08/07/john-bauters-nikki-bas-alameda-county-supervisor-election-finance/
To continue writing as is that it is Councilman Bauter's own campaign's FPPC form to push the argument it is his direct campaign and the headline that he lied is deceitful on your part.
It is a rhetorical tool for propaganda.
Responsible journalism would be to report that an IEC supporting Bauters' campaign received money from law enforcement PAC.
It would be valid of you to question whether Bauters lied during the forum by questioning whether Bauters would have known an IEC supporting him received money from law enforcement.
It is not valid to write as truth Bauters lied.
In fact, you're the one lying.
You should go back and re-read the story. Can you read the part were I report, “Oakland Police Officer’s Association PAC on August 13th, payable to the FPPC registered committee, ’Bauters for a Safer East Bay’”?
DeleteSo it seems like you’re positing that it’s somehow a game changer that Bauters set up an independent expenditure committee to be able to pull in more money than can be had by the sole use of a regular election campaign committee. Are you an attorney? Did you present to the Supreme Court in the Citizens United case (on the side of aggrieved billionaires who wanted more ‘speech’)?
DeleteIt sounds like maybe you’re unaware of the reputation of independent expenditure committees around the world. There’s a well earned reputation there. Regardless, I very clearly reported about the Bauters for a Safer East Bay Committee in the story. Everybody knows money there is used to elect Bauters. Everybody but you and the billionaires who wrote Citizens United…wait, scratch that….the billionaires know, they’re just gaming the system. I think it’s only you that thinks there’s some kind of distinction. I could be wrong about even that though.
You’re acting as if donating money to that committee is somehow not donating money to help elect John Bauters. Why don’t you tell Mr Bauters to make this argument himself (if you’re not him)? I doubt he would though because it would make him look even slimier. One way he’s a liar, the other way he’s a slimy liar. Councilman Bauters knew he was deceiving the Democrats when he said the word,”NO”. How about asking the Democratic Party of Alameda themselves….”Was John Bauters good to say NO about police funding even though Bauters for a Safer East Bay received funding?” See what they say.
all of that word vomit to disguise the simple fact that your headline is a lie. you're worse than what you accuse others of doing. John bauters may or may not be aware of what donations are made to IECs that support him. You are 100% aware your headline is a lie because it's not his direct campaign.
Deleteyou should know words matter. you scrutinize Sukdeeph Kaur's campaign's word choice of 're-elect' yet and wrote an entire article about it. yet, your headline is a blatant lie.
your bias for anyone not aligned with Kalimah Priforce is showing. your favorite council member was late filing campaign finance statements 2 years into his term for periods dating back to 2023. but to you, that's just good old regular "bungling" of first timers.
Brian Donahue: You should go back and re-read the story. Can you read the part were I report, “Oakland Police Officer’s Association PAC on August 13th, payable to the FPPC registered committee, ’Bauters for a Safer East Bay’”?
DeleteResponse: Brian Donahue should go back and re-read his own story, including the headline and preceding parts containing:
* "Using Councilman Bauters’ own FPPC candidate’s Form 497, the Tattler learned his answer can only be described as deceitful."
Response: Emeryville Tattler's writing and headline can only be described as a lie.
The headline is accurate; it describes the essence of the story accurately, just as a headline should do. People who don’t have the time to read the story can understand by reading the headline that Councilman Bauters lied to the Democrats, the main takeaway of the story.
DeleteIn the text of the story, I included the fact that Mr Bauters had set up an independent expenditure committee entitled Bauters for a Safer East Bay and that the police funding was made to that committee. You, a Bauters supporter, are sore I didn’t spread a postulation that you think is super important because by positing it and expanding understanding past the breaking point, Mr Bauters could be shown to have not lied. This is all something I would expect a politician (or a sycophant) to want to get control of. But the Tattler is not here to spread Bauters propaganda.
If any reader would be of a mind to do what you’re doing, they can go there from my information reported about the independent expenditure committee, on their own. The Tattler is not here to help elect John Bauters. People are free to make up whatever they want to about donations to Bauters for a Safer East Bay and speculate about it in whatever manner they want. I’m the reporter. I report the fact that Council member Bauters lied to the Democratic Party of Alameda County.
Maybe you should start up your own news site all about John Bauters. You can say anything you want about how he’s a truth telling politician and how even when everybody thinks he’s lying, he’s really not. Good luck.
Please send my what you have on Council member Priforce's FPPC filings. It's a story you seem to think is very important. I might also think it's important. Convince me. Send me your evidence of bad intent and I'll certainly do a story on it if your info checks out. Thanks.
Delete“The essence of the story” headline. I’m sure Trump will also say eating cats and dogs are the “essence” of his point.
DeleteIf you can’t capture truthful fact, then don’t pose as a journalist. You’re a columnist.
Nowhere in your story had you written the words IEC. That was by design on your part to sow lies.
What you did do in the very beginning is to state it was Bauters’ own filing to mislead readers it was his campaign.
Candidate and council member FPPC filings are publicly posted on the Emeryville website, Brian. You know this.
Delete
DeleteWhy do you think the Democratic Party wanted to know if police had funded Bauters election? Why did they ask him about police funding and not labor funding for instance? Do you think perhaps it’s because police tend to support right wing candidates over progressive candidates? What’s the score on that do you think? Do Democratic candidates commonly get police funding nation wide? The answer is no, they don’t. Police tend to support Republicans. So a Democrat receiving police support is informative for Democrats. What happened to the money the police gave to support the election of John Bauters? It went to support the election of John Bauters; something of interest to Democrats. John Bauters likely wanted to hide the police support because he thought it would hinder his chance to get an endorsement from the Democratic Party. And he was probably right in that.
I agree with that Bauters lied to the dems to try to hide that the cops love him. This is the East Bay after all , many politicians would not want that known before the election. Don’t let these Bauters trolls get to you Brian.
DeleteYou may be right. Councilman Bauters has the conservative vote locked up. He's going to get virtually all of the Republicans and the corporate Democrats. The race is just a matter of the progressive Democrats, the Greens and the others on the left. Nikki Bas has that vote virtually locked in so to the extent John can pick away at the progressive voters, get some of those voters, he wins the election. John certainly knows this. That's why it's been pure left wing rhetoric loudly proclaimed from John and dog whistles extended to the right wing. He's doing a lot of winking at the conservatives of Alameda County as he talks up his progressive bonafides.
DeleteYou keep hiding from answering the question. I ask again: Where are the words independent expenditure committee in your article? Nowhere.
DeleteYou hid the facts on purpose to mislead your readers.
Nowhere did you mention IEC in the story. All you had to do was insert it right before “Bauters for a Safer East Bay.” But no, you wrote “Councilmember Bauters’ own FPPC Form 497” to mislead readers.
Nowhere did you ever bring up it’s an IEC until others brought up the IEC in comments. Otherwise readers would have fallen pretty to your lies.
The Bauters crew is getting testy. They're really trolling you. That tells you you hit a nerve. You're right Brian, money to Bauters for Supervisor is the same as Bauters for a safer East Bay. It's all meant to elect John Bauters. This troll screaming about some difference only he can see knows he's grasping at straws. Good reporting job. Keep it up, you're making them sweat.
ReplyDelete