The woman has an excellent professional reputation in the field


The left wing conspiracy mongers are at it again. They can be just as bad as the tin-hat Right.

Or worse.




It’s been archived in San Francisco. Look it up, morons.

It’s quite a good interview– she sounds extremely tough on adult offenders. That’s her specialty.



The adult victim flaked out on the evidence. It wasn’t there. A plea deal was the best they could do because the evidence completely fell apart on the timeline. It happens.

This Rachel Mitchell sounds like an interesting choice. She made her career going after priests btw.

Kavanaugh must know of her, and he’s obviously not happy. They all know each other in that business, which is why this pick isn’t surprising.

She’ll slowly and gently tweeze out the story from the then-juvenile victim, as experienced prosecutors do, and then go after him in a semi-cross. People are going to be surprised. It’s not going to help Kavanaugh as much as having a GOP senator complimenting him on his girls soccer team.








Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

She was 31


Just a reminder.


“It is time for justice. Mr. Cosby, this has all circled back to you. The time has come,” Judge Steven O’Neill told the convicted sex offender, denying his request for bail pending appeal and ordering him into immediate custody. He quoted from Constand’s statement to the court, in which she said Cosby took her “beautiful, young spirit and crushed it.” 


She was 31.

The crushing — if any, and the ability to safeguard against it — began long before.

Is almost everyone now full of shit? And all the crap detectors have been removed?



Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

This was a grown woman, right?




She was 31 when she says it happened — not a teenager — and got millions from him.

It’s also a ridiculous statement on its own. Unctuous and insincere.





Filed under Uncategorized

You think so?


She’d never make it now.



Women back then didn’t know very much, did they?





Filed under Uncategorized

Because of Bill Cosby I was reduced to living in a poor rundown garage in Topanga Canyon in 1969!


One of the alleged Cosby victims just said that right now on MSNBC.  She also had to give up a record contract of her “own songs.” For so many years he had ruined her life!

The reporters and commenters listening in were beside themselves in sympathy and angst. It’s a Sisterhood Moment!

So is the world coming to an end? Irony and crap-detecting are certainly gone.

Middle-aged women blaming men for their mostly self-inflicted or spoiled, self-indulgent problems. Enough. Such a habit is terrifically demeaning to women in general. And do men really have all that power?

How about some real problems?


GERMANY. Dessau. A transit camp was located between the American and Soviet zones organised for refugees; political prisoners, POW’s, STO’s (Forced Labourers), displaced persons, returning from the Eastern front of Germany that had been liberated by the Soviet Army. A young Belgian woman and former Gestapo informer, being identified as she tried to hide in the crowd. April 1945.







Filed under Uncategorized

City of Burbank insists on harassing a property owner


Tonight staff wants the city council to continue to bully and harass someone for a situation that causes absolutely no problem to anyone.

So what’s going on here?

This guy’s house on Lincoln Street was suddenly caught with an old “illegal” garage on the property, and also an apparently “illegal” conversion of the original carriage house.

Now isn’t there an SOL on matters like this? The city had years to catch this so-called problem. Why now?

Nothing to be grandfathered? No possibility of that?

How terrifically unfair. Imagine being forced to suddenly tear everything down. And the hypocrisy of Burbank on this issue. What assholes.


The property was originally developed with a single family home in 1937. Building permits on file with the City of Burbank Building Division identify that the single family residence was approved to be 756 square feet in size, with an attached 180 square foot one-car garage. Since 1937, the following improvements have been completed on the property without the issuance of City building permits:

1. The originally built attached one-car garage was converted into a bedroom; and
2. A new 480 square foot detached two-car garage was constructed at the rear of the
Images of the property’s existing conditions can be seen in pages three through seven
(3-7) of this exhibit. City planning staff was unable to identify when these unpermitted
improvements were completed.


They don’t even know how long anything’s been there! And yet, they insist on punishing him.

We also think that’s a lie. Any contractor could tell right away from the building materials and style of construction approximately when it was done.

Are the two-by-fours exactly 2X4? No old neighbors around as witnesses? (who btw never complained previously.)

We think the city knows — and that the timing of the old construction could hurt their punitive case. Any contractor would agree about dating the work.



Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The “Burbank Hospitality Association” has no effect on “tourism” in Burbank


From the annual staff report tonight on that notoriously controversial City of Burbank T-BID, a bunch of total b.s. Perhaps “lies” is the better word.

It’d be nice if one of the council members tonight would ask their people exactly how this T-BID is responsible for the increase, especially when the economy was bad in 2011 and “tourism” in general has been increasing everywhere else since then too.

Don’t count on it.


The T-BID is managed by Burbank Hospitality Association (BHA), a non-profit corporation. The BHA, also known as Visit Burbank, is an example of how public/private partnerships can flourish and be mutually beneficial. The BHA plays an integral part in stimulating economic growth in Burbank through tourism and maintaining its competitive edge in the rapidly growing tourism industry in California and nationwide.

Tourism in Burbank is on the rise with an estimated 3.5 million tourists visiting Burbank in 2017. These visitors stay in our hotels, dine in our restaurants, shop in our retail establishments, and utilize our rental car facilities, all of which generate additional local tax revenues for the City’s General Fund. In 2017 visitors spent an estimated $829.32 million total in lodging, recreation, retail shopping, food/ beverage, and transportation in Burbank. Burbank’s direct benefit in local taxes from visitor spending in 2017 was $36.7 million3.

The T-BID has been instrumental in growing the tourism industry in Burbank, the success of the T-BID is measured by its ability to increase occupancy and Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenue for Burbank. Since inception in 2011 the T-BID has helped increase the City’s TOT revenue from $5,948,777 in FY 11/12 to $11,733,719 in FY 17/18, a 97 percent increase. The funding from the TOT revenue as well as the additional local taxes generated through tourism helps support libraries, infrastructure improvements, police and fire services and more, adding to the quality of life for residents, businesses and visitors.

Tourism also continues to be one of the highest growth industries in California…


Which the Burbank T-BID also helped bring about?

That last sentence totally contradicts the phony, boosterish claims of their previous paragraph. Nothing was especially “instrumental” here.

This T-BID is useless. Nobody reads their glossy brochures and suddenly says, “Burbank it is!” Nobody is convinced or sold on the idea of visiting Burbank. It’s not an attraction and never will be. People who stay or eat here do so as single-site specific at best.

Wonder what the involuntary membership thinks of this T-BID? They have no choice but to be part of it.






Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Now they’re all lying




Those who are ardently wishing for “an FBI investigation” on Kavanaugh might end up seeing this whole “Georgetown culture” get blown wide open.

Like what this is about, for instance:


Renate Schroeder Dolphin is a woman who was referenced by name in Brett Kavanaugh’s yearbook, according to a new report by The New York Times.

The term “Renate Alumnius”, which is referenced in Kavanaugh’s yearbook blurb, isn’t the only time Shroeder was mentioned in the yearbook: The New York Times reports that “Renate” or “Renate Alumnius” is mentioned 14 times throughout the yearbook by different classmates of Kavanaugh.

A statement by Kavanaugh’s lawyer read, “Judge Kavanaugh was friends with Renate Dolphin in high school. He admired her very much then, and he admires her to this day. Judge Kavanaugh and Ms. Dolphin attended one high school event together and shared a brief kiss good night following that event,” the statement continued. “They had no other such encounter. The language from Judge Kavanaugh’s high school yearbook refers to the fact that he and Ms. Dolphin attended that one high school event together and nothing else.”


Gag us with a spoon. That must have been a helluva peck. None of these people ever pursued extended relationships with each other, and none of the girls were ever physically attracted to the males?

It was all a guy thing, this aggressive sexual behavior we’re hearing about? The women never initiated or even desired anything on their own? No one was ever what they used to call “wild”?

On Planet Earth? In the late 70s and early 80s?

It gets better. From the NYT:


This month, Renate Schroeder Dolphin joined 64 other women who, saying they knew Judge Kavanaugh during their high school years, signed a letter to the leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is weighing Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination. The letter stated that “he has behaved honorably and treated women with respect.”

When Ms. Dolphin signed the Sept. 14 letter, she wasn’t aware of the “Renate” yearbook references on the pages of Judge Kavanaugh and his football teammates.

“I learned about these yearbook pages only a few days ago,” Ms. Dolphin said in a statement to The New York Times. “I don’t know what ‘Renate Alumnus’ actually means. I can’t begin to comprehend what goes through the minds of 17-year-old boys who write such things, but the insinuation is horrible, hurtful and simply untrue. I pray their daughters are never treated this way. I will have no further comment.”

Four of the men who were pictured with Judge Kavanaugh in a photo captioned “Renate Alumni” said it was simply a reference to their dating or going to dances with Ms. Dolphin.


So how come she was the only one they cited in the yearbook? Was she the only female girl around?

She didn’t know about that yearbook way back when? Nobody noticed the references in it and then happened to mention them to her?

Bullshit. On that alone she’s full of it. They all are.


Four of the players in the “Renate Alumni” photo — Mr. Davis, Mr. Kane, Tim Gaudette and Don Urgo Jr. — said in a statement that they had “never bragged about” sexual contact or anything like that with Ms. Dolphin. The statement, issued by Jim McCarthy, a public-relations representative, said the yearbook’s “Renate” references “were intended to allude to innocent dates or dance partners and were generally known within the community of people involved for over 35 years.”

“These comments,” the statement continued, “were never controversial and did not impact ongoing relationships until The Times twisted and forced an untrue narrative. This shabby journalism is causing egregious harm to all involved, particularly our friend, and is simply beneath contempt.”

Michael Walsh, another Georgetown Prep alumnus, also listed himself on his personal yearbook page as a “Renate Alumnus.” Alongside some song lyrics, he included a short poem: “You need a date / and it’s getting late / so don’t hesitate / to call Renate.”


She was the only one they “dated”? So prim and proper they all are, too.

We don’t know who’s being more puerile and dishonest about these sanitized versions of past events — the Georgetowners or the news media. This drunken Kavanaugh friend named “Mark” is the only one who sounds like he’s being half-way honest. And he’s clammed up.

Renate Schroeder does sound like the name of a girl who gives great head. So bring on the FBI at your own risk people. Everything’s gonna be found out and everything’s gonna be discredited.

Dems and “liberals” are fooling themselves to think it’s only gonna make Kavanaugh look shady.









1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

BPD brass obviously doesn’t want citizen complaints going up the ladder to civilians — including the council


Tomorrow night our council members are being asked to approve the City of Burbank’s formal response to a recent grand jury investigation into proper and effective citizen complaint procedures in several different L.A. County communities. Burbank was one of them.

After a good deal of research and personal interviews, the grand jury made about a dozen different generic recommendations for improvement. Burbank agreed with most of the items, but disagreed with a couple of the others because they already had effective policies and procedures that went in the same direction.

On this one though they flatly refused:


1.14 Police Departments should consider developing an appeal process to be initiated when a complainant is dissatisfied with the result of an investigation or disposition.


The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted.

Currently, every BPD Citizen Complaint Response letter [as required per California Penal Code section 832.7(e)(1)] includes the divisional Captain’s name and telephone number in case a complainant would like to discuss anything related to their complaint. The letter informs the complainant that pursuant to policy, “Any complaining party who is not satisfied with the findings of the Department concerning their complaint may contact the Chief of Police or designee to discuss the matter further” and the Captain signing the letter should be contacted for this purpose (Please see Section 1020.10, Notification to Complainant, of the attached policy).

This practice affirms the Department’s commitment to transparency and observes the confidentiality obligations mandated per California Penal Code 832.7. Moreover, the Department has an independent oversight and review performed by the Office of Independent Review (OIR). OIR conducts an annual review of the Department’s internal affairs investigations including citizen complaints and provides input regarding the investigative process, to include how the Department communicates with complainants and its responsiveness to their concerns. Based on the foregoing, this recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted given the protections already in place.


Hold on.

Handing out a supervisor’s phone number for a chat session is not the same thing as having a formalized up-the-ladder grievance and complaint process. Such a refusal to get the different higher-ups involved — meaning possibly civilians and/or police commission and council members — only shows that the City of Burbank is not serious about responding to any real complaints about its police force.

Remember, claimed civilian ignorance and inaction is what helped get the BPD in trouble a few years ago with the FBI.  There’s no excuse for refusing to initiate an appeals process for departmental complaints. It undercuts any real effort at reform, and also indicates a serious amount of bad faith and lack of transparency.

PC 832.7 for instance does not preclude confidential civilian review of employee records, such as by city management. Such a claim is both preposterous and disingenuous. It’s a lie.

This notion would also be a big surprise to all of the terminated or otherwise disciplined BPD officers circa the years 2009 to 2015. The city manager et al got majorly involved in those cases.

Without an appeals process there’s no teeth in the game. Everything stays quiet. That must be the idea.






Filed under Uncategorized

Now they’re getting ridiculous


We dislike Kavanaugh and Republicans, but these people can’t even display their outrage convincingly.


Ramirez, who was raised a devout Catholic, in Connecticut, said that she was shaken. “I wasn’t going to touch a penis until I was married,” she said. “I was embarrassed and ashamed and humiliated.” 


We just got through surveying several women in their 30s and 40s about this claim, and they all say that she’s totally full of shit. Nobody who went to Yale thinks that saving yourself for marriage also includes completely refraining from heavy petting.

No, we take that back. Maybe someone in 1899 did.

This is where “liberals” get ridiculous. It’s also obvious lawyer talk.  Ronan Farrow actually wrote this pious, tearful nonsense down without instantly laughing out loud?

This is where we start to not believe “the women.” They make it difficult.











Filed under Uncategorized

Yes! All us Burbank kids kept calendars




Here, we’ll reach over and grab ours from, what year again?


WASHINGTON — Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh has calendars from the summer of 1982 that he plans to hand over to the Senate Judiciary Committee that do not show a party consistent with the description of his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, according to someone working for his confirmation.

The calendars do not disprove Dr. Blasey’s allegations, Judge Kavanaugh’s team acknowledged. He could have attended a party that he did not list. But his team will argue to the senators that the calendars provide no corroboration for her account of a small gathering at a house where he allegedly pinned her to a bed and tried to remove her clothing.

The calendar pages from June, July and August 1982, which were examined by The New York Times, show that Judge Kavanaugh was out of town much of the summer at the beach or away with his parents. When he was at home, the calendars list his basketball games, movie outings, football workouts and college interviews. A few parties are mentioned but include names of friends other than those identified by Dr. Blasey.



Uh-huh. His accuser is much more likely to have a diary.







Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

It’s a documentary, people


Not Michael Bay.



Michael Moore’s ‘Fahrenheit 11/9’ falls flat at the box office with dismal $3 million opening



This is more like it:




Today on Twitter the “Democrats” and “liberals” are celebrating Moore’s decline.





Where’s their documentary; and have they figured out yet why they’re always being kept on the defensive?




And the Dems is …?


Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized






Filed under Uncategorized

It’s just so gay


From a story in MyBurbank about some kind of hootenanny fundraiser at Burbank High.







Filed under Uncategorized

A great white hope






Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

So what’s wrong with “indigent defendants”?


Fronnie has a good piece this week about Police Commissioner David Diamond calling for the removal of Chief LaChasse.

Aside from the complicated issues and entanglements, one snide email remark of LaChasse’s says it all. It can be framed in isolation.


LaChasse:  “I can’t believe his (David Diamond’s) biggest remaining attribute appears to be serving the indigent defendants!”


He’s obviously not too sympathetic about the little guy, is he. Is this the way Burbank cops talk about public defenders as well?

This same police chief also went light on Tom Angel about those bigoted emails that went back and forth a few years ago, and that eventually got Angel fired from the Sheriff’s Office.

No wonder. They were obviously more conscientious about that situation than Burbank.

Let’s see. Hostility and sarcasm towards the poor, ridicule towards defense attorneys, and not much concern about your fellow management cops talking trash about ethnics, foreigners, weird religions, and liberal do-gooders.

Is this what Burbank wants? It certainly deserves it.








Filed under Uncategorized

Did anyone ever figure out who did these?


Once all over the place, a couple of them for a time turned Gary Bric into a local folk hero.

Kind of.



We could never follow the story, but it involved some guy being afraid of Burbank because Bric and a bunch of BPD officers had been seen secretly kidnapping people from the Smokehouse and then burying them alive down off of Forest Lawn Drive.

Back then anything was plausible. Good times.






Filed under Uncategorized

Was all of the sex going on back then male assault?


You’d certainly think so when reading these current interpretations of past events.



Thank god we grew up in Burbank. They usually initiated it.

And btw, when it was assault, they always talked about it.  We never knew any shrinking violets.









Filed under Uncategorized






Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Face it, Dems. The woman is starting to look like a flake


But then, aren’t so many career psychology majors?

We’ve known very few whose interest in the field wasn’t inspired by the tremendous number of personal problems in their lives, if not some quite serious emotional issues and instabilities. The only exceptions to this have been those for whom it’s the family business.

That’s been our big concern from the beginning, her own personal background. It doesn’t inspire too much confidence, and we hate Kavanaugh.

Her friends and supporters aren’t looking too good now either.


A former classmate of Christine Blasey Ford tells NPR that she does not know if an alleged sexual assault by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh took place as she first suggested on social media.

“That it happened or not, I have no idea,” Cristina King Miranda told NPR’s Nina Totenberg. “I can’t say that it did or didn’t.”

That’s different from what Miranda wrote Wednesday in a now-deleted Facebook post that stated definitively, “The incident DID happen, many of us heard about it in school.”


The accuser needs to show up on Monday. Nobody needs an “FBI investigation” to get her story heard, and it wouldn’t prove anything anyway. It could also easily backfire on the Dems.

The accuser’s waffling and grandstanding is only making her look bad. The Dems are stupid not to get her story out there early. They’ve waited way too long already. They’re not in charge, they don’t have the luxury of dictating terms, and it’s the only thing that could wrest a few of the Republicans away from stampeding this guy onto the Supreme Court.

You know what we think? She might be dingy as hell. Not taking anything away from the charge, but she sounds more than a little overwrought.



This must explain why the Dems sat on her story for two months.

They have only one hand to play now. Will they? Or is it going to be sanctimony/self-righteous time again?




Filed under Uncategorized