Impertinent question: Will Mayor Lee take on the Bank of America for unethical behavior?

|
(16)

Mayor Ed Lee moved with lightning speed to suspend Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi without pay on misconduct charges and unethical behavior  in a spousal abuse case and continue the costly, distracting, divisive  media and City Hall circus.

Meanwhile, the Bank of America, an institution called "Too Crooked to Fail" by Rolling Stone,  is responsible for 10 per cent of all foreclosures in San Francisco and the city keeps its lucrative multi-million dollar short term investment portfolio in the B of A.  Matt Taibbi, the Rolling Stone investigative reporter on the story, said in a lengthy interview  on the Democracy Now radio program Thursday morning that bailouts and fraud are the secrets to the B of A success. The B of A, he said,  has defrauded "everyone from investors and insurers to homeowners and the unemployed."  He said "most people think of the mortgage crisis as some airy abstraction--you know, bankers ripping off bankers. That's not what it is.  It's bankers stealing from old ladies and retirees."

Impertinent question: So will Lee apply his new found standard of ethics to the Bank of America? See the Democracy Now clip on the Taibbi interview for specifics on B of A behavior:

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/3/22/too_crooked_to_fail_matt_taibbi

Comments

Yes, your point is taken but get real, the mayor can't do that if he wanted to (unless he would want to put himself and the city at risk of a lawsuit).

Part of the reason he can say and do what he is doing to the Sheriff is because he is the Mayor and has the authority to do so. In political terms his free speech is well protected under our constitution but not so under private circumstances.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 22, 2012 @ 5:14 pm

so you don't think any lawsuits against the city could arise out of the railroading of Ross Mirkarimi?

Posted by Guest Christine Craft on Mar. 23, 2012 @ 7:15 am

I have confidence in the City Attorney's ability to follow the City Charter. A Charter that was in effect long before Mirkarimi ever ran for Sheriff.

Unfortunately, you can't successfully sue the City because of your opinion. And multiple polls are showing that the majority of voters do not share your opinion. Sorry!!!

Posted by Troll on Mar. 23, 2012 @ 8:06 am

The City has been successfully sued and damages awarded for previous efforts to oust an official due to misuse of the Official Misconduct provisions.

Posted by marcos on Mar. 23, 2012 @ 8:40 am

...the conviction for Wrongful Imprisonment will provide some cover.

Again, well over a majority of the people in the city agree with what Lee did. Efforts to paint him as a rogue crusader are just a bit silly at this point.

Posted by Troll on Mar. 23, 2012 @ 8:55 am

Will Mayor Lee take on the Bank of America for unethical behavior?

No.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 22, 2012 @ 5:15 pm

What does Ross Mirkarimi have to do with the Bank of America? The Bay Guardian is obsessed with the man!! It's kind of like how the press was with Sarah Palin not too long ago - always looking for a way to add the name to an article no matter how relevant or irrelevant.

Many people in the Bay Area have lost their homes due to Bank of America's behavior and the Bay Guardian writes little. One cushy politician is in danger of losing his $200,000 a year job and the Bay Guardian is outraged with editorial after editorial.

It's not just the people who pull in $200,000 a year who should only matter. Maybe you should give Mirkarimi a rest and report on issues that affect those of us who aren't part of the 2%.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 22, 2012 @ 6:24 pm

So are we now comparing Ross Mirkarimi to the Bank of America?

Posted by Guest on Mar. 22, 2012 @ 7:04 pm

Weird true believer crazy paraded as news.

The Bay Guardian has now found that politicians should have a sense of consistency even around disparate things. Things that the mayor can do things about, giving Mirkarimi the boot, things the mayor can do nothing about, something to do with another meaningless resolution form the board of supervisors I guess?

The Bay Guardian and the Bay Area progressives are sorely lacking in any consistent approach to government, it is all about getting over and winning.

Bruce / Bay Guardian wanted the progressives to appoint one of their own to the mayor's office even though the person being replaced was not a "progressive."

One short year later Bruce / Bay Guardian insisted that it would be an outrage for Lee to not appoint a "progressive" to the seat vacated by Ross Mirkarimi, a progressive.

In the score card of political consistency the Bay Guardian gets a Fail, unless consistency is always trying to get over and claiming some bullshit moral stand.

Posted by Pedro Jones on Mar. 22, 2012 @ 7:56 pm

Stop hating on yourself.

Posted by Nate miller on Mar. 22, 2012 @ 10:26 pm

Jason Grant Garza here ... ETHICS at the ETHICS commission ... wasn't St. Croix found guilty of "OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT" by the SUNSHINE TASK FORCE? What about all the ORDERS of DETERMINATION for "OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT" that get shot down by ETHICS? They seemed to have "GROUND RULES" to do this ... so how this is ROSS matter any different? Don't the same GROUND RULES apply?

Interestingly enough if you type my name into a google search engine you read here at SF BAY GUARDIAN an article where I received a NURSE RATCHED letter in response to a record request thru SUNSHINE that was sent to ETHICS ... want to bet the OUTCOME ??? What is the difference? You could also ask about the referral on case # 10038 from SUNSHINE that went to SUNSHINE ... would you like to see the OUTCOME?

Yes, VIRGINIA ,,, SANTA CLAUS is NOT ONLY VERY MUCH ALIVE ... the ETHICS COMMISSION has ETHICS ... shall I tell you about writing them (ETHICS) with the CITY ATTORNEY"S HANDBOOK definition of "OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT' in my NURSE RATCHED case and what response I got? Would you believe NOTHING, NADA, ZIP.

Isn't Scott Wiener's Office interested in SUNSHINE's cost ... what about the MONEY that the city saves ( since SUNSHINE and ETHICS are a FARCE) and when the individual uses these "RIGGED" process ... they give up. GREAT "RISK MANAGEMENT" SHILL action ... FALSE HOPE, FALSE PROCESS and FALSE OUTCOME sort of like GARBAGE in , GARBAGE out. Wasn't there an article in the BAY GUARDIAN regarding ETHICS, the MINISTRY of SUNSHINE and the constant GOING NOWHERE with the MINISTRY's ORDER of DETERMINATION for "OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT' that is sent to ETHICS for ENFORCEMENT ??? Yes, the BIGGER the LIE ... the MORE the (sheep - people) will believe it. Isn't it UNETHICAL not to ASK THESE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ???

Please type my name into a google search engine and read how the city BROKE FEDERAL LAW, had my case dismissed in FEDERAL COURT (c02-3485PJH) by TESTILYING only to sign a confession (settlement agreement) years later with the OFFICE of INSPECTOR GENERAL to whom they paid a FINE yet LEFT their INNOCENT VINDICATED VICTIM for DEAD. NO JUSTICE, NO REMEDY, NO HOPE and NO HUMANITY. Any more questions ...

So where are ... were the ETHICS ... will the MINISTRY of SUNSHINE ask why their referrals are STRUCK DOWN and how this (Ross') Official Misconduct is any different than NURSE RATCHED, or ST. Croix and I believe Ms. Gomez from the Library?

Just thought I would ask the question for "REASONABLE" men.

Posted by Jason Grant Garza on Mar. 23, 2012 @ 8:54 am

Jason Grant Garza here ... ETHICS at the ETHICS commission ... wasn't St. Croix found guilty of "OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT" by the SUNSHINE TASK FORCE? What about all the ORDERS of DETERMINATION for "OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT" that get shot down by ETHICS? They seemed to have "GROUND RULES" to do this ... so how this is ROSS matter any different? Don't the same GROUND RULES apply?

Interestingly enough if you type my name into a google search engine you read here at SF BAY GUARDIAN an article where I received a NURSE RATCHED letter in response to a record request thru SUNSHINE that was sent to ETHICS ... want to bet the OUTCOME ??? What is the difference? You could also ask about the referral on case # 10038 from SUNSHINE that went to SUNSHINE ... would you like to see the OUTCOME?

Yes, VIRGINIA ,,, SANTA CLAUS is NOT ONLY VERY MUCH ALIVE ... the ETHICS COMMISSION has ETHICS ... shall I tell you about writing them (ETHICS) with the CITY ATTORNEY"S HANDBOOK definition of "OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT' in my NURSE RATCHED case and what response I got? Would you believe NOTHING, NADA, ZIP.

Isn't Scott Wiener's Office interested in SUNSHINE's cost ... what about the MONEY that the city saves ( since SUNSHINE and ETHICS are a FARCE) and when the individual uses these "RIGGED" process ... they give up. GREAT "RISK MANAGEMENT" SHILL action ... FALSE HOPE, FALSE PROCESS and FALSE OUTCOME sort of like GARBAGE in , GARBAGE out. Wasn't there an article in the BAY GUARDIAN regarding ETHICS, the MINISTRY of SUNSHINE and the constant GOING NOWHERE with the MINISTRY's ORDER of DETERMINATION for "OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT' that is sent to ETHICS for ENFORCEMENT ??? Yes, the BIGGER the LIE ... the MORE the (sheep - people) will believe it. Isn't it UNETHICAL not to ASK THESE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ???

Please type my name into a google search engine and read how the city BROKE FEDERAL LAW, had my case dismissed in FEDERAL COURT (c02-3485PJH) by TESTILYING only to sign a confession (settlement agreement) years later with the OFFICE of INSPECTOR GENERAL to whom they paid a FINE yet LEFT their INNOCENT VINDICATED VICTIM for DEAD. NO JUSTICE, NO REMEDY, NO HOPE and NO HUMANITY. Any more questions ...

So where are ... were the ETHICS ... will the MINISTRY of SUNSHINE ask why their referrals are STRUCK DOWN and how this (Ross') Official Misconduct is any different than NURSE RATCHED, or ST. Croix and I believe Ms. Gomez from the Library?

Just thought I would ask the question for "REASONABLE" men.

Posted by Jason Grant Garza on Mar. 23, 2012 @ 8:57 am

...is the day Bernie Sanders becomes President of the US. It's way easier for him to use Sheriff Mirkarimi's problems as public political entertainment just to distract the public from his ineffectiveness.

Posted by Peter on Mar. 23, 2012 @ 10:48 am

Any transgressions by BofA are a Federal matter and Lee has little standing to deal with that.

But Lee has every right to remove Ross from office while the investigations continue into his crimes.

Posted by Greg on Mar. 23, 2012 @ 11:16 am

So it is Mayor Lee who is responsible for athe costly, distracting, divisive media and City Hall circus. Once again the BG blames everyone except the guy who pled guilty. As for Bank of America, why not just write a piece about that issue without bringing in your Mirkarimi obsession?

Posted by Ryan C on Mar. 23, 2012 @ 12:10 pm

You nailed it. Why do we have to "continue the costly, distracting, divisive media and City Hall circus?" Except you're implying it's the Mayor's fault, when it's Mirkarimi that needs to step down and end this charade. Absolutely ridiculous that this is being debated, and even more ridiculous the BG continues to read into this situation like some rabidly obsessed conspiracy theorist. Ya, we get it, Mirkarimi's your guy. You may like his politics, but you're backing the wrong horse on this race. By-all-that-is-holy-and-good I pray he has the sense to step down and keep this slow train wreck from tearing through town further. Even if he stays in office he'll NEVER win re-election. Great, left with a lame duck that isn't trusted by the people, liked by the department, or respected by City Hall. Another fabulous "get nothing done" SF fiasco. And somehow you're trying to hook the B of A caboose to this wreck? Is this a newspaper or a shill... 'er... I mean shell game?

Posted by Crispy on Mar. 23, 2012 @ 11:11 pm