<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: RivPE: Report: S.B. County DA&#8217;s accuser had agenda against him</title> <atom:link href="http://inlandpolitics.com/blog/2010/01/28/rivpe-report-s-b-county-das-accuser-had-agenda-against-him/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://inlandpolitics.com/blog/2010/01/28/rivpe-report-s-b-county-das-accuser-had-agenda-against-him/</link> <description>Politics, Government and Business in Southern California&#039;s Inland Empire</description> <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 09:55:56 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator> <item><title>By: Little Stevie Wonder</title><link>http://inlandpolitics.com/blog/2010/01/28/rivpe-report-s-b-county-das-accuser-had-agenda-against-him/comment-page-1/#comment-359</link> <dc:creator>Little Stevie Wonder</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 16:28:56 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://inlandpolitics.com/blog/?p=2140#comment-359</guid> <description>The Devil is in the details...the report is a totally slanted account of one little part of the claim, &quot;retaliation&quot;.  The question should really be, how was the incoming CAO able to limit the scope of what should have been a comprehensive investigation for HR purposes?  Instead Mikey and the Devil have obviously conspired to spin the report for reelection purposes.  Now I&#039;m starting to see how the Devil had enough leverage to get an unheard of &quot;guaranteed&quot; 10-year contract with the County.  RELEASE THE NAME REDACTED INTERVIEWS AND LET THE PUBLIC DECIDE.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Devil is in the details&#8230;the report is a totally slanted account of one little part of the claim, &#8220;retaliation&#8221;.  The question should really be, how was the incoming CAO able to limit the scope of what should have been a comprehensive investigation for HR purposes?  Instead Mikey and the Devil have obviously conspired to spin the report for reelection purposes.  Now I&#8217;m starting to see how the Devil had enough leverage to get an unheard of &#8220;guaranteed&#8221; 10-year contract with the County.  RELEASE THE NAME REDACTED INTERVIEWS AND LET THE PUBLIC DECIDE.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: DA Insider</title><link>http://inlandpolitics.com/blog/2010/01/28/rivpe-report-s-b-county-das-accuser-had-agenda-against-him/comment-page-1/#comment-357</link> <dc:creator>DA Insider</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 15:43:53 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://inlandpolitics.com/blog/?p=2140#comment-357</guid> <description>The report in a number of places finds that the affair did take place.  But Ramos claims he hardly knew her.  Is being a liar so accepable that it merits a claim that he was cleared.  Is being an adulterer only newsworthy for John Edwards?  Is grabbing someones breasts without permission after the affair was over not sexual harrassmenht?  It sounds more like the crime of sexual battery. The people in this office know the truth.  What about the dozens of witnesses that coroborated her story and told of the other sexual affairs?  Doesn&#039;t that also make him the liar.  Where are their interviews?  We all know they gave statements. The people here know this stinks.  Too bad the Board has guaranteed his reelection. The truth will eventually come out and everyone will know this report is a lie.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The report in a number of places finds that the affair did take place.  But Ramos claims he hardly knew her.  Is being a liar so accepable that it merits a claim that he was cleared.  Is being an adulterer only newsworthy for John Edwards?  Is grabbing someones breasts without permission after the affair was over not sexual harrassmenht?  It sounds more like the crime of sexual battery. The people in this office know the truth.  What about the dozens of witnesses that coroborated her story and told of the other sexual affairs?  Doesn&#8217;t that also make him the liar.  Where are their interviews?  We all know they gave statements. The people here know this stinks.  Too bad the Board has guaranteed his reelection. The truth will eventually come out and everyone will know this report is a lie.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
