Replacing a Fighter: U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer’s seat up for grabs


Photo I took of Barbara Boxer during her 1992 campaign for U.S. Senate in front of the Van Nuys Federal Bldg at SFV/NELA NOW's "Rally in the Valley" for Roe v Wade Day

Photo I took of Barbara Boxer during her 1992 campaign for U.S. Senate in front of the Van Nuys Federal Bldg at SFV/NELA NOW’s “Rally in the Valley” for Roe v Wade Day

It’s going to be hard to replace Senator Barbara Boxer.  She’s been one of the best representatives California has ever had in Congress. Wikipedia points out that:

She previously held the record for the most popular votes in any U.S. Senate election in history, having received 6.96 million votes in her 2004 re-election, until her colleague, Dianne Feinstein, the senior Senator from California, surpassed that number in her 2012 re-election

For more photos from her legendary 1992 election to the Senate go to:

While I go way back with Boxer from that 1992 campaign I have had some disagreements with her.  Once, at a Pacific Palisades private gathering, leftist activist actor David Clennon, standing next to me, asked her, “what about Palestinian rights?”  Her response:  a long rambling response about the Holocaust, the historical suffering of Jews, and why Israel was created….then:  “….and Palestinian rights?  Of course, of course.”   ?????  Well, that wasn’t a real answer then and it takes on more significance today in the light of Bernie Sanders–her landesman (Ashkenazic Yiddish term for a fellow Jew)–strong and forthright support for Palestinian rights and his courageous appointment of James Zogby and Cornel West to the Democratic platform committee.

In 1998 for precisely these kinds of reasons, I managed Ophie Beltran’s Peace & Freedom Party campaign against Boxer for U.S. Senate while I was running for State Treasurer.

Now Californians are faced with a field of candidates longer than my arm:

2016 US Senate_001 2016 US Senate_002 2016 US Senate_003For those who want my wisdom and more or less share my politics I can narrow this down to four (4) candidates for you:

Kamala Harris explaining why she wouldn't intervene to bring justice in Sonoma County over Deputy Erick Gelhaus killing of Andy Lopez who had a toy gun

Kamala Harris explaining why she wouldn’t intervene to bring justice in Sonoma County over Deputy Erick Gelhaus killing of Andy Lopez who had a toy gun

First, why not Kamala Harris?  In 2012 I wrote the Attorney General the following letter and it pretty much explains why I’ve soured on her:

Honorable Kamala Harris:

I personally endorsed your candidacy in 2012 for Attorney, breaking with my own party to do so (], writing:

KAMALA HARRIS’s election is imperative because LGBTI rights are not trivial and same-sex marriage is a very important issue. Harris will not appeal decisions striking down Proposition 8 as unconstitutional; Republican Steve Cooley is committed to doing so.”

Were I writing today, to be fair, I would have to point out that while I substantively disagree with Steve Cooley on most issues, at least his administration as District Attorney has been far more accessible and communicative than your administration has been since taking office. As State Director of the California League of Latin American Citizens (CALLAC) I can say definitively that we (and our national organization, NLLAC) have been at best dismayed at the efforts of a coalition of most major civil rights organizations to (a) enlist your support to oppose the expiration of Hate Crime reporting requirements as proposed by Governor Brown and (b) to have a sit-down meeting with you and your staff regarding civil rights issues in California.

As was the case for many other civil rights leaders in California, I was at first extremely hopeful and inspired by your decision to have us forward our concerns to Bill Lann Lee as a part of your transition. Since then, it seems that the only thing that gets your staff to even respond to formal requests for follow up are threats to go public with this dispute. I do not relish the thought of undermining public confidence in your administration, but as a leader of an organization, my legal duties of loyalty, of care, of reasonable inquiry, and my fiduciary duty may soon dictate that I have no other way of advancing our organizational mission and purpose.

Why Sanchez, Parker, Stokes or Elizondo:

Loretta Sanchez1.  If you want a decent human being who can win, vote for Democratic Rep. Loretta Sanchez.  She voted against the Iraq war.  She’s tried her darndest for Dream Act children.  Her father has Alzheimer’s and is very much in tune with what we need to do as a society to cope with the biggest looming health care disaster this nation has ever faced.

John Parker, PFP for U.S. Senate

John Parker, PFP for U.S. Senate

2. John Parker is running as a Peace & Freedom Party candidate although he is primarily an activist with the Workers World Party.  He has a creditable activist record and a platform and emphasis I appreciate, but is obviously not going to make it into the runoff.



Steven Stokes for U.S. Senator

Steven Stokes for U.S. Senator

3.  Steve Stokes is running as a Bernie Sanders supporter, saying:  “Although I have been a longtime activist for non-partisan politics and independent candidates, I am joining Senator Bernie Sanders as a Democrat, determined to restore democratic principles and processes to the Democratic Party and to our Nation.”



Pam Elizondo was PFP, then Reform, now Green

Pam Elizondo was PFP, then Reform, now Green

4. In past elections, Pam Elizondo started as a Peace & Freedom Party candidate, went briefly into the Reform Party, and is now in the Green Party, saying that “the Green Party is international, the only way to solve worldwide problems is convince the rich of the profit of spending taxpayer’s money restoring Earth & Inhabitants greening it everywhere growing marijuana to produce water & be used for all it’s uses.” Sounds too cool and it may be just that, too cool, because as a reliable source tells the Detective’s Diary:

A cursory examination of nomination signatures (and the respective residential addresses) for several previous candidacies of Pam Elizondo appeared to show that the sigs and other info was done in the same handwriting on certain petitions circulated by the candidate herself. The papers were viewed at the Mendocino County elections department. Don’t know what the county archive there is like, but I understand the original petitions may be on file at the Secretary of State’s office in Sacramento, California. Elizondo is currently running as you point out in your blog for the U.S. Senate seat as a Green Party candidate.

Great but like Parker and Stokes, she can’t get into the runoff.  Loretta Sanchez can.



For President see my commentary at:

Los Angeles County District Attorney


Los Angeles County, Judge of Superior Court

Office No. 11 – Debra R. Archuleta

Office No. 42 – E. Matthew Aceves

Office No. 60 – Stepan W. Baghdassarian

Office No. 84 – Susan Jung Townsend

Office No. 120 – Ray Santana

Office No. 158 – Kim L. Nguyen

Office No. 165 – Kathryn Ann Solorzano

LA Supervisorial Seat 2


LA Supervisorial Seat 4


LA Supervisorial Seat 5


Torrance City Council (vote for 3)




Proposition 50


Panama Papers: An L.A. Connection


An International Consortium of Investigative Journalists data base reveals a Los Angeles connection to the Panama Papers.  The Shafrir Family Trust — of Amiram “Ami” and Sarit Shafrir — government witnesses in the prosecution of Tony Pellicano and his co-defendants, is among the entities listed in the data base.

Shafrir Family Trust_001




Ami Shafrir was last known to be in the Philippines; some describe his departure there as having “fled” there.  The Shafrir Family Trust was set up in the Cook Islands:

Shafrir Family Trust 2_001Cook Islands trusts are highly desirable because if you get sued in the United States for fraudulent transfer, by the time the case is over and you get an American judgment, the statute of limitations to get a “sister state judgment” in the Cook Islands will have expired.  During the Pellicano case I also learned of allegations that a certain former California State Bar President set up a Cook Islands Trust for a group including the Shafrirs and a certain prime minister of another nation.   That the Shafrir Family Trust was located there as well lends credence to this revelation from the Panama Papers.

If any of my readers have information about the Shafrirs, Portcullis Trustnet, or the Master Client and Trustee involved, Raiskin & Revitz and Trustcorp Limited respectively, please contact me at













Alphonse F. Provinziano and the Credibility of Attorneys


Attorney Anthony Provinziano seems to think he is a “top lawyer.” He boasts on his website that:


Attorney Alphonse F. Provinziano "top lawyer???????"

Attorney Alphonse F. Provinziano “top lawyer???????”

We are a boutique law firm of top lawyers and legal professionals dedicated to giving our clients excellent service and aggressive advocacy. The Provinziano Legal Team is client focused giving each client customized, individual attention, specifically tailored to his or her unique matter.

Here are the lawyers listed on his letterhead as his associates and their dates of admittance to the State Bar:

Baruch Yosef Kreiman 12/02/15
Curtis A. Gole 12/01/15
Maria E. Azcueta 06/04/15
Ninel Kocharyan (mis-spelled on Provinziano’s letterhead as “Kochrayian” implying that she is of Armenian Lebanese or Iranian extraction as opposed to Armenia or Russian Armenian, who usually transliterate their names with “yan” endings to their surnames) 12/03/14

Wow! These attorneys must be the TOPPEST! Like, how do you become a “top” lawyer in less than less than three (3) years?

Provinziano boasts that he is a former San Bernardino County Deputy District Attorney…..well, yeah, for all of two (2) years, 2005-2007. Who on Earth becomes a D.D.A. for two years? Somebody who can’t cut it in the department, that’s who. Maybe his leaving in 2007 had something to do with his own disastrous marriage….

In Case No. FAMVS802576 (filed in 2008) of the San Bernardino Superior Court, Provinziano sought a domestic violence restraining order (with children involved) against his spouse, amongst other things. There are of course two-sides told in court to every domestic violence story especially when it’s the male accusing the female. I’m waiting with baited breath to see the court documents on this case and will add the details when I obtain them. Also consider that by the time you wind up in divorce court, your marital problems have been building perhaps for years: were Provinziano’s marital difficulties building up while he was a Deputy D.A.? Was he let go or told to leave because they were affecting his work? Inquiring minds want to know.

Then there was his Chapter 7 Bankruptcy filing in 2012. What was that all about?

Bottom line, does this sound like the record of a “top lawyer” to you?

Section 6128(a) Business & Professions Code states:

“Every attorney is guilty of a misdemeanor who either: (a) Is guilty of any deceit or collusion, or consents to any deceit or collusion, with intent to deceive the court or any party.”

Section 6068(d) says:

“It is the duty of an attorney to do all of the following: (d) To employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to him or her those means only as are consistent with truth, and never to seek to mislead the judge or any judicial officer by an artifice or false statement of fact or law.”

Rule 5-200 of the Rules of Professional Conduct says:

In presenting a matter to a tribunal, a member:

(A) Shall employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to the member such means only as are consistent with truth;

(B) Shall not seek to mislead the judge, judicial officer, or jury by an artifice or false statement of fact or law;

(C) Shall not intentionally misquote to a tribunal the language of a book, statute, or decision;

(D) Shall not, knowing its invalidity, cite as authority a decision that has been overruled or a statute that has been repealed or declared unconstitutional; and

(E) Shall not assert personal knowledge of the facts at issue, except when testifying as a witness.

Then of course there’s the State Bar Rule of Professional Conduct on advertising, Rule 1-400(D) which states in pertinent part:

A communication or a solicitation (as defined herein) shall not:

(1) Contain any untrue statement; or

(2) Contain any matter, or present or arrange any matter in a manner or format which is false, deceptive, or which tends to confuse, deceive, or mislead the public; or

(3) Omit to state any fact necessary to make the statements made, in the light of circumstances under which they are made, not misleading to the public;

Any of this sound relevant?

Now, this lawyer has been accusing a woman against whom he is litigating, to not be credible to the judge. Does that sound like the pot calling the kettle black?

Beware of 1972 in 2016 Congressional Elections


In 1972, Democrat George McGovern carried only Massachusetts and the District of Columbia against Republican Richard Nixon but at the same time, Democrats only lost 13 House seats and gained two Senate seats.  What happened and why?

With a nominee that the Democratic establishment couldn’t stomach, they raised all their money and spent it on keeping their house majority and increasing it in the Senate.  This is likely what’s going to happen if its Hilary vs Trump for President but in the reverse.  Hilary will have no coat-tails for down-ticket Democrats the way Bernie would given the kind of support he commands, the demographics, and the poll results that predict it.  Hilary’s negatives are too big and it’s bad enough to argue she’s the lesser of two evils so vote for the other people on her ticket…’s a very hard sell

The Republican establishment will make the most of the situation by raising all the money they’d normally spend on the presidential race for keeping and extending their congressional majority….if they have any brains at all.  The Democrats did it in 1972 and the Republicans are capable of it in 2016, especially if the Democrats cooperate by nominating the person with the second highest negative poll ratings following Trump!


Bring Hollywood Home on the Oscars 2016




Peabody Award Winning Broadcaster Bob Jimenez, LA’s Austin Beutner (former publisher of the LA Times, & Sharon Hardee Jimenez Founder President Bring Hollywood Home and co-host LA Business Today 

Monday, February 29, 2016

The complexity of so called ‘racism’ in Hollywood is a very big topic.  Los Angeles Oscar broadcast 2016 focused more on allegations of racism than who won the most coveted awards in movie and film making this past year.   It was a difficult night as labels – Black – White were bantered around making viewers uncomfortable and guests at the awards even less comfortable at the Kodak Theater in Hollywood.

For an activist like myself, whose career from TV news, to publicist, to foundation founder, and advocate for finding solutions to the job outsourcing that has devastated LA’s creative economy, the night was unsettling.

Speaking two weeks ago to the Inglewood NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) with actress/activist Diane Ladd (3 time Oscar nominee and the winner of the British Academy Award, the big problem is a lack of productions at the studio level (the studios once made thousands of movies each year and last year made just over 6 hundred with less than one percent directed by minorities or women.)

The political woes in California are pretty straight forward.  The studios through the MPAA lobby the legislature for tax credit incentives in many states and in other countries.  A whole industry has been created that presents a very challenging business model if you are a minority or woman owned production company.  Tax credits are a ‘turn key’ to bring investors to films.   The credits provide the stability and initial investments productions need to get their bonded status so crews can begin to work.  Independent producers don’t get the tax credit incentives in California as the lawmakers keep in place a discriminatory business model that prohibits any real competition for the studios.  Add to this a history in Hollywood of blacklisting, and keeping out the movies of writers and stars who make noise about these problems, and you have a very sad picture in Hollywood in 2016.

Bring Hollywood Home set about blowing the lid off of these discriminatory problems five years ago when we created the foundation in 2010.   You would have thought we were trying to build a nuclear power plant in Hollywood the way the lawmakers circled around the studios to make sure there would be no new voices in this company town.


Ironically, one of the first people I met with high up in the industry to talk about the problems of lack of financing for women and minority owned productions, was the Executive Producer of the Best Picture 2016, Spotlight’s Tom Ortenberg.  I knew Tom from my role as senior advisor to US Congressman Dennis Kucinich in 2004 and 2008 when he ran as a democrat for the US presidency.  Tom had just successfully helped director Paul Haggis win a Best Picture Oscar for CRASH, a provocative movie about racial tensions in Los Angeles.  In 2010 Tom Ortenberg told me he was focusing all of his attention on Open Roads a distribution house in Hollywood.  We discussed how difficult it is to make things happen here in Tinsel Town.   Seeing Open Roads and Tom Ortenberg and the cast of Spotlight win an Oscar for exposing the story of the Boston Globe journalists who went against the powerful Catholic Church to expose the sexual exploitation of children, was a reason to have faith further investigative reporting efforts will help stop the aggressive assault on our youth from human trafficking and the pornography film genre exposing children to sexual violence everyday.     90 percent of commercial porn is made here in LA according to the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.  Pornography films have made their way onto the Internet now exposing children as young as 9 and 10 years of age, to objectification, rape,and sexual violence.     The problem of rape made center stage at the 2016 Oscars when New York’s Lady Gaga sang about the phenomenon.  Rape is a common theme in pornography according to The National Center on Sexual Exploitation working to expose human trafficking.  The Washington DC based advocacy foundation just named a Dirty Dozen that points to the US Justice Department failure to prosecute and enforce laws upheld by the US Supreme Court on obscenity.  Indeed the 88th Academy Awards boldly confronted some of the biggest issues facing our nation and the world today.

There is extraordinary talent in Hollywood.  The major studios have created an industry that is the envy of the world.  But, it’s time to grow the industry for everyone’s benefit.  As the population of the world has exploded so should independently owned and led production companies.  Minorities and women, Black, White, Asian, Latino, and others should all have a chance to build upon the great legacies of the Hollywood Studios.  Expanding the California Tax Credit incentives and/or creating a public private film fund big enough to seriously impact the number of productions hiring in the state would go along in healing the wounds that afflicted us last night.  If you were anything like me you hung your head last night, and woke up today with a new resolve to Bring Hollywood Home.

Sharon Hardee Jimenez, President Founder Bring Hollywood Home Foundation