Apparently Ward 3 is trying to compete with Ward 5 in terms of the number of candidates running for an open seat.

Glad the DC Wire team and the Post worked out whatever so that you resumed the blogs and we don't have to go another day with last month's blog. We have something to live for now.

I said the same thing the other day. Only I said it as "Taxation Without Equal Representation."

Another shout out!

Strauss is jumping in on Sunday at Stoddert Elementary (4001 Calvert St., NW) at 1:00 Refeshement will be served.

Sam Brooks is still the top candidate, as far as my vote goes. He still has the best ideas and most forward-looking, realistic approach that our city/state needs.

I was delighted to hear that Paul is jumping into the City Council race. I have known Paul for a great many years, and he has always taken the position of Shadow Senator very seriously (and let's face it, the position is pretty low on the glamor scale). Over the last 15+ years, Paul has been unswerving in his desire to do the best for DC, and I know he will be great on the Council. Wish I still lived in DC so I could vote for him!

--Cris Cusack
Springfield, VA

With four heavy hitters (Cheh, Gaull, Rice and Strauss) in the ward 3 race, I have a gut feel that they will take votes away from each other and the net result is that one of the lesser candidates will slip by and win.

If Sam Brooks or Jonathan Rees wins, I will move out of the District.

The above two posts are by Jonathan Rees, who seems unable to control himself on the Internet. More about Jonathan Rees here:

http://www.dcist.com/archives/2006/02/13/professionalism.php

profiles.yahoo.com/jrrees_1955 (Rees' own Yahoo Profile)

I totally agree. I noticed that, since people started figuring out he was posting stuff under fake names all over town, he's started posting things that are seemingly as anti-Rees as they are anti-Brooks. (I think he cares more about hurting Brooks for some odd reason than winning.)

I guess he thinks this ploy is going to make everyone think it's not him, but from what I've read on other websites and heard from neighbors, no one's buying it. It's really weird!

The nonstandard "if anybody" structure is, coincidentally, one found in all the Rees alias posts here an elsewhere.

Busted again, man. You're just not very clever.

The use of "people" with no comma is also a dead giveaway.

Ward 3 folks, as some of these comments indicate, are obsessed with Brooks and Rees. Apparently they are doing the campaigning that they should because now the rest of us that participate in these "blog forums" know who they are and never would have heard of them otherwise. It is interesting to see that there is someone that is relatively moderate in his views running and a relatively social conservative. Maybe there is someone out there that won't push D.C. over the deep end. May the best campaigner, man or woman, win. Let the games continue.

Is it possible to have just one discussion that doesn't devolve into endless loops of jonathan rees talking to and about himself?

The concept of standing outside of "bars along Conencticutt Avenue" is laughable.

So is that bars in Woodley Park, Cleveland Park or Chevy Chase?

Oh my God, this Rees guy has got to be a joke of some sort.

Flyers don't win election. Any advertising professional will tell you: it doesn't matter how many people you reach if your product isn't what they want. Reach is only part of the equation. You need a good (ethical, capable, mentally stable) product and an intelligently crafted message.

Otherwise, it's just a waste of paper and time.

No tears will be shed, I guarantee you.

"A. Schulze"

This just gets funnier and funnier. And sadder, in a way.

obviously....

Mr. Rees' by-now-hackneyed misrepresentation of the facts of the Penn State incident (Martin was NOT threatened with deportation, he was charged with dozens of students for the misdemeanor "failure to disperse") etc is completely irresponsible, and becomes more annoying with repetition. Google "Rees" "Austermuehle" and see what really happened.

A guy who resorts to shameless lying about a private citizen (who dared criticize him non-anonymously) is hardly fit for public office.

If I were Rees, I'd be careful about quoting Aleksander Boyd. Google him and you'll see that he's in a speck of legal trouble, and is widely considered to be a rightwing anti-democracy operative, who has advocated violence again the current Venezuelan government.

Marxists! Student protestors! Venezualans! Gays! Bloggers! Brooks!

Rees' inner world must be a frightening place.

ooooh.... lookout Lori! See what happens when you cross Rees? Next thing you know he'll start a poorly written, but vaguely threatening blog about you. And then he'll accuse you of being A Communist Radically Pro-Gay Liberal Elitist Threat.

;-)

So where are these smears against other Ward 3 candidates? I am curious to know what is being said abot Rice, Cheh and Gaull.

This is what Jonathan Rees says: "You will not see anyone in my building subscribing to the Washington Post but to the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Times or the Financial Times as we want real newspapers not one that resorts to yellow journalismto sell a paper as the Washington Post has bceome."

Nobody in Rees' building subscribes to The Washington Post? Really? Somehow I doubt that Rees is telling the truth.

sleeping on garrison street = rees, too.

creep.

So, Rees. You claim that Martin is on the Homeland Security Watch List.

How the hell would you know that?

You don't. It's just more pathological babbling from the Lyin' King.

Diagnosis: Paranoid.

Diagnosis, Part Two: Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

http://www.ousterhout.net/zoom/npd.html

90%? No, statistically that's incorrect. It's actually a fairly uncommon diagnosis.

And one that makes you unfit for office.

The "people fear me"/"everyone's jealous" line? It only serves to convince me that you do indeed have this very serious disorder.

not folled (sic) = rees

In the last few months online, Rees has accused the following (a partial list) of orchestrating what he calls "attacks" on him: Brooks, DCist Martin. Dr. Blecher. A 'female lawyer who admitted the whole sham." Fred Vinson! Eric Marshall! John Capozzi! No, wait, it's the Gays! No, wait, it's the Democratic party elite!

It certainly can't be blog readers and voters who are offended by Rees' behavior.

Nah. That's just too far-fetched ;-)

We need a guy like Rees only because Marion Barry isn't enough of a joke.

Scare me.

1. Usually only professionals in the mental health business know what "DSM" means. It is "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV)"

You will find the standard definition for (and elements of) "Narcissistic Personality Disorder" there.

2. Voters in the District have not been "disenfranchised" with respect to voting. They never had the franchise to begin with.

3. What difference does it make to DC residents whether or not Utah gets another seat?

If it is such a morally correct issue for DC to receive voting representation in Congress, why do they care if another state gets another seat? It's not the first time trade-offs such as this have been done. Entire states were brought into to the Union in horse trades such as this.

You should be focused solely on whether on not DC residents deserve the right to voting representation, or not.

What is going on here? My word, this is getting nuttier and nuttier. I've never seen a political candidate behave the way Jonathan Rees does.

Let's put some things down on paper to get our bearings. We know that Rees has:

* Impersonated numerous individuals on the Internet, including his political rivals

* Is pathologically obsessed with Sam Brooks

* Lied about his lawsuit against Daro Reality -- it was a groundless lawsuit and not a joint suit with the US Department of Justice, as Rees claims

* Lied about where he went to college

* Lied about his employment history

* Created dozens of aliases, many of whom are now retired, apparently, including Alex Biddy, Kathleen Roddy, Thelma Roque, Juan Sanchez, Thelma Cumes, and others. (Where have all these people gone, Jonathan Rees? Where?)

* Lied about his so-called "Team Rees" and campaign staff, including his made-up website designers

* Meanly attacked his critics online, accusing them of crimes and other things

So where does that put us? It puts us in a place where we are dealing with somebody who either can't tell the difference between reality and fiction, or who just doesn't care.

Please, Washington Post blog, make him stop.

good grief, mark. you know there is a thing called "the newspaper." we had a front page story 2 weeks ago about norton and the democrats at long last signing on to the davis bill because they were finally convinced they that the GOP wasn't trying to screw the only democrat house member from utah.
yes, it is true that norton and pelosi and the dems were resisting davis's bill. but that conflict now appears to be resolved. the question now is whether davis can persuade republicans to support his bill, because democrats appear to be voting yes.

Please don't bother responding to Rees' post above.

This is where all his threads end up. He asks for proof that he lied, people supply it in the form of publicly accessible links (from DCPages, local Yahoogroups etc, Legal databases, etc.).

Trust me. His response will simply be some variation of "That's Not True!"

Don't even bother. It'll be a waste of your time, and it'll just give him more of the attention he so desperately craves.

You Ward 3 folks are a trip. I guess this is going to be another runaway blog comment line exceeding 200 comments. Enjoy. It's always fun to read. And I must follow you to other blogs to see what's up.

It's Sunday night, about 10:30 PM. I'm sorry. Mr. Rees can't respond to your post just now. He's currently busy violating the rules of Craigslist by posting libelous spam on multiple forums. Again.

This sums it up so well:

"Rees has injected something into the ward three race that I've long felt was needed: frighteningly unhinged sociopathy."

http://dceiver.blogspot.com/2005/11/ward-3-more-like-psycho-ward-jonathan.html

I can't wait until the -real- Christopher Neff reads the above post.

Is this for real?

Please show me anywhere that Sam Brooks has been present on these blogs or anywhere. You can't, because he hasn't. Rees, get over your sick fascination with Brooks and sell your lies somewhere else. No one here wants them.

Jonathan,

I say this as a fellow member of the human race. Please seek counseling, or get back on your medications. You are a truly ill person.

I feel for you.

Jonathan, I say this as a fellow member of the human race. Please seek counseling, or get back on your medications. You are a truly ill person. I feel for you.

Thanks Sybil.

Jonathan Rees has picked up petitions to get on the ballot. A word of warning: If you sign Rees' petition he will have your home address.

Based on what Rees has done to other people, it's not a good idea to give Jonathan Rees your home address.

Keep this in mind: http://dceiver.blogspot.com/2005/11/ward-3-more-like-psycho-ward-jonathan.html

mark, the stories ran on may 11 and may 12, both on the front page. however, they refer to "house democrats" rather than specifically to pelosi. i did speak to her staff, though, and they said they are "supporting delegate norton" on the issue. which i took to mean they are no longer blocking the bill.
if you look at the vote in government reform, all the dems voted for the bill. dems on judiciary are expected to vote for it as well, from what i hear.....

Beatrice: Get in line, girl! He's apparently QUITE the self-styled chick magnet:

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:iyfcTf4lQ2UJ:www.hellocutie.com/dts_membersprofile_home.asp%3FUserid%3D1127390+jrrees%40&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=

hee hee

Note: Divorced, no children.

Laughing our loud. That cached site is from February of 2005...long before the concept of Rees as a candidate or public figure. So which is it? 0 kids, 2 kids, 3 kids?

You are a joke Mr. Rees.

wrong wrong wrong.

google caches are always dated. This is a simple fact.

I just went to this website http://www.hellocutie.com/adt_browsesearch_results.asp and there is no profile there for Rees. The date you give shows when it was retrieved but not when it was created nor who created it.

This seems fishy to me.

So, Rees, I'm guessing this whole "cache" concept is new to you? Wow. For someone who spends all day on the net, you really display a shocking ignorance of the basic.s

Read the page again, closely this time, and you'll clearly see what it means, according to Google itself:

"This is G o o g l e's cache of http://www.hellocutie.com/dts_membersprofile_home.asp?Userid=1127390 as retrieved on Feb 21, 2005 22:57:28 GMT.
G o o g l e's cache is the snapshot that we took of the page as we crawled the web."

Foolish little person.

If it was RETRIEVED on feburary 21st,2005 then the original page had to have been created BEFORE then. Meaning BEFORE anyone had ever even heard of your crazy campaign. I seriously doubt that some political foe flew backwards in time to plant a fake profile.

Though I suppose it's possible that the laws of physics, like the laws of logic, may not apply in whatever universe you inhabit.

For someone who claims a high level of computer literacy on his (ahem) resume, I'm a bit surprised at your lame response.

I'm too polite to post it (and I don't want to disgust other readers), but I would not be averse to someone else sharing the now-infamous Craigslist post from a year ago wherein you bragged about your sexual prowess in a certain technique.

I have a screenshot of it, and I can't wait to get this revolting thing off my hard drive.

sherlock holmes = rees

whatever, dude. It gets more pathetic every day.

'night all.

This just gets funnier and more pathetic all the time.

Mr. Rees, you are a sad, sick man.

Jonathan Rees is deeply disturbed. If you sign his ballot petition and he gets your home address, you'll be sorry.

If you cant stand the heat, get out of the kitchen

Not "Harry S. Truman". Finally something affiliated with the Washington Post which gets "Harry S Truman" correct.

Thanks, Harry S .

Actually it's not that clear-cut. While the "S" does not stand for a middle name, President Truman himself used the period after the "S" when signing his own signature. And most official organizations (Harry S. Truman Library) and style manuals suggest using the period.

Just found this site. All this attack on Sam Brooks makes me and my wife think he must have a lot to offer the voters of Ward 3. Why else would so many fear his candidacy. Maybe he is the new face Ward 3 needs.

Check out Rees' latest, and utterly revolting, bit of sleaze...before he deletes it.

http://austermuhle.blogspot.com/

I expect it will be gone any seond. If the WashingtonPost wants a copy of the screenshot, just ask and you'll receive.

From tonights Rees spam on Craigslist. Can this be the "power" behind his odd campaign? Google the email address for some unexpected hits.

(Also: "inclumblant!")

"Get Your Posters up, Yard Signs Place or Brochures Distributed by the Award Winning Teams of Global AHJ GroupLLC. We distribute for candidates, inclumblants
and business. District of Columbia or Maryland. Great Rates, Quality Service.

Email us today for Free Estimate ahjgroup2005@yahoo.com "

Go Away Rees.

Yes, AHJgroup is a real company. What's your connection to it? Or did you just hijack their email (which is actually not a yahoo address?) Either way, there's definitely a story there.

And pa-leez. "Gilley". Har!

"Gilley": There's DEFINITELY a story here. I'll post the findings here later.

'night!

Even Mary Cheh knows that the crap being spread about her is originating at the hands of Jonathan Rees.

Sir, please stop your single handed attacks on the other candidates.

There's a lot of information to digest on this thread. But one thing that's clear is that Jonathan Rees is playing fast and loose with the fact. And indeed he prefers not to use any facts at all.

Rees continues make up stuff about his political opponents and about his own life. He continues to impersonate others online, and has even fabricated blogs, as if they were created by other people. (Surely this --impersonating other people-- is a crime for which Rees could be arrested and punished. Can the Washington Post investigate?)

Based on everything that's been said about Rees, and on things that Rees himself has said, I would recommend staying away from him. If you see Rees on the street handing out flyers, walk away. Don't engage him in conversation.

I will allow that Brooks accepting money from an anti-Gay-rights contributor is troubling.

And I will allow that Rees' has, uncharacteristically, provided documentation of the contribution.

However:

1. This is to my knowledge the only example of substantive documentation this guy has ever provided. It does not retroactively confer credibility to his months of unsubstantiated rumormongering and ad hominem sleazery. Note how many of the posts on this thread alone are based on "I heard" and "So-and-so said..." His months of personal attacks and grandiose boasting (voted "fastest kickboxer in the world" anyone? how about "orchestrated several political campaigns on both coasts?") Everything else he's posted has been ridiculous, sleazy and wholly unsupported by any sort of external link.

2. His disgusting alias-posting campaign - and the public response to those posts - began MANY months before he posted Brooks' campaign contribution list. And long before his new I Blame The Gays campaign. The assertion that Brooks or The Evil Gays have been on a retaliatory rampage doesn't jibe with the calendar.

3. Rees has yet to post any documentation demonstrating that Brooks has EVER posted using aliases. While Rees' on-line alias-fest, dating back to last summer, has been documented in many places. Do I REALLY need to post the links to DCpages and the various yahoogroups again? And what he's posted under those aliases has been hateful - to gays, to women, to private citizens and human decency in general. And when people respond to this stuff using their own names, Rees responds by sending sick and libelous emails about them out into the community. Or contacting their employers.

THIS is why people keep trying to draw attention to those posts. The content of the posts, and the ongoing deception behind them, is just plain wrong. And for an alleged office-seeker to engage in such low behavior - well it's just unthinkable.

4. I do have a problem with Brooks accepting money from Quinn, but it doesn't mean that Brooks isn't personally committed to GLBT issues. And certainly not that he's a "homophobe", any more than local journalists writing about you are "neo-nazis" or "drug addicts", as you've alleged.

While I realize this post will be met with the usual distortion, deflection and the disengenous cry of "My detractors posted fake alias posts and blamed me for it", I thank you for reading it. I hope you'll regard this post as an open window in the Hall of Mirrors.

Can the truth-squad ever get any rest? Jonathan Rees (obviously under the alias "Beatrice Nettle") says that "As for Sam Brooks, well the internet if full of proof of his dirty tricks."

Just for the record: There is no such proof. Sam Brooks, Erik Gaull, Mary Cheh, Robert Gordon, Bill Rice, and the other candidates for Ward 3 City Council know to stay away from Rees, not to comment on him, and not to get involved with Rees in any way.

As for the hurtful and dishonest things that Rees has been doing, Google can reveal that. Just start here:

http://dcdl.org/2006/02/06/false-balance-ward-3

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/08/AR2006020800989_pf.html

How interesting that "Lucifer," the supposed author of the Anti-Brooks blog to which Rees linked above, was for a while posting on DCpages. Here's one of his gems:

http://www.dcmessageboards.com/index.php?showtopic=8315

Yeah, right. Big friend of gays and lesbians, that guy.

One imagines Rees will now deny being Lucifer. And further that he'll attempt to say there are two, distinct, Lucifers at work here. To which I offer a pre-emptive "pathetic, just pathetic."

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/columbia_heights/message/3735

alias much?

http://www.dcmessageboards.com/index.php?showtopic=7539&hl=multiple+alias

More Rees alias stuff:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tenleytown/message/3904

He's DC's worst spammer.

If there's one thing you can be sure of, it's that a post by Jonathan Rees (as the above two messages are) will be completely empty of facts.

It's interesting to watch how Rees does mess up every now and then with his one-man Internet show. He forgot that in one place on the Internet he said he has 2 children, and posted elsewhere that he has 3 children. He forgot that he said he went to NYU for college and then posted that he went to Columbia University for college.

He's stuck with other assertions that he can't undo and which collapse under the smallest scrutiny: Rees said that he had his flyers printed in Puerto Rico: false. Looks more like Kinko's. Rees said that he joined forces with the US Department of Justice in a discrimination lawsuit against Daro Realty: false.

I dare Rees to submit to an interview with a bona fide reporter or be questioned at a candidate's forum. It's easy for Rees to throw out lies here (on one of the few forums where he hasn't been banned); but it would not be easy for Rees to duck questions face-to-face. Go ahead, Rees, make the call this very afternoon. Be interviewed. Call the Washington Post or the Washignton Times or even City Paper. But I doubt you will.

Never Fooled, you wrote, "I do not think any of this is hurting Mr. Rees because I feel most of us are wise enough to realize that a man of Mr. Rees' background would not be doing this stuff but others who are out to make him look bad are."

What background would that be?

I think that this Rees interview is very interesting:

http://dceiver.blogspot.com/2006/02/does-jonathan-rees-dream-of-electric.html

Another gem of Malapropism: "I suspect he deals with medias that are more like him and will toot his good points like the In Towner does."

Don't ever stop Rees. It's comedy GOLD.

PS: It's been quite a while since the In Towner "tooted" Rees. One guess why.

http://www.dcmessageboards.com/index.php?showtopic=8851

I guess blogspot.com had enough of Rees's crap and deleted the inflammatory stuff about some local bloggers that the candidate had posted.

So why is Mr. Rees posting using an email address ward3lady@hotmail.com?

I guess that alias stuff is true.

You need some help, Mr. Rees. Please get it.

So everyone who disagrees or has something insightful to say about Rees is a "jackass," according to Rees? Contrary to what Rees thinks, there are a lot of good bloggers out there. It's just unfortunate for you, Rees, that these bloggers are onto your scam.

Rees is clearly afraid of talking to the press. If not the Washington Post how about City Paper? Or even the Northwest Current? Or call Mark Plotkin for an interview. Or Kojo Nnamdi.

Like somebody said, Rees is not going to submit to an interview because he has a lot to hide.

That's not what I hear. Believe me, dude, the journalists are hip to you. You'll find out soon enough.

Also: Hey yeah. Why DO you post as "ward3lady". Are you trying to fool the other dudes on all those personals websites you frequent?

There are a lot of questions people and the press have for Rees.

How is it that Rees claimed to go to two different colleges, despite the fact that his writing is that of a sixth grader? How come Rees claimed to be in a discrimination lawsuit with the Department of Justice against Daro Reality, when there was no such suit. Why did Rees create this disgusting Yahoo profile (and yes, this is by Jonathan Rees): http://profiles.yahoo.com/jrrees_1955 Why is Jonathan Rees pathologically obsessed with Sam Brooks? Why does Rees savagely attack anyone who criticizes him? And what did Rees do in Longview, Texas?

Lots of questions, but no good answers from Jonathan Rees.

Rees is avoiding the press so he doesn't have to answer these questions...and more.

Bush Family? Hardly. It involves a woman. And an extended vacation.

Rees, you poor man. I can only imagine what happened in your childhood to result in this kind of severe personality disorder.
I honestly hope you find some kind of peace one day and are able to find real love rather then the negative attention that's become your substitute for it. And genuine self-love rather than the hollow grandiosity you've used to replace it.

Seriously.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/columbia_heights/message/3735

Believe me, some of us know more about what the press is working on than you do. They've seen everyone's IP addresses and have been privy to a lot more information than you have. But I've said too much. You'll find out, Ms. Roque/Officer Magana/Ramon/Lucifer

So Ida was a hot texan, then?

Actually, I don't imagine anyone really DOES care about rees' family, his divorce, his work history, his alleged kickboxing title....except that his varying stories conflict with each other.

And no one would care about THAT if it didn't speak to character. The character of someone who's spent months posting utterly shameful things about private citizens and political rivals under thinly-veiled aliases.

That has ALWAYS been the main point. The only point. No one should be allowed to deceive the electorate like this.

You aren't what you pretend to be. You lie about other people and about yourself, and that is simply unacceptable in any political candidate.

Deflect, distort, avoid, all you want, but that's what it all comes down to.

If that's not the pot calling the kettle 'unconvincing', nothing is.

By the way, this sentence is one of your best yet. And by best, I mean most hilarious:

"PEOPLE WILL BELIEVE VERIFIABLE MATTERS LIKE BROOKS OWN RECORDED LIES BY THE MEDIA vs. HIS RECORDED WORDS AFFIRMING WHAT HE SAID EARLIER TO HAVE BEEN LIES."

I know you don't see why, but believe me,you've struck comedy gold yet again.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/columbia_heights/message/3735

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/columbia_heights/message/3665

From one of the aliases mentioned in the above post. This was the first known example, back in 2001, of Rees posting under aliases (including Biddy, Stewart and others we've all come to know and, um, love.)

Oh, pa-leez. I'm not Sam Brooks nor affiliated in any way with any political candidate or organization. Never had been and doubt I ever will. I don't expect the other posters here, those who keep challenging your rank nonsense, are involved in your fantastical conspiracy theory either.

But if your Big Bad Brooks story helps you sleep tonight, then by all means have at it.

My word, DCeiver is right:

http://dceiver.blogspot.com/2005/11/ward-3-more-like-psycho-ward-jonathan.html

"Rees has injected something into the ward three race that I've long felt was needed: frighteningly unhinged sociopathy. God bless him.

"Let me put it this way: this guy really hates Sam Brooks. I mean...wow. Wow. His basic plan for Ward 3 is hating Sam Brooks. Under Rees leadership, Ward 3 would become the world destination for Sam Brooks hatred."

Anyone who's got an ounce of common sense will stay far, far away from Jonathan Rees. Who knows what Rees will do to you if you end up on his enemies' list.

Interesting column by Washington Times (I know, blasphemy in these parts) writer Tom Knott:

http://washtimes.com/metro/20060524-112241-2633r.htm

It is an interesting side-by-side to an earlier article by Lori Montgomery of this publication:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/08/AR2006020800989_pf.html

Time to place your bets, Reeswatchers...

When he comments on the Times article, will he dismiss it by calling the author

a. a yellow journalist
b. a jerk
c. a drug addict
e. a communist
f. a radical gayrights activist
g. a Brooks supporter
or
h. Brooks himself, using a psuedonym?

;-)

(Yeah, I know. D. is missing. it should have said "member of the liberal Democratic party elite.")

Winner, by the way, gets an oversized teeshirt featuring the phrase "Crazy Carribean" written in glitter.

RE: that Fenty story. It's really old, though you wouldn't know it since the not-so-mysterious OP failed to provide attribution.

What's significant is this section: "A judge later ordered Fenty to reimburse $15,000 to Hardy's estate, saying Fenty "made a series of errors that lead to both the improper withdrawal of funds by Mr. Hardy's family."

Hardly scandalous, that.

According to a post made by Jonathan Rees, using the alias, "Sam Brooks Watch": "Thelma Roque is an alias name Rees daughter Antonetta uses."

False. Another Rees lie. (Just look at the DC Superior Court record about Rees and you'll understand why this couldn't possibly be true.)

Thelma Roque is just a made up person -- another of Rees' many aliases.

The thing about all of this is that Rees may actually believe that he's fooling people, like the child who thinks that he is invisible when hiding under a blanket. But he's not fooling anyone. The only thing he's doing is further establishing his credentials as a disturbed, evil individual.

Why does Rees distribute (or claim to) his flyers in the middle of the night? Why does Rees avoid interviews with the media? The answer is that Rees is afraid of the light. He is afraid of the truth.

Interesting that Sam Brooks Watch would post that Thelma Roque is an alias used by Rees's daughter. According the the link above, Lori Montgomery already certified that Rees responded to emails on behalf of Thelma Roque.

The whole question of Rees and his kids has come up repeatedly, as he has been on the record as stating he has no children, 2 children and three children. At one point the three children were of different ages, and another point it was twins and another child.

It is clear from the afore mention legal citations that Rees has no connection with his children, by legal remedy, so it would be virtually impossible for the afore mentioned daughter to be posting on his behalf, as claimed by the candidate.

(Isn't also amazing that Gilley and DC Eye made the exact same post 6 minutes apart this morning -- see 11:45 and 11:51. Rees has confirmed his multiple username affliction)

Rees is sending out "thousands of emails"? Oh no! He is DC's most worst spammer.

On themail, www.dcwatch.com, Jonathan Rees has also said ""I have an E-mail list of 11,000 voters in my ward".

How in the world did Rees get a list of 11,000 voters' email addresses? He could not have acquired these email addresses legally.

Spamming is a crime. Along with impersonating people online, as Rees has done.

Tom Knott's article about Rees is hysterical. He really put Rees in his place, as a laughing stock. Ridicule is one good way to deal with Rees. In case anyone missed it: http://washtimes.com/metro/20060524-112241-2633r.htm

I'm sure that this won't be the last time that there's a good story about Rees -- he's such a goof.

Thelma Roque -- really. Did Rees actually believe that he could create an alias like that and nobody would find out?

I do not suppose that Gilley aka Mr. Rees aka Lucifer has heard of faulty logic? Spamming that blogspot URL is simply hysterical.

I said it before and Ill say it agian, you need help Mr. Rees, please seek it out.