Straw Poll In Ward 6

There were no hanging chads. There weren't even voting machines.

But Wednesday night's straw poll, conducted by the Ward 6 Democrats, drew accusations of voter tampering and ineligible voters. "That's not strictly kosher," said Jan Eichhorn, president of the Ward 6 Democrats.
Dozens of people waited around for more than an hour to get the results as excited as they would be on a real election night.

The Ward 6 Democrats announced that poll results in the at-large race between Council member Phil Mendelson (D) and his challenger A. Scott Bolden could not be determined. The group took 22 sealed ballots to the Board of Elections and Ethics today because no one could find them on the rolls.

"Of the 22 challenge ballots cast, 20 were cast by individuals that were not registered Ward 6 Democrats at the address the voter provided," Charles Allen, in charge of the poll, wrote in an e-mail today. "These 20 ballots were therefore not counted."

Final results: Bolden 106, Mendelson 98 and 21 undecided.

Mendelson supporters criticized Bolden for bringing in three busloads of seniors.

"The problem with a straw poll is they reflect who shows up," Mendelson said. "The more accurate poll, of course, is Election Day."

Bolden, who said he is smart enough to bus in supporters, was so frustrated by accusations that one of his staffers helped fill out the ballots of the seniors that he could hardly speak. "They're a bunch of SOB's. Write that," he said. "I'm tired."

In the chairman's race, the 22 votes would not have made a difference. Council member Vincent C. Gray (D-Ward 7) received 141 votes compared to 77 for council member Kathy Patterson (D-Ward 3). Fourteen people were undecided.

Gray said he was "pleasantly surprised by the margin." He said he has tried to reach out to as many people as possible in Ward 6.

By the way, those seniors getting off Bolden's bus were wearing both Bolden and Gray stickers.

Nikita Stewart

By Marcia Slacum Greene |  June 2, 2006; 7:00 AM ET
Previous: Fenty: New, Improved, Under Attack | Next: Black Republican for Mayor?!


Please email us to report offensive comments.

Stay classy, Mr. Bolden.

Posted by: SOB's? | June 2, 2006 08:00 AM

What will this blog read the morning after Election Day?

"Mendelson Loses, Complains About Better Organized Opponent Who Had More Supporters"

Organizing and transporting supporters is something that all good campaigns do. The Mendelson campaign doesn't have the capacity to conduct those operations, the Bolden campaign does.

Mendelson's whining about losing is a display of poor sportmanship and reveals his desperation.

Posted by: Sixth Sense | June 2, 2006 08:38 AM

I was there at the straw poll and Mr. Bolden is absolutely correct that bussing in supporters is a legitimate exercise for this kind of event. The fact that people were helped to vote to the extent of Bolden campaign staff filling in ballots is not acceptable and it is too bad Bolden Campaign's actions tarred Gray's campaign with the same brush. What Bolden needs to worry about is despite his bussing people in, Phil Mendelson showed nearly identical support based on people who came of their own volition. This essentially amounts to Bolden losing his Ward. The fact that Gray, who apparently shared the busses with Bolden (Have they endorsed one another? I hope not) did so much better than Bolden is further evidence of Bolden's lack of support, and Kathy Patterson's much poorer showing is a clear indication that Phil's support and campaign is strong and independent. I'm not sure who raised concerns about the Bolden campaign's activities, but Bolden's comments are just more whining by a candidate who appears to be unable to take responsibility for his record or the actions of his campaign.

Posted by: Capitol Hill Wants Results | June 2, 2006 09:26 AM

I too was at the straw poll -- and Mr. Bolden's comments suggest that he is interesting in winning at all cost.

Posted by: A voter who wnats a clean election | June 2, 2006 09:42 AM

Busing people in is indeed part of politics and easy for someone who has raised tons of money from developers, business interests and suburbanites to do. However, let it be noted that many of the people Bolden bused in were seniors in poor health and it was a very hot and uncomfortable evening. Although voting did not start until 7:30, the buses got there much earlier and many of these seniors had to wait up to 45 minutes in an incredibly hot and stuffy hallway to vote. Not very considerate and not at all classy. Also let it be noted that although Bolden bused the seniors in, it was mostly Mendelson volunteers who helped them up the front steps of the school. Maybe that's why Gray got 141 votes and Bolden only 106. Clearly many the people bused in voted for Gray but not for Bolden.

Posted by: rg | June 2, 2006 09:51 AM

Interesting to see such a tight race. Ward 6 is a great place to get a feel for how things might come out.

I agree with others that we don't need another Chamber of Commerce flack on the Council, though. Mendelson may be white, but when I write the Council seeking assistance or to urge a vote, he's one of the first to respond (along with Fenty), and he's truly oriented to all constituents, not just business.

Posted by: NW Observer | June 2, 2006 10:06 AM

Fenty just can't shake that Sin Skin germ! Too bad since Adrian is a decent guy. I just saw his dad the other day while I ran through Mt. P & I thought to myself 'Your son has Skinner on his staff, I can't vote for him.'

Posted by: Wash Post reader | June 2, 2006 10:19 AM

It is so sad to see so many hurting, sour grape type, player haters commenting on Bolden's victory at the Ward 6 Dems. It might have been a tight race, but nonetheless he beat a two term incumbent that probably had never been to side of Ward 6 where the seniors were transported from. They didn't seem to know who the incumbent was. How pitiful.

It was interesting that the forum was held at the farthest point in Ward 6 in S.W. for such an important event. For a straw poll, a more central location would have been better suited. Rotating meetings is a good idea, but wouldn't it have been nice for it to be in a location with different demographics, socioeconomic levels. That part of Ward 6 just became part of the ward during the redistricting. It was once part of Ward 2. Good thing there is public housing nearby to keep it from being a verywealthy area with all the new expensive townhouses in the area.

It's interesting that only Bolden and Gray seemed to be interested in getting a more representative body of people to the polls. How kind of them to transport seniors that did not have a way to get there. It is insulting that there was not more outreach. Stop taking voters for granted and reach out to everyone like Bolden.

Bolden is a smart man with smart people around him (paid and volunteer team members). That's the type of leadership that we need. Hardworking people that care about others and know what to do. Jefferson Junior High was clearly in the incumbent's base. Just a coincidence of course, but no one was going to be outsmarted and toyed with and because Bolden won,there's a problem. Bolden learned how to circumvent obstacles and not fall prey to someone's games.

Stop whining and let's move on. Bolden won fair and square. He's not a dummy. Take him seriously. I'm glad that he is raising money so that he can become the new blood on the council that it so desperately needs.

Black, white and otherwise are voting for Bolden. We want change and Bolden is the one that represents that. We need someone articulate that will speak out and do some good. P.M.'s time has come and he needs to face it. Don't waste a lot of time crying on this blog so that others can feel the pain of defeat. This was one round of many.

Bolden is not perfect and has his flaws, but on any day he is better than the incumbent and D.C. voters are learning that. Be very afraid P.M. Bolden is going work hard and win this election and he is not going to whine along the way.

And I am glad that he headed the Chamber of Commerce and the DCDSC. He knows about a lot of people and a lot groups. He is diverse. Businesses have helped this city thrive and small businesses are the ones hiring in America so we are thankful that we have some here and someone that knows about payrolls and staffing and the like. Bolden is not one dimensional and that is a good thing.

Jealously and envy doesn't play very well. Hate the game and not the player. Bolden outsmarted a carefully thought out way to hurt him. He didn't take the bait and lose. He overcame the challenge and was successful. He played by the rules and I guess they will constantly keep changing.

Posted by: A DC Voter and follower of politics in the great city | June 2, 2006 10:50 AM

I'm not sure what "player hater" really means as the last poster keeps referring to (I've seen him/her post before on the "player hating issue," but my take as one who attended was that all candidates did a pretty good job at addressing Mark Plotkin's sometimes absurd questions. One being why those in office have not done more to make the Wilson Building more asthetically pleasing. Finally Kathy Patterson said there were more important things to worry about - to the crowd's cheer.

I have to say that the level of discourse here on this blog is disappointing, but not shocking. Jan Eichorn, the head of the Ward 6 Dems, admitted that there had been voter tampering - apparently someone from a campaign was helping folks vote. That's just sad, and in a straw poll? So for folks to express their disappointment in the process being tainted is probably fair. For Scott Bolden to call the folks who shed light on these apparent shenanigans names, is plain unacceptable. I don't really know Scott Bolden, and I'm sure I'll learn more as the campaign continues, but I have to say that this first impression is not a good one fo this voter. I'm sure he was just frustrated, but someone who wants to gain the public's trust should know that that type of behavior turns people off.

All in all, the candidates did a rather good job during this straw poll, and I look forward to learning more about all of them.

Posted by: SW P.O.V. | June 2, 2006 11:18 AM

Shenanigans is right. What is this, a high school student body president election? Candidates, grow up and stop the name-calling! It's no wonder why so many americans don't vote anymore. I know bolden is trying to make a name for himself, but come on!

Posted by: P.O.V. is on point | June 2, 2006 11:31 AM

It is indeed a joy to hear that A. Scott Bolden won the straw poll in Ward 6. It is understood that there will be detractors and there will always be criticism of a winner. He worked hard and he was tired and still gets criticized for doing what he was supposed to do -- win. If he had lost, the same excuses for him winning would have been used against him. No matter what, there will be those that do not have anything gracious to say about him. That's human nature, that's life, that's politics.

In any event, many D.C. voters hope that this is the beginning of a long string of victories. Bolden's success makes D.C. voters winners. We have a great leader in Bolden and on September 12th he will be elected to become an official leader of the people. God is good all the time. I am thankful that we have Bolden on the horizon for the good of D.C.

The negativity of others will not shake our belief in Bolden the leader or his will to succeed. Many of the people of D.C. stand by him and continue to be proud with each step he takes toward victory. He does what he can to try to be caring to all, but some still put him down. All he can do is keep moving forward and keep his critics in his prayers.

Posted by: What a happy day -- Bolden won | June 2, 2006 12:03 PM

Gray and Bolden win in Ward 6 straw vote. So the reasons are vote tampering, 3 bus loads of seniors, and team Mendelson helping the seniors up the steps. I was there, saw the three buses, saw the seniors in line, and saw the Mendelson, Gray and Bolden people outside passing out literature. I guess the Patterson people were there, but I remember seeing only one as I was leaving. I offer my own analysis:
Gray had three meet and greets in Ward 6 the last week before the straw vote--one on the 1300 block of Independence Ave SE, one at the park near Hopkins Public Housing also attended by Bolden on Memorial Day, and one at an 8th SE bar the night before the vote. I dropped in two of the three and a major effort was being made to sign up people to come and vote in the straw vote including a handout with the date, time and location of the forum and straw vote. Gray (and Bolden on Memorial Day) specifically asked those attending the meet and greets to come and vote. Yes , there were buses, but there were also phone calls and personal requests by both candidates for support.
As for Mendelson, there was no visable effort to turn out supporters and no one I know received a phone call asking for their support or vote. Patterson hired a campaign director who is an outsider to DC politics unless you count banning smoking in restaurants as DC politics, and relied on the endorsement of Ambrose for support. That got her a much deserved poor second place showing.
But all of this is politics. Two candidates (Bolden and Gray) are hungry for votes and are working hard to get them. Patterson deserves better but she is responsible for her campaign or lack of campaign, and Mendelson still needs to show he is more than a self consumed policy wonk incapable of connecting with the average voter.

Posted by: Ward 6 Voter | June 2, 2006 12:31 PM

As a participant at the Ward 6 Straw Poll all I can say is that there appeared to be some serious mischief going on. But the worst of it was when I overheard a couple of senior citizens say they came at the behest of Marion Barry and that if Vincent Gray won the Council Chair race he would work to ensure that Barry would become chair of the education committee. As and ardent supporter of improving DC public schools I find this reprehensible. We all remember what happened to DC property values when Barry became mayor again, they plummeted. I don't think we need his style of crooked good old boy politics overseeing the DC education system.

Posted by: Ward 6 Voter | June 2, 2006 12:44 PM

Whether or not this is a good use of his resources, according to his supporters here it seems pretty clear Bolden spent some significant amount of money and effort on winning the straw poll. If the discussion here is accurate, Mendelson does not appear to have spent the kind of money and time on this straw poll that Bolden did. If this is true, than the result Bolden got for the effort were mediocre at best, especially if the story above is to be believed and "The Ward 6 Democrats announced that poll results in the at-large race between Council member Phil Mendelson (D) and his challenger A. Scott Bolden could not be determined." Mr. Bolden is a past chair of the DC Democratic Party and President of the Chamber of Commerce and a resident of the Ward, apparently living a few blocks from Jefferson Jr. High where the forum was held, not an outsider, political neophyte. This event appears to have shown the Bolden campaign's weakness not its strength.

Posted by: Ward 6 Wants Results | June 2, 2006 01:02 PM

I heard that same rumor about Gray helping Barry get the Education committee seat. Turns out it's not true. Supposedly Barry made the statement several weeks ago, but Gray never promised anything.

Posted by: Gray appointing Barry? Not likely. | June 2, 2006 03:56 PM

I think we can attribute most of our newest taxes that is crippling DC to Mendelson and Patterson who think the solution to all our poroblems are more taxes.

I am one who want to see these two jokers go and I live two downs down from Phil in McLean Gardens.

Posted by: Nose Meat | June 2, 2006 05:25 PM

Hey Rees, welcome back to DC Wire.

Posted by: ^^^^^^^^^^ | June 2, 2006 05:51 PM

Hey "ward 6 voter" it's so easy to go on the attack with information, or lack there of, when you post anonymously. Perhaps because you are so partial to Gray/Bolden you deliberately choose to share your ignorance about Kathy Patterson's campaign. She in fact also had meet and greets. 1.5th st, SE on May 20. 2.F St, SE last wednesday. Ignorance strikes again when you say you only saw one of Kathy's supporters' there. You must be the DC political outsider when you don't recognize the civil rights leader and former board of ed member Roger Wilkins and ANC Commisioner David Sobelsohn, and Tom Heineman, there to support Patterson. Considering the amount of weight the restaurant lobby has in this city, you should really investigate the smoke-free campaign and it's success

Posted by: Shannon | June 2, 2006 06:06 PM

I think the outcome will be along racial lines.

Posted by: Amos & Andy | June 2, 2006 08:05 PM

For all the people who hate Rees, here is something to hate him all the more for.

Half of the ward 3 voters live in apartment buildings which do not allow anybody to enter to give out anything but Rees is being allowed in by several of Metro DC's biggest property management companies.

As such, this past week, Rees and his people have been flooding apartment dwellers with his stuff while all his rivals are being denied access.

While this may sound unfair, it gives Rees a major advantage.

If you live in an apartment building in ward 3 and have only seen Rees' stuff then you now know why.

Posted by: An Ugly Truth | June 2, 2006 08:34 PM

please. I beg you. delete all Rees' posts above. He's proven himself to be unworthy of our company.

Posted by: | June 2, 2006 08:58 PM

No matter who wins, you still lose!

Posted by: Pessimist | June 2, 2006 09:51 PM

Rees is, reportedly, a sociopath.

Posted by: - - - - | June 2, 2006 10:51 PM

Here we go round in circles.

Posted by: Billy Preston | June 3, 2006 12:44 AM

PLEASE shut up Rees. You've ruined this and every other blog with your prevarication and psychotic babble. No one, but NO one, believes a word you say.

And for eff's sake: ENOUGH with your anti-gay slurs.

PS: DCIst Martin, you deserve SO much better than this.

Posted by: ----- --- - | June 3, 2006 01:10 AM

By the way, what the hell does "but not an unemployed candidate and (slur deleted) and life of my political contributions and my mother."

Seriously. What does that phrase even MEAN? You get more incoherent as the night wears on. Every night. Drinks? Or what?

Posted by: - - - - | June 3, 2006 01:18 AM

All of the posts above that have the "/" in them are Rees...the "/" is a coding error which is a result of using a proxy server, whhc Rees has been hiding behend, when making inappropriate posts, since he was clued into the concept of IP addresses and was exposed for his posting under psuedonymns and aliases on Yahoo, where the posting IP address is public.

You are a sick man and need some serious professional help, Mr. Rees.

Posted by: ^^^^^ | June 3, 2006 07:46 AM

I think homosexuals have no place in government because they are perverting the natural order.

Posted by: | June 3, 2006 10:06 AM

We do not have to go to the deep south to have a homosexual free goverment. We can do north to Dealware, Pennsylvania, Ohio, NH, VT or even Maine where people still believe homosexuality is an abomination.

Posted by: | June 3, 2006 10:08 AM

The people who lobbied for the smoking ban in DC argued that they did not want to have to front the cost of health care for people who knowingly put themselves at risk for lung diseases.

In the same vein, I do not want any of my tax dollars to go and treat homosexuals who have put themselves at risk for AIDS! The US Dept. of Health & Human Services says that the average gay man has had 10 times the number of sex partners than a heterosexual which says that homosexuals are wreak less.

Homosexuality again is nasty and if you think there is no God who will punish you then wait and see.

I would like to see leaders in this city who can say no to the homosexuals.

Posted by: | June 3, 2006 10:21 AM

I live in Ward 7 and also I heard that same rumor about Gray helping Marion
Barry gets the Education committee seat. Mr. Barry is assist Vincent to
become Chair of the City Council he should be reward with any chair seat on
the Council he wants. Remember. The spoils go to the winner. It would be
nice having Marion Barry running the city again. Marion will be Co-Chair
with Vincent, and you cannot ask for better combination of leadership for
the city. Also, I was there at Ward 6 Forum straw poll and the people who
were bused in stated they were there assist Vincent because Marion Barry
asks them. And remember, Mr. Bolden assist Marion in other matters. All I
get to say Go Barry.

Posted by: Victory | June 3, 2006 12:09 PM

I guess ignorance is bliss and the strategists that try to use Barry as a wedge continue their tricks. Those folks can make Barry the issue while the rest of the city works toward electing their candidates. Barry's son went to Jefferson so why shouldn't he show up. If Barry wants to help someone, that is good. I bet some of the other candidates wish he would lend a hand. Grow up and talk real issues instead of going back to yesterday's old tricks and racist inspirations. This is the 21st century and time to get with it. Some candidates are just well qualified and articulate. They do well because they are all that. They attract supporters because they are credible candidates. Some folks need to go spread their venom elsewhere since most of the people that read these blogs/comments are intelligent and know what time of day it is. Try campaigning instead of spouting ill will and nonsense on the blog comment section. Get a life. Let Barry do his thing and the other political operatives do their thing. Talking about Barry is a signal to what group exactly??? What nerve are you trying to hit? Name some other council members that are supporting candidates so that they too can hit sensitive nerves.

Posted by: we know that game | June 3, 2006 01:18 PM

Go, Bolden. I am glad that you won the Ward 6 Straw poll. Surely Ward 6 is a microcosm of Washington, District of Columbia. Winning in Ward 6 is a tribute to you as a viable candidate as well as to your vision and campaign organizational skills. Voters look to seeing more of you as you crisscross the city campaigning. It is so good to see you in neighborhoods meeting people and trying to tend to the people's business. That is refreshing. You're one of the good guys and voters look forward to voting for you on September 12th. I hope you do more in D.C. than try to get restaurants to post the ingredients on their menues. Issues that concern me are education, workforce development, workforce housing, healthcare, employment/job creation in the private sector, public safety, and clean neighborhoods. As an at large member of the Council, Bolden has the best chance of working with D.C. government, citizens, and the other council members to make a difference in these areas. Bolden in 2006.

Posted by: Looking forward to a new day with new citywide leadership | June 3, 2006 01:43 PM

Most of the seniors were met by Bolden supporters that put stickers on them as they dismounted. It is incorrect to say that most of the seniors were wearing stickers when they got off the bus. I guess it would have been too much like right for other candidates to venture out in the city to get supporters to come. Bolden opens access to all throughout the city.

Posted by: an observation | June 3, 2006 03:37 PM

Vincent Gray will make a good chair. He has star leadership ability and a great personality.

Posted by: seeking the right chair | June 3, 2006 05:51 PM

There was never any doubt in my mind that Rees was behind that complaint filed against Sam Brooks and his campaign chair Tamela Gordon for violating the Hatch Act.

This week, Rees won that silent battle:

Tamela Gordon was found to have in fact violated the Hatch Act by being heavily involved in obtaining political contributions for Sam Brooks for city council.

Yet, since the US Office of Special Counsel says that the only remedy under DC Code 1-1001.17 is to recall an ANC commissioner for such a violation, they would not go any further in this matter other than to confirm she did as accused and allow the voters to move for a recall. Since Gordon's term is up soon and has not filed seeking re-election to her seat, any action at this date might be moot.

The complaint against Tamela Gordon was filed by a Philadelphia, Pennsylvania resident whose name is not available for public disclosure.

Unpublished op. OSC File No. HA-06-1005

Posted by: Rees Scores A Victory | June 4, 2006 12:10 AM

Perfect! A sociopath never acknowledges his shortcomings, and is generally evasive, grandiose and boastful. So congratulations on that.

Posted by: confirmed diagnosis | June 4, 2006 02:38 AM

Ted Bundy had money, too. It hardly made up for his sickening lack of conscience. Or yours, to the extent that you actual are "richer than all the readers of this blog combined." Which I guess you've ascertained through the use of your Super Sociopathic Online Xray Bank Account Vision. Or something.

Posted by: - - - | June 4, 2006 03:18 AM

Isn't amazing that "all these people" are posting around the same time both here and at DCist, and they are all Rees supporters.

This would be very funny, if it weren't so sad.

Posted by: Maia | June 4, 2006 07:35 AM

Rees' actions, which speak louder than the words of his aliases, demonstrate his sociopathic behavior. Rees has posted vile messages about people he apparently hates on Craig's List, has stolen people's identities to create blogs in their own names, has filed numerous frivolous lawsuits against his enemies, and more. When people have asked him to stop sending them email, he's replied with four-letter words. Rees has been judged mentally unfit by a court of law.

The only safe course of action is to completely avoid Jonatha R. Rees. Sociopaths like Rees can be dangerous. Rees, through is aliases, may try to trivialize his condition, but the fact remains that Rees is a potentially dangerous sociopath. Just ask any of the people whose lives Rees has tried to destroy.

In the words of Marta Stout, author of "The Sociopath Next Door," here's one of the ways you can recognize a sociopath, and this is so true of Rees: "Make the Rule of Threes your personal policy. One lie, one broken promise, or a single neglected responsibility may be a misunderstanding instead. Two may involve a serious mistake. But three lies says you're dealing with a liar, and deceit is the linchpin of conscienceless behavior."

You can listen to an interview with Martha Stout here: She's talking about Rees.

Posted by: | June 4, 2006 11:21 AM

As has been pointed out, Rees' actions do the speaking for him. His mission in life is clear: to cause as much hurt and harm as he can to others.

Lying is as easy for Rees as breathing is for normal people. It doesn't matter how big the lie, either.

He's not interested in being on the city council. Rees is only interested in seeing how much misery he can cause -- this is what makes Jonathan Rees tick.

To quote from Martha Stout's amazing book on sociopaths, which is recommended reading to anyone watching or involved with Rees:

"Imagine -if you can- not having a conscience, none at all, no feelings of guilt or remorse no matter what you do, no limiting sense of concern of the well-being of strangers, friends, or even family members. Imagine no struggles with shame, not a single one in your whole life, no matter what kind of selfish, lazy, harmful, or immoral action you had taken. And pretend that the concept of responsibility is unknown to you, except as a burden others seem to accept without question, like gullible fools. Now add to this strange fantasy the ability to conceal from other people that your psychological makeup is radically different from theirs. Since everyone simply assumes that conscience is universal among human beings, hiding the fact that you are conscience-free is nearly effortless. You are not held back from any of your desires by guilt or shame, and you are never confronted by others for your cold-bloodedness. The ice water in your veins is so bizarre, so completely outside of their personal experience that they seldom even guess at your condition."

Posted by: | June 4, 2006 12:47 PM

Martin Austermuhle is absolutely NOT working with Brooks or any other candidate. It's one of the several lie Rees continues to repeat in a weak attempt to discredit any journalist or private citizen who criticizes his abhorrent online behavior, using their own name.

Quit frikkin' slandering people, you amoral monster.

Posted by: btw | June 4, 2006 01:07 PM

In the midst of all this, look at the at large and council chair races and know that there candidates from around the city not caught up in this Ward 3 bickering match.

Posted by: | June 4, 2006 02:59 PM

Impressive wins in Ward 6, at large and council chair candidates. Keep up the good work.

So much for the myth of a racial or socio-economic divide.

Posted by: | June 4, 2006 03:29 PM

Hey, I post heabout how crazy and evil you are, and so do people I know. And none of 'em are, or know, Martin or Sam Brooks, nor are any of 'em Gay rights activists.

Any other crazy-ass theories you'd like to prattle on about.

Posted by: - -- - - - | June 4, 2006 08:02 PM

The only person maligning candidates is Jonathan Rees.

The criticism of him? It's all been a response to his months of sick and fallacious posts.

I have yet to see anyone posting similar stuff about any other candidate, nor any evidence that any other candidate has sunk to embracing the sort of despicable tactics in which Rees habitually engages. He keeps trying to reframe this as "one person is attacking all the candidates," but it's demonstrably untrue.

Posted by: XDC | June 4, 2006 08:22 PM

I guess sicks minds who are so twisted in their own beliefs cannot accept that there are many a lot of people who do not agree with them. So they chose to attack a symbol of the opposition to them and in this case, it is Jonathan Rees.

I can assure you, there are a good number of people who may not support Rees but agree with him.

As for this man Martin Austermuhle, he does have a criminal record, he did contribute to inciting a riot, he did join a marxist group and he does work for a marxist leaders and there is no lie in that. The fact that these facts are seized on is fair play to cast doubts but I guess we might be dealing with some who do not believe in fair play.

Posted by: FU | June 4, 2006 08:42 PM

Rees is going to use if elected, the one man - one vote concept to side-step issues that he dislikes and use that as a tool to bargain for what he wants. I have seen that tactic used before.

Posturing as a swing vote on a steady basis is a very effective tool politicians on the local level use to get what they want.

What is Rees real agenda?

Posted by: ^^^^^^^^^^^ | June 4, 2006 08:54 PM


The man is a sociopath

What more is there to say

Posted by: Nuff said | June 4, 2006 09:12 PM

I received this position statement Rees made sometime today and submitted to TheMail at DC Watch where they often publish his opinion.

From: Jonathan R. Rees
Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006
To: ''
Subject: Domestic Partnership Adoption Equality Act of 2006

Domestic Partnership Adoption Equality Act of 2006
Jonathan R. Rees -

I believe that the issues of "Same Sex" adoption and marriage should not be decided by the DC City Council but put before the voters in a binding referendum.

Kathy Patterson' introduction of Bill 16-0590 Domestic Partnership Adoption Equality Act of 2006 was deceptive and an election year ploy to get votes, because she knows that the DC City Council would shelve that bill, not vote on it and that Congress would veto it if passed. In other words, Kathy Patterson knew the bill was DOA before she even filed it.

This sort of act by a sitting council member to build up the hopes of people wrongfully demonstrates a lack of sound leadership quality needed for out next chair of the DC City Council.

It is my position that the DC City Council should step back and not vote any further on these two hot button issues, but put them before the voters in a binding referendum once and for all, as doing such would finally address these two matters in the most democratic manner possible, and not allow special interest groups to prevail one way or the other over the Will of The People of Washington DC, as Congress would be more sensitive to a vote by all Washingtonians and not those thirteen that make up our council.

Posted by: Rees To TheMail @ DCWatch | June 5, 2006 12:55 AM

Thanks, but I don't really give a crap what that lunatic thinks.

Posted by: - - - -- | June 5, 2006 01:03 AM

It's nice to see that themail, published by dcwatch, is no longer printing Jonathan Rees' messages. That probably explains why he had to post here what themail wouldn't. I suspect that themail now knows, as just about everyone does, that Rees is just a made up candidate, and is out to hurt anyone he doesn't like. themail has probably been reading this: and

Posted by: dcwatcher | June 5, 2006 07:34 AM

That's pretty good. You happened to be getting divorced and you amicable asked him to research a case about another divorce? How did you know about the other divorce?

Rees has claimed that all of his case records are sealed. How is it that your husband was able to access them?

What is the complaint number your ex has filed with Judge Rufus King?

You are very ill Mr Rees, and your incoherant posts in this forum do nothing to dispell the depth of your illness.

Posted by: A Questioner | June 5, 2006 10:17 AM

I know! The post from the alleged divorce woman above you is some of Rees' most transparent alias-posting yet.

And it does nothing to aid his loopy cause. All he basically says his "Everyone Lied!" That's all he's got, really, since the court record is quite clear about the psychiatrist's findings.

Sheesh. Poor guy. He never quits, even in the face of utter humiliation.

Posted by: ^^^ | June 5, 2006 10:44 AM

In 1992, here's what a court psychiatrist said about Jonathan R. Rees:

"Mr. Rees either purposely lied to me or distorted reality, due to a pathologic process, or both. It appears reality is interpreted to meet his own internal needs. Given his functioning, he is not capable of entering into agreements nor abiding by decisions of the court."

It's quite possible that Rees has gotten worse since 1992.

Posted by: | June 5, 2006 11:08 AM

Also note that, significantly, Rees has on several message boards claimed never to have been divorced.

The hypocrisy of him calling anyone else a "liar" is apparent. And no, Rees, not all politicians lie. I for one hold political candidates to a higher standard than this. I imagine most voters might agree: if you lie about being divorced, I'm disinclined to believe anything else you claim to be factual.

Ugh. Why do I bother? It's so obvious as to require no argument of any kind.

Posted by: ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ | June 5, 2006 11:11 AM

You are right Jonathan, people's private lives are of no concern to the voting public. What is of interest however is the intgrity and mental fitness of the candidate.

Given the public pronouncements of 2 kids or three kids, the statements about never having been divorced, the ambiguity of educational background, the ambiguity of employment history and credentials/qualifications for public service, there are broader concerns about your candidacy, then if you have been divorced.

Other than the Clintonian lie, none of the others you cited have lied about their personal lives. Clinton was impeached over his lies.

Posted by: A Ward 3 Voter | June 5, 2006 04:44 PM

Rees never lied to anyone. I did in his name and if you check the ownership of the IP addresses used, then they can all be traced back to me Ramon Stewart-Rivera.

My IP address is

See how easy it is to fool stupid people and I have been doing it since October of last year.

I had all of you believing I was Jonathan Rees and others and you believed it.

I am the one who also has been attacking that idiot Martin Austermuhle and etcetera.

Why am I doing it? To make all of you look stupid and to prove how easy it is to make anyone look like they have done things they have not.

I am all the aliases you have accused me of.

This is such fun making you guys look like idiots that you are.

If you do not think I am a real person then contact Serge Kovaleski or Eric Weiss at the Washington Post and ask them if I am a real person.

Posted by: Ramon Stewart-Rivera | June 5, 2006 04:50 PM


Why is it that your IP address matches that of Mr. Rees (as signed in his own name) in several Yahoo Groups dating back to 2001?

Posted by: A Ward 3 Voter | June 5, 2006 05:03 PM

Facts and resources about Jonathan Rees --

1. In 1992, here's what a court psychiatrist said about Jonathan R. Rees: "Mr. Rees either purposely lied to me or distorted reality, due to a pathologic process, or both. It appears reality is interpreted to meet his own internal needs. Given his functioning, he is not capable of entering into agreements nor abiding by decisions of the court."

2. Just some of Rees' aliases:

3. A summary of what Rees is from "The Sociopath Next Door": "The covetous sociopath thinks that life has cheated her somehow, has not given her nearly the same bounty as other people, and so she must even the score by robbing people, by secretly causing destruction in their lives. the most important activity in the covetous sociopath's life, her highest priority."

Remember, Rees' main purpose in lying is to hurt other people.

I do have two questions: Has anyone been able to figure out what he does for a living? Has anyone ever spotted his so-called campaign manager and wife, Mindy Silverman? It seems on the surface that both his job and his wife are also fictions.

Posted by: Tim | June 5, 2006 06:13 PM

Why doesn't the Washington Post just send Rees a cease and desist letter, telling him that he's not allowed to post on DC Wire, and if he does it will be considered computer trespass. And then if he does, sue him! Surely the Washington Post has the kind of clout to do this -- Rees is just an insignificant nothing with no resources to go head to head with the Post.

Posted by: | June 5, 2006 06:28 PM

Hey Ramon, at what address are you registered? Oh, and at what address is Jonathan Rees registered? Just wondering.

Posted by: ? | June 5, 2006 06:32 PM

How any rational adult would consider "Mr. Rivera"'s behavior to be anything but juvenile and contemptible is beyond me.

On the spectacularly unlikely chance that "he" and Mr. Rees are not in fact the same person, it's remains the case that one is known by the company one keeps. And the things "Mr. Rivera" has posted under the various aliases have been utterly revolting, rude, peurile, libelous and threatening.

Nice imaginary pal ya got there Rees. One can only imagine the kind of staff members you'd have if elected. I can just see it -- they'd spend all day online threatening other council members, posting voters personal information, and creating idiotic "blogs" about television characters and Rees imaginary riches and kickboxing titles.

Fortunately, we'll never have to find out.

Posted by: xdc | June 5, 2006 09:38 PM

NEVER click on any link Rees supplies.
Spam, viruses, or generally offensive crap no doubt await.

I'm with the court psychiatrist. Diagnosis:Whackjob

Posted by: _____ | June 5, 2006 10:30 PM

And what judge or case would that be?

Posted by: A Questioner | June 5, 2006 10:57 PM

According to those case numbers listed, by that attorney Jackson, the list of judges that heard the matter according to a print out I bought were:

Judge Cheryl Long
Judge Eric Holder
Judge Ricardo Urbina
Judge Shelly Bowers
Magistrate Judge Dennis Doyle

A copy of the order I bought concerning this psychiatric report written by Judge Ricardo Urbina which is four pages long rejects the report of Dr. Joel Ganz as being factual, the judge offered attorney Jackson an opportunity to object to his findings that the report should be rejected and she agreed it should be rejected and the court ruled the report was so flawed and its findings are to be rejected.

I would be tickled of the Wash Post would go get a copy and come here and tell what they see in that order to shut you people up.

Go buy your own copy people.

The sad thing is, it is not candidate Rees which is also another lie.

Posted by: Ramon Rivera | June 5, 2006 11:29 PM

Rees doesn't like the facts of his past. For more about the kind of person who Jonathan R. Rees is:


Contempt for sending an Email?

On Feb. 10, the entire US D.C. judiciary received an e-mail filled with vulgarities and aimed at Superior Court Judge John Bayly Jr. The message revealed that the author was Jonathan Rees. At the time, Judge Bayly was presiding over Rees' divorce case, which had been going on for eight years. Bayly ordered that Rees show cause why he should not be held in contempt for violating a previous judge's 1992 order prohibiting him additional filings in the divorce matter without judicial approval.

But in a hearing before Superior Court Judge Michael Rankin, Rankin decided against prosecuting Rees for the contempt charge because Rees did not receive sufficient warning that his actions violated the 1992 order. At the hearing, Rankin said any order will put Rees on notice that any further e-mails to D.C. judges would be grounds for contempt. But Rees' attorney says that prohibiting his client from communicating with the judiciary would infringe on Rees' right to free speech.

(There's more about this available to anyone who has access to Nexis.)

Posted by: | June 5, 2006 11:50 PM

I'm sure Rees' past is rife with misdeeds.

However, we need look no further than his and "Mr. Rivera"'s recent behavior on-line for evidence of his serious and ongoing ethical breeches.

Even as recently as this thread.

Ethics matter. Character matters. Decency matters. You've given voters/readers no reason to think anything but the worst about you. In fact, we've seen nothing that could by any stretch by considered a -virtue-. Not the slightest indication of competence, kindness, trustworthiness or even a modicum of personal charm.

That you're unfit for office is clear; what we're still trying to determine is whether you're even fit for human society.

Posted by: - - - - | June 6, 2006 12:16 AM

I am sure Rees is losing sleep over your worthless opinion.

Posted by: Ramon Rivera | June 6, 2006 12:30 AM

Whether Rees/you loses sleep is immaterial.

That he'll lose the election, and has completely lost the sympathies of the electorate, is comfort enough, thanks.

Now say something vulgar and/or evasive, preferably poorly spelled, please. You don't want to disappoint your public.

Posted by: - - - - | June 6, 2006 12:34 AM

What makes you think any of the candidates are a sure winner or loser?

Posted by: Ramon Rivera | June 6, 2006 12:41 AM

"Is." Any of the candidates "is."

Technically, it wasn't poorly spelled. But the grammar was atrocious. So close enough.


Posted by: Moron Raving | June 6, 2006 12:57 AM

All of the nine ward 3 candidates agree that the race will be decided based upon who reaches the voters more often.

If you have looked, Rees has the largest number of volunteers and actually more than all the others combined.

Since there are nine candidates, and only about 10,000 voter in any primary, it will be easier for anyone to pull it off.

Nobody can be sure they have the race in the bag.

Posted by: Ramon Rivera | June 6, 2006 01:01 AM

Is this the same Judge Urbina that both YOU and REES slammed on the Columbia Heights Yahoo Group between Feb 12 and 16th 2001?

The record is very clear -- and is still there -- for anyone to examine.

You make no sense.

You are very ill and should get help.

Posted by: A Questioner | June 6, 2006 06:32 AM

Follow the thread for a few days, and look at the IP addresses of the various posters.

Sick sick sick

Posted by: A Questioner | June 6, 2006 06:55 AM

That has to be one of the most racist things I have seen come from your keyboard. There are millions of Latinos who are of African decent, from all parts of Central and South America, not to mention the islands.

The slam you refer to had plenty of extracurricular information in it.

You are a very twisted, warped individual.

Posted by: actually you are wrong | June 6, 2006 09:40 AM

And you were a clerk of his?

Posted by: A Questioner | June 6, 2006 10:30 AM

Who cares people! Can we get back to the thread?

Posted by: | June 6, 2006 12:29 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.


© 2007 The Washington Post Company