The “Me Too” anti-sexual harassment campaign that quickly yielded several resignations by state lawmakers last fall appears to have hit a lull in Sacramento with Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia, D-Bell Gardens, now seemingly on track for re-election this November despite scandalous allegations. But new twists may loom.

Garcia, 40, appeared doomed to a primary defeat two months ago. She took a voluntary leave of absence after she was accused of groping a then-legislative staffer four years ago; making inappropriate comments to a lobbyist; playing “spin the bottle” with staffers; and of using racist and homophobic language. The perception that she was a weakened candidate led the State Building & Construction Trades Council of California – which supported her in 2014 and 2016 – to oppose her primary bid.

But between a preliminary probe finding no evidence for the most serious allegation against Garcia – that she groped a staffer – and the strong support of Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, D-Paramount, Garcia finished first in her June 5 primary. She got 29 percent of the votes to 27 percent for Republican activist Mike Simpfenderfer, a mortgage banker. The other five candidates in the race, all Democrats, split the remaining 44 percent of the vote.

Last week, however, saw two developments that suggested Garcia wasn’t out of the woods yet. The first came when the Assembly agreed to consider an appeal of its finding clearing Garcia of groping former legislative aide Daniel Fierro, who now works as a Los Angeles County political consultant. Fierro sought the appeal last month amid grumbling that the initial investigation of Garcia was released even though it was incomplete.

This concern may have been a factor in the second development: the call from two Democratic lawmakers for a much more transparent and responsive approach to allegations of misconduct involving state lawmakers and staffers.

Anti-gay, anti-Asian remarks could haunt Garcia

State Sen. Holly Mitchell, D-Los Angeles, and Assemblywoman Laura Friedman, D-Glendale, said existing efforts to respond to sexual harassment don’t go nearly far enough to take on a “toxic” culture in the Capitol. They propose establishing a new investigative unit that would focus only on discrimination and harassment complaints; would handle probes for both the Assembly and the Senate; and would rely on an independent committee of experts to recommend punishment for those found guilty of wrongdoing. Legislators, however, still would have the final say on what if any penalties were assessed.

But the Mitchell-Friedman proposal targets not just the behavior that Garcia has so far been cleared of but behavior of the sort the Assembly probe found she had engaged in: using homophobic slurs to describe fellow Los Angeles County Democrat John Perez, the Assembly’s first openly gay speaker, and of threatening violence against Asian-Americans after some Asian-American lawmakers balked at affirmative-action proposals that they thought would help some minority groups but not their own.

“The proposed policy … aims to spur a shift in how people in the Capitol community speak and act toward each other,” the Associated Press reported. “It encourages people to report minor incidents such as insensitive comments all the way through more aggressive acts of misconduct.”

Rendon’s decision to defend Garcia while still appearing strongly sympathetic to the Me Too movement has been complicated by comments that suggest he thinks Garcia’s larger record of legislative priorities and accomplishments should matter in judging her behavior. Similar suggestions made in defense of former President Bill Clinton and now-former Rep. John Conyers, D-Michigan, triggered a furious backlash.

Rendon entered this territory in April when he denounced the building trades unions for seeking to replace Garcia with other Democrats whom Rendon said would be more willing to challenge aggressive environmental policies touted by Gov. Jerry Brown and all the party’s legislative leaders. A spokesperson for the unions said their opposition to Garcia was prompted not by her strong environmentalism but by sympathy for her alleged victim and a belief another candidate would better reflect the values of the 58th Assembly District.

But Rendon rejected the claims in a blistering statement posted by the Sacramento Bee in which he called the unions’ maneuvering “a thinly veiled attempt by Big Oil and polluters to intimidate me and my members,” “ an affront to my speakership” and an “ill-advised political attack.”

“We recognize that accomplishing these objectives will take time, but we must start now,” said Assemblymember Laura Friedman, D-Glendale, and Senator Holly Mitchell ,D-Los Angeles, the chair and vice chair of the committee, in a statement.

While the exact guidelines are still a work in progress, the pair announced three guiding principles: “Significant cultural change to create a workplace of respect, civility and diversity”; “comprehensive redesign of policy, procedures and training”; and “independent investigation and determinations of sexual harassment allegations to ensure equitable and accountable outcomes.”

The push to change the rules follows several months of revelations surrounding sexual harassment and a toxic culture for employees in the capitol. After Sen. Tony Mendoza’s resignation stemming from allegations of sexual harassment, the Senate announced new guidelines that require outside investigators in such cases. The Assembly, however, did not adopt similar reforms. The subcommittee hopes to streamline these disparities.

The Joint Committee’s next hearing will be on June 18.

The stakes are particularly high for Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, D-Paramount, who has already gotten on the bad side of the “Bernie-crats” who may soon dominate the Capitol. Last year, he shelved Senate Bill 562 – a Senate-backed measure that would commit California to single-payer health care without a blueprint on how to overcome cost and legal obstacles – saying it was much too incomplete to approve.

Now, however, Rendon has decided to assert his bona fides on another foundational issue for progressives – fighting global warming – in a way that eventually could put him at odds with another progressive cause: the #MeToo anti-sexual harassment campaign.

Rendon’s maneuvering relates to Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia (pictured), D-Bell Gardens, who was an outspoken leader of the Capitol’s #MeToo movement after allegations emerged against several lawmakers last fall. In early February – after the Legislature passed an unprecedented whistleblower-protection measure to help root out lawmakers responsible for sexual harassment – Garcia was celebrated as a hero in the Associated Press story about the law’s enactment.

But within days, Garcia – a single, 40-year-old former high school teacher – found herself accused of groping a former aide, Daniel Fierro, who is now a Los Angeles County political consultant. Garcia denied the allegations and is now taking unpaid leave while she is the subject of a formal investigation by the Assembly Rules Committee.

Lawmaker allegedly used gay slurs, ripped Asians

Yet her headaches have only intensified in recent weeks due to two new allegations. The first asserted that in 2014 she used homophobic insults to describe then-Assembly Speaker John Perez. The second, made by Perez, was that he had formally admonished her for saying in a closed Assembly Democratic Caucus meeting that she wanted to “punch the next Asian person” she encountered over Asian-American lawmakers’ opposition to efforts to overturn the 1996 state law banning affirmative action in college admissions.

Now, however, Rendon is coming to Garcia’s defense against efforts by other Democrats and Democratic allies to unseat Garcia in her bid for a fourth term in the June primary – with the speaker citing her history as a defender of the state’s cap-and-trade program against more business-friendly lawmakers.

On April 20, the State Building & Construction Trades Council of California opened an independent expenditure committee targeting Garcia after twice having previously endorsed her. The labor group’s beef with Garcia stemmed from her support last year of cap-and-trade and other pollution control programs; construction unions are much closer to oil-and-gas interests than other factions in the California Democratic coalition. Two credible challengers to Garcia have emerged – Commerce Councilman Ivan Altamirano and Bell Gardens Councilman Pedro Aceituno.

Rendon responded as if setting up the committee was an attack on him. According to a Sacramento Bee report, he called the targeting of Garcia “a thinly veiled attempt by Big Oil and polluters to intimidate me and my members” and “an affront to my speakership.” The Assembly speaker also vowed to “vigorously defend the members of our caucus from any ill-advised political attack.”

But a spokeswoman for the independent expenditure committee backing Garcia’s defeat told the Bee that no one should buy any characterization of Garcia as a victim.
“It wasn’t politics that forced her to do the things of which she’s been accused,” said Erin Lehane.

Rendon’s decision to defend Garcia could grow even more problematic if the Rules Committee returns with a report corroborating the harassment allegations against her. At that point, even Garcia’s close allies in the Sacramento #MeToo movement may be inclined to cut her loose. There is no firm timetable for when that report will be released.

Senate President Pro Tempore Kevin de Leon, D-Los Angeles, announced this week that all harassment investigations in his chamber will be handled by an outside legal firm. De Leon also announced that he was moving out of a house he shared with Sen. Tony Mendoza, the Artesia Democrat who is the latest legislator accused of inappropriate behavior.

California’s state government has been dealing with a sexual harassment scandal after 140 influential women who have worked in and around the Capitol published an open letter in mid-October stating that they have “endured, or witnessed or worked with women who have experienced some form of dehumanizing behavior by men with power in our workplaces.”

Signed by six sitting legislators, the letter decried such behavior “in a state that postures itself as a leader in justice and equality.” The California Legislative Women’s Caucus was even more pointed, as its statement alleged “a lack of accountability and remorse” and a “pervasive culture of sexual harassment within California politics.” The statement claimed that “the Legislature’s own zero-tolerance policies are not enforced.”

A couple of prominent legislators have been caught up in the scandal. First, longtime Capitol staffer Elise Flynn Gyore said that she was treated like “prey” and then groped by Assemblyman Raul Bocanegra, D-Pacoima, in 2009, when he was a staffer. The Assembly Rules Committee investigated and disciplined Bocanegra, but didn’t release the details to a group of 11 women who sought such information when he was running for office with widespread party backing.

Bocanegra recently has apologized for the incident, but the details raise questions about an institution that some people say values secrecy over accountability. It’s also led to criticism of Sen. Nancy Skinner, a Berkeley Democrat known for her strong stance for women’s rights, who chaired the Assembly Rules Committee at the time of the incident. KPIX-TV in the Bay Area contacted one of the women who signed the letter asking for the file on the harassment complaint, but she said that “Nancy Skinner never responded to their request.”

Now Mendoza is in the spotlight. Southern California Public Radio reported that Mendoza “fired three employees after they reported his alleged inappropriate behavior toward a young female colleague, according to an attorney representing one of the staffers.”

Mendoza denies the allegations and apologized if he “ever communicated or miscommunicated anything that made an employee feel uncomfortable.” He also says the firings were based on work performance. The Sacramento Bee broke the news this week about allegations from a second intern. She claims that Mendoza took her to his hotel suite at the California Democratic Party convention and acted inappropriately toward her. Mendoza’s spokesperson told the Bee that that the woman’s recounting of what took place was “completely false.”

And the Senate president has received criticism, with some “wondering how de Leon – who chairs the Senate committee that investigates allegations of sexual harassment – could have been unaware of the reports and investigation into his roommate,” reported the San Jose Mercury News. De Leon denies knowing anything about the reports.

The scandal comes against the backdrop of Alabama’s Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore, who is facing sexual misconduct allegations – a nationally publicized story that’s being depicted by Moore and some of his supporters as a “witch hunt.” And, of course, sexual harassment allegations have been roiling the entertainment industry.

For California political observers, the big questions are whether the Capitol has fostered an insular environment that promotes, or at least tolerates, sexual misbehavior – and whether de Leon’s new rules have a chance of fixing that situation.

Specifically, the new approach will remove the Senate Rules Committee from dealing with harassment allegations. “Instead, an independent outside legal team will investigate any and all allegations and make findings and recommendations to resolve and, where appropriate, discipline,” according to the committee’s statement this week. “The Senate’s Rules Committee and Senate Democratic Women’s Caucus will work jointly and expeditiously to retain a highly qualified team of counsel and investigators to fulfill this obligation.”

The committee stated that the process “will be designed to protect the privacy of victims and whistleblowers, transparency for the public, and adequate due process for all parties involved.” The “general findings will be made public” even if some names and details will be withheld based on the discretion of “victims and whistleblowers.” This will apply to all current complaints. The committee has also asked the women’s caucus to make recommendations for reform and has retained a human-resources consulting firm to review its policies.

Yet some critics believe that by bringing in an outside legal firm that this could establish attorney-client privilege and shield key facts from the public. But others believe the rules will help Capitol staffers, who are at-will hires who can be fired for any reason, to feel more comfortable lodging a complaint. “The short-range plan is to pull this out of the current system where people really don’t feel their complaints will be handled appropriately,” Sen. Toni Atkins, D-San Diego, told Capital Public Radio. She is on the rules committee.

Even if the new process succeeds in dealing more forthrightly with particular harassment claims, it might just be the first step in dealing with broader problems within the Capitol.

Steven Greenhut is Western region director for the R Street Institute. Write to him at sgreenhut@rstreet.org.

The far-reaching reverberations from the Harvey Weinstein sexual harassment scandal continue to roil the state Capitol more than two weeks after 147 women released a

On Tuesday, the Los Angeles Daily News published an editorial that said the only sitting lawmaker known to have been formally rebuked for sexual harassment – Assemblyman Raul Bocanegra, D-Los Angeles (pictured) – should resign.

“While Bocanegra has apologized for his conduct, we believe the best way for him to serve the public at this point is to resign from office,” the Daily News editorial concluded.

The Los Angeles Times story that revealed Bocanegra’s rebuke could also portend headaches for Democratic lawmakers who knew about the incident that got him in trouble but who either kept quiet or actively helped Bocanegra’s career. The story was based on an interview with his victim, Elise Flynn Gyore, who provided a copy of the Assembly Rules Committee letter rebuking Bocanegra.

The incident that led to the complaint to the Rules Committee came at a 2009 Sacramento event in which Bocanegra – then the chief of staff for then-Assemblyman Felipe Fuentes, D-Los Angeles – allegedly reached down the blouse of Gyore, then a staffer for state Sen. Ron Calderon, D-Montebello. Bocanegra also acted in a way Gyore characterized as stalking.

A subsequent Sacramento Bee story detailed how Bocanegra’s rebuke didn’t get in the way of his political ascent. He was elected to the Assembly in 2012. Among those who helped him with donations or endorsements: then-Assemblyman Isadore Hall, D-Compton, who served on the Assembly Rules Committee while it reviewed the allegations against Bocanegra, and then-Sen. Calderon, whom Gyore said knew about what Bocanegra had done.

Hall went on to serve in the state Senate before losing a bid for Congress last year. In January, Hall was appointed by Gov. Jerry Brown to the California Agricultural Labor Relations Board, with an annual salary of $142,095. Hall, 45, is expected to seek elected office again in coming years.

Calderon was convicted in 2016 of federal corruption charges and is now serving a 42-month prison sentence.

Gyore is now chief of staff for Sen. Richard Roth, D-Riverside, who has been among the leading advocates in the Legislature for holding lawmakers accountable for their bad behavior.

Villaraigosa, Newsom may face questions over their past scandals

The Bocanegra case has many insiders wondering what California politician might next come under fire for inappropriate behavior or worse. But the increasing focus on politicians’ treatment of and attitudes about women could eventually lead to tough questions for the two Democratic frontrunners to replace termed-out Gov. Brown in the 2018 election.

In 2007, when he was mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigosa revealed that he was involved romantically with a much-younger TV journalist, leading to his marriage’s collapse and his divorce in 2010.

The Los Angeles Times reported then that Telemundo reporter-anchor Mirthala Salinas, 35, apparently began her affair with Villaraigosa, 54, while she was covering the mayor for her network.

Villaraigosa got remarried in 2016.

Also in 2007, then-San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom was involved in a messy office scandal. Alex Tourk, Newsom’s campaign manager and former deputy chief of staff, abruptly resigned “after confronting the mayor about an affair Newsom had with his wife while she worked in the mayor’s office,” the San Francisco Chronicle reported. Ruby Rippey-Tourk had been Newsom’s appointments secretary for two years.

The New York Times gave national coverage to what it described as “a fast-unfolding scandal with all the sex and betrayal of a tawdry novel,” noting that the affair came while Newsom was “in the throes of a divorce.” But after Newsom repeatedly apologized, his political career continued, seemingly unaffected.

In 2008, he got married for a second time.

As one of 13 CalPERS board members, J.J. Jelincic presumably has some authority. But last June and July, he filed Public Records Act requests to force CalPERS to give him weekly reports from its federal lobbyists, much like any member of the public.

 

CalPERS tripled its federal lobbying force last year from one all-purpose firm, the Lussier Group, to three separate lobbying representatives for retirement policy, investment and market regulation, and health care issues.

 

Jelincic wanted to see what CalPERS was getting for its increased spending. So he asked for the weekly reports from the lobbyists, as specified in their contracts. But the rest of the board had decided monthly reports, also specified in the contracts, are enough, and Jelincic’s informal request was denied.

 

The unusual Public Records Act requests by a board member helped trigger a CalPERS governance committee discussion last month of “board member behavior” that was clearly aimed at Jelincic.  … In addition to filing the Public Records Act requests, Jelincic was criticized by other board members for “disparaging” staff in public and taking more than his fair share of time at board meetings by asking questions.

Board targets only member who challenges staff

CalPERS’ actions got two much more savage takedowns at Naked Capitalism, a popular niche website dedicated to exposing improper and unethical behavior by large financial institutions and corporations and the government agencies which regulate them. Susan Webber, a 35-year veteran of Wall Street and high finance, writes for the site under the name Yves Smith. Among her allegations:

• CalPERS board routinely tries to hide basic information about what its doing, apparently at the behest of its staff, which doesn’t like outside scrutiny.
• CalPERS ignores state laws on taking testimony at its meetings and uses security guards to intimidate individuals who ask difficult or multiple questions.
• CalPERS is trying to break Jelincic’s will by hassling him. Some specifics from Webber:

[Some video of last month’s] Governance Committee meeting clearly shows that the board, aided and abetted by [fiduciary counsel Robert] Klausner, is in the process of establishing a procedure for implementing trumped-up sanctions against Jelincic, presumably so as to facilitate an opponent unseating him in his next election. But Jelincic’s term isn’t up until 2018, so from their perspective they are stuck with an apostate in their ranks for an uncomfortably long amount of time. Part of their strategy appears to harass him into compliance with the posture the rest of the board, that of ceding authority to staff and conducting board meetings that are largely ceremonial. …

 

The board ganging up against Jelincic comes straight out of The Peter Principle. One of its corollaries was “hierarchical exfoliation,” in which organizations expel both poor performers and notable outperformers, the latter because they make everyone else look bad. Jelincic, the lone board member willing to do his job, must be tarred and feathered for his crime of showing the rest of the board up. …

 

[It] is particularly unseemly that the board member who has been the most aggressive in pushing the illegal notion that CalPERS can and should sanction Jelincic over filing Public Records Act requests is Priya Mathur, who has been fined repeatedly for violating state ethics laws.

Jelincic has history as CalPERS maverick

This isn’t the first time Jelincic has tangled with other board members and top CalPERS officials. The Sacramento Bee reported in April on one contretemps, involving limits put on his voting to avoid conflicts of interest because his full-time job is as a CalPERS investment officer.

In 2011, Jelincic was officially reprimanded for alleged sexual harassment of co-workers in CalPERS’ investment office. But he denied the allegations and called the sanctions “politically motivated.”

But Jelincic’s campaign biography and website doesn’t focus on his maverick ways. Instead, they emphasize his history as a union leader, including time as president of the California State Employees Association. Strong union support helped him first win his seat on the CalPERS board in 2009.

KRDO photo, Hunter Yelton

Only predatory lawyers and statist school bureaucrats could label 6-year old Hunter Yelton a sexual harasser for kissing a female classmate on the hand.

If serial sexual harasser, former San Diego Mayor Bob Filner, doesn’t have to register as a sex offender, Huntel Yelton should not be labeled one. Filner was just sentenced to home confinement, even after being charged with felony false imprisonment and two counts of misdemeanor battery, after more than 17 women brought lurid sexual harassment allegations against the former  Mayor and 10-term congressman.

“It was during class, yeah. We were doing reading group and I leaned over and kissed her on the hand. That’s what happened,” Hunter said.

“The focus needs to be on his behavior,” said School Superintendent Robin Goody. “We usually try to get the student to stop, but if it continues, we need to take action and it sometimes rises to the level of suspension,” reported KRDO in Colorado Springs.

Goody said Hunter’s record will remain within the district and that “his behavior fits the school policy description of sexual harassment, which includes unwanted touching,” KRDO in Colorado Springs reported.

“Our main interest in this is having the behavior stop because the story is not just about the student that was disciplined, it is also about the student receiving the unwanted advances,” Gooldy told HLN. “We have to think about both students in the situation.

What is sexual harassment?

Standard “sexual harassment” can include unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature, according to the U.S. Equal Opportunity Commission.

“Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision.”

Predatory adult outrage

What kind of predatory policy enforcer  suggests this kid is a sexual harasser?

School officials, including Superintendent Goody, have messed with the development of a little boy, whose care has been entrusted to them, and turned that into an abuse of that child.

A kiss on the hand by a six-year old school boy — even unwanted — is not sexual harassment.

In another era for example, when I was six, I would have socked Hunter on the arm, and wiped my hand off, if I didn’t want his kisses. And Hunter would be a better man for it.

School officials said regardless of his age, what he did fits their school policy code’s description sexual harassment and say the offense will go on his record.

Witch hunt

I went through many of the news stories and news videos about Hunter’s kiss, and found the witch hunt appears to have been spearheaded by the school’s female principal, Tammy DeWolfe, but she was not named in most of the stories. Superintendent Goody was just the idiot front man.

The girl’s mother, Jade Masters-Ownbey, has also been outspoken about the kissing, and told the Canon City Daily Record on Wednesday that the school district did a “great job” protecting her daughter from repeated harassment from the boy, MSN news reported.

She said she hoped people would not “start bashing the school that is doing a great job protecting my child from what is sexual harassment.”

Ridiculousness or predatory?

School officials say Hunter is a repeat kissing offender and has had behavior problems. “Allegedly, he kissed the same girl on the cheek previously and was disciplined for acting out,” the Washington Examiner reported.

Hunter was suspended once before for kissing the girl and “had other disciplinary problems,” according to the school.

Hunter’s Mom said he has had a few scrapes at school with roughhousing, and has kissed the same girl. Hunter admits he has high energy.

Cañon City Schools Superintendent Robin Gooldy released the following statement to ABC News late yesterday: “The parents of the student and the principal met this morning. One of the outcomes of the conference was to change the category of the disciplinary offense from ‘sexual harassment’ to ‘misconduct’. The student has returned to school.”

And finally, this UPDATE late last night from KRDO: “Today, the school district had a change of heart, and dropped sexual harassment from his record, now calling it misconduct.”

“Sandy Wurtele, a child psychologist, was critical about the district’s decision to punish the boy over the kiss,” KRDO reported. Wurtele is a child clinical psychologist who specializes in child sexual development and the prevention of childhood sexual abuse.

She said tough love in this case could have negative consequences. She said kissing is normal behavior for children of that age, the Gazette reported.

“For most 6-year-old boys, absolutely. That would be a normal behavior,” said Wurtele,

Wurtele said she was surprised to hear the school suspended him.

“That really gives mixed messages, negative messages to the kids,” she said. “This part of development is just as important if not more than their academic subjects.”

Wurtele said children at that age are simply curious about the differences between boys and girls. “I don’t think a 6-year-old would understand what harassment is,” Wurtele told KRDO. “That has some longer-term implications.”

A source close to Filner tells me rumors that he will resign today are untrue.

— Craig Gustafson (@gustafsoncraig) August 12, 2013

Late morning on Monday, a rumor swept San Diego political and journalistic circles that Mayor Bob Filner was on the verge of resignation. Weekend reports that Filner’s security detail had been deposed at length about what they witnessed while at the accused sexual harasser’s side seemed to be one more nail in his coffin. The rumor was later shot down.

It got me to thinking about the other career-threatening scandal that Filner now faces: a federal probe of whether he traded approval of a San Diego project for a developer’s giving $100,000 to two of his pet causes. It’s not bribery, and it may not be extortion, but it’s plainly against settled law that a government permit cannot be dependent on circumstances unrelated to the permit.

In an interview, incredibly enough, Filner laid out his view of the permitting process as this: “You don’t get free things.”

Why give away your only bargaining chip?

It seems awfully likely that this is also his exact view of the calls for him to resign from all nine San Diego City Council members, Sens. Feinstein and Boxer, and many San Diegans: “You don’t get free things.”

Like Anthony Weiner, who lectures reporters for focusing on his perversions, Filner is plainly kind of delusional. But he has always been absolutely brazen and contemptuous of behavorial norms. So what if a “normal” politician would quit rather than take a city through an ugly, not-sure-to-succeed recall process. So what if a “normal” politician would have been embarrassed into instant retirement when a 10th sexual-harassment accuser came forward.

That’s not what Filner will do. He will extract every last concession he can from the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department, state Attorney General Kamala Harris (handling the investigation for recused DA Bonnie Dumanis, who ran against Filner for mayor), City Attorney Jan Goldsmith and the Justice Department/FBI. And maybe then he will quit.

But Filner won’t leave quietly. “You don’t get free things.”

Another theory is plausible, as I wrote over the weekend.

“Filner is so off the chart weird and different that no one should assume he will think conventionally. … He doesn’t see anything wrong with hitting on rape victims. Why would anyone assume his motivations are conventional when he displays industrial-strength depravity and thinks it’s just another day at the office?”

But the more I think about Filner’s options and his personality, the more I’m confident we’ll see the “you don’t get free things” attitude from the mayor.

Ant that’s no matter what his lawyers say — he’s 70, and I see no evidence he’s deferred to anyone his entire political career.

The first is that he simply can’t stay in office. Now that all nine City Council members say he must go and statewide officials are issuing increasingly personal calls for him to quit, Filner is dead meat. He knows he can’t beat a recall push that will kick into gear in a week, so why prolong the ordeal.

The second is that he will never leave office unless he can parlay his resignation into both a plea deal in a federal corruption investigation that seems increasingly serious and into the city agreeing to pay part or all of his legal expenses from pending lawsuits over his treatment of women while mayor. (Filner can’t escape footing the bill for lawsuits from when he was in Congress and hitting on rape victims who came to him for help.)

I think the second conventional wisdom is on far firmer ground. This approach insulated Spiro Agnew and lots of other pols gone bad from the full consequences of their actions.

Someone this weird may not think conventionally

But there is also another angle to raise: Filner is so off the chart weird and different that no one should assume he will think conventionally. He has been relentlessly obnoxious for 35 years in his political career and it’s somehow paid off for him with a long, successful run. He doesn’t see anything wrong with making open declarations that as mayor, he is running a pay-for-play administration — telling companies seeking city permits, “you don’t get free things.” He doesn’t see anything wrong with hitting on rape victims.

Why would anyone assume his motivations are conventional when he displays industrial-strength depravity and thinks it’s just another day at the office?

And now who’s come to the City Hall circus in America’s Finest City to point out this ugly hypocrisy?

SocialistWorker.org! In a tightly written broadside, the website of the Socialist Workers’ Party tears into union leaders who tolerate Filner, the sociopath and misogynist:

The ‘progressive community’? Not so progressive

“A BREATHTAKING case study in sexism, sexual harassment and even assault is unfolding in San Diego, where a growing number of women have come forward to accuse Mayor Bob Filner of repeated sexual harassment–and some in the progressive community are refusing to call for the mayor’s resignation.

“News of Filner’s behavior was made public at a July 11 press conference, when several of his longtime allies, including former San Diego City Council member Donna Frye and lawyers Cory Briggs and Marco Gonzalez, called for his resignation.

“Since then, at least 13 women who say they experienced groping, sexist language, unwanted sexual advances and other physical and verbal harassment from Filner have come forward.  …

“At first, many liberal supporters rallied behind the mayor, calling for ‘due process,’ fearful that, if Filner was forced to resign, the agenda they had entrusted to him would be dashed by a Republican successor. Even some self-identified progressives who have supported and fought for women’s rights have defended Filner. …

“On the liberal OBRag website, one shameful, dismissive apology piece amounted to asking San Diegans why the women in the mayor’s office couldn’t just take one for the team in the name of progress. ‘Are we in for a decade of Republicanism delivered by Democrats in name only?’ questioned writer Bob Dorn, while suggesting that the charges against Finer were part of a ‘set-up.'”

Filner’s remaining defenders? Union leaders

“AS MORE and more of these brave women have come forward, support for the mayor has begun to slowly evaporate. …

“It appears now that only establishment union leadership is unwilling to demand the mayor’s immediate resignation. The San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council, with affiliate organizations representing 200,000 workers, has issued only a vague statement calling the allegations ‘serious.’ The head of the San Diego County Building and Construction Trades Council, with affiliates representing 30,000 workers, is standing by calls for ‘due process’ for Filner. Business Manager Tom Lemmon told the San Diego Union Tribune, ‘It’s an awkward situation, but we have a lot invested in him.’

“The women who have come forward in protest of sexual harassment by a person in their workplace might take issue with the description of their standing up and speaking out as ‘an awkward situation’ from a union organizer!

“Workers in San Diego should demand that their union leaders side with the women who have come forward in calling for the mayor’s resignation, no matter the apparent short-term political cost. We cannot afford to abandon anti-sexist principles in the hopes that Filner will “deliver” for labor.”

Now that’s what principle sounds like. A little more admirable than “we have a lot invested in him,” don’t you think?

I have no illusions about the fact that both parties act hypocritically when it comes to defending their own interests. But, really, it’s beyond the pale to see unions defending a mayor who hit on rape victims whom he only met because they were rape victims, and he was a congressman who was supposed to help them.

That’s industrial-strength depravity. But it’s no biggie to San Diego’s union “investors.”