KCBS: Another Woman Caught in "Compromising Position" with Disgraced OC Pol

• "Matt, everyone knows you are paid to flack for Republicans." Is that so? because those Republicans must be sending the checks to wrong address. Perhaps you can tell me who is paying me to "flack" for them, so I can send them an invoice. "Matt, everyone knows you are paid to flack for Republicans. But why have you decided to attack OC Weekly on the Desiree story knowing full well that KCBS broke the story?" Well, anonymous, point me to Dave Lopez's blog and I'll comment there, too. By the way, perhaps Moxley can explain how Desiree has been "caught" when there are no evidence other than "unidentified sources."? Also, maybe he can explain what a "potential" witness is? Either they witnessed something, or they didn't.

• Matt's not doing a very good job spinning this story. It looks like his fellow scumbags might have to withold payment for services rendered on this deal.

• Matt, everyone knows you are paid to flack for Republicans. But why have you decided to attack OC Weekly on the Desiree story knowing full well that KCBS broke the story? Is it because you think that is how you can best reassure your Republican Party members that your group is under attack?

• "THIS IS EXCELLENT REPORTING, By Lopez and Moxely. To suggest otherwise is idiotic." No -- to call this excellent reporting is idiotic. Sliming someone quoting "unnamed sources" sure is excellent reporting, kenlaysnotdead. The convenient thing about unnamed sources is since you never name them, it makes it hard for the slimed to refute the sliming. There are no accusers to face. "Matt has yet again done a superb job at changing the subject of this thread." Speaking of idiotic, kenlaysnotdead, perhaps you can re-read the thread and then tell me again who changed the subject?

• This whole thing has made buy Zappa's Sheik Yerbouti from my fav russian download site. When I here Track 5 (side three), I can't help but think of "Dez"!

• Me thinks Matt Cunningham doth protest too much.

• definately something hinky going on here fornicating defending pedophile priests one big dysfunctional GOP anyone out there in the lifestyle what to anonymously confirm my suspicions?

• Matt did my one of my client's family ask you to identify who gave you the deposition? Yes or No?

• Matt has yet again done a superb job at changing the subject iof this thread. Instead of sticking to the topic: Ackermans relatioanship to sex-scadal plauged inviduals (not Linda to be sure!) We are talking about his releasing the names of victims of sex abuse at the hands of our clergy. I don't know what's worse, the fact that he did that, or that he is willing to take the shot to change the subject on behalf of his cronies. THIS IS EXCELLENT REPORTING, By Lopez and Moxely. To suggest otherwise is idiotic.

• Jubal - How is the article any different from Frank Troglidite's daily hack piece in the OC Rag, wherein he usually re-gurgitates whatever cocktail talk he hear at Gulfstream? Seems here - (1) some sources on the inside were vetted; (2) the "victim" here had plenty of opportunity to confront and deny with Lopez and Mox, and she passed. Lets here from were whether she played doctor with that fat pig Duvall; (3) she worked as a staffer for him so she is not enitrely a "private" person -

• "You know that he and his family begged you to do the right thing and disclose who gave you the document. You refused." Manly, that is an absolute lie.

• "One has to wonder how much the Ackerman campaign is paying "Jubal" or is it Matt? he is awfully busy here trying to spin this story away from the most disturbing aspects of it." Just the kind of "when did you stop beating your wife" tactic I'd expect from you, Sean. When you're out of ammo, just make it up!

• "For the record I never wrote that Art "used his blog to try and destroy people's reputations". If you can find where I said that I'd appreciate it." Sean, that's not a verbatim quote, but the exchanges where you expressed that sentiment aren't hard to find. "And Matt I don't issue threats. I figured since you were having a hard time understanding that I did not want to continue to recieve harassing emails from you that perhaps you would better comprehend what I was saying if I told you face to face." That's BS through and through.

• Matt, you are the king of innuendo and personal attacks. You outed the victims and obtained a copy of a un-redacted deposition that was supposed to be in possession of the court and parties only To this day you refuse to identify who gave it to you. I'm certain that's because it's one of your buddies from the diocese who have been involved with protecting molester priests. The fact that you pulled the deposition off the web as soon as I wrote you a letter doesn't mitigate the damage you did. You know one of the victims families quite well and despite that you published the name. You know personally the damage you caused him. You know that he and his family begged you to do the right thing and disclose who gave you the document. You refused. Matt, I'm sure you are at some level a good person but until you disclose who gave you that highly protected and confidential material (that contained the names of child rape victims that you disclosed) you are solely responsible for outing these victims and your statements of sorrow have no moral import because you continue to protect the person or persons who gave you the deposition. When are you going to do the right thing and tell us who gave it to you so we can hold them accountable? Well? John C. Manly Manly and Stewart

• Actually, I do pat myself on the back for not being blinded by the sins of my priest. My childhood priest was John Lenihan--the moment I found out his crimes, I stopped liking him. On the other hand, you spun and spun for John Urell despite knowing full well the hell he put sex-abuse victims through. But those compliments I cited come from others, and I treasure them. The fact remains: you released the name of sex-abuse victims. We nor any other respectable news organization did that. For you to accuse others of slimy writing not only is hypocritical, but HILARIOUS. Shill away!

• I hate to interrupt your Catholic pissing match, ladies, but have any of you noticed how Dave Lopez crunches his butt cheeks when he's on camera? Pete Fundy calls it the Dave Lopez Bump. Watch him when he speaks to the camera. He bounces up and down as if he's working his glutes. Warmly yours, Pete Fundy Former Senior Editorial Writer OCLegend.Com

• One has to wonder how much the Ackerman campaign is paying "Jubal" or is it Matt? he is awfully busy here trying to spin this story away from the most disturbing aspects of it. Or is he just here to defend the honor and integrity of his boy Probolsky's girlfriend? For the record I never wrote that Art "used his blog to try and destroy people's reputations". If you can find where I said that I'd appreciate it. And Matt I don't issue threats. I figured since you were having a hard time understanding that I did not want to continue to recieve harassing emails from you that perhaps you would better comprehend what I was saying if I told you face to face.

• "What was my first comment if not defending the reporting of Moxley and Lopez?" That was a defense? all you did was say we should trust Lopez and Moxley are correct. "No amount of spin on your part can change the fact that you revealed the names of sex abuse victims, so spare us the rocks. And what you call "sanctimonious blog tantrums," hundreds of survivors have called courageous, helpful reporting." Boy, pat yourself on the back much? Gustavo, you are either unwilling or unable recognize the difference between an intended action and an unintended effect. I think it is the former.

• "..but you're being disingenuous to imply in your comment that I am responsible for Dave Lopez's Duvall/Desiree story on KCBS/KCAL last night." I implied no such thing. I didn't even say it outright. "Given your secretly-paid-political-blog coverage business, you must surely know the difference between reporting a story and identifying what other news outlets are saying about a subject. You do that very act on a daily basis. " Secret? On a daily basis? You are out of your mind. OK, Scott. Give me an example where I have ever posted about a client without disclosing as much in the post? And given your inference that I do it frequently, please point out who has hired me to "secretly" blog about them? "In addition, I conducted multiple interviews with potential witnesses (by the way, all of whom are your Republican pals) and determined that, at a minimum, Lopez had reason to pursue another story about the ugly, hypocritical inner-workings of Orange County politics." Let's assume Lopez "had reason" -- and that these pals had actual knowledge and weren't just repeating cocktail circuit rumors to you -- how is is Desiree some kind of symptom "ugly, hypocritical inner-workings of Orange County politics"? Is she a candidate? An elected official? Does she make public policy pronouncements? Is she a public figure in any way? "Finally, to harrumph about OC Weekly's integrity given your shameless, historic shilling for the unethical/immoral likes of Sheriff Mike Carona, Jeffrey Nielsen and Mike Duvall et al demonstrates that you're committed to hackery above all else." Whoa. Where did R. Scott Moxley the reporter of facts go? "Shilling" is a weasel word used to try and shout down opposing voices. I supported Mike Carona in the 2006 election because I didn't buy the allegations against him (and it turned out I was wrong) and because I thought the alternative was worse. Accusing me of "shilling" for Jeff Nielsen -- or even Mike Duvall, for that matter -- is a pure, unadulterated lie, Scott.

• What was my first comment if not defending the reporting of Moxley and Lopez? No amount of spin on your part can change the fact that you revealed the names of sex abuse victims, so spare us the rocks. And what you call "sanctimonious blog tantrums," hundreds of survivors have called courageous, helpful reporting. Hmm...who is the better judge of my reporting on the scandal?

• And Sean Mill...the soul of restraint and and reason...the same cyber-bully who threatened to drive to my house late at night because he didn't like that his pal Art had included him on one of Art's e-mail tirades. Interesting you bring up that Weekly story, which was only the last act in the revealing of who "Jubal" was, something that had been going on for months. What "chapped" me were the false allegations in the article. Oh wait...what am I saying? the Weekly never makes things up, does it? Look up that article in the OC Weekly archives. It carries a "Will Swaim" byline. Which is funny because when it was published, the byline was "Paul Brennan." Will Swaim claims he wrote the article. So why did the Weekly put someone else's byline on it? This is the very "logrolling" these guys were accusing me of. But pardon me..there I go questioning the accuracy of the Weekly again. Come one, Sean. You're the same guy who quit Orange Juice, wrote over at TheLiberalOC that Art Pedroza was a liar who used his blog to try and destroy people's reputations, then went back to OJ where you praise Art as a paragon of truth and integrity. You were either lying at OJ or lying at LibOC. Which is it?

• Sheesh. How about a little intellectual honesty, Gustavo? As you know perfectly well, my intent was not to publish the names of victims. That was incidental and unintended when I posted that deposition. And when that was brought to my attention a few hours later, I took it down immediately. That is completely different from this post and Lopez's story. As a matter of fact, it was one of your sanctimonious blog tantrums about me that practically drew a road map to the identity of one of the victims. That post is still up. Interesting how you don't try to defend this post or Lopez's story, but just attack me with the usual red herring.

• Matt: your selective sanctimony has provided all rational Orange County readers much mirth over the years, but your comments here take the cake. As Sean pointed out, it was your blogging that led to the public revealing of church molestation victims, most of who had to suffer the indignity of your beloved John Urell. So don't go around accusing us of gutter writing or besmirching people--you are the king of it.

• Maybe if the Register wasn't busy enabling and supporting the hacks that dominate the local republican machinery, ied., Carona and his merry band of degenerates) - Lopez and the OC Weekly would spend less time exposing all of these dirty little secrets about these hypocrital family values losers posing as Republicans - the article does more than tie someone's business/professional connection to an unsavory and disgraced ex politico - its tied her (possibly) to him in an unspecified comprmising position - we won't know the truth if she runs away now will we? But the Ackermans brought this game of dirty pool onto themselves . . . .

• Scott, Great response to Matt and thanks for putting a historical perspective on his hypocrisy. If anyone knows about "pure sleaze" it would be Matt Cunningham. This is the guy who championed the causes of folks like Mike "Little Sheriff" Carona and pedophile enabler John Urell. Let's not forget that Matt is still red assed about the Weekly exposing him for the fraud that he is. Remember it was the Weekly was the one who exposed him as "Jubal" after he would blog as both himself and "Jubal", carrying on discussions in which "Jubal" and "Matt" praised each other as geniuses. And of course he is responsible for the sleaziest episode in local blogging, the out of the Catholic church sexual abuse victims names. Matt is a class act all the way. Well he is if you ask "Jubal".

• Matt Cunningham outed sex-abuse victims.

• Matt Cunningham: I understand that it's knee jerk in certain OC Republican circles to gain cheap PR points by blaming OC Weekly whenever possible, but you're being disingenuous to imply in your comment that I am responsible for Dave Lopez's Duvall/Desiree story on KCBS/KCAL last night. Given your secretly-paid-political-blog coverage business, you must surely know the difference between reporting a story and identifying what other news outlets are saying about a subject. You do that very act on a daily basis. Should we blame you at Red County for writing about controversial stories that first appear in the Register or LA Times? Should we consider you gutter trash every time you assail Loretta Sanchez based solely on what other entities report? In this particular case, I did learn yesterday that the KCBS story was coming and took the time to repeatedly seek an interview with Desiree. In addition, I conducted multiple interviews with potential witnesses (by the way, all of whom are your Republican pals) and determined that, at a minimum, Lopez had reason to pursue another story about the ugly, hypocritical inner-workings of Orange County politics. But, Matt, this particular story belongs to KCBS/KCAL. They did the work. They attended the Ackerman fundraiser. They conducted interviews. They came face to face with Desiree, who, by the way, had ample opportunity to deny the allegations contained in Lopez's report. Finally, to harrumph about OC Weekly's integrity given your shameless, historic shilling for the unethical/immoral likes of Sheriff Mike Carona, Jeffrey Nielsen and Mike Duvall etal demonstrates that you're committed to hackery above all else.

• Pardon my impertinence, Gustavo. I didn't realize Lopez and Scott are permitted to ruin someone's reputation, and possibly their ability to earn a living, on the basis of "unidentified sources" -- and we're supposed to take it on faith that those unidentified sources are correct? Because we all know the Weekly never, ever gets anything wrong, or twists the facts. Make up your minds if this a news organization or a gossip circle, because this kind of reporting is pure sleaze. Look at Lopez's video: he doesn't even asked Desiree a genuine question. He just chases her around, chirping "Is it true? Is it true?" At least we know the subterranean level to which the bar has been lowered here.

• Republican Family Values Maybe they are all closeted swingers?

• Desiree was in my MBA section. I don't know her well but she was a known slacker. Never showed up for class and her teammates were always frustrated with her lack of team work. So for those people who think just because she went to Merage she must be smart kindly check her grades and ask her teammates they will attest to her lack of professionalism.

• Spare Scott the advice, Matt: if Orange County knows anything about Scott and Dave's reporting when it comes to matters on your side, it's that they know what they report of.

• Holy mackerel. "Unidentified sources"? Is that all it takes for you guys to smear some innocent person? I would have thought this one beneath you, Scott.

• Mike Carona--America's Dirtiest Sheriff--would still be in power if it wasn't for the OC Weekly's bravery.

• I hope Moxley digs deeper into Dick and Linda Ackerman's relationship with Duvall. Why would they associate so closely with a sexual deviant like Duvall? These people are ruining my Republican Party.

• I am always humored by the people who are afraid to identify themselves in public forums but feel free to label as "cowards" the journalists who put their names on their work.

• Is this really newsworthy? A vicious and totally un-provable rumor printed on the blog of a newspaper that is largely just a medium to deliver head shop, plastic surgery, and escort ads? The OC Weekly is supposed to be the voice of moral indignation? It is unbelievable to me that a reporter like Moxley (who sometimes writes great stories and breaks real news) uses the First Amendment to hide the fact that this is nothing more repeating a rumor like a High School student on the yard rather than as a journalist with any integrity or standards. It is skin to how the ACLU has completely corrupted their original charter to benefit causes which run completely antithetical to the overall mission. In other words, stories like this one erase any credibility that Moxely may gain through his real reporting. I have personally worked with Desiree and can attest to her high level of integrity and professionalism. Does this story mention that she has a Masters in Business Administration from a great school like UCI? No, becuase that wouldn't play into the accusatory nature of the piece. Does it mention the pro-bono work that she does for the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society or American Heroes Tribute? Again, no, because that would be fair and balanced reporting.

• To commenters Libel and Give me: Ummm, nice try. If you can get off your deceitful soap boxes for a moment of sober reflection--you might have noticed that neither OC Weekly nor Moxley broke this story. KCBS-TV in Los Angeles did. But acknowledging that fact wouldn't have allowed you to use your tired fish wrap cliche. Okay, now you can go back to your breathless shouting about the Weekly. I'm sure the reporters there will be greatly wounded by your diatribes.

• This article is typical of the OC Weekly's brand of "journalism"; repeat unsubstantiated, salacious rumors and then further insult the victim by creating a perception that they are guilty merely by the fact that they don't wish to have such rumors aired on the news. The only thing worse than Moxley's bottom-feeder mentality are the commenters like Anthony who defame people like Ms. Moouzeen without any consequences because they hide behind anonymous posts like these. Anthony, how would you like your Mother or Sister to be called a whore by anonymous posters on a website merely because they were associated with you (a libelous coward)? Desiree is a consumate professional and is not a candidate for any political office. Attacking someone's fundraiser really pushes the boundaries of political mudslinging and is below even the standards of a fish-wrapper like the OC Weekly.

• First, what you are trying to do is despicable. Attempting to smear a person's reputation by connecting their professional business contacts to the failed personal conduct of a former elected official is a beyond a stretch, it�s totally off base and no one makes that connection except you. Second, if you had any capability as reporters or any native insight into weighing the validity of a story, you would reconsider this subject matter and implement some minimal journalistic standards. Duvall will stand to account for his own conduct, apart from attempts to tie others to him. While it serves your conspiratorial purposes to do so, it is not grounded in fact and degrades overall credibility. Its time to get real stories of significance, those that would demonstrate well researched facts, substantive connections, and meaningful points. Instead what we see is slime merchant peddling. You might want to consider a career choice; I hear the adult video industry is hiring writers. It�s sad that you are projecting your self hatred onto others at their expense. It�s the hallmark of the left to engage in these types of ritual sacrifices. Very evolved conduct, most "progressive" I would say. I believe that there is a deep darkness and a void in your heart, to think that you would attempt to hurt a good person, someone who you do not even know. But I understand that the poison is in the wound. I would hope you would come to terms with your own pain and stop punishing others for your personal burdens. You exemplify cowardice and deserve to be vetted as such. Liberals live by the criminal�s code of conduct. It�s a credo of self preservation at the expense of others. How about get a life.

• Wow what a whore. I know she has been working with Duvall for a looong time, now she finally got caught. Now she's with adam Probolsky, who is even more of a pig than Duvall, hope it was worth it Desiree.

• It gets even better! According to Mouzoon's Facebook page she is dating Adam Probolsky... http://orangejuiceblog.com/2009/10/the-ackermans-get-snared-in-mike-duvalls-latest-drippy-mess/#more-30496

TotalComments: 41