"Dr. Eugene's actions are reprehensible and charges should be brought against him and he should be fined by Campaign Finance Board for wasting millions of dollars in taxpayer money"

"Doctor" Eugene's actions may indeed be reprehensible. But, even if he is indeed ineligible, what charges should be brought against him? He never concealed the truth about his residence.

And millions of dollars? Please explain where that figure comes from.   

So if there is no decption is this entire thing just about being dumb?

Dr. Eugene has spent more time working with 40th Council District residents than ANY of the other candidates.  He serves on the Community Board.  His kids grew up here, he used to live here.  He spends more time here than residents who work somewhere else.  More importantly, HE NOW LIVES HERE.  I don't know where people get their information, but the truth is that in order to comply with election law, he signed a lease on February 1st, got keys, started bringing his boxes of stuff and furniture, convinced his (none too pleased) kids (who by the way still attend school in the district) and his wife to start moving.  He himself started staying in the apartment before election day, satisfying the law however you interpret it.

A very decent man just got elected by a huge margin by voters who knew him and knew what they were doing.  Stop hyperventilating.

The good doctor lacks integrity.  He said he moved out of the district just recently but in fact be bought his two family house out of the district in 1999.

The good doctor upon winning the election via his attorney and campaign officials said he was looking for an apartment.

The good doctor then said he had a lease but never move in.

The good doctor then said today, he moved in days before the election and can't remeber when.  See today NY1.com as the top story.

The good doctor is not even a good doctor because as he is not licensed to practice ANYTHING IN NEW YORK OR ANYWHERE IN THE USA.

Mr. Eugene as Tenessee Williams wrote has, "a strong smell of mendacity about him"

When Brian Lehrer asked Dr. Eugene about his residence on February 19th, the day before the election, why didn't he say "Yes I now live in the district at ___________"?  Why did he say he recently moved out of the district because he bought a house, but that his children were born in the district?  If he knew he moved in by the 19th why didn't he say so?

Could someone explain this to me?

b/c eugene is a liar and is corrupt before he even takes office.  he is just bad at it.

does anyone know the name his youth sports thing, i would like that investigated as well.

to real 40th person and I ACTUALLY LIVE . . . , please go get universal health coverage or stop the war or do something else productive.  This is absurd.  A politically isolated community finally gets a representative in a legislative body and types like you reveal yourselves by trying to catch him in a trivial falsehood.

Problem is the guy is pretty straightforward.  He moved in prior to election day.  Have you ever moved?  In the middle of running an election campaign?  It's a little chaotic.  He slept in his apartment for several days prior to election day.  His kids weren't there yet.  But he OFFICIALLY LIVED there.  He never lied about his previous residence in canarsie.  He attempted to explain to Brian Leherer his history in the neighborhood, since his petitions correctly said the Canarsie address.  and he has never practiced medicine in the US or pretended to be able to. 

40th CD has an extremely consciencious, devoted and truly humble (VERY rare quality among the elected class and even on this blog) representative who you obviously don't know yet.  Give him a chance. 

what is this compulsion of out of district persons running in our district?  I do not get it.

Lew from Brooklyn who support Sharpe James, what his reason?  If he likes us so much, he should move into the district.  Unless he is just an opportunist looking for districts to run in.

Now back to Eugene, the man has a problem with the truth.  First he was not in the district and looking for an apartment,

second, then he had a lease but would not move until 10 days after the election AND ASKS FOR THE SWEARING IN CEROMONY TO BE PUT OFF FOR A FEW WEEKS,

third then he says he moved in a few days before election day and can't remember when.

Things are seldom what the seem;

Skim milk masquerading as cream.

(Gilbert & Sullivan)-they too did not live in the 40th

Here's a link to a ny1 article, which says Eugene showed a reporter his new apartment *but did not* show him the signed lease with the date on it:

http://www.ny1.com/ny1/content/index.jsp?&aid=67119&search_result=1&stid=1

The anonymous poster a few posts back said that Eugene's kids weren't pleased about moving.  If Eugene wouldn't show this reporter the signed lease, is it possible that it is because he didn't want the reporter to see the date the lease took effect?  This because perhaps Eugene got his wife and kids to go along with moving by agreeing to not move unless he won.  He could have done this by signing a post-dated lease that took effect after the primary, and at the same time getting some informal agreement from the landlord to actually sleep there a night or two before the election or on election day and bring in a couple of boxes.  This way he can say he was in the apartment on election day, but if he loses the election he can void the lease because it hasn't taken effect yet.  Thereby not having to move and keeping his wife and kids happy.

All Eugene had to do to avoid such speculation is show the reporter the lease, the paper he signed and let the reporter see the dates on it.  He did not do this.  Was his lease in effect on election day, that is the question.  Not whether he signed the lease on or before election day, but was it in effect, was he legally in possession of a residence in the district on that date?  Sleeping there as a guest of the landlord and keeping a box or two there before the lease took effect is not being legally in possession is it?  The constituents are entitled to know the truth of this matter.

Interesting perceptions about this election. When I attended the forum at the Flatbush Church, a candidate who indicated he was a resident of the district commented about carpetbaggers that it was his understanding that although this made out-of-districters less qualified candidates, neverthelss  under the special election laws this was all perfectly legal...while it may be the candidates' (or their attorneys') error, one thing seems  clear--- there is a lot of confusion surrounding this issue and it could have been better clarified/investigated by the media (or the blogs?) before it got this far.

I didn't vote for Dr Eugene, but I am sure election lawyers can get rich on this stuff, so if no one challenged this issue before the election,  it isn't really appropriate to imply that the candidate-elect was necessarily malfeasant, since there was a lot of greyed out confusion to begin with..

To this voter, it seems that this was a very retro type of local election that was waged not in the media but behind the scenes through grassroots political action. Whomever could garner the most support/votes behind the scenes could win/won.. Therefore, the nuts and bolts and ins and outs of this election were somewhat muddled and hard to follow for we average voters.  

You lost.  He won.  He will be the elected official.  Stop your crying.  Some of you could not even pull out 500 votes.  So shut up and get over it.  He won. You lost.

 Please editor -- when there are repeated posts by the same ip crying the same cry, please make a note. Otherwise the blog has less integrity than usual.

Does the law apply to everyone except the person calling himself Dr.?

He is not registered in NYS as a Doctor

His lawyer Paul Wooten used the election law to knock two Haitian candidates off the ballot.

Just what laws apply to 1199 candidate?

The New York Times reported on this in Friday's editions, and their reporter was shown Eugene's new apartment, just like NY1's apartment, but again he refused to show the reporter the lease.  Eugene says he is not showing anyone the lease on the advice of his lawyer, according to the article.  Now why would his lawyer be telling him to do that?  The only reason would seem to be that some of the information on that lease he does not want public, such as maybe, I dunno, the effective date on it?  Eugene keeps saying he was "sleeping in the apartment" on February 1st.  That is vague, was he sleeping there as a guest or had he taken legal possession of the apartment on that date.  All he has to do is show the lease, the dates on the lease, and everything would be fine.  The fact that he won't do so is suspicious.

The question everyone should be asking is: if the election were held again today and Dr. Eugene -- with all of the controvesies swirling around him -- were allowed to run again, would he win.  In my opinion, Dr. Eugene would win in a landslide, perhaps doubling the number of votes he received the first time.  That's partly because he's become more popular -- no one even knew the guy even existed 3 months ago -- and that his supposed sin does not rise to the level of this condemnation.  If not living in the district is the only sin anyone can find about Dr. Eugene, then, he's certainly a clean man and deserves to be sworn in Council member. 

I have frequently get skilful written custom research paper from that company

testking 642-971 // testking 650-472 // testking CISSP-ISSMP // testking 642-974 // testking 642-481 // testking 642-415 // testking 9L0-407 // 

Join our weekly "coffee service" and offer your staff members freshly roasted Creekside coffee, hassle-free! A 1/2lb or 1lb bag of Creekside coffee also makes a great gift for staff members or clients. testking 220-701 testking 220-701 testking 220-701 testking 220-701 testking 220-701 testking 220-701 testking 220-701 testking 220-701