factchecker2

No I am not Martin Austermuhle. I am not Bfrank. I'm not anyone who Jonathan Rees claims I am. I haven't bothered to post here in a long time because there's no point. Jonathan Rees didn't even get a few dozen votes in the election and has become even more irrelevant than he was before the election. Virtually nobody reads DC Pages either.

If I were a betting person, I'd bet that Rees does not show up. He can't risk having to answer some very difficult questions about his resume, about his attacks on other candidates, about his contradictory statements all over the Internet. While Rees can try to deflect the truth using his numerous aliases on the Internet, it's another thing entirely to have to answer tough questions in person.

On his new website, www.rees2006.com, Jonathan Rees says: I have three adult children: Twin daughters Antonetta and Anita, and a son Jason all who currently live and work in different European countries. Yet in other places on the Internet Rees has also talked about his daughter Gabriella Rees: http://www.dcist.com/archives/2005/11/10/t...nners_los_1.php http://www.dcist.com/archives/2005/11/08/war_of_words_in.php

There is indeed something very fishy going on with Rees and the American Health Care Campaign: www.yourAHCC.org Look at the broader picture and Rees' actions are extremely troubling. First is the post made by Michael Griffiths, DDS, defending Jonathan Rees on the Tenleytown email list, but which was apparently written and posted by Jonathan Rees himself: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tenleytown/message/3331 Second is the attack on Sam Brooks made by Jonathan Rees and posted on Dr. Michael Griffiths' company's website: http://dcdl.org/2005/11/05/bizarre-smear-campaign-in-ward-3 And here's an interesting coincidence. The URL of that website where Rees posted the attack on Brooks (now deleted by cached) is http://eds20018.com/page2.html. Dr Michael Griffiths' Yahoo ID --the one that Rees apparently forged-- is eds20018.

It's valuable to point out that Jonathan Rees has been consistently lying about his campaign, his background -- and everything else. Does it matter that Rees actually designed his website, but said that "Margaret Clay" designed it? Yes, it matters a lot: This is more proof of Rees' lies. He lied about who created his website. Rees lied about where he went to school. And let's not forget perhaps the biggest lie of them all: The lawsuit, USA and Rees v Daro Reality, in which Rees claimed to have been part of an anti-discrimination lawsuit. USA and Rees v Daro Reality never happened.

Equally interesting is the fact that the source code behind Jonathan Rees' website revealed that the site's author was not the world renowned web designer, Margaret Clay, but was, in fact Jonathan Rees. I have reprinted the original source code, which was captured and saved, below. Once Rees found out about this big oops in October 2005, he changed the "authorship" to pretend that Margaret Clay designed his site. <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:DocumentProperties> <o:Author>Jonathan R. Rees</o:Author> <o:Template>Normal</o:Template> <o:LastAuthor>Jonathan R. Rees</o:LastAuthor> <o:Revision>2</o:Revision> <o:TotalTime>15</o:TotalTime> <o:Created>2005-09-15T03:56:00Z</o:Created> <o:LastSaved>2005-09-15T03:56:00Z</o:LastSaved> <o:Pages>1</o:Pages> <o:Words>296</o:Words> <o:Characters>1693</o:Characters> <o:Company>Rees for DC City Council</o:Company> <o:Lines>14</o:Lines> <o:Paragraphs>3</o:Paragraphs> <o:CharactersWithSpaces>1986</o:CharactersWithSpaces> <o:Version>10.6735</o:Version> </o:DocumentProperties> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:Zoom>75</w:Zoom> <w:SpellingState>Clean</w:SpellingState> <w:GrammarState>Clean</w:GrammarState> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object> <style> st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } </style> <![endif]-->

It strikes me as odd that Rees would write "I have spoken before 15 groups ranging from 30 to 172." Who counts an exact number of people like that? Where was this gathering of 172 people? Where was the gathering of 30 people? Rees can't name a place and a date because these events never occurred.

I makes zero sense that the email address of IDC's boss would be broken for many months. The only conclusion is that Rees is lying.

Email sent to mgriffiths@idcinc.com bounces back: no known recipient. That email address is supposed to belong to Dr. Michael Griffiths, DDS, at IDC. In fact, email sent to mgriffiths@idcinc.com has been bouncing for months. This certainly casts a lot of doubt on Jonathan Rees' assertions about where he works. But don't just believe me: Go to www.idcinc.com and click on "Contact Us" See what happens to the email you send. As for a business card -- anyone can print one with Photoshop. Even Rees.

There's no business card here. Why am I not surprised: Jonathan Rees has been lying about where he works.

Jonathan Rees saying that he's a serious candidate does not make him one. Jonathan Rees has said a lot of things, most of which are false. Rees has lied about where he went to school. Rees fabricated an anti-discrimination lawsuit, USA and Rees v. Daro Reality, to boost his image. Rees lied about who created his website: He says "Margaret Clay," but the original source code, posted here and elsewhere, shows that Rees designed his own (really awful, but the way) website. Rees lied about his marital status. Rees lied about his work experience. Rees has lied about the forums and community meetings he's attended. Rees has lied about where he had his campaign flyers printed. (He says Puerto Rico, but it isn't so.) It looks like it's become something of a competition to see who can spot Rees' latest lie the fastest on the Washington Post's new blog, DC Wire.

I hesitate to bring up Jonathan Rees again, because it's been so quiet here, and we know from experience that any criticism of him will bring about multiple comments from either Rees or his aliases. But there's something important about Rees that's been posted on some blogs and forums, and it sheds a great deal of light on why Rees' behavior is so confounding and anti-social. How can a candidate for City Council, as Rees claims to be, post so many lies and so many harassing messages about people? Nobody's ever encountered a so-called politician like this before -- somebody who goes out of his way to inflict maximum harm on people through the Internet. The answer is that Rees is a sociopath. There's a book that's getting attention, Marta Stout's "The Sociopath Next Door," which has a lot to say about Jonathan Rees. Sociopaths are strange and disturbing people because they have no conscience, and no ability to feel kindness or love for other people. Without a conscience, sociopaths are completely unrestrained in what they can do to others. And worse, sociopaths like Rees enjoy hurting other people. But don't take my word for it. Read Stout's book or listen to an interview with her at http://www.eyeonbooks.com/ibp.php?ISBN=076791581X Here's an excerpt from "The Sociopath Next Door": "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. "In other words, you are completely free of internal restraints, and your unhampered liberty to do just as you please, with no pangs of conscience, is conveniently invisible to the world. You can do anything at all, and still your strange advantage over the majority of people, who are kept in line by their consciences, will most likely remain undiscovered. "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. Retribution is the most important activity in the covetous sociopath's life, her highest priority."

And these are the same flyers that Rees claims to have had printed in Puerto Rico at a steep discount to keep his campaign expenditures under $500 so that he doesn't have to file financial reports with the Board of Elections? Pleeze. Rees did not have his flyers printed in Puerto Rico at a discounted price -- that's simply false. And either Rees is lying about his so-called "Team Rees" activities or Rees has spent a lot more than $500 on his campaign. Take your pick -- its a lie either way. As for what we're dealing with, keep in mind DCeiver's insight: "Rees has injected something into the ward three race that I've long felt was needed: frighteningly unhinged sociopathy." Posted at http://dceiver.blogspot.com/2005/11/ward-3...d-jonathan.html By the way, there's some new stuff about Rees on DCist today.

An observation: Jonathan Rees condems his critics for wasting their time by posting here, saying that almost nobody reads this forum. But then why does Jonathan Rees bother to post on DC Pages? I suspect that it is because he has been banned from just about everywhere else.