“This morning I found out that my X or Twitter account was temporarily suspended,” Villanueva said in a video posted to Instagram. “This is straight dirty politics 101.”
Spokespeople for his opponent, incumbent Janice Hahn, said the supervisor and her campaign had nothing to do with Villanueva’s account suspension.
“This is laughable,” said Dave Jacobson, a consultant with Hahn’s reelection campaign. “It’s simply more evidence of a lying, disgraced and failed former sheriff yet again attempting to mislead the public with baseless claims.”
(Screenshot)
On X, @AlexVilanueva33 bore an “Account suspended” message Tuesday.
“X suspends accounts which violate the X Rules,” the message said. It did not specify which rule the account violated or whether it was related to harassment of Hahn’s account, which is one of several that Villanueva regularly tags in combative posts.
The site did not answer questions from The Times about the reasons behind the account suspension. A message sent to an email address for media inquiries was met with what appeared to be an automated response: “Busy now, please check back later.”
When reached for comment, Villanueva said he did not have proof that the suspension was in response to his interactions with his opponent.
“The notification did not offer a reason, but based on the content it seems most likely where the complaint came from,” he wrote in an email to The Times. “Criticism of the performance of elected officials should always be protected speech.”
Villanueva encouraged people to follow him on Instagram, Facebook and his new X account, @SheriffV33.
“We’re going to keep harassing with the truth,” he said on Instagram. “The truth will continue to come out no matter what Janice Hahn throws our way.”
This is not the first time Villanueva has grappled with accusations of harassment. Last month, The Times reported that an oversight panel recommended Villanueva be deemed ineligible for rehire because he discriminated against and harassed Inspector General Max Huntsman, repeatedly referring to the county watchdog by his foreign-sounding birth name and at one point telling The Times editorial board — without offering evidence — that Huntsman was a Holocaust denier.
At the time, amid his unsuccessful 2022 bid for reelection as sheriff, Villanueva promised he would provide proof to support his claims “in due time.” He has yet to do so.
After Huntsman reported Villanueva to the county in March 2022, the Sheriff’s Department investigated the allegations and in October 2023 the County Equity Oversight Panel met and found that Villanueva had violated several policies against discrimination and harassment. By that point, Villanueva was no longer sheriff, but the panel recommended that he “should receive a ‘Do Not Rehire’ notation’ in his personnel file. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department confirmed to The Times last month that it followed the recommendation.
Villanueva previously described the outcome of the Huntsman case as a “brazen attempt by the Board of Supervisors to engage in electioneering to influence the outcome of the race for 4th District supervisor.”
Also in October, the panel found that Villanueva had harassed, discriminated and retaliated against another county employee. Those records came to light this month, after The Times submitted a formal request for copies of any findings regarding allegations that the former sheriff discriminated against either the inspector general or the justice deputy for Supervisor Hilda Solis. After producing extensive records relating to Huntsman’s case several weeks ago, in early February the county produced six pages of records relating to the case involving the justice deputy, Esther Lim, though officials redacted her name.
It’s unclear from records reviewed by The Times what the exact allegations were in that case, but the County Equity Oversight Panel again recommended Villanueva receive a “Do Not Rehire” notation. Lim did not respond to an emailed request for comment Tuesday.
In addition to again describing the case as a “brazen attempt at electioneering,” in an email Tuesday, Villanueva questioned the timing of the release.
“This new report from October, 2022, conveniently held on for maximum effect in the March 2024 primary, amounts to defamation and I will pursue legal remedies against all parties responsible for this retaliatory act,” he wrote.
He also pointed out that he and the justice deputy had sparred before, when he filed complaints about her that he said “were ignored.”
According to county records reviewed by The Times, in 2021 the county declined to investigate a claim that Lim had behaved unprofessionally when she allegedly questioned the competence and impartiality of law enforcement in her tweets. The claim was deemed outside the scope of the County Policy of Equity complaint process, records show.