Sun 14 Dec 2008
New Times contradicting its prior position on disclosure by Stapley
Posted by Pat under County Government , Crime and Punishment , Media[7] Comments
It has been amusing reading the Phoenix New Times’ recent articles trying to dismiss the investigation into Maricopa County Supervisor Don Stapley’s financial fraud. The New Times is bending over backwards now trying to minimize Stapley’s misreporting and failure to report substantial amounts of money he had earned with felons. The reason is obvious – the New Times can’t stand Republicans, but they dislike the conservative Republicans investigating Stapley – Sheriff Arpaio and County Attorney Andrew Thomas – worse than they dislike RINO Stapley. Here’s how New Times is currently minimizing the 118 count indictment against Stapley for financial fraud spanning 14 years -
But here’s what it comes down to. Stapley listed his real estate investment company on financial disclosure forms with the county. But, for fourteen years, he failed to list the company’s holdings. That’s it.
Contrast this with one of the myriads of articles written about Stapley in the past -
When Don Stapley comes to a corner, he cuts it. When he sees a string, he pulls it. A Maricopa County supervisor since 1994, Stapley has never seen a rule that can’t be bent, a law that can’t be skirted, a standard that can’t be doubled, an interest that can’t be conflicted. He’s an avatar of avarice. The denouements of Fife Symington and Tony West and Jeff Groscost have elevated Stapley’s dubious stature. He’s now the sleaziest politician striding Arizona’s political landscape. When Eminem asks the real Slim Shady to please stand up, Don Stapley should leap to his feet.
and this -
It’s a pattern Stapley has followed for a decade, frequently stretching legal and ethical boundaries as a real estate broker.
The Phoenix New Times loses all credibility when it prints something one day and ignores it the next day, instead printing the exact opposite because of some internal bias. Ironically, if it hadn’t been for the New Times diligently reporting over the years on Stapley’s financial misdealings, there probably wouldn’t be an investigation now.
December 14th, 2008 at 11:27 am
I’m sure New Times is particularly sensitive to others getting steamrolled by the dynamic duo, so maybe its not surprising they have come to Stapley’s defense. Some people don’t confuse means and ends, unlike our friend Pat.
Of course I predicted when this first came out that 116 of the 118 counts would be garbage. Looks like I might have been right.
December 14th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
The New Times piled on when the Sheriff went after Sandra Dowling and she was in the dock. To his credit, Andy Thomas rejected the case against her, and Arpaio shopped it to Terry Goddard.
You can see right through the New Times. They had no use for Stapley, but now the enemy of my enemy is my new-found friend.
Let’s let the system work. Let’s give Stapley the presumption of innocence (more than he ever gave Sandra Dowling) and let’s presume that Thomas is acting in good faith. If Thomas can prove what he says, he’s acted with a lot of guts to take on a man as powerful as Stapley. If he can’t, he’ll be the goat.
I will say this: There’s a paper trail for most financial transactions, particularly those involving land. If Stapley failed to disclose his interests in the alleged transactions, he’ll have a hard row to hoe. He may have to resort to the Jesse Jackson Jr. defense: It wasn’t me, I didn’t know it.
December 14th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
James, it is not allowing the “system to work” to continue seeing an out-of-control County Attorney and Sheriff ride roughshod over citizens rights. The New Times makes a convincing argument that the charges against Stapley are complete garbage. While I enjoy the sight of this type of right-wing infighting, in the end we have a situation where a prosecution is being advanced for largely political reasons.
December 14th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
Todd,
You might consider filling out the financial disclosure forms just “paperwork” as the New Times does. Others view the financial disclosure forms, which have been required of state, county, and city public officials for more than 30 years, as significant to making government honest. Our law does require them, and no one is above the law. This, after all, is Arisona, not Illinois.
Read the indictment. I have. Again, I say give Stapley the presumption of innocence. But if what is charged is proven, Stapley is going to have a problem.
The New Times despises Arpaio and Thomas. Yet it was a cheerleader when Arpaio and Goddard went after Dowling. So it’s hard to give the New Times much credence. It is not objective.
I have no truck for the sheriff, but let’s give Thomas his day in court. If he proves it, it’s not a case of riding roughshod. If he fails, as I said, he will be the goat.
December 17th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Sonoran Alliance just deleted an entire thread discussing the identity of the author of this column, Rachel Alexander. It also claimed that Ms. Alexander was doing blogging on the taxpayers’ clock.
The thread had real gems, such as “a friend” of Rachel Alexander claiming that the outing of Ms. Alexander was the work of a vindictive ex-boyfriend.
Is it not political news that a deputy county attorney, who lacks the qualifications to serve in her job in the first place, is blogging on the taxpayers’ dime?
The thread appeared in response to the entry “SA in PNT.” Now the comments section on that entry is closed. “Todd” from this thread was one of the several people who commented on the thread, so he can confirm Sonoran Alliance’s attempt at cover-up.
Apparently Sonoran Alliance is not “dedicated to reporting on Arizona’s political news,” as it claims on its mission statement.
January 18th, 2009 at 9:18 am
Disgusted Conservative,
I’d LOVE to get paid to blog at my job, “on the taxpayers’ dime” as you refer to it. DO TELL me how to do so, since apparently I’m doing something wrong at my job because I spend two days in court a week prosecuting, and the rest of the week doing projects, research, and legal-related writing. I have to do all my blogging early in the morning before I leave for work, and write my articles for the American Spectator and Townhall.com on the weekends.
I’ll be eagerly waiting your response.
Rachel
IntellectualConservative.com
January 18th, 2009 at 10:25 am
And be sure to check out my blogging on gopusa.com, intellectualconservative.blogspot.com, and icarizona.blogspot.com. I’m launching another site too.