Comments on: “Sloppy Joe” List Really Isn’t That Messy for the GOP

By: Rum, Romanism and Rebellion » Blog Archive » What Was Weak Last Week

Rum, Romanism and Rebellion » Blog Archive » What Was Weak Last Week — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 15:23:03 +0000

[...] The folks at Sonoran Alliance published a piece defending Charles Jensen and Michael Williams, whose names appeared on a list of clients of the [...]

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:10:55 +0000

The difference is that Mecum represents the Arizona republican party. Jensen represents some group he made up. Mecum is held to a higher standard since GOP contributions pay his salary. Jensen – the dude probly doesn’t even have a salary running that group.

By: John

John — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 03:53:25 +0000

Wow, if you’re going to claim moral equivalency for what Mecum did versus what Jensen is alleged to have done, you really should at least use Mecum’s arrest for criminal speeding? There’s nothing illegal about posing for pictures at a costume party no matter what the ladies are wearing. However Mecum’s vehicle did actually break a law. Of course Mecum claimed he wasn’t driving his car that night so maybe it was being driven by the same mysterious person who rented Jensen’s house last year, or 2007, or whenever?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 03:41:05 +0000

I want to know why the ED of the Arizona republican party gets away with this – http://thedirty.com/2009/05/21/az-republican-party-exec-director-loves-his-job/ while some no-name gets crucified over a list full of fake names? Glad the ED doesn’t have me in his sites, I’d hate to have my career ruined over “allegations” like these. Why is Mecum kept around?

By: Kramer

Kramer — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 03:02:54 +0000

I find this interesting unfolding. Jensen is an ambitious, charming fellow who has done well for Republicans with Politics on the Rocks. His rival, Bret Mecum, is universally disliked by almost everyone except the state GOP shills leaving comments supporting him on this blog. Don’t think Mecum’s attack methods against Jensen will get anywhere.

By: Wolfy

Wolfy — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 03:01:53 +0000

I’m waiting for someone to check the county recorder and treasurer site and see if he paid prop tax on that house as a rental (higher taxes) or as his own residence (lower taxes). Happens all the time.

People, if you are accused of a crime don’t start by offering completely unrelated information.

Sometimes proving you have an alibi is worse than admitting the crime.

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 02:52:28 +0000

“story on this actually went pubic when”

Hahahaha.

By: DSW

DSW — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 02:50:32 +0000

Yes, you are correct. My time reference was off because I was thinking of when the list was revealed back in February.

By: John

John — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 02:22:06 +0000

Sounds like we need to get the timeline straight. You’re saying that Charles claims to have rented his property to someone “earlier this year”. However the document posted at Greg’s site shows the dates of alleged escort services at the address listed as being Charles Jensen’s took place two years ago. Specifically on 7/16/07, 11/27/07 and 12/13/07. So, is Mr. Jensen claiming that the house was also rented two years ago when this activity apparently occured? If so, he should make that clear and he should also come forward with the proof he claims to have that he was not in town on those dates.