Same crime: Jesse Jackson, Jr. gets prison, Don Stapley getting a generous settlement, disbars prosecutor
More than four years after the fact, John McCain the senator is benefiting big time from John McCain the presidential candidate.
That’s because the McCain-Palin Compliance Fund Inc. of a presidential election more than four years distant transferred $819,200 this winter to the Arizona Republican’s U.S. Senate campaign committee, according to a document filed today with the Federal Election Commission.
Cash transfers between established political committees are in general, legal, and McCain for several years after the 2008 election routinely shuttled funds among the several political committees under his watch. They include his 2008 presidential committee, a Senate committee, joint fundraising committees and a leadership political action committee.
But the McCain-Palin Compliance Fund was supposed to raise private dollars to pay for legal and accounting costs associated with McCain complying with presidential campaign finance rules.
It now will ostensibly fuel a Senate re-election bid, which would next come in 2016 for the 76-year-old senator.
Response shows there was no coordination
Attached is a 9 page response to the Order Requiring Compliance in the matter of Tom Horne and Kathleen Winn. Here are the salient points:
- Under applicable law, Horne and Winn were free to communicate, as long as it was not about the independent expenditure, which it was not.
- Winn, who had over 25 years in the real estate business, was Horne’s principle advisor with respect to a complex real estate transaction which closed on October 29, 2010.
- The order falsely claims that phones calls between Winn and Horne spiked between October 13 and October 28, 2010, when the independent ad was being developed. (See false and misleading chart, page 11 of Order, Exhibit 4 to Response.) In fact, the FBI transcripts show that the ad was completed on October 21, and that the spike in phone calls occurred after the ad was completed, during the intense period of the closing of the real estate transaction. (See Exhibit 4, page 2, with corrections to the false and misleading chart.)
- The entire case is based on this kind of misleading speculation. There is no direct evidence of coordination, because there was none. This is shown in the 9 pages attached, and if necessary, will be proven in the legal proceedings.
A m e r i c a n P o s t – G a z e t t e
Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona
Sunday, October 21, 2012
The Arizona Congressional Majority Fund
Invites You to Attend a Southern Arizona Reception in Support of
Martha McSally, Vernon Parker &
Jonathan Paton for Congress
Congressman Pete Sessions
Chairman, National Republican Congressional Committee
Congressman Greg Walden
Deputy Chairman, National Republican Congressional Committee
Congressman Andy Harris, MD
Home of Joy and Dr. Jeff Maltzman
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
5:30 – 7:00 p.m.
|Event Chairman||Co-Chair||Host Committee||Individual Tickets|
Contributions to the joint fundraising committee, or any of the participating committees individually, are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.
I am writing to ask that you join me in supporting Jeff Flake and his U.S. Senate campaign.
There is no doubt that the wheels of the entire liberal campaign machine are turning to stop Jeff from reaching the U.S. Senate, becoming part of a Republican Majority, and to working with Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and John Boehner to get America back on the right track to prosperity.
This race is so important to the Democrats that it was a “rare personal call from President Obama” that helped recruit Jeff’s opponent.
Frankly, Jeff is a target for defeat because he refuses to waste your money.
Friend, Jeff Flake is a common sense conservative you can count on and I hope you’ll partner with me in doing all we can to elect him on November 6th.
The most urgent challenge Jeff faces is raising funds get out his message to Republicans and Independents. This means the best step you can take today toward winning a Republican Senate Majority is to rush contribute a gift of $100, $250, $500, $1,000 or even $2,500 more to Jeff Flake for U.S. Senate.
Friend, for the next generation of Americans to have the same opportunities to succeed and forge their own American dreams, we must bring allies like Jeff Flake to the Senate to vote for free markets, less government regulation and an end to wasteful spending that has us nearly $16 trillion dollars in debt.
by Anonymous Because I Could Lose My Job
Usually, rank-and-file voters make up their minds last minute. Additionally, they only really bother to vote in the races at the top of the ticket: President, U.S. Senate, Congress, and Governor. State offices tend to fall by the wayside. If voters aren’t going to bother to be informed, it’s not such a bad thing because no one in their right mind would advocate for the uninformed casting votes. But if you live in the new LD 20, if you are going to bother to vote down-ticket from the Presidential race, the U.S. Senate race, and Congressional races, much less vote at all, it’s high time you know the truth about the LD 20 Arizona Senate candidate named Doug Quelland. Elections have consequences. If you vote for him, just know the kind of person you’ll be voting for.
Voters should know Quelland has been removed from office before because he violated a number of campaign finance laws. In fact, Quelland is continuing to skirt the law even today by putting up “Q” signs without the required “paid by” disclosure (more on this later). Once you learn about Quelland’s assertions about his campaign finance as opposed to the evidence to the contrary, couple that with his claims about his political beliefs as opposed to his record, and see his actions today, you’ll understand that the man has a continuing track record of fundamental dishonesty.
The only thing worse than a politician that lies is a lying politician that stands for nothing. Doug Quelland is that politician. In the past, Quelland has campaigned as a conservative, but his voting record shows him as anything but. His scores from Goldwater Institute, Americans for Prosperity, and Pachyderm Coalition show that his votes have been all over the map: some years, he scored as high as the most conservative members; other years, he was the most liberal Republican in the House.
Is this really who you want to vote for?
QUELLAND’S DISHONESTY re PAYING A POLITICAL CONSULTANT WITH BUSINESS FUNDS IN 2008
During the 2008 campaign season, Quelland, mid-stream, decided to become a “participating” candidate. Quelland failed to disclose a consulting contract with Larry Davis of Intermedia PR that he was required to disclose when he became a Clean Elections candidate. Quelland asserts that he aborted the contract 2 days after he made it and before he became a participating candidate, never paid the consultant at all and wasn’t required to report it. However, the CCEC produced a number of checks from Quelland’s Q-Land Enterprises, Inc. business account to the consultant during the course of the campaign. Not only were payments made, but the corporate payments to the consultant were made on the exact same time schedule agreed to in the contract that Quelland claimed he terminated. Clean Elections candidates can’t accept corporate donations, but Quelland financed his “clean elections” campaign not only with public money, but with his business’ money too. One could argue that Quelland sought to circumvent campaign finance laws by trying to pay a consultant through his business so the corporate donations would be off the campaign books and undetectable. Additional information tends to prove that Quelland didn’t terminate the contract at all: the consultant did campaign work for Quelland, got a campaign debit card to make expenditures, worked with vendors for Quelland’s campaign, collected signatures for him and held two fundraisers for him. What’s worse is that Quelland testified that the consultant collected no signatures for his campaign, but signed petitions show that the consultant did collect signatures. In simple terms, Quelland lied to the CCEC about hiring the consultant, illegally paid the consultant through his business account, and lied about the consultant collecting signatures for him. Granted, Quelland asserts that he hired Intermedia to do work for his businesses and that Davis did volunteer work for his campaign, but if that’s true, why wasn’t there a separate contract for business services and only the contract for campaign services that Quelland claims he terminated and why did the corporate payments to Intermedia match the schedule in the political consulting contract?
QUELLAND VIOLATED SPENDING CAPS
If one runs as a participating candidate, they agree, up front, to spending limits. Quelland’s corporate payments to Intermedia not only were illegal because they were business donations, but the amount spent put Quelland well over the spending limits he agreed to. Do you want to vote for someone who violates agreements? Is it honest? Is it the level of honesty that you expect from a politician?
QUELLAND VIOLATED CAMPAIGN FINANCE RULES WITH HIS WEBSITE
In addition to violating the CCEC campaign funding rules by failing to disclose the political consulting contract when he chose to become a participating candidate and paying for the political consulting services with his corporate accounts, he re-used a campaign website he used from 2006 and failed to report its use to the CCEC. According to CCEC rules, Quelland was required to report the use of the website and count the fair market value of the site’s use as a campaign expense. Quelland failed to make any report of the site.
QUELLAND’S VOTING RECORD
As mentioned before, Quelland made representations to those who signed his petitions that he was a conservative. True conservatives believe in, and endeavor not to waver from, a set of principles: less taxation, less spending, smaller government, the law meaning what it says (that is the rule of law as opposed to judicial activism). A hallmark of true conservatism is a consistent voting record. In 2003 and 2006, the Goldwater Institute gave Quelland scores that put him in the middle of the Republican pack. In 2004 and 2005, according to Goldwater, Quelland earned scores that put him in the company of top conservatives.
In 2009, Goldwater scored him as one of the most liberal Republicans in the legislature. The Pachyderm Coalition gave him the lowest score of any Republican in the legislature that year for the regular session, but their special session report marks him as a middle-of-the-road Republican.
In 2010, according to Goldwater, Quelland returned to voting with the middle of the Republican pack. Americans for Prosperity’s 2010 score card that includes cumulative scoring gives Quelland a rating that equates him with liberal Republicans. Pachyderm’s ratings that year again gave Quelland the lowest marks in the legislature.
As is illustrated by these scores, Quelland oscillates politically like a garden sprinkler. He’s all over the map from year to year. The fact that the man is absolutely inconsistent in his voting record shows that no voter can trust what the man says he believes in because he may vote the opposite way the very next year.
DOUG QUELLAND’S CONTINUING, CONSISTENT PATTERN OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY
If you live in LD 20 or the immediate area, you’ve likely seen red “Q” signs that are similar to campaign signs. While, Quelland has claimed the signs are promoting his business, the “business signs” are the size of campaign signs, they’re put up in the exact same areas as other political signs, are erected during campaign season, and are shuttled to their spots in a truck covered in Quelland for Senate signs. Most importantly, Quelland asks supporters to put a Q sign in their yards on his political website. If the Q signs are not political signs, why does he ask supporters to put them up in their yards like they are campaign signs? Additionally, the signs on the truck have no “paid by” disclosure either. But this isn’t all when it comes to Quelland’s consistently dishonest behavior!
This election cycle, Quelland has paid for letters distributed to homes in the district inviting the residents to visit his campaign website and learn about his policy positions. Quelland claimed that he put “paid by” stickers on the letters and the stickers must have fallen off, but when the Secretary of State’s office tried to remove one of the stickers Quelland claims he applied, the letter was damaged. Considering the letter was damaged when the sticker was removed, do YOU believe the stickers “just fell off”?
Even after the complaint about Quelland’s letters arose, one local news outlet noticed that Quelland’s campaign website also lacked the requisite funding disclosures. Since the news outlet pointed out the lack of campaign disclosures on Quelland’s website, the disclosure has been added. So, taken in the aggregate, one can see that Quelland has serious difficulties with campaign finance requirements and an inability to tell the truth about it. One might think that if a candidate had encountered difficulties with campaign finance disclosures, they might become paranoid about them and disclose who things are paid by more often than is necessary, but Quelland seems to take the opposite lesson.
Quelland has an outstanding CCEC judgment against him for $31,000 from 2009 and he has yet to pay it. Apparently, he has an agreement to pay the judgment, but he has not adhered to the agreement. According to one source, he has a, “wink and a nod agreement with the Attorney General.” In other words, Quelland and the AG put up a written agreement to make it appear that there’s enforcement, but Quelland has no intention of paying back the $31,000 and the AG will do nothing to truly see that the fine is paid.
Between his website and linked Twitter account, Quelland states that he will personally visit every household in LD 20. Numerous individuals questioned about visits by Quelland said that they were never paid a visit by him. Insignificant? Sure, but it shows a consistent, continuing pattern of dishonesty by Quelland.
CURRENT THOUGHT ABOUT QUELLAND’S CAMPAIGN
In a recent Capitol Times article, consultants noted that Quelland hasn’t raised very much money for his campaign and has contributed personal funds to keep the campaign going. The consultants interviewed were dismissive of his campaign. That’s dangerous. Any candidate should always take their opponents seriously lest they be upset. One of the consultants stated that if Quelland wanted to win, he needed to stroke a big personal check, but if he stroked a personal check it suggests he could pay the fine he’s been willfully ignoring.
The only thing consistent about Quelland is inconsistency. There’s inconsistency in the fabricated excuses he tried to sell the CCEC, inconsistency in his voting record, and inconsistency between his current behavior and the law. Voters expect candidates to fulfil their promises: promises to pay fines, promises to abide by campaign finance laws, promises to be transparent in their campaign funding, and promises to adhere to either party platforms or stated positions. Quelland can’t be counted on to fulfill any promises.
If one speculates that Quelland may actually believe the lies he’s told, one might discern a pattern of insanity in the man. Quelland’s actions actually conform when viewed through the lens of insanity as an explanation for his actions: believing his own lies; megalomania, believing he’s above the law, expressed in his consistent flaunting of disclosure laws and refusal to pay the judgment against him; the strange moustache; outrageous assertions that he’s visited every home in the district…it all fits. Granted, this is all pure speculative musings from someone with no expertise in the mental health field.
Elections have consequences. If you’re going to vote, learn what you can about the candidates and vote as wisely as possible. The questions remains, LD 20 voters, considering everything above, is this the man you want representing you? Is he reflective of your views? Is this the man you want standing in your stead casting votes in your name?
Legislative District 11 candidate Dave Joseph is under investigation for violating the Arizona Clean Elections Commission rules that apply when you take campaign funds from the state. A weekend article from the Arizona Republic details the two violations that he committed, according to a complaint filed by a resident of Pinal County. The violations being investigated are so serious even the local public radio station in Tucson took note in this news report.
This case is just one more example of what is wrong with the Clean Elections system. Candidates get free money and often times bend or break the rules when using these state funds. The system also artificially inflates the amount of money being spent on campaigns and drives up the cost of running for office. The liberals always whine about more money for education but they too often seem willing to accept campaign welfare when the money could be better used to fund education in Arizona.
Bolick Asking Illegal Campaign Contributions To Be Returned
Phoenix, AZ – October 5, 2012 – Shawnna L.M. Bolick, a 16 year veteran in the education reform movement filed a complaint with the Arizona Secretary of State’s office against the Quality Education and Jobs (QEJ) political committee citing an illegal $120,000 contribution from Arizona Students Association (ASA). ASA is a non-profit 501(c) (4) organization.
ASA contributed $120,000 in cash to the QEJ political committee on May 22, 2012, and June 18, 2012, according to QEJ’s campaign finance reports. It appears certain board members and executive officers of ASA may have violated the organization’s bylaws and/or breached their fiduciary duties when they approved funding for QEJ, according to Bolick’s complaint. The purpose of her letter is to seek an order pursuant to A.R.S. § 16-924(A) requiring QEJ to return the $120,000 to ASA.
Upon filing her complaint Bolick stated, “I am adamantly opposed to special interests illegally misappropriating student fees. When I was an undergraduate I chose to have my student fee reimbursed from a special interest group to whom I disagreed with their political speech. It was a cumbersome process and not well-advertised, but I felt compelled to make a statement.”
Duly noted in Bolick’s complaint, funding for ASA comes from a mandatory $2 fee assessed on all public university students’ tuition dues each semester. According to QEJ’s campaign finance reports they are in possession of misappropriated corporate funds. This money belongs to Arizona’s public university students and it may not be used for political purposes without their consent.
“The Yes on 204 campaign should not prey on unsuspecting college students. Misappropriating their student fees is not only unconstitutional, but it clearly violates their freedom of speech. This is not a lesson that special interests should be involved on the college campus,” Bolick added.
# # #
Special Event for Martha McSally, Jonathan Paton & Vernon Parker with House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy
Liberals In Washington Are Trying To Prop Up Richard Carmona’s Campaign
PHOENIX – When President Obama phoned Richard Carmona just over a year ago to get him to run for the U.S. Senate, it was just the first of many attempts by liberal Democrats in Washington, D.C., to spread their influence onto Arizona’s voters. Today we learned that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) is spending more than a half-million dollars on television advertising trying to help Richard Carmona run away from his connection to Mr. Obama.
Additionally, not only does this money ensure that Carmona will try to protect the Democrats’ majority in the U.S. Senate – by voting for Harry Reid as the Senate Majority Leader – but it’s another reminder that he’ll be a reliable vote for President Obama’s tax-and-spend agenda.
“We’re just now getting a better understanding of why Democrat Richard Carmona answered ‘yes’ to President Obama’s call for him to run for office,” said Arizona Republican Party spokesman Tim Sifert. “This money serves as a notice that Richard Carmona will be a reliable vote for President Obama and Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid’s liberal agenda.”
President Barack Obama & Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid Personally Recruited Richard Carmona
- “On September 23, President Obama called Richard Carmona to encourage him to run,” said one Democratic strategist. (Alexander Burns, Obama courts Ariz. Senate candidate, may contest state ‘heavily’, Politico, 10/06/11)
- Carmona is one of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee’s favorite candidates and was personally courted by President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to get into the race. (David Catanese, Bivens clears the way for Carmona, Politico, 3/27/2012)
- Obama personally called Carmona and asked him to run, and Carmona told The Hill in February that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and other top Democrats were also among those who reached out to court him. (Josh Lederman, Democrat Bivens drops out of Arizona Senate primary, clearing way for Carmona, The Hill, 3/27/2012)
Well before Election Day, voters throughout Arizona need to get the message that Proposition 121 is a hoax, a major fraud designed to convince citizens that the measure will open the political system to more candidates and voters.
Mislabeled the Open Elections Open Government initiative, the measure does the exact opposite. It is the Closed Elections Closed Government initiative. Arizona voters must not be fooled.
A close look at Proposition 121 reveals a cynical scheme that will eliminate voter choice, foster political corruption and advance extremists by abolishing party primaries and eventually destroy political parties themselves.
Proponents of 121 want to hijack the political system so they can elect candidates of their own choosing and take candidate selection out of the hands of the voters. Unable to compete in the primary system as it exists, they propose an end to the system that has served voters well for decades.
The proposition would abolish party primaries and establish one primary open to all candidates and all voters. The top two finishers in the primary would face off in the general election. Party identification by candidates would be optional.
That is the real flaw in Proposition 121. Voters would have no way to verify the accuracy of a candidate’s party identification. With no party primary system to verify candidate identification, the system would be open to sham candidates hand picked and financed by special interests out to fool the voters.
What is worse, millions of voters could be left with no choice in a general election if the top two primary finishers represented the same party. With nowhere to turn on Election Day, voter turnout would plummet as citizens would simply give up and stay home.
This already has happened in California where there will be 28 elections this fall with no voter choice due to top two primaries. Contrary to top two primary advocates, voter turnout was not up in the state’s June primaries and the primaries did not produce more so-called moderate candidates.
Under Proposition 121, candidates with extreme views easily could manipulate their way into a general election. Voters need only recall how the top two system in Louisiana once produced a run off between a candidate with a history of KKK leadership and a corrupt politician who was convicted and went to jail.
Proposition 121 would give political insiders and unscrupulous consultants the vehicle they want to corrupt the candidate selection process. Special interests would pour millions into primaries to elect sham candidates.
The voters need clear choices. They need confidence in the honesty of candidate identity. They need protection against corruption in the election process.
The party primary system provides these safeguards. Proposition 121 destroys them. The measure should be soundly defeated on Election Day.
A m e r i c a n P o s t – G a z e t t e
Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona
Monday, September 1, 2012
Arizona Republican Party Sends Bouquet to Carmona to Celebrate Important Anniversary
PHOENIX – What a difference a year makes! Just one year ago — September 23, 2011 — Richard Carmona received a phone call from President Obama who encouraged the Tucson resident to run as a Democrat for the U.S. Senate. Carmona responded enthusiastically, and for the past year has busily embraced the liberal agenda of the Obama Administration on every issue from taxes, healthcare, abortion, to the redistribution of wealth — all while collecting campaign checks from liberal interest groups and Senate Democrats like Harry Reid, Al Franken and Chuck Schumer.
In recognition of the anniversary of Obama’s call recruiting Carmona, the Arizona Republican Party sent a bouquet of carnations to Carmona’s campaign office in Phoenix. Carnations are the traditional symbol of the first anniversary of an important event.
“While Arizona is suffering from devastating unemployment and higher taxes from Obama’s healthcare plan, Richard Carmona is jet-setting around Washington, DC, and rubbing elbows with wealthy liberals who are only going to make things worse,” said Arizona Republican Party spokesman Tim Sifert. “President Obama and his liberal cohorts have failed this country once already and Richard Carmona is part of their plan to do it again.”
Richard Carmona Is The Handpicked Candidate Of President Barack Obama
“On September 23, President Obama called Richard Carmona to encourage him to run,” said one Democratic strategist. (Alexander Burns, Obama courts Ariz. Senate candidate, may contest state ‘heavily’, Politico, 10/06/11)
Carmona is one of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee’s favorite candidates and was personally courted by President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to get into the race. (David Catanese, Bivens clears the way for Carmona, Politico, 3/27/2012)
And Has Taken Money From Numerous Liberals Like Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer and Al Franken
- Harry Reid’s Searchlight PAC Has Given Democrat Richard Carmona $10,000. (Center For Responsive Politics, www.opensecrets.org, Accessed 5/30/12)
- Al Franken’s Midwest Values PAC Has Given Democrat Richard Carmona $10,000.(Center For Responsive Politics, www.opensecrets.org, Accessed 5/30/12)
- Chuck Schumer’s Impact PAC Has Given Democrat Richard Carmona $10,000. (Center For Responsive Politics, www.opensecrets.org, Accessed 5/30/12)
President Obama Promised The Stimulus Would ‘Create Or Save’ 3.5 Million Jobs
ASSOCIATED PRESS: The Obama administration is defending its claim that the $787 billion economic stimulus plan will save or create 3.5 million jobs before 2011 even while conceding that unemployment will likely continue to rise beyond its earlier predictions. (Stimulus plan will create or save 3.5 million jobs, White House says, Associated Press, 05/11/09)
Poverty and Unemployment Now Lasting Hallmarks of Obama Administration
- In 2011, the official overall poverty rate was 15.0 percent. There were 46.2 million people in poverty in the U.S. (“Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2011″United States Census Bureau, Figure 4 and Table 3)
- National unemployment rate for August 2011 is 8.1% (News Release, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, 9/7/2012)
- Household income nationally in 2011 was 8.1% lower than in 2007 (“Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2011″ United States Census Bureau, Figure 1 and Table A-1)
A m e r i c a n P o s t – G a z e t t e
Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona
Friday September 14, 2012
Four Republican Candidates Take Steps Toward ‘Young Gun’ Status
Washington — The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) today announced its newest round of ‘On the Radar’ candidates. By reaching the second step of the four-step ‘Young Guns’ program, these Republican candidates have reached the fundamental benchmarks to place them on the road to victory. Now, these four candidates are ready to take on the Democrat establishment and return fiscal sanity to Washington.
“These candidates have worked hard to meet the benchmarks that have been laid out before them and are determined to hold Washington Democrats accountable this November,” said NRCC Chairman Pete Sessions (R-TX). “American taxpayers are tired of watching the Democrat majority spend this country deeper into recession while they have been forced to tighten their belts. With American families desperate for change, these four candidates are determined to rein in reckless spending, cut taxes and return the economy back to a state of vitality.”
Originally founded in the 2007-2008 election cycle by Reps. Eric Cantor (R-VA), Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and Paul Ryan (R-WI) as a member-driven organization, the Young Guns program has become an official NRCC effort dedicated to electing open-seat and challenger candidates nationwide. Reps. Cantor, McCarthy and Ryan remain actively involved in the Young Guns program, working together to recruit and prime conservative leaders for victory.
After reaching the second step of the four-step program, these ‘On the Radar’ candidates now face a new set of rigorous benchmarks that will continue to help them build competitive, effective and winning campaigns.
The NRCC’s ‘On the Radar’ Candidates Are:
- Martha McSally (AZ-02)
- Vernon Parker (AZ-09)
- Wendy Rogers (AZ-09)
- Martin Sepulveda (AZ-09)
For more information, click here.