Same crime: Jesse Jackson, Jr. gets prison, Don Stapley getting a generous settlement, disbars prosecutor

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
Thursday, August 20, 2013

Both men grossly misspent campaign funds

Jesse Jackson, Jr. should have gone after the prosecutor and he would have skated too

Jesse Jackson, Jr., being sentenced to 2.5 years in prison We almost felt bad for Jesse Jackson, Jr., hearing that he will be going to prison for 2.5 years for misspending campaign funds. His wife will spend a year in prison. He should have never resigned from Congress. If he’d stayed in Congress, he would have had the best lawyers in the state, like Don Stapley did. Of course, Stapley also had that little advantage of controlling the purse strings of the judges (shhhh!), what judge is going to rule against him? Now Stapley is in negotiations with the county to receive a humongous settlement over the “stress” of being prosecuted. His convicted ex-felon business partner, Conley Wolfswinkel, got a $1 million settlement from the county over “stress” from being prosecuted, his secretary got $500,000, and there have been several more along the way. We predict Stapley will get an even more generous settlement. After all, the judges wouldn’t want to tick off his former cronies on the board of supervisors by showing they aren’t going to pony it up for a former supervisor, would they? They voted to give crooked supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox $900,000.

Let’s compare campaign misspending by the two. According to the Wall Street Journal,

Jesse Jackson, Jr., was sentenced to prison for “treating his campaign fund like a ‘personal piggy bank,’ siphoning $750,000 over the years to pay for personal items such as spa treatments and televisions.”


This sounds exactly like what Don Stapley did. Stapley used $4,000 of his campaign funds to buy expensive electronics from Bang & Olafson. He also purchased numerous spa treatments. He spent at least $86,000 of campaign funds on personal luxury items, including lavish vacations for his family in Hawaii, Florida and Utah. Read more about it here.


Don Stapley with his powerful, well-connected attorney who helped him beat the charges, former U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton
Don Stapley with his powerful, well-connected attorney who helped him beat the charges, former U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton

Stapley went out and found the biggest, most connected law firms in the state to represent him – including powerful former U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton – (guess how many of Stapley’s attorneys are friends with judges?), who spent hundreds of hours researching obscure case law and the facts to come up with an uber-technical argument that would not fly with any fair judge, but that some sleazy judge could use to get Stapley off the hook. The Arizona legislature had instructed the county supervisors to implement rules stating that county officials who misuse campaign funds commit a crime. The supervisors never bothered to do so. Therefore, sleazy judge John Leonardo found that Stapley is not guilty of anything. Seriously. It should be pointed out that Stapley could have easily been found guilty of a general crime of misuse of funds, fraud, or similar – but Leonardo knows where his bread is buttered, he had a clever way out most of the general public would buy. In return, Leonardo received a plum appointment to – you guessed it – the next U.S. Attorney from Arizona!  Remember, help out those who are in power, and you will be greatly rewarded. I pat your back, you pat my back, and never mind the little guy who gets run over along the way, that little prosecutor Andrew Thomas, who should have been patting backs too.


We’re reeling over here, seeing that the corruption in Arizona is even WORSE than in Chicago,. If you can beat the Jesse Jackson family at corruption, there is something seriously wrong with you.


When are the grown-ups in Arizona going to stop this? Who’s next in the lineup for another taxpayer handout for stress over being prosecuted the way Jesse Jackson, Jr, was?


We have a tip for Jackson. File a bar complaint against the prosecutor and allege prosecutorial misconduct, then sue the government for a really, really large cash settlement! Two juries found probable cause against Don Stapley – that didn’t matter, he still skated. You can still beat it, we’re rooting for you! Can’t let Maricopa County get the reputation of replacing Cook County as the most corrupt county in America.


And frankly, where is Jesse Jackson, Sr.? Why is a white man allowed to skate for the exact same crime a black man is sent to prison for?


Here is a partial list of what Stapley spent his campaign funds on:


Luxury vacations for himself and his family to Florida, Hawaii and Utah. $12,042 for the condo in Hawaii alone.
$1300 for hair implants
$5036 in expensive stereo equipment from Bang & Olufsen
psychological counseling
animal groomingeyewear
$99 at Bath & Body Works
home furnishings
lots of groceries
ASU event tickets
medical bills
vitamins, minerals, herbs
$1480 on Mesa water/trash/sewer
$471 at Donna Karan for women’s clothing
fitness center
$350 for an art show in Pasadena
Phoenix Zoo
$104 for women’s clothing from Rampage
$630 for Broadway tickets
$420 for concerts at America West Arena
$100 at Ulta for beauty
$428 for the Utah Shakespeare Festival
$775 for women’s clothing at Zara in New York City

Join Our Mailing List

Maricopa GOP Chair Rallies LD Censures

To all Arizona County and LD Republican Committee Chairmen -
Below is the front page article of the July 15 Arizona Capitol Times. I want to express my appreciation to those courageous and principled County and LD Republican Committees who have already conducted votes of “censure” and/or “no confidence.”
Jan Brewer, the legislators and their crony capitalist friends that support ObamaCare and Medicaid expansion have betrayed Americans, Arizona Republicans and the Republican Party Platform.  Their lack of ethics, integrity and egregious acts are motivated by only two things – greed and the lust for power – at the expense of hard working tax paying Americans.
The law was expected to cost $898 billion over the first decade when the bill was first passed, but this year the Congressional Budget Office revised that estimate to $1.85 trillion.  Money that will have to be borrowed from the Chinese or printed in the backroom of the Federal Reserve.  Latest polls indicate a majority of Americans are opposed to ObamaCare and Medicaid expansion with an overwhelming majority of Republicans in opposition.
During the past six months, we did everything we could to make a solid argument against ObamaCare and Medicaid expansion, we tried to reason with these people and even tried to make them see the light.  Unfortunately, our lobbying efforts fell on deaf ears and without success.
During one of Ronald Reagan’s difficult political battles he said,
               “When you can’t make them see the light, make them feel the heat.”
I’m asking all the County and LD Republican Committees to make these people feel the heat by passing public censures for their actions.  They are elitists who think what they have done should be forgiven. They are mistaken.  We are not going to be able to defeat all of them, but we can defeat a majority of them in the 2014 Primary Election.
You can go to “MCRC Briefs” and get examples of public censures that have already been passed.  Just type “censure” in the search field on the left.
Warmest regards,
 A. J. LaFaro
Chairman, Maricopa County Republican Committee
P.S.  Please encourage all of your PCs to keep up their daily efforts in getting petition signatures for  Getting ObamaCare and Medicaid expansion on the November 2014 ballot will be historic for Arizona’s grassroots conservatives.

Senator John McCain Moves Money from McCain-Palin Compliance Fund to Senate Campaign Account

More revelations how money moves in the political campaign world. Here’s an article by David Levinthal on about our senior senator that also reveals his plans for 2016.

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.

(Continue reading)

Attorney General Tom Horne, Kathleen Winn Respond to Order Requiring Compliance

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:

  1. Under applicable law, Horne and Winn were free to communicate, as long as it was not about the independent expenditure, which it was not.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.)
  4. 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.

View Attachment

More scandalous details come out about Tom Horne campaign

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

Here are some portions from the AZ Central article. Horne’s ruthless illegal campaign to get elected is ironically what will get him removed from office.

Horne and Winn have until Nov. 5 to amend the 2010 election reports and pay back an estimated $400,000 in contributions made to the independent-expenditure committee. If they do not comply with the order, Montgomery will issue an order assessing civil penalties, which could exceed $1 million.

Witnesses described to investigators a sorority-type environment at the Attorney General’s Office. Some women were described as a “harem” of “Horne-ites” who vied for the politician’s attention. One witness said another witness was directed to Horne’s office to tell him about her FBI interview while another female worker gave Horne a massage.

Horne’s criminal investigator, Margaret “Meg” Hinchey, described a conversation in which Horne asked her and her boss, Andy Rubalcava, if he could tell them about a possible crime with the promise that they would not investigate it.

At a 2010 primary-victory party, Horne’s California brother-in-law, Richard Newman, asked Horne if there was anything he could do to help during the general election. Horne directed Newman to talk to Winn, who was also at the party. “Well, I know Tom said that it was – it was an independent committee,” Newman told investigators.

Newman donated $115,000 total to the committee. In the days leading up to an initial $15,000 donation, investigators said phone records showed more frequent communication between Horne and his sister and between Horne and Newman. After Newman’s first $15,000 check did not arrive as quickly as it was needed, he sent a second check. That check “was delivered to Tom’s home and left” near the front door, according to an Oct. 21, 2010 e-mail to Newman from his assistant.

Lucia de Vernai, an attorney general’s legal assistant, told investigators that Winn talked openly to Horne’s campaign workers about her involvement with the independent-expenditure committee in the weeks following the primary and intensified in October 2010. De Vernai said Winn would stop by Horne’s campaign headquarters and “talk to Tom, you know, kind of in the corner.”

Former Assistant Attorney General Ron Lebowitz said he believed Winn was working with Horne’s campaign in October 2010 when she came to Lebowitz’s house to pick up an $840 check. Lebowitz said Winn told him to make the check payable to the independent-expenditure committee and told him the maximum amount he could donate was $840 – the same limit for an individual donating to a candidate

Hinchey’s notes said that on Oct. 7, 2011, Horne asked her and her boss, Rubalcava, if he could tell them about something he may have learned as a result of someone listening to another person’s phone call in the office. The investigators said there could be potential criminal implications. “He said he knew that and thus wanted to ask Rubalcava and I if we would promise not to investigate or report it as a crime,” Hinchey wrote.

Hinchey and Rubalcava said they could not because it would violate their oaths as law-enforcement officers. Hinchey wrote that she told Horne, “I also advised AG Horne that if he, as the top law-enforcement officer in the state, knew of a possible crime and withheld that information, it would not look good for him or be a good idea.”

The county has offered as evidence that Horne and Winn were on the phone as she was e-mailing Murray about a Rotellini attack ad. In their response, Horne and Winn deny that allegation, saying the phone call was unrelated to the campaign. They also said Winn did not send Murray a response until two minutes after the phone call ended.. 

Click here for the full article

Join Our Mailing List

Congressional Majority Fund Comes to Arizona – Wednesday, October 17

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
$10,000 $2,500 $1,000 $250

For questions or to RSVP please contact Katie Fischer at (480)570-7887 / or Jess Yescalis at (602) 400-5683 /

Contributions to the joint fundraising committee, or any of the participating committees individually, are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.

Senator John McCain: You need to know about Jeff

Dear Friend,

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.

In advance, thank you for joining me in helping elect Jeff to the Senate.

Sincerely yours,

John McCain
John McCain
U.S. Senator 

Is Quelland the Man to Represent You in LD 20?

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?


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?


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?


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.


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.


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.


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?

Democrat Dave Joseph under investigation for violating Clean Elections law

Dave JosephLegislative 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.

Longtime Education Reformer Files Complaint Against Proposition 204 Committee

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

D.C. Liberals Put Their Money Behind Richard Carmona, The Handpicked Candidate Of President Obama

Arizona Republican Party

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

President Obama phones 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)


Proposition 121 Corrupts Arizona’s Election System

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.

Bill Montgomery charging Tom Horne; also Horne under investigation involving hit and run

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

Self-promotional video Horne made of himself pretending to be Mission Impossible
The FBI has finally released the results of its investigation into Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne, and turned the results over to County Attorney Bill Montgomery. Montgomery announced this morning that he will be filing civil charges against Horne, no doubt too terrified to file criminal charges after what happened to Andrew Thomas when he tried to criminally prosecute powerful public officials.
According to AZ Family:
Montgomery is initiating a civil enforcement action against Horne and Kathleen Winn, general director of community outreach for the Attorney General’s Office, for alleged campaign finance violations committed during the 2010 election cycle.
The allegations stem from an 11-month-long FBI investigation into Business Leaders for Arizona (BLA), an independent expenditure committee chaired by Winn and operated in close coordination with Horne in violation of ARS 16-917.

According to the results of the FBI’s investigation, Horne actively directed BLA’s fundraising and communications strategy with Winn in the final weeks of his 2010 campaign for attorney general. During this time period, BLA raised more than $500,000 from the Republican State Leadership Committee and individual donors which paid for television advertisements advocating against Felicia Rotellini, Horne’s Democrat opponent.

After reviewing the investigation, Secretary of State Ken Bennett determined there was reasonable cause to believe Horne and Winn’s actions violated civil statutes governing independent expenditures and directed the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office to initiate an enforcement action pursuant to its statutory authority.

The Arizona Republic reported this:

Two of Horne’s employees — one a longtime state investigator — have accused him of communicating with an independent expenditure committee during the 2010 election as it raised money to run negative ads against Horne’s Democratic opponent. State law prohibits coordination between candidates and independent expenditure committees. Those who violate laws governing independent expenditure committees can face stiff financial penalties.

Horne’s employees alleged he communicated regularly with Winn, chairwoman of the Business Leaders for Arizona, as she solicited money from Horne’s brother-in-law in California and GOP supporters across the Valley.

In June, state criminal investigator Margaret “Meg” Hinchey said she had obtained information that Horne collaborated with the independent expenditure committee. Hinchey turned witness statements and other evidence over to the FBI, which began an investigation in January.

A separate complaint filed with the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office by another Horne employee and former political ally alleged Horne helped funnel $115,000 from his brother-in-law to the committee and promised a job to Winn as a reward for her work on the committee. Horne has vehemently denied the allegation, and points out he first offered Winn’s position to someone else.
Previously, Horne has said that Winn, in December 2009, filed paperwork to create Business Leaders for Arizona to oppose Thomas, who ran against Horne in the primary election. Horne said that although Winn filed the paperwork, there was no independent expenditure during the primary.

“The conduct in question is expressly prohibited by Arizona’s election laws and we will work to hold those responsible accountable,” Montgomery said in a media release.

Click here for the AZ Family article.

Join Our Mailing List

Richard Carmona Visits DC for Anniversary of Obama’s Phone Call Recruiting Him to Run

Arizona Republican Party

Arizona Republican Party Sends Bouquet to Carmona to Celebrate Important Anniversary

Obama Phones Carmona

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,, Accessed 5/30/12)
  • Al Franken’s Midwest Values PAC Has Given Democrat Richard Carmona $10,000.(Center For Responsive Politics,, Accessed 5/30/12)
  • Chuck Schumer’s Impact PAC Has Given Democrat Richard Carmona $10,000. (Center For Responsive Politics,, 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)


Reminder of why Supervisor Stapley was prosecuted

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

Read the full list of lavish expenditures Stapley spent $86,012 of campaign money on    

Less powerful politicians would have been removed from office for just a couple of wrongful expenditures

Supervisor Don Stapley's mug shot
Supervisor Don Stapley’s mug shot

Now that the US Attorney’s office has exonerated Andrew Thomas and Sheriff Arpaio from any wrongdoing in their attempts to prosecute powerful corrupt politicians, we’ve had a few people ask us to remind them what they tried to prosecute them for. Stapley was prosecuted for financial misreporting, leading to a risky loan that the FDIC is now investigating. He also engaged in a land swap with his business partner, convicted felon Conley Wolfswinkel, where Wolfswinkel would funnel him $15,000/month. Finally, he spent $86,012 in campaign funds raised for a campaign where he had NO OPPONENT on hundreds of luxury items for himself and his family!

Officials like former Representative David Burnell Smith were removed from office for far less violations. Clean Elections claimed that Smith violated election laws by spending a few thousand dollars more than authorized by Clean Elections, and removed him from office. It was a technical accounting mistake, it wasn’t like he had spent the money on lavish vacations for himself and his family like Stapley had, and it was only a few thousand dollars. Yet Smith was thrown out of office, and Stapley got the prosecutor disbarred and is now suing the County for thousands if not a million dollars over “stress” from being prosecuted.

You decide, who should have been prosecuted – Thomas or Stapley? Does it sound like Thomas and Arpaio had a “vendetta” against Stapley, or were they simply trying to prosecute someone who was VERY corrupt? Read the Arizona Republic article here, which contains even more unethical behavior by Stapley –

Read the full shocking list of items Stapley spent campaign money on

Join Our Mailing List

NRCC: Arizona Candidates Achieve ‘On the Radar’ Status

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.