A prosecutor must seek justice regardless of a defendant’s wealth, connections or position. Unfortunately, Arizona prosecutors who try to follow this standard come under public attack.

Throughout the recent controversies in Maricopa County, a clear theme has developed. On one side are the elites-the political establishment, courts, major media-supporting the board of supervisors no matter the evidence of wrongdoing and egregious taxpayer abuses. On the other side are the people. They have a stubborn habit of siding with Sheriff Joe Arpaio and me when we’ve brought cases before the county grand jury. This divide became clear once again following the self-serving and false claims by interim County Attorney Richard Romley about investigations and prosecutions done with Sheriff Arpaio’s office. Romley’s recent efforts obviously were done to distract from his rejection by members of his own party who are tired of his liberal policies and endorsements. When citizens seated on a grand jury have heard the evidence of guilt involving county officials, they have sided with Arpaio and me.

Two county supervisors-Donald Stapley and Mary Rose Wilcox-have been indicted twice by two separate grand juries. A third grand jury heard testimony related to alleged hindering of prosecution by county officials who ordered a publicly funded sweep for electronic “bugs” immediately after Stapley was served with his first indictment, and alleged misconduct by Judge Gary Donahoe.

Right after the grand jury heard the evidence, they asked for a draft indictment. Experienced prosecutors know this request almost always leads to some sort of indictment.

However, before the grand jury could finish deliberating, Judge Donahoe’s lawyers appeared before a judge in another county and obtained a stay blocking the grand jury’s deliberations. But for that action, all signs suggest the grand jury was prepared to act.

Later, our prosecutors asked that the grand jury end their inquiry so it could be referred to another law enforcement agency. They did so.

It’s not easy to tackle public corruption, just as it wasn’t easy to take up the fight against illegal immigration years ago. But I did so unapologetically.

For their part, the board of supervisors and their employees have brazenly retaliated against Sheriff Arpaio and me, both directly and indirectly by exploiting their network of relationships.

Forgotten is the fact that I sought to appoint highly qualified special prosecutors so I would not have to prosecute these matters. The board of supervisors blocked their appointment, then complained when I handled them myself.

I also offered to hand over the matters to the U.S. Attorney’s Office. They declined to take them. Now that same office reportedly is investigating and second-guessing Sheriff Arpaio’s and my handling of the same cases they refused to accept.

If true, this is not only a blatant violation of state police powers and the Tenth Amendment. It threatens to destroy our system of justice. Prosecutors simply will not bring charges against powerful officials if they know their work will be subject to effective lobbying before the Obama Justice Department or the State Bar.

I’ve taken on public corruption and paid a political price with election-year smears from friends of these officials. But like Sheriff Arpaio, I’ve always believed I answered to the people. Soon the people will make the ultimate decision, choosing whether they want a top prosecutor who will tackle these tough cases or take the easy way out. As for me, I will do my duty and serve the people no matter the cost.

After the release of grand jury records revealing Andy Thomas had purposely mislead the public for his own personal and political gain, often referring to an ongoing investigation that had long since been  thrown out, you would think he would learn a lesson.  Or maybe when other County Attorney’s told him..you’ve got no case, buddy…he would stop.  But, no.  He lied and attempted to keep it going while he shopped for someone to prosecute what he perceived as his political enemies. 

All in the name of the law.

But, it is very clear that the law means nothing to Mr. Thomas and the truth even less.

Today the Thomas campaign issued a press release, you can see it in the post below, saying the ACC was investigating Tom Horne.  If you read the letter they use as the evidence, it is nowhere near a statement of investigation.  It is nothing more than a reply to a letter of complaint they received from Thomas’ campaign. 

There is no investigation. Thomas’ claims are not true says the Arizona Corporation Commission.  Not at all.

But, never one to let the truth get in the way of a good press release…Thomas ran with it and once again, lied.

It’s actually not accurate,” commission spokesman Rebecca Wilder said of the Thomas press release. “We received a complaint. We’re not conducting an investigation at this time.”

So will Andy retract his statement…of course not.  He will continue to spread his version of the truth.  After all, isn’t that all that matters?

Thomas however is under investigation;  reportedly by the State Bar and the FBI over abuse of power allegations related to his pursuit of criminal charges against county judges, supervisors and top administrators. 

Either the law means something or it doesn’t.” Jason Rose….

 

Unless you are Andrew Thomas.

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

Saturday, August 14, 2010

Tribune exposes Romley’s fake police database campaign trick

Romley swipes funds from Arpaio’s immigration sweeps and creates new $130k “illegal immigration” job as payback to crony

Cmdr. Bob Rampy, who has led the AZLINK effort and does a lot of the sheriff’s IT work, said, “I’m concerned he’s (Romley) is coming around and taking credit for what has already been done.” Rampy said he was not invited to Tuesday’s meeting. “AZLINK has really been widespread. He should’ve done a little more due diligence on data sharing efforts going on.”

Leesa Morrison-Weisz and her husband George Weisz

Romley also pulled a fast one by taking away funds from Sheriff Arpaio’s illegal immigration sweeps and transferring them to his own office, where he created a fake new position for a supporter of his. The job title is “Special Assistant for Immigration and Border Protection,” but since Romley supports amnesty and open borders, and the person he chose to fill that position, Leesa Morrison-Weisz, came from former Governer Janet Napolitano’s administration, you can rest assured that it will be a complete waste of taxpayers’ money and there will be no actual illegal immigration enforcement. The circumstances surrounding Morrison’s appointment are typical sleazy quid pro quo. Morrison’s husband, George Weisz, was working as an advisor for Democrat Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon. He quit that job to become a political consultant for Romley’s election campaign. Two days later, his wife was appointed to this brand-new position. How nice, you go work for Romley’s campaign and your wife gets a fat new job custom-created for her two days later! It probably also helped that the Weisz’s have contributed to Romley, some of the County Supervisors’ campaigns, and attorneys who oppose Sheriff Arpaio.

Rick Romley is demonstrating after just a few months that he intends to run the County Attorney’s Office equally as corruptly as the Supervisors are running their office. We wonder what will happen to the Shadow County Attorney’s Office now that it’s in the middle of these two corrupt agencies, which the Supervisors stole away from Andrew Thomas when he was County Attorney?

I have been reading Espresso Pundit for years.  I usually agree with Greg on most subjects and find his wit and style interesting.  He is front and center in the CD5 campaign, anyone who has read his blog for more than awhile knows he is squarely behind Schweikert.   A CPA, he is also an attorney and dude, until recently did not have a TV in his house!

 He doesn’t pull any punches. Greg has taken on APS, The Republic, and now he has a new object of his effort.

Sometimes you just have to give credit where credit is due, Greg Patterson who writes Espresso Pundit,  nails the reality of Andy Thomas in his latest post on the subject… 

With such flagrant and well documented ethical violations, I don’t see how Thomas could possibly still be a licensed attorney this time next year. 

This is the reality most have come to believe.  The evidence pointing to extreme abuse of power and corruption is so overwhelming, that to suggest Thomas will escape this without, at the minimum, being disbarred is foolish.  The odds he may very well be sitting in Camp Cupcake very soon are pretty good.  Disappointing.

So, what is a conservative to do?  Patterson had this to say about Tom Horne:

…he supported parental consent as well as the ban on partial birth abortion–and he has pledged to defend the laws that the legislature passes. 

So I can say that from a Conservative perspective, I’m not simply voting against Thomas.  I’m very comfortable voting for Tom Horne. 

However, there is another point that has been made by more than a few very conservative folks.  When faced with the idea of having an AG who is likely to be indicted, disbarred, and tied up in personal fights of corruption…

And if Horne doesn’t win the Primary…?  Ok, then I’ll simply be voting against Thomas.

A growing number of R’s will not pull the lever for Thomas.  No D’s will.  Certainly a good portion of I’s will go with the Democratic nominee.  In light of these latest developments, Andrew Thomas should immediately step aside, get his house in order, fight his good fight and when, or if, he can… return to public service.  For now, he is doing more harm than good.

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

Corrupt County Supervisors and RINO Rick Romley target nonpolitical line prosecutor in order to tarnish Andrew Thomas Lisa Aubuchon, an experienced career prosecutor, one of the top prosecutors in the office, has had enough of their abuse

As part of their desperate attempts to avoid prosecution, the Maricopa County Supervisors have appointed their crony, liberal Republican Rick Romley (who has endorsed numerous Democrats – even Jan Brewer’s last Democrat opponent) as interim County Attorney. As the Supervisors’ puppet, Romley is doing the bidding of the Supervisors which means destroying conservative Republicans like Thomas and Sheriff Arpaio – including FIRING a lifelong experienced, nonpolitical line prosecutor, Lisa Aubuchon. Aubuchon had worked her way up to management at the County Attorney’s Office under multiple administrations, and had a reputation for being extremely tough on crime – even on domestic violence, not exactly a conservative issue. Lisa is no partisan political figure – she is a regular person like you or me. The Supervisors are trying to destroy her in order to destroy Andrew Thomas.  Lisa is fighting back with a claim of her own against the corrupt Supervisors. Let’s hope she wins – and the corruption is stopped. Read her complaint against the corrupt big-spending Supervisors here.

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

Supervisors may skate on millions of dollars wasted Media, friendly liberal judges and libertarians help them flip blame to prosecution

This article was sent in by a reader Democrat Supervisor and activist Mary Rose Wilcox is one happy lady these days.  “I think we’re finally beating back the prosecution. The best way to beat criminal charges is to accuse the prosecution of being unethical and overly zealous. We’ve got the liberal media on our side, since they support the big-spending programs we direct taxpayers’ money to, like Chicanos por la Causa, environmental initiatives, and AIDS prevention.  We’ve also got libertarians on our side like the Arizona Republic’s Bob Robb and the Goldwater Institute’s Clint Bolick, who mostly ignore our big-spending because they’re more concerned with looking “fair” so they would rather attack guys like Sheriff Arpaio and Andrew Thomas who are tough when it comes to law enforcement. It doesn’t matter how much money we spend, or that Tea Parties are organizing protests against us, those two guys give us a free pass and help us attack the prosecution.” Wilcox is under investigation for funneling grant money to Chicanos por la Causa, then turning around and giving herself a cheap loan from Chicanos por la Causa. She has been in trouble with the law many times in the past, and due to her connections, escaped a criminal conviction for illegally razing down an historic home. (Read more about Wilcox’s shady background here and here) The Supervisors and a couple other employees who work with them have filed complaints (technically – “Notices of Claim”) against County taxpayers, demanding $47 million in damages for suffering “emotional distress” over being prosecuted. They hired their own pricey “mediator” to then adjudicate the claims, to ensure that they will receive them. As a result, Tea Party groups across the Valley have become enraged, and are planning a protest. Liberal Republican Don Stapley is equally happy at beating the rule of law. “My name is Stapley, there is a street in Mesa named after me. Sheriff Arpaio and Andrew Thomas were fools to run on a platform of “ending public corruption” a couple of years ago knowing they would be taking ME on. Granted, I have a long history of seedy dealings well-documented in the Phoenix New Times, which includes a shady land swap and unscrupulous dealing with my friend, convicted felon Conley Wolfswinkel. It’s understandable why they looked at me. It’s not like they got any benefit out of it either, I’m from their same party! Idiots. Should have just left me alone. Because they don’t have the connections that I do. As Supervisors, we control the purse strings for the judges. And we share the same attorney as the judges, former Democrat Party attorney Tom Irvine. That was a smart call on our part. It may be unethical, but what judge is ever going to dare rule against the JUDGES? I think I’m pretty clever to have come up with that. We’re completely insulated from prosecution! I love to be me.” Stapley is under investigation for spending $60,000 raised for a campaign where he had no opponent on personal luxury items for himself.Stapley allegedly spent $6000 of these funds at Bang and Olufson electronics, along with $1300 for hair implants, $400 for candle holders and $10,000 for furniture for his home. He also spent these funds, solicited as campaign money, to buy tickets to Broadway plays and movie theatres, flowers, grocery store bills, massages, department stores and trips for his family to Sundance, Utah to ski, a trip for his son and friends to Florida and a three-week vacation in Hawaii for his entire family at a beach house costing approximately $11,000. Stapley is also being prosecuted for lying about his finances when applying for mortgages. “I realize that I dishonestly didn’t follow the law,” Stapley said. “But I’m THE DON Stapley. I am a powerful County Supervisor. I am not like the little people. The rules don’t apply to me because I MAKE THE RULES. I figured out how to get the media and judges on my side – pursue a big-spending liberal agenda – and they support me no matter what I do.” Fulton Brock, another liberal Republican Supervisor, is ecstatic that the $64,344 he spent on taxpayer-funded county credit cards on mostly questionable items like promoting himself will go ignored. “Normally, I would think the Goldwater Institute would be all over the hundreds of thousands of dollars we racked up on county credit cards on things that probably should have been paid personally. But since they’ve decided to go after law enforcement instead, emphasizing their libertarian criminal justice side, they’ve given us a free pass.” All of the Supervisors had big smiles knowing that the $340 million Taj Mahal court tower they insist on building during the recession for the judges (wink, wink, nod, nod) seems to be escaping scrutiny. The tower will be made of travertine and marble, wooden floors, and will have separate “robing rooms” for the judges. No extravagant expense was spared, even as the county was laying off employees. Wilcox said, “The Tea Parties are having a fit over the tower, but who cares what they think. WE control the purse strings. And we must not not dock a penny from the cost of the tower since we need the judges on OUR SIDE, otherwise we risk being prosecuted.”

You know a political campaign is desperate when they start putting up a flurry of last-minute signs in front of other candidates’ signs. Jim Ward’s campaign must have done some internal polling and discovered that he is way behind in the primary. It is illegal to tamper with other candidates’ signs, and the way some of the Ward signs have been put up raises suspicions. The photos below reveal that Ward has tied his signs onto other candidates’ signs – did the candidates approve or was the activity illegal? It wouldn’t be the first time Ward has illegally posted his signs; in the past he has posted oversized signs blocking the view at intersections. It is amusing watching the Jim Ward meltdown. He started out his campaign as a San Francisco elitist with ties to McCain, and now is resorting to elementary school tactics.

John McCain has lied about his connection to a $1.2 Billion Ponzi scheme convicted felon who bundled $1.1 Million to John McCain.

Watch this video as Scott Rothstein, Senator John McCain’s number one fundraiser for his presidential campaign, is caught on video showing how he skirted and used campaign finance loopholes to bundle more than $1.1 million dollars to John McCain. As it turns out, most, if not all of that money, came from investors who Rothstein swindled out of billions of dollars in an elaborate Ponzi scheme, much like Bernie Madoff.

According to Wikipedia,

Scott W. Rothstein (born June 10, 1962) is a disbarred lawyer and the former managing shareholder, chairman, and chief executive officer of the now-defunct Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler law firm. He is accused of funding his philanthropy, political contributions, law firm salaries, and an extravagant lifestyle with a massive 1.2 billion dollar Ponzi scheme. On December 1, 2009, Rothstein turned himself in to authorities and was subsequently arrested on charges related to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). Although his arraignment plea was not guilty, Rothstein cooperated with the Government and reversed his plea to guilty of five federal crimes on January 27, 2010. Rothstein was denied bond by U.S. Magistrate Judge Robin Rosenbaum, who ruled that due to his ability to forge documents, he was considered a flight risk.

On June 9, 2010, Rothstein received a 50-year prison sentence after a hearing in federal court in Fort Lauderdale.

The full story of JD Hayworth’s involvement with Jack Abramoff has been told, just not by the man who would keep the money, violate the law, and pay his wife with over $100,000 of the tainted funds.  That would be JD himself.

So in case the truth is important, minus the self-promoting, defense based distorted accounts presented by Team Hayworth in hopes no one will notice….take a look.  

Hayworth Worked With Abramoff Associate Kevin Ring To Pass An Amendment That Benefited One Of Ring’s Clients, Even As Abramoff And His Team Were Under Investigation By Sen. McCain And The Senate Indian Affairs Committee.

Lobbyist Kevin A. Ring sat silently as Senate Indian Affairs Committee Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.) displayed e-mails and canceled checks to support allegations that Ring and lobbyist Jack Abramoff inflated fees and concocted invoices to defraud their client, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians. … Ring is one of more than a dozen lobbyists who were members of ‘Team Abramoff,’ the tight-knit group who worked under Abramoff when he was at the lobbying helm of the Washington office of Greenberg Traurig LLP and, before that, Preston Gates Ellis & Rouvelas Meeds LLP. … For the Choctaws, Ring has tried to win support for an amendment by Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-Ariz.) that would exempt tribal casinos from labor laws on the grounds that the tribes are sovereign governments. … According to records obtained by The Post, Ring last month coordinated with Hayworth’s office on a letter to members of Congress from Choctaw Chief Phillip Martin seeking support for the tribal labor amendment.” (James V. Grimaldi, “Lobbyists, Clients Undeterred By Scandal,” The Washington Post, 6/26/05)

Ring Is Currently Being Re-Tried, With A Judge Ruling Just Four Days Ago That The Prosecution Against Him Can Continue.

A federal judge on Thursday let stand charges of honest-services fraud against a key figure in the Abramoff lobbying scandal – marking a victory for Justice Department prosecutors in the first high-profile challenge to one of the government’s most widely used, yet recently narrowed, anti-corruption statutes. … Judge Huvelle denied a motion for acquittal in the case filed by Mr. Ring, whose efforts were closely watched in legal circles since seven of the 10 charges he faces related to honest-services fraud.” (Ben Conery, “Judge Approves Retrial In ‘Honest-Services Fraud’ Case,” The Washington Times, 8/6/10)

Hayworth Also Lobbied The Department Of The Interior On Behalf Of One Of Abramoff’s Clients.

The pattern of donations and letters matches a similar Abramoff effort reported by AP last week. In that instance, 33 lawmakers wrote letters between 2001 and 2004 pressing the Interior Department to reject a rival Indian casino that Abramoff’s clients wanted defeated, while collecting more than $830,000. The Senate and House ethics committees were asked Tuesday to investigate. As they lobbied to win school funding, Abramoff and his team kept a tally of congressional assistance. One e-mail noted a Dorgan staffer planned to contact Interior to discuss the issue. A top agency official ‘is actively trying to kill’ the funding, Abramoff was told. That e-mail identified a half-dozen letters written or signed by 14 lawmakers on behalf of the tribes. One was written Jan. 23, 2003 by Democratic Sens. Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow and Republican Rep. Dave Camp, all of Michigan, on the Saginaw’s behalf. … Another letter, according to Abramoff’s e-mails, came from Michigan Rep. Dale Kildee and Arizona Rep. J.D. Hayworth, who run a congressional group on tribal issues. Hayworth got about $64,520 and Kildee $10,500 in Abramoff-related donations between 2001 and 2004. ‘I can assure you the letter was not related to the contributions he had accepted previously or following that letter. He does not do quid pro quo business,’ Hayworth spokesman Larry VanHoose said.” (John Solomon and Sharon Theimer, “Lawmakers Helped Abramoff Tribes Get Money, Collected Donations,” The Associated Press, 11/24/05)

Hayworth Donated The $2,250 He Received Directly From Abramoff To Charity.

Abramoff directly gave a total of $2,250 to Hayworth’s campaign through separate payments in 1998 and 1999, the congressman said. Hayworth donated that amount to the Salvation Army’s Hurricane Katrina relief fund.” (“Hayworth Named As Target In Abramoff Probe,”)

However, Hayworth Refused To Return The Tainted Money From Abramoff’s Clients, Even After Other Politicians Announced They Would Give Their Contributions Back.

With four other politicians returning more than $250,000 in recent days to Indian tribes and others connected with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, pressures have mounted for Hayworth and other recipients to follow suit. [Hayworth chief of staff Joe] Eule said that the Republican congressman has received campaign contributions totaling $150,000 from tribes affiliated at one time or another with the former lobbyist but that the donations had nothing to do with actions that have put Abramoff at the center of Senate and criminal investigations into possible influence-buying.” (Jon Kamman and Billy House, “Hayworth Will Keep Tribal Gifts Despite Scandal,”

Should SB1070 Be Secondary to… SB1108?

Crime Control  vs. The Bill of Rights

by Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce

The entire world, driven by news-media reports, has become fixated on the illegal-immigrant invasion Arizona has suffered under for years.

The invasion had previously been ignored, a news-media black hole from which little real information escaped.

The catalyst for the attention is my bill SB1070, which empowers our law enforcement agencies to deal with the invasion. We passed the bill because along with the feds the state and local governments are aiding and abetting the invaders, instead of stopping them and defending the nation against a flood of biblical proportions.

In its frenzy the media missed huge Bill of Rights restoration in Arizona. SB1070 is a criminal statute, enacted to treat symptoms of the very harmful crime of sneaking into a nation without permission, involved in serious criminal activity, billions in cost, jobs taken from Americans, and leaching off the nation’s success and abundance.  I do not want to undermine the importance of SB1070 and the national debate way over due on this issue.

A different law, SB1108, for which I am as responsible as I am for SB1070, is a critical important act. SB1108 is no simple crime-control law. It repeals outrageous infringements to the Bill of Rights, reinstating wholesome fullness to the right to keep and bear arms.

The media however, driven by a nearly fanatical racist miasma, has blindly focused on the immigration-crime law, finding racism where none exists — at the expense of even seeing the strengthened Bill of Rights.
 
The media inaccurately conflated the racial (not racist) nature of our invasion, with the powers in the immigration bill, which are pure law enforcement. That’s because the invaders are overwhelmingly Hispanic — though the Border Patrol says 20% are OTMs — “Other Than Mexicans.”

Civil rights were reborn here on the same day the anti-invasion bill took effect, but the media ignored that. While they cried racism, “Constitutional Carry” restored fundamental civil rights to anyone on the planet who enters the state of Arizona legally. This bill extends rights to all people.

The God-given right to protect your family, your property and yourself from immediate physical harm has been accepted since the dawn of civilization. It was ensconced in the Constitution when the Founding Fathers put the Second Amendment in our Bill of Rights. There was little controversy over this well understood, deeply rooted basic human right until recently, when forces of darkness began attacking many of the truths we hold to be self evident.

Arizona now has the most robust protection for the right to keep arms, and the right to bear arms, anywhere on Earth. How could media pundits miss that?

Are they so blinded by imagined racism they find where there is none, that they can’t see what was put in front of them at a packed news conference the day before either law took effect?

In times just recently past, enactment of a law that frees every decent adult in the world to carry a gun with no prior permission would have led to a national uproar.

Could it be that a law crafted to prevent illegal activity is more important than the historic renewal of a cherished human right?

Maybe the media is just tired of crying wolf? They screamed about imminent blood-in-the-streets when Arizona’s gun-permit law passed in 1994, but nothing ever happened (and they never apologized).
They convulsed recently about anticipated wild-west mayhem when a 30-year-old ban on gun possession was repealed for National Parks, but nothing happened (and they showed no remorse for the fear mongering).

When Arizona’s restaurant gun ban was lifted a year-and-a-half ago, we heard insane screeching about impending homicidal frenzy from “shotguns in nightclubs,” but it turned out that breakfast at Denny’s or lunch at Applebee’s is really a mild-mannered affair. No correction has been issued or is expected.

So why should the media pay any attention to a law that merely restores the Second Amendment, not just for citizens but for any law-abiding adult who legally visits?

Who really cares that amassed infringements on 10% of the Bill of Rights have finally been overturned, without bloodshed?

Why even bother covering a law that one other state, Alaska, passed in 2003?

Does it really matter that states all over the union are now seeking Constitutional Carry for themselves?

Could people care less if a place like Arizona frees its women to put handguns in their handbags, go about their business, and return home without fear of arrest? How could feminists or NOW complain about that?

Would it bore people if you told them Sen. Pearce’s bill and its chief advocates, the Arizona Citizens Defense League (azcdl.org) worked for the past five years to make statute conform to the state’s Constitution?
No one wants to hear that all these crazies are carrying guns and no one is getting shot. How could that possibly be newsworthy?

And perhaps most of all, people don’t want to hear that government’s exit from the enforced-training game is a business-stimulus plan.

Private enterprise within the state has launched the TrainMeAZ.com campaign to promote a culture of marksmanship and gun safety to every person in the state. This is Arizona — learn to shoot straight. Marksmanship matters. Teach your children well. Why would the news media ever cover that, even if it is going up on billboards statewide?

The Constitutional Carry law and TrainMeAZ campaign have ignited a firestorm of entrepreneurism, and rekindled a burning desire to restore the nation of marksmen our Founder envisioned. An entire state trained to arms, what a concept.

I personally urge the nation to look at what we’ve done with Defensive Display, Castle Doctrine inside and outside the home, Burden of Proof, Specious Civil Suit immunity, Firearms Freedom Act, Preemption and more. Make your legislatures emulate the freedom of spirit that thrives in the Grand Canyon State. Come visit and feel what it’s like to be a free adult instead of a ward of the state. You may not want to leave. And if you do leave, you’ll take the spirit for freedom back home with you.

Russell Pearce is the Republican State Senator from Arizona legislative district 18 and author of the anti-illegal immigration bill SB1070, and the Constitutional Carry law for firearms, SB1108, neither of which are controversial in point of fact.