Abortion: Seeing Is Believing

By Jason Walsh

August 2015 – On August 22nd all throughout this country, thousands of people will gather in solidarity to protest the barbarity of abortion and the heinous practices of Planned Parenthood. The main catalyst behind this great show of outrage has been the wide publication of pictures of what abortion actually looks like. In the great history of social reform movements, uncluttered visual images of injustice have always changed hearts and minds like nothing else. Finally, Planned Parenthood has been stripped of all of its euphemisms and has revealed its cold, callous and calculating ways. Tomorrow, as we stand united against the hellishness of abortion, let us remember the words of Martin Luther King Jr., “Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.”

AZRTLD&E

Jason Walsh serves as the Executive Director of Arizona Right to Life. You can read his blog here.

The Left Disbars Another Conservative Prosecutor

Charles Sebesta in front of the building where he worked as DA for many years.

Charles Sebesta in front of the building where he worked as DA for many years.

Reprinted from Townhall

By Rachel Alexander

Realizing they control the judiciary and state bar associations, as well as much of the complicit media, the left is going after conservatives with a vengeance using the legal system. Any conservative is at risk of being sued, but conservative attorneys and judges are getting hit the hardest because state bars can take away their license to practice law, destroying their reputations and careers. Once they’ve been disciplined by the state bar, it is easy for aggrieved “victims” to sue and get a large judgment awarded against them from a sympathetic judiciary.

Several years ago, society was concerned about renegade prosecutors. Now, the tables have turned. Prosecutors are scared to bring charges on politically charged issues, especially if they go against the left’s agenda. Any little technical, meaningless mistake made by anyone down the chain – from an assistant to a detective to a secretary – can be magnified and used against them.

Powerful public officials with income streams to protect and left-wing agendas to push regularly bully prosecutors around now. Prosecutors are terrified to file charges against corrupt public officials, knowing the system is too stacked against them and will be turned around and used to destroy them.

Charles Sebesta was the Burleson County District Attorney in Texas for many years. He would have retired with an impressive career except for one thing – the left started making traction unpopularizing the death penalty toward the end of his tenure, and he had a case that was inconveniently getting in the way. In 1994, Anthony Graves and Robert Carter were convicted of capital murder in the deaths of six black people and sentenced to death. Carter was put to death, but Graves and his attorneys continued his appeals. Finally, in 2006, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the conviction, on the grounds that Sebesta had “withheld evidence.”

The evidence Sebesta supposedly had withheld from the defense was that Carter had agreed to testify that he had solely committed the crimes, in order to protect his wife. Sebesta had plenty of evidence that Carter’s wife was involved in the crimes, including five witnesses working at the jail who overheard Carter and Graves talking in their cells about protecting her, and statements from Carter admitting his wife had used a hammer when he broke down during a lie detector test.

Sebesta told Graves’ attorney, Calvin Garvie, about Carter’s offer to testify that he’d solely committed the crimes, and Garvie decided not to use the testimony during trial. When Garvie was asked under oath during an evidentiary hearing before a Federal Magistrate in 2004 if knowledge of this statement by Carter would have changed anything at trial, he said no. Since three murder weapons had been used – a hammer, knife and gun – Garvie likely thought no one would believe only one person was involved, so decided to go with the approach that his client wasn’t one of the three involved.

Later, when Garvie was asked under oath if Sebesta had told him this, Garvie said he didn’t recall. Note he didn’t say he didn’t say no, he merely said he didn’t recall – probably because he didn’t want to get caught in a lie if a written document showed up later showing otherwise. When Sebesta took a lie detector test administered by the same individual who has handled a significant amount of testing for the Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct, he successfully passed when he answered affirmatively that he had provided Garvie that evidence.

In 2010, the DA who replaced Sebesta was able to use the overturned verdict for “withholding evidence” as an excuse not to retry Graves, throwing Sebesta under the bus.

The state bar ran with it, putting on a kangaroo court trial against Sebesta where he wasn’t allowed to offer any of this exonerating evidence. Controlled by the left, their agenda was simple: destroy this prosecutor and use him as an example of why the death penalty needs to be abolished. Since the statute of limitations had already run for holding proceedings against Sebesta, incredibly, the legislature was brought in to pass a law allowing the state bar to retroactively reach back and get him.

Curiously, note that most accounts don’t attempt to say that Graves was innocent. The language used is purposely directed at Sebesta instead, merely vague accusations of unethical behavior. Even the left knows someone could dig up the testimony of the witnesses who overheard Carter and Graves talking about the crimes in jail. Since the court hadn’t used the words “actual innocence,” Graves was ineligible to sue the state for damages. The legislature was coerced – again – to jump in and change the law to remove that requirement, and Graves was awarded $1.4 million in damages.

Emboldened with power, the media ran articles such as this one, entitled, “Why Won’t Charles Sebesta Just Go Away?” The left knew their machine was utterly obliterating him, and couldn’t understand why the little guy bothered to fight back.

No one will stick up for Sebesta, everyone is too afraid. Now they are going to pile on him, as there is speculation that lawsuits will be filed against him and maybe even criminal charges.

All Sebesta has is a four-year-old website explaining his side, none of which has been included in news accounts. On it, he refutes several more unfair things he was accused of doing, by attorneys and judges scared to retry Graves and face the wrath of the anti-death penalty movement.

Whether you agree with the death penalty or not, this is a sick way to go about abolishing it, destroying the life of a conservative prosecutor and disrespecting the lives of the six black people who were murdered. Sebesta writes on his website, “The six victims: a 46-year old grandmother, her 16-year old daughter and four grandchildren between the ages of four and nine – all black – will forever be denied the justice they deserve because it was more important for a very left-leaning, liberal media to sacrifice the lives of these victims in exchange for an opportunity to use this case as justification for abolishing the death penalty!”

Too many conservatives say they are libertarian and concerned about overzealous prosecutors. Well, this isn’t 1980 anymore. Conservatives are now scared to become prosecutors, and eventually there will be no one ethical left to serve in this increasingly thankless and bullied profession. When the left takes over the prosecutors’ offices, conservatives and libertarians who have pretended not to notice this happening are going to find themselves wishing they never run afoul of the law.

Huge breaking ethics scandal with Mary Rose Wilcox and APS

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,  October 24th, 2014

APS sold Mary Rose Wilcox a plot of land for nearly $100,000 below market value

She rents it back to APS for at least $5,000 a year; didn’t disclose when voting on APS projects as county supervisor

Retrieved from http://www.facebook.com/APSpayingoffMaryRoseWilcox

For the first time, we now know that APS gave Mary Rose Wilcox a shady, below-market land deal AND is paying her at least $5,000 a year for the right to rent back that property.

The Phoenix New Times reported yesterday that the land Mary Rose Wilcox bought from APS for $152,750 “should have gone for at least $675,000.”

But Wilcox never disclosed this business deal with APS while voting to give APS millions of dollars in county contracts. So what is Mary Rose Wilcox hiding?

But what is APS getting from Wilcox?

The Phoenix New Times reports: “Wilcox increased her net worth through land deals, with at least one in 2003 involving an acre purchased from Arizona Public Service for hundreds of thousands of dollars below market value. She didn’t disclose that transaction even as she voted as a county supervisor on APS-related projects.”

Mary Rose Wilcox bought a parking lot from APS for, according to the New Times, between 1/3rd and 1/5th of fair market value — and then rented the space back to APS for thousands of dollars a year.

Not a bad deal if you can get it, right?

When asked why she had received tens of thousands of dollars from APS without disclosing it, Mary Rose Wilcox’s only explanation was: “APS says, ‘We need to pay you.'”

Demand to know why APS is paying Mary Rose Wilcox.

Why is APS paying Mary Rose Wilcox while she votes on their projects such a big deal? This breaks it down pretty well:

“What is APS? The largest electric utility in Arizona and 27th largest coal energy producer in the United States has ownership interests in three huge coal-fired power plants: the Cholla Generating Station, the Four Corners Steam Plant, and the Navajo Generating Station. It’s a corporate funder of ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, and sits on its energy, environment, and agriculture task force. APS is notorious for its attack on net metering solar energy, pouring $9 million – or $9 per ratepayer – into an effort to convince regulators that Arizona’s precious sunshine is so rare that solar panel owners must pay to access it.”

Mary Rose Wilcox drives a North Star SLS Cadillac with a “MRSROSE” vanity plate. But it should read: “APSPAYSME”

For more information, visit the Facebook page

Join Our Mailing List

AZGOP to Fred DuVal: ‘What Were You Thinking?’

AZGOPBanner

AZGOP Chairman: Pay for Play Lobbying Scandal Involved Democrat Lobbyist Now Running for Arizona Governor

Robert Graham to Democrat Candidate: What Were You Thinking?

PHOENIX – Chairman of the Arizona Republican Party, Robert Graham, today sent a fourth letter to the Democrat nominee for governor of Arizona asking for more information about the nominee’s career as a lobbyist, specifically about his involvement in a “pay-for-play” scandal involving lucrative government contracts in exchange for massive political campaign contributions in New Mexico.

“Your deep involvement in New Mexico politics – engaged with an incumbent governor who can best be described as “ethically challenged” – raises serious doubts about your judgment,” asked Robert Graham, Chairman of the Arizona Republican Party. “Is that the way you’ll do business in Arizona? Would a DuVal administration be another feeding frenzy for the politically-connected lobbying class, as it was in New Mexico?”

Letter Attached

Hugh Hallman Statement on Accusations of Sign Tampering

Hugh Hallman

STATEMENT BY HUGH HALLMAN ON JEFF DEWIT’S ACCUSATIONS ABOUT POLITICAL SIGN TAMPERING

Today, Jeff DeWit accused our campaign of blocking the view of his road signs to passers-by by placing our signs in front of his.

We know signs are a lightening rod for mischief. And we know that pictures can tell false stories — and the ones produced by Jeff DeWit’s campaign are no different.

To be clear — our campaign has a strict policy to never purposefully interfere with the signs of any other candidate, and to be fair with the placement of our signs near the signs of any other candidate, including competitors. This is a policy for all campaign staff and has been clearly communicated from Day 1.

Why would we take the risk of embarrassing our campaign to block one or two out of the thousands of road signs currently positioned by all candidates statewide?

Our campaign can also produce photos showing Hallman signs that have been blocked by DeWit signs, taken down and/or tampered with. But we’re not going to accuse a grown man running for office of being behind teenage shenanigans. Candidates running in an important statewide race should have more important things to worry about.

When we find instances where our signs have been tampered with, we fix them and move on. We don’t have a fit about it on Twitter.

Instead, we try to address these issues like adults. We’re not going out and making baseless accusations about anyone. If Jeff DeWit — or any other candidate for that matter — has a problem with the placement of any of our signs, we invite them to call us at 480.423.0515 and let us know.

It would also be helpful to let us know where they are, which DeWit didn’t do. Our staff went out today to make sure there were no instances of these kinds of shenanigans, spending several hours where we believed the “gotcha” photos were taken to make sure we caught any sign placements others may have done that were improper.

With less than two weeks left until Election Day, we can’t help but wonder if Mr. DeWit is looking for a distraction — any distraction — to keep voters from focusing on the concerning record of risky business by his day-trading firm, or the lack of support he has from statewide conservative leaders, or the fact that he has had to almost entirely self-fund his campaign because he can’t raise money from supporters.

But if it’s really signs Jeff is most concerned about, then Jeff, give us a call. We’re happy to discuss it like adults.

The Shocking Link Between Tom Horne and An Alleged Fast & Furious Co-Conspirator

Campaign finance reports occasionally reveal a donation or two that can place a political candidate in the awkward position of having to defend a donor. Oftentimes the candidate is unaware of the controversy until notified by a persistent pesky reporter or the opposing campaigns.

However, it’s also not often that a donor rises to the level of being at the center of what many believe is the biggest scandal of the scandal-plagued Obama administration.

Once such donation is to Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne, who accepted a political contribution of $500 from Patrick Cunningham on February 13, 2014. If Cunningham’s name sounds familiar it’s because he was named as a co-conspirator in the Fast and Furious scandal.

The Chair of the House committee that investigated the Fast and Furious scandal, Congressman Darrell Issa, went as far as to say that “Mr. Cunningham may have engaged in criminal conduct with respect to Fast and Furious…” and that his refusal to testify before congress was a “…major escalation of the department’s culpability.”

Justice Department officials even claimed Cunningham misinformed them about Fast and Furious. The conservative local blog SeeingRed AZ previously covered the scandal here.

The Operation Fast & Furious “gun walking” saga placed hundreds of guns into the hands of Mexican drug cartels. The scandal had a distinct Arizona connection. The firearms were sold and bought in the Phoenix and Tucson metro areas, and ultimately one the guns was used to murder Arizona Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.

Arizona U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke, the former Chief of Staff to former Governor Janet Napolitanoran the Fast and Furious operation. Burke eventually walked away from charges and resigned from his post despite his fingerprints being all over the scandal. Many considered Burke to be the sacrificial lamb for the Obama Administration.

Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa criticized the U.S. Attorney’s office including Cunningham and Burke for their obstruction in the case:

“The U.S. Attorney’s Office advised ATF that agents needed to meet unnecessarily strict evidentiary standards in order to speak with suspects, temporarily detain them, or interdict weapons,” Chairman Issa said. “ATF’s reliance on this advice from the U.S. Attorney’s Office during Fast and Furious resulted in many lost opportunities to interdict weapons.”

Advice and management from people like Dennis Burke and Patrick Cunningham.

Patrick Cunningham worked directly under Burke as the chief of the criminal division. Cunningham was called before Issa’s committee to testify, but ultimately he plead the 5th rather than incriminate himself, Burke, and members of the Obama Administration. Cunningham was allowed to resign his position and eventually he accepted a position working for HighGround Public Affairs in Phoenix. Ironically, HighGround now serves as a campaign consultant to Tom Horne’s re-election bid.

Cunningham provided the inaccurate (or false) information to Senator Grassley and the Justice Department that the ATF (which was overseeing the program with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Arizona) never intentionally allowed the the guns to cross the border or knowingly allowed the sale of weapons to suspicious straw buyers. That was obviously later proven false and the Justice Department later took the unprecedented step of pulling the letter they sent to Congress.

While Tom Horne attacks his Republican opponent, Mark Brnovich, for a $120 donation made to a Democrat back in 2006, Tom Horne is actively soliciting donations from Democrats.

Tom Horne is running on a message of border security and fighting back against Obama this cycle, but how can you truly trust Tom Horne to secure the border and fight the overreach of the federal government when he’s receiving financial support from the very people who were engaged in the Obama Administration’s Fast and Furious cover up?

Editor’s note and correction: This post was in error regarding the political affiliation of Patrick Cunningham. A representative of High Ground clarified Cunningham has been a registered Republican since the early 70’s.

Unethical Bar prosecutor who disbarred Andrew Thomas finally exposed, loses job

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

Wednesday July 23rd, 2014

Attorneys in Colorado and Oregon calling out John Gleason for political targeting

“Abused his authority to selectively prosecute effective advocates of their license without due process of law”

Finally some justice is being done. John Gleason, the slimy Colorado Bar prosecutor the Arizona State Bar brought in to disbar Andrew Thomas, because they knew of his history of successfully politically targeting conservative attorneys, has lost his job over it – AGAIN. Gleason was forced out of the Colorado State Bar after his targeting of Thomas, and could only find a job with the State Bar in Oregon, leaving his family behind. Now, only a year later, he’s out there too.

Here are some excerpts from the article in Oregon Live:

After a short, stormy run that antagonized some lawyers around the state and divided the Oregon State Bar, John Gleason, the bar’s high-profile new disciplinary counsel, quietly left the job and Oregon late last month.

“Gleason came here with a goal to radically change Oregon Bar discipline which he disclosed only to (Bar Executive Director) Sylvia Stevens and I’m glad he’s gone,” said Greg Hendrix, a Bend lawyer and former chair of the bar’s State Professional Responsibility Board.
Here are some excerpts from the comment after the article, written by a successful Colorado attorney who Gleason targeted:
Far from being cause for concern, John Gleason’s premature departure from the post of Disciplinary Counsel should be welcomed by anyone devoted to “Equal Justice Under the Law”. Gleason is third-rate lawyer and under- qualified career bureaucrat with little to no meaningful experience in private practice who, even while his Colorado office routinely ignored or countenanced massive ethical lapses by attorneys for the rich and powerful, complaisantly abused his authority to selectively prosecute and unconstitutionally deprive effective advocates for the little guy of their liberty and property interests in their profession and license without due process of law. I am a Stanford Law School graduate with over 25 years of experience in labor and employment counseling and litigation in the private, public, and corporate sector.
In 2006, I won a $1.22 million ADEA jury verdict against the City and County of Denver on behalf of a long-time firefighter whom it had unlawfully terminated on the pretext of fraudulent shoplifting charges after he turned age 50 (and retirement eligible). In Nov. 2006, the presiding judge, Robert Blackburn, entered judgment in the full amount of the verdict, stating that there was more than enough evidence of willful age discrimination to support the jury’s verdict.
In late September, 2007, however, Blackburn fraudulently, unlawfully, and unconstitutionally granted a new trial in the case on the basis of alleged trivial misconduct by me during trial that was never the subject of a motion for mistrial and was therefore waived, as a matter of law, as grounds for a new trial.
As Alan Prendergast of “Westword” reported soon thereafter, and as the new trial order itself impliedly admitted, there were absolutely no grounds for a new trial. As the jurors Prendergast (and, later, Asst. Attorney Regulation Counsel Kim Ikeler) interviewed attested, the judge’s new trial order was completely unfounded, and they had decided the case in full conformity with the evidence and the law, as instructed:
After interviewing the jurors, Asst. Attorney Regulation Counsel Kim Ikeler told me on Jan. 31, 2008 that he found no clear and convincing evidence of misconduct by me during trial, and would therefore recommend dismissal of the complaint against me.
Nonetheless, at the request of the City of Denver, which has numerous Democrat allies on the Colorado Supreme Court, the Supreme Court’s Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel directed Ikeler to defraud the Attorney Regulation Committee by unlawfully and unethically concealing evidence (the juror’s statements) exculpating me in order to gain permission to prosecute me, then subjected me to a retaliatory and completely unfounded witch hunt and show trial for the purpose of: attempting to force me off the case before retrial; providing a fraudulent veneer of credibility to Judge Blackburn’s blatantly unlawful new trial order; retaliating against me for humiliating the City and its lawless officials so very publicly and gleefully; making an example of me to any other maverick, politically unconnected attorney who might be encouraged to do the same, given the massive corruption and stupidity within the City of Denver’s government; punishing me for my searing criticism of Judge Blackburn and the Colorado Supreme Court.
For the serious crime of winning my client’s case, and vindicating his federally protected rights, against the resistance of a massively powerful, corrupt, and dishonest bureaucracy, another massively powerful, dishonest and corrupt bureaucracy, the Colorado Supreme Court, effectively destroyed my reputation, and ability to ever again practice law, by suspending me for a year and a day for the void-for-vagueness offense of “interfering with the administration of justice” by winning my client’s case through very hard work and skillful lawyering. They exploited local mainstream media to defame me from behind the cover of the fair report doctrine by conspiring with them to portray me in the worst possible light, and refrain from reporting the wealth of evidence exculpating me. Only a few isolated bloggers came close to reporting the truth, and then only after they had parroted false reports I encouraged them to retract, for example:|
My very well-founded appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court was, of course, ignored. I was informed by expert counsel that there was no chance the US Supreme Court would take up my case. Because of overbroad abstention and immunity doctrines, I could not sue in federal court for this blatant violation of my right to due process and deprivation of my liberty and property interests in my career and license.
In short, I was judicially lynched by Mr. Gleason and his colleagues in the Colorado Supreme Court as part of a politically-motivated prosecution that had no foundation in the facts or the law. They did the same thing to me for which Gleason was hired (by Andrew Thomas’ political enemies in Arizona) to disbar Andrew Thomas: abusing prosecutorial powers to punish political enemies.
THAT is the sort of bureaucratic weasel the Oregon Bar hired as its Disciplinary Counsel. Maverick Oregon advocates for the little guy should be relieved by his premature departure under pressure.
Here are some excerpts from another article & comments about the complicit judiciary (sound familiar?):
You have experienced what I believe sadly is the norm of the Colorado Judicial Branch. It has become so flagrant and the “players” so comfortable in their roles that there is no possibility of correcting it. Think about it. What can you or anyone possibly do to overcome the corruption that has become so deeply embedded in every facet of our government. Yes, you can try and fight it, but for what purpose? Unless you resign yourself to the role of bending your knee and bowing your head; life will be very difficult for you as an attorney in Colorado.
It is obvious that this is a political prosecution, and that Gleason, a political reptile who has long abused the power of his office to oppress enemies of those who control the State of Colorado, and protect their friends from scrutiny or prosecution for their routine subversion of justice for fun and profit, was called in to provide the result desired by Thomas’ political enemies.
SunnyFebruary 28, 2014 at 7:07 PM
Very good, Mark. Andrew Thomas’s chief political enemy is Conley Wolfswinkel, a Phoenix developer who is partners with S&L crook Charles Keating, who is a “business partner” of Larry Mizel’s, Mizel being a Colorado homebuilder who–like Keating–is also a big S&L crook. He obtained huge loans from Silverado Savings & Loan which he never paid back. It is zillionaire Larry Mizel who picks the public officials in Colorado, via his criminal campaign-contribution shakedowns. (There’s a classic Denver Post picture of Mizel’s “green light” to John Hickenlooper to run for governor over lunch, for example.) The governor then appoints ALL judges in Colorado, and it was one of these, chief justice Mary Mullarkey–herself appointed by Mizel stooge Roy Romer–who selected John Gleason to head the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel. That selection is more than a little curious because Gleason flunked out of college and never practiced law before joining OARC, despite lying about his “prosecutorial” and “extensive private practice” experience on his bios which are online. So we come full circle: my take is Gleason was imported to Arizona because Wolfswinkel wanted to end Thomas’s career, and needed a mob plant with “disciplinary power” to do it. Aside from the fact he is a lawyer impersonator, as mentioned, witchhunts and abuses of power are John Gleason’s trademark.

It bears mentioning that Gleason was advanced early in his career by the sheriff of Arapahoe County, Pat Sullivan, who gave him rave reviews on evaluations. Sullivan was arrested in 2010 for offering to exchange drugs for homosexual sex, an offer he also apparently routinely made to jail inmates in return for letting them bond out, when he was sheriff. Gleason currently runs, on the side, a nonprofit called “Warrior Youth Sports,” which I have been told, by a parent of a child involved in it, is engaging in financial improprieties. I’m wondering if there are worse abuses afoot, a la Jerry Sandusky. Are we concerned yet? 

See “John Gleason–Lawyer Impersonator?” (and follow-up posts) on my blog,therealcolorado.blogspog.com, for documentation supporting what I’ve said about this man. There should be more documents, of course, but Gleason’s personnel file at OARC, including his application, has been unlawfully withheld. This sure looks like they’ve got to hide that application, because it shows the reptile lied to get the job–as well as that he was profoundly unqualified. Complying with the Open Records Law and producing these records would, of course, impair Job #1 at the OARC, which–as Mark and I both know firsthand–is to protect white collar crime.
Join Our Mailing List

Will Kyrsten Sinema break her silence on Lois Lerner’s “lost” emails?

Will Sinema Help Uncover the Truth Behind the IRS Scandal or Will She Help the Administration Cover Up Another Scandal?

Kyrsten Sinema

Kyrsten Sinema

WASHINGTON – Last week, the IRS sent a letter to the House Ways and Means committee explaining that they lost Lois Lerner’s emails from January 2009 to April 2011 due to a “computer crash.” These “missing emails” demonstrate the lengths the Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats will go in order to cover up the IRS’ effort to target tax-exempt conservative groups based on their political beliefs.

Sinema’s silence solidifies the fact that she has become a Washington insider and is out of touch with Arizona taxpayers. Instead of demanding answers and holding the IRS accountable, Sinema is helping the Administration cover up a scandal in hopes of political support for her re-election.

“First Lois Lerner refused to comply with Congressional investigations and now her emails are ‘missing’. That just doesn’t pass the smell test,” said NRCC Communications Director Andrea Bozek. “Kyrsten Sinema has the opportunity to protect Arizona taxpayers from being wrongfully targeted by holding the Administration accountable and condemning the IRS officials responsible for this scandal.”

IRS claims Lois Lerner’s e-mails are lost due to a computer crash.

(Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, The IRS claims that Lois Lerner’s e-mails were wiped out by a ‘computer crash’, The Washington Post, 6/15/14)

Lawsuit Filed Alleging Forgery By Candidate Toby Farmer

Farmer and the Rotary QuestionsAccording to a lawsuit filed today in the Superior Court of Arizona, the candidate petitions filed with the Secretary of State’s office by Republican candidate for State Senate Toby Farmer, contained a large number of forged signatures.

Candidates are required to obtain signatures from registered voters in their district in order to qualify for the ballot.  In Toby Farmer’s case, the petitions that he swore contained legitimate signatures actually contained large numbers of forged signatures.  Exhibits to the lawsuit include sworn affidavits from the voters purported to have signed the petitions.

The petitions carrying the forged signatures were circulated by Toby Farmer himself.  Farmer signed an affirmation on the back of each page containing forged signatures swearing that each name was signed in his presence.

The backgrounds of those whose identities were stolen ranged from senior citizens to college-aged kids.  It is unclear at this time how or why they were targeted by Farmer’s campaign.

Farmer also forged signatures for voters who no longer lived in Arizona, but who were still on the voter rolls.  In some cases he forged signatures where the homes listed were vacant and lender-owned.

The matter is expected to be heard in a week or so and the entire matter will also be turned over to law enforcement for prosecution.  At least one signer also indicated a desire to press charges themselves.

This is just the latest ethical breach by Farmer in his campaigns for office, although it is admittedly the most serious.  Farmer’s 2012 campaign for the State House of Representatives also ended early after his petition signatures were challenged.  In that case, Farmer dropped out of the race the day he was due in court, thereby short-circuiting the process and ending the case.  Farmer filed to run for the State House again in 2013 and abandoned that bid to run for State Senate instead.  Farmer later claimed that his 2013 House run was his first campaign for office, until court documents from 2012 re-surfaced.

Ironically, Farmer’s campaign website lists his #1 priority as “Leading with Integrity”.

Corrupt Democrat supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox gets her $1 million from taxpayers for stress

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 June 2nd, 2014
Left wing 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirms $975,000 settlement to corrupt Maricopa County Supervisor

Even the other county supervisors – who are mostly corrupt themselves – voted against her awarding herself money for “stress” over being prosecuted for filing false financial forms and voting on a grant to Chicanos por la Causa which was a conflict of interest considering they’d given her a loan at a great interest rate. 

UNBELIEVABLE……Read the story here. Must be nice to be powerful and connected. The rest of us little people would be in prison.
 
Join Our Mailing List