Taxpayer outrage! Supervisors award $1.4 million to convicted felon Wolfswinkel

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, April 26, 2013

The bigger the crook, the larger the settlement 
Supervisors out of control awarding millions to more gold-diggers in order to make Sheriff Arpaio look bad 

Convicted felon Conley Wolfswinkel When are the adults going to take over?  Even the judges are figuring out the Supervisors’ little scam, and are refusing to allow more million dollar settlements to Wolfswinkel and Mary Rose Wilcox. After it was clear that the judge was not going to approve convicted felon and Don Stapley business partner Conley Wolfswinkel’s lawsuit against the county over “stress” from Arpaio and Thomas prosecuting him, Wolfswinkel went to the County Supervisors and demanded a payout. They awarded him $1.4 million this morning, the largest settlement yet. Next up for a generous settlement offer of YOUR money will be disgraced former Don Stapley, who was so corrupt he didn’t dare run for reelection last year.

Here are other settlements that have already been awarded, a waste of OUR taxpayer money, courtesy of the Supervisors, who are always eager to give their pals and themselves handouts in the name of making Arpaio look bad -

* Supervisor Andrew Kunasek; $123,000.

* Retired Judge Barbara Rodriguez Mundell; $500,000

* Susan Schuerman, executive assistant for former Supervisor Don Stapley; $500,000

* Retired Judge Anna Baca; $100,000

* Retired Judge Kenneth Fields; $100,000

Steve Wetzel, Maricopa Chief Information Officer; $75,000
Contact the Supervisors NOW and tell them you do not approve of them handing out OUR money to corrupt politicians in order to shame Arpaio.

We hear that Andrew Thomas is running for governor. We bet he will finally put a stop to these abuses of tax dollars, since no one else will.

Join Our Mailing List

Convicted felon Wolfswinkel about to get huge settlement from County Supervisors

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, April 26, 2013

UNBELIEVABLE. Will Supervisors award him $5 million, even more than Mary Rose Wilcox? 
Judge repeatedly ruling against Wolfswinkel’s lawsuit against Maricopa County over “stress” from being prosecuted, so he turns to County Supervisors for settlement   

Convicted felon Conley Wolfswinkel You can’t make this stuff up. Convicted felon Conley Wolfswinkel, who was disgraced former County Supervisor Don Stapley’s business partner, is demanding $5 million from county taxpayers over Sheriff Arpaio and former County Attorney Andrew Thomas attempting to prosecute him. The Phoenix New Times exposed Wolfswinkel’s dishonest land swaps with Stapley a few years ago.

We’ve been told that Wolfswinkel’s lawsuit against the county hasn’t been going so well, the judge has been ruling against him on everything. Realizing he’s going to lose and not get even one cent of our money, Wolfswinkel has turned to the County Supervisors, who have a pattern of handing out millions of taxpayers’ dollars to anyone who disagrees with Arpaio (and Thomas), in order to make them look bad. Any whistleblower who tries to put a stop to their taxpayer-funded political vendetta spending spree is fired, as happened to poor Deputy County Attorney Maria Brandon.

Will the County Supervisors repeat their generous handouts of taxpayer money and award convicted felon Wolfswinkel millions of dollars, simply to make Arpaio look bad? How many more people have to lose their jobs, reputations, and live savings simply because they tried to put a stop to this kind of corrupt activity? The Supervisors are meeting this morning at 10 a.m. to discuss his settlement.

Contact the Supervisors NOW and tell them you do not approve of them handing out OUR money to corrupt politicians in order to shame Arpaio.

Join Our Mailing List

Consultant Legislators: A conflict of interest?

In the most general of terms, a conflict of interest is “a set of circumstances that creates a risk that professional judgment or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced by a secondary interest.”

In Arizona, there really are no rules governing legislative conflict of interest statutes.  Essentially, as long as at least 10 people benefit from a piece of legislation, there is no conflict of interest.  Should allegations of conflicts of interest arise, there’s really nothing anyone can do about it.  Arizona is one of only nine states without an independent organization to oversee ethics comp

ethicsIt is not uncommon for legislators to sponsor or vote on bills that affect their personal career industry.  When you have a “citizen legislature” it’s impossible to not vote on bills that relate to education, doctors, lawyers, real-estate agents, landlords, etc.  But what about political consultants?  Does that pass the “citizen legislature” smell test?

The Arizona Republic pointed out earlier this year that there are a number of lawmakers who run or work for consulting firms whose scope of work remains unclear.  The campaign disclosure forms do not require lawmakers to reveal their clients, making their potential conflicts of interest even murkier.  But, some of these contracts are no doubt related to campaigns and public policy objectives.

House Minority Leader and potential Democratic candidate for Governor Chad Campbell lists “public affairs consulting” for Inspired Connections on his financial disclosure form. The “About Us” page for Inspired Consulting does not list Campbell as a member of their staff and it is unclear what his role is with the firm.  Other state legislators who serve as “consultants” include Sen. Al Melvin, Sen. Steve Gallardo, and Rep. Ruben Gallego.  Melvin recently made news by announcing he’s exploring a run for governor.

Former LD15 State Senator David Lujan (and good friend of Kyrsten Sinema) directed an independent expenditure effort against Republicans during the 2012 election cycle.  “Building Arizona’s Future” spent over $700,000 in the last cycle defeating Republicans, funded in large part by national Democratic money from D.C. that Sinema helped direct into Lujan’s committee coffers.  Lujan is now running for Phoenix City Council District 4.

This isn’t the first foray in the consulting arena for Campbell or Lujan.  In 2007 Campbell and Lujan formed a political consulting firm with then Democratic legislator and colleague Kyrsten Sinema.  It is unclear what Forza Consulting did or whom they represented, but according to records with the Corporation Commission the LLC still remains “open.”

Democratic Representative and rising star of the Left Ruben Gallego currently has the most prolific consulting background.  Before being elected to office in 2010, Gallego previously spent time with Valley PR firm Reister, and also served as Chief of Staff for Democratic Phoenix City Councilmember Michael Nowakowski.  He was also the Vice Chair of the Arizona Democratic Party.  Gallego’s wife, Kate Gallego, is running for Phoenix City Council in District 8 to replace term-limited Councilmember Michael Johnson.

Ruben Gallego is listed as the Director of Latino and New Media operations for Strategies360’s Arizona office.  Gallego works with Director of Arizona Operations Robbie Sherwood, a former reporter for the Arizona Republic and former Congressman Harry Mitchell’s Chief of Staff.

10-veterans-videoDuring the 2012 election cycle, Strategies360 was paid by the Yes on Prop 204 committee (“Quality Education & Jobs”) to handle communications on behalf of the union-funded campaign.  Prop 204 proposed the single-largest permanent sales tax increase in Arizona’s history and was viewed by many as a “special interest giveaway.”  Voters defeated the proposition nearly 2-to-1

Strategies360 was also paid at least $10,000 during the 2012 election cycle to handle “earned media outreach & strategic communications” for the Arizona Accountability Project (AAP).  The AAP was one of the chief committees used to funnel liberal money into the last election cycle to defeat Republican candidates.  AAP spent almost $600,000 last election cycle targeting Republicans including efforts against Jerry Lewis, Joe Ortiz, Frank Antenori, and John McComish.  They also did work in support of Democrat Tom Chabin.

Strategies360 was involved in the 2012 election to defeat Sheriff Joe Arpaio and is currently involved in the present effort to recall Arapaio.  Recently, Gallego appeared at a “Respect Arizona” rally (the group organizing the recall).  Also present at that event was Minority Leader Chad Campbell.

During 2012, Gallego even helped lead the efforts of the group opposing Arpaio, Citizens for Professional Law Enforcement PAC.  Arpaio’s campaign manager at the time, Chad Willems, questioned the financial motivations of Gallego and others:

“This is just another group out there of people lining their pockets,” Willems told HuffPost. “It seems like a full-time employment group for these guys.”

Gallego’s reach into the far-Left elements of the Democratic Party are deep.  He even served as the professional consultant for Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona during the 2012 cycle, orchestrating their attacks against pro-life Republicans.  His firm was paid nearly $5,000 in consulting fees, and they were paid more than $20,000 to handle the mail program attacking several Republican lawmakers and candidates.

Let me be clear: there’s nothing illegal about what Gallego or his firm is doing.  Consultants on both sides of the political spectrum are involved in these sorts of efforts every cycle.  Some would argue this is no different than the efforts of the Senate President and the Speaker of the House and their Victory Funds last cycle.  That’s a fair comparison, but unlike Gallego (and possibly other legislators), the President and the Speaker were not financially compensated for their involvement.

Current Arizona statute provides for a one-year ban on former legislators serving as lobbyists after they leave the legislature.  Specifically, ARS 38-504(a)(b) state that for one year, a former public officer, including legislator, shall not represent another person for compensation before the legislature concerning any matter with which the legislator was directly concerned and personally participated.For two years after he or she leaves office, no public officer, including legislator, may disclose or use for personal profit information designated as confidential.  Further, section c states:

A public officer or employee shall not use or attempt to use the officer’s or employee’s official position to secure any valuable thing or valuable benefit for the officer or employee that would not ordinarily accrue to the officer or employee in the performance of the officer’s or employee’s official duties if the thing or benefit is of such character as to manifest a substantial and improper influence on the officer or employee with respect to the officer’s or employee’s duties.

When legislators like Gallego are using their positions of influence to help direct thousands of dollars in independent expenditure efforts designed to defeat their colleagues and change the partisan make-up of their chamber, while simultaneously making money off of these efforts, how is that not a conflict of interest?

MIHS Meets in Closed Door Session to Discuss Controversial State Contract


The Maricopa County Integrated Health Systems Board of Directors
is currently meeting in closed-door Executive Session to discuss the current legal challenge and protest filed by Magellan and United RHBA against MMIC (Mercy Maricopa Integrated Care), MIHS CEO Betsey Bayless, and Maricopa County Special Health Care District.  The current agenda shows a 30-minute spot dedicated to discussion of this subject, all of which will be exempt from records requests and exempt from public inspection.

It is not surprising that the MIHS Board is keeping a low profile and is remaining tight-lipped about this controversial contract after being awarded a possibly illegal $2 billion to $3 billion dollar contract from the State of Arizona.  This came on the heels of a controversial pay raise for MIHS CEO Betsey Bayless that raised her taxpayer salary to $500,000.

Accountability and SunshineThe board will apparently receive legal advice on the protest to the bid and discuss options moving forward.  An administrative law judge is likely to uphold the Department’s awarding of the contract, leaving a lawsuit targeting the state as a possible option.  Magellan has already filed a civil suit seeking financial damages in Maricopa County Superior Court against MIHS and MIHS’ CEO Betsey Bayless.  Magellan alleges MIHS was awarded the contract improperly and used proprietary information from Magellan to win the bid.

The new contract was set to begin on October 1, 2013, but the protest and lawsuit are likely to delay implementation.  Previously MIHS responded to the formal protest with the following statement:

“We are studying those protests and will respond in the appropriate venues,” the statement said. “We are confident in the strength of our bid, and we are proud to offer a unique, collaborative approach to meet Maricopa County Medicaid recipients’ behavioral-health needs and to integrate the behavioral- health and medical services for those with serious mental illness.”

If you recall, the lawsuit also alleges “serious conflicts of interest” by MIHS because Mercy Maricopa both manages the system and provide services, which is “prohibited by the contract and by state law.” Magellan also alleges that the bidding process contained “serious irregularities,” such as the state’s bidding process being amended twice to unfairly benefit MIHS over their private competitors.  Additional claims include conflicts of interest, improper scoring, licensing problems, and disclosure of proprietary information to competitors. Magellan originally serviced the state contract since 2007.

The serious allegations require attention and deserve public scrutiny.  MIHS should be holding discussions on the contract and the protest, but they should be doing this in the face of the public.  Not behind closed doors immune from public records requests. MIHS is a government entity that collects nearly $60 million dollars in property taxes every year and is run by a publicly elected Board of Directors.  When the state awards a contract that could be worth up to $3 billion dollars, possible bias in favor of a taxpayer funded MIHS over private competitors deserves more sunshine and certainly more accountability.

If you’d like to contact the MIHS Board of Directors and demand more transparency for taxpayers, they can be reached via email as follows:

 

State Bar assigns Andrew Thomas nemesis to investigate whistleblower’s complaint against Disciplinary Judge

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, April 20, 2013

State Bar assigns candidate who lost race to Thomas, and who was fined, to investigate legitimate complaint about Thomas disciplinary judge
Corruption within State Bar at highest levels ever

—–Original Message—– From: Mark Dixon [mailto:md20033@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 6:20 PM To: ‘Amelia Cramer’ Cc: ‘levine2005@aol.com‘; ‘whitney@cunninghammott.com‘; ‘rtplattlaw@gmail.com‘; ‘bryan.chambers@azbar.org‘; ‘lisaloo@asu.edu‘; ‘jennifer.rebholz@farmersinsurance.com‘; ‘alex@vakulalaw.net‘; ‘jflagler@flaglerlaw.org‘; ‘mcrawford@mcrazlaw.com‘; ‘Dee-Dee.Samet@azbar.org‘; ‘r.coffinger@gmail.com‘; ‘tom@crowescott.com‘; ‘dderickson@rhlfirm.com‘; ‘DDrain@DianeDrain.com‘; ‘mho@polsinelli.com‘; ‘ssaks@cb-attorney.com‘; ‘gt@ltinjury.com‘; ‘JimmieDeeSmith@azbar.org‘; ‘Kanefieldj@ballardspahr.com‘; ‘smays@phoenixlaw.edu‘; ‘marc.miller@law.arizona.edu‘; ‘Douglas.Sylvester@asu.edu‘; ‘tonyfinley@hotmail.com‘; ‘ajennings@bloodsystems.org‘; ‘meredith_peabody@hotmail.com‘; ‘maritajohn@cox.net‘; ‘jennifer.burns@azbar.org‘; ‘dbyers@courts.az.gov‘; ‘virginia.gonzales@azag.gov‘; ‘John F. Phelps’

Subject: Expected contact regarding State Bar Disciplinary Council and Disciplinary Judge William J. O’Neil

Ms. Cramer,

I have been waiting patiently for the response you promised below. The only communication I have received is an email from Mr. Thomas McCauley:

“RE: 13-0689 (Kent Volkmer); 13-0691 (David Cowles)
Mr. Dixon,
“These matters have been assigned to me for investigation. I will let you know if I need any additional information and the results of my investigation.
Tom McCauley 602-340-7352″

I strongly object to the assignment of Mr. Thomas McCauley to the investigation of these issues. It is impossible for Mr. McCauley to be impartial in any investigation regarding any matter revolving around William J. O’Neil, my issues, or any issue involving Andrew Thomas, Lisa Aubuchon, Rachel Alexander etc.

Mr. McCauley ran for Maricopa County Attorney in 2004, a race he lost in the primary, and in which he was, quite frankly, not even a serious contender. Upon losing the primary race he organized Concerned Citizens Against Andrew Thomas. Mr. McCauley subsequently was fined $1,000.00 by the Maricopa County Elections Department for campaign violations under order CF04-35. McCauley supported the Democrat candidate in the General Election over Thomas — who was so out there that even Democrat Mayor Phil Gordon supported Thomas over him in the General election. The Wells Fargo bank account used was out of Portland Oregon. This appears to be an obvious attempt to secret additional finance information.

Mr. McCauley’s loyalties clearly lie against Andrew Thomas and investigating my claims against Judge O’Neil will entail reopening Thomas’s discipline investigation, along with many others that are tainted by Jg. O’Neil and his accomplices at the State Bar. As I revealed in an earlier email, Kent Volkmer warned me that O’Neil and “the establishment” would try to take me down for my attempts to expose the corruption.

My claims, which are fully supported by the evidence, clearly show a severe problem with William J. O’Neil and the attorney discipline process he controls. The true and factual affidavit that Lisa Aubuchon used in her appeal adds to the credible information supporting the fact that O’Neil did not provide Andrew Thomas and his subordinates with a fair and unbiased hearing. Mr. McCauley’s extreme bias against Andrew Thomas is cause to remove him from investigating this matter because the essence of my complaint includes abuses perpetrated against Thomas and the others by O’Neil and the disciplinary arm of the State Bar.

This speaks to the bias of the Arizona State Bar and Ms. Vessella, head of the discipline department. Ms. Vessella would have been the individual to assign these complaints to Mr. McCauley. To put it frankly, upon the inevitable investigation of my claims and exposure of William J. O’Neil, Mr. McCauley, Ms. Vessella and others in her department also will be exposed for abuses of power.

A next logical step is to re-open and question every proceeding brought by the Bar and presided over by O’Neil as the Disciplinary Judge, starting with Andrew Thomas. Mr. McCauley’s personal vendetta against Andrew Thomas compels him to find any reason not to expose the truth. Moreover, we need not look any farther than the actions taken against Mr. Ernest Calderon. Mr. Calderon served as the State Bar President from 2002 – 2003. He worked for the State Bar reviewing hundreds of investigations similar to those brought against Andrew Thomas. Even though he publicly did not agree with Thomas’s immigration policy, the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office asked Mr. Calderon to review the many bar complaints filed against Andrew Thomas and the others in his administration. Mr. Calderon determined none were legitimate.

What did Mr. Calderon receive for this? He was removed as one of the four delegates to the American Bar Association’s House of Delegates, a position he had held for four years. Emails reveal that there were no character issues raised regarding Mr. Calderon. The only issues raised were “related to the Thomas matter and concerns about loyalty to the organization.” The emails further reveal the individuals attacking Mr. Calderon: “Several, led by Ed (Novak), Drain and Ditcher wayed[sic] in. Alan defended the recommendation of the Appointments Committee to reappoint you. It seemed the general sentiment was not to reappoint you and a motion was made to appoint Jeff Willis instead.

Tabling the decisions works in your favor because it will buy you time to make your case for reappointment. ” Emotions were running too high to vote today. I’m sorry about all of this, I get the impression that many Board members are unhappy with me also because of my role in the Thomas matter.” Former Bar President Daniel J. McAuliffe stated, as you have, “the members of the State Bar of Arizona’s Board of Governors do not involve themselves in disciplinary matters.”

Yet, in the matter of Mr. Calderon, it is apparent that they do, in fact, involve themselves in disciplinary matters. Specifically Mr. Calderon was punished by being removed as a delegate strictly because he presented an unbiased opinion regarding the numerous bar complaints brought against Mr. Thomas that said complaints were unfounded. Please remember that Ed Novak has been central in all these issues at the State Bar and still is.

A more recent development, just after coming out in support of the allegations I have raised, a NPR radio reported that Mr. Jack Levine, a member of the Bar’s Board of Governors, was accused of assaulting a State Bar staffer. Such an accusation is incredible. Come on, how low will some people stoop? Let’s see that one stick in the face of a claim of retaliation for Mr. Levine trying to do the right thing in attempting to hold members of the Board of the Arizona State Bar accountable.

One of the two complaints Mr. McCauley is “investigating” revolves around Tiffany & Bosco and Mr. David Cowles. Tiffany and Bosco breached an agreement with me regarding my property and they lied to me regarding my rights and their future conduct regarding the property. Since the complaint was filed, the foreclosure sale date has been postponed twice and now is set for April 18, 2013. I contend that if there was no merit to my complaint the property would have sold on the original sale date of March 21, 2013. Tiffany & Bosco committed to a judicial foreclosure on the mortgage and not the property; they further assured me that I would have access to the escrow account on said property. I do not. If there was no merit to the complaint the property would have sold long before now.

The fact that Mr. McCauley has not contacted me needing any additional information on this matter causes additional great concern regarding the integrity of this investigation. I am afraid that in the response to the complaint Tiffany and Bosco will not disclose the volumes of emails and other correspondence validating my claims. I also am sure Tiffany and Bosco will be protected from discipline due to the many Tiffany & Bosco representatives serving at the State Bar, “the establishment” will protect itself.

Currently the most conspicuous event is the change in status of my contractor’s license. In the enclosed attachment “ROC Timeline exhibits 4-15-13.pdf” (which can be found on scribd.com if not now then in the immediate future when I upload it) you will see said license was suspended on May 13, 2010 or September 27, 2010 or February 8, 2011 depending on which document you want to believe. The suspension stems from an unsubstantiated complaint filed on November 16, 2009. The complaint originally was cleared by the ROC investigator but reopened through the persistence of Maxine M. Becker Esq. with Salmon Lewis & Weldon, P. L. C. I ask you to review the file and realize that this was all done at the request of William J. O’Neil. The enclosed documents and timeline backs up this accusation and it is further substantiated by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors, along with the Arizona Attorney General’s office, removing the complaint history etc. from the file. This pleases me of course but, does nothing to compensate me for the years I was not able to use my license (asset) to earn a living.

I was informed that the Arizona State Bar had no intention of looking into a complaint against William J. O’Neil regarding Robert M. Gallo as mentioned in the previous email. The State Bar disciplinary counsel has misinformed you that the Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct cleared O’Neil in this matter. O’Neil was NOT cleared on these charges by the Commission on Judicial Conduct. They didn’t even consider them; the charges were just flat ignored, see the attachment “oneil complaint dismissal 12-4-12.pdf.” (check scribd.com in a few days for this file)

I want to make it clear that these charges were never addressed by the Commission and the attachment “william j oneil judicial complaint 4-16-13.pdf” (check scribd.com in a few days) is a new complaint to the Commission on Judicial Conduct addressing, in detail, those charges. I will also formally ask you to investigate those charges as it is very apparent the State Bar Disciplinary Counsel lacks the credibility to pursue this matter.

In my initial conversation with Mr. Jack Levine, we agreed that there were just a few bad apples in the system and some things needed to be straightened out. My opinion is quickly changing. A conclusion I am coming to is the Arizona Supreme Court is unable or incapable of policing its own and nothing short of a constitutional amendment abolishing the current judicial selection process and attorney discipline process will solve the problem. The Judiciary seems to thumb their nose at the legislature and governor all the while doing whatever they want, violating anyone’s rights who cross them and placing themselves above any and all A. R. S. statutes. It is time to remove this absolute power from the judiciary and put some serious oversight in the hands of the other branches of government.

I will remind you that I did not ask for this fight, it was visited upon me. What have I gotten for demanding my constitutional rights? I have had my family and business destroyed, my reputation attacked and my civil rights denied. When all this has not shut me up, then the cowards who are protected by the State Bar of Arizona attempt physical threats and intimidation. I have received death threat phone calls telling me to back off. I won’t. It is time to clean up this mess and restore the judicial process to its legitimate, respectful status. Are you part of the solution or the problem?

Sincerely, Mark Dixon

Join Our Mailing List

Follow the Money…..

MIHSThe recent mental health contract awarded by the state to Maricopa County Integrated Health System or MIHS is raising eyebrows. MIHS, a government funded and owned entity, is on the cusp of receiving a 3-year contract that is potentially worth $3 billion dollars.

Any $3 billion dollar deal should be viewed as suspect by watchdog groups and taxpayers, but what makes this deal special is that MIHS is a government owned, property tax levying entity bidding against private providers.  In fact, MIHS currently collects nearly $60 million dollars in property taxes each year.  MIHS is even allowed to go into debt with revenue bonds that can be paid for through the district’s operating property tax levy without voter approval.

To secure the lucrative contract, MIHS teamed up with Aetna-owned Schaller Anderson, Medicaid provider Mercy Care Plan, Carondelet Health Network and Dignity Health.  Not surprisingly, private providers Magellan Health Services and UnitedHealthcare (both of whom bid on the same contract) have filed formal protests against MIHS and MIHS CEO Betsey Bayless.

MagellanWhy would the state award the largest contract its ever offered to another government entity in what appears to be a clear violation of the Arizona Constitution’s “gift clause?”  When you pull the thread and follow the money trail, it’s hard to not suspect corruption, cronyism, and a healthy dose of conspiracy.

MIHS was created by Proposition 414 in 2003 after voters approved the measure in a special election by a margin of 58% to 42%.  At the time, AZ Republic columnist Robert Robb called the establishment of a property-tax-supported hospital district “unnecessary and unwise.”  Robb even warned voters that “…special tax districts, focused on only a single service with independently elected boards, are bad fiscal policy.  Hard choices are good for taxpayers and make for more efficient government.”

Robb even called the publicity pamphlet and ballot question used to promote the measure “the most blatant case of government propagandizing I’ve seen in over a quarter century of Arizona elections.”  Bold statement for a columnist who typically calls it as he sees it.

The lobbying firm responsible for the passage of the ballot referral legislation at the Capitol also ran the ballot campaign.  Phoenix-based HighGround public affairs is run by consultant Chuck Coughlin, Brewer’s campaign advisor and a man who has been referred to as Arizona’s “shadow governor.”   According to their website:

“Our team was the principal public affairs and lobbying team for the legislation that authorized the creation of the new Maricopa County Hospital District on behalf of Maricopa County.  Following the successful passage of the legislation, HighGround was retained as the principal campaign consultant for the Yes on 414 Committee.”

Fast forward to 2008.  HighGround is once again rewarded for their work and is retained by MIHS with their first lobbying contract.  Today, HighGround works hand-in-hand with Betsey Bayless who was hired as MIHS’ CEO in September 2005.

BaylessIn February 2013, Bayless was given a 33% pay raise, an extra $125,000 per year, bringing her annual taxpayer-funded salary to a whopping $500,000.  This despite a poor rating issued by a national accrediting group, the Joint Commission, which found widespread record-keeping problems and other flaws that posed risks to patients’ safety.  This even despite the fact that Bayless has already announced she’s leaving her position at the end of 2013.  Two of MIHS’ board members even voted against the pay raise, saying they opposed raising the pay of a CEO who is leaving in less than a year and working for a public hospital.

“It really rubs me the wrong way that we’re spending this type of money,” board member Elbert Bicknell said. “Don’t get me wrong. Betsey is a smart … woman, and she’s done a hell of a job from 2005 to now. But a ($125,000) raise in a year when we give our janitors maybe a 1 percent raise or lay off people? It just doesn’t make sense.”  Dissenting board member Sue Gerard commented: “I think having that kind of salary is totally inappropriate.”

Could the pay raise have anything to do with the fact that it was widely speculated that MIHS was going to be awarded the enormous mental health contract?  Was this Betsey’s “swan song” on her way out the door?  Possibly.

But where this story gets really tangled is when one considers the ramifications of the state adopting Governor Brewer’s Medicaid expansion proposal.  Again, the value of the contract could increase an additional $1 billion dollars if the state accepts federal Medicaid dollars.  Who is running the campaign in Arizona for Medicaid expansion?

If you guessed Chuck Coughlin and HighGround, you’re correct.  Serving as Coughlin’s wingman is Peter Burns, a former Brewer budget advisor.  Perhaps that explains the governor’s complete flip-flop on this issue from less than a year ago.  The Wall Street Journal went as far as to describe the governor’s flip-flop as a “political 540°” and “a case study in the political pressure and fiscal gimmicks designed to get states to succumb.”

The New York Times sums up the magnitude of political forces and financial incentives behind this coordinated effort:

Recently, 40 lobbyists, representing at least 110 groups pushing for the expansion, among them hospitals, health care associations and business organizations, huddled in the executive wing of the State Capitol to update the governor’s advisers on their progress and hone strategies.

The Wall Street Journal goes further, discussing how “Ms. Brewer was nonetheless besieged by health-industry lobbying, especially from hospitals that want more government money and the insurers that administer Medicaid.”

There is something wrong with the State of Arizona climbing into bed with private business to give away billions of dollars in public funds.  When those decisions are tied to the largest health contract the state has ever awarded and possibly the biggest expansion of federal government our state has ever seen, tax-paying citizens are owed an explanation and deserve transparency.

Aside from the arguments of whether accepting federal Medicaid dollars related to the full implementation of Obamacare is good or bad policy, the one thing that is clear is that the consultants, lobbyists, and hospital administrators pushing the plan stand to make millions of dollars in profits.

Money makes people do strange things, indeed.

Judge who disbarred Andrew Thomas embroiled in another scandal

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, March 4, 2013

Judge acting as mad dictator thinks he can disbar attorneys from bench without due process

Mark Dixon, a former close friend of the disciplinary judge William O’Neil who disbarred Andrew Thomas, has come forth as a whistleblower to expose the corruption behind O’Neil, who he believes was handpicked to disbar Thomas in a quid pro quo. Here is one of the letters Dixon sent an Arizona state legislator with new revelations of corruption by O’Neil.

Ms. Ward,

You,  as member of the Arizona Senate Appropriations and Health & Human Services Committees, are now being provided additional information in hopes that some type of hearings and investigation will take place regarding activities stemming from William J. O’Neil, the Supreme Court Presiding Disciplinary Judge, actions along with the Clarence Carter as head of CPS.  In my previous emails activities have been outlined, which are fully documented, regarding the injustice which has been done to my family by Pinal County and the State of Arizona.  The activities outlined documents a small example of a much larger problem which exists within the Judiciary and CPS.  Please review the emails sent to Clarence Carter, Director Arizona Department of Economic Security, outlining the activities of individuals within CPS using their official positions to protect the actions of friends and William J. O’Neil.  The Actions performed were solely for the purpose of attempting to silence me and my attempts to expose the problems that exist.  All my attempts to turn to Clarence Carter for help has resulted in the destruction of my family.  Please take the time to read the emails, they are self explanatory.

Due to the problems I have been plagued with revolving around CPS I have been forced to ask questions myself.  Many long term investigators and case workers will confirm the problems within CPS can not be changed by throwing money at it.  The management of CPS is corrupt at best and rules thru threats and intimidation.  If an employee dares to speak up they are fearful of the loss of their job and benefits, it is the unhealthy and corrupt nature of CPS that causes the high employee turnover, CPS management causes its own problems.  I personally have had CPS employees warn me about unethical and illegal actions being taken against me to cover up the activities within their department.  Throwing money at the problem will not fix it, before allowing another cent to be wasted change the management, change the antagonistic work environment, give CPS employees complete immunity to speak our regarding the many injustices which occur.  You, the legislature, are the only ones who can bring about the real change that needs to happen.

Enclosed please find the Judicial Complaint which was filed against O’Neil, this complaint was dismissed in its entirety without any investigation what so ever.  Had there been any real attempt at an investigation misrepresentations such as those O’Neil gave to Melissa Blasius with Channel 12 would have caused the complaint to move forward.  A retired Judge and past member of the Commission on Judicial Conduct wrote.

“Your detailed complaints raise issues that will be investigated because the actions taken there do not pass the smell test.”

This review was done before Ms. Blasius did any investigation and discovered areas where O’Neil at least lied to her regarding the accusations.  Unsealing the entire complaint and investigation would allow the light of justice to prevail.  The true nature and agenda of the State Bar  and the Disciplinary Judge should be exposed and safeguards put in place to stop the miscarriage of justice.

In review of the findings of the Commission on Judicial Conduct over the past several years it is apparent the no Judge from the Superior Court level on up has had a negative finding (except those who turned themselves in) or any discipline.  What a perfect world the Judiciary lives in.  Over the past several years the same theme keeps coming up, individuals including Judges, are fearful to speak out or even do the right thing due to the fear of retaliation from a few powerful individuals which can and do block their appointments or stall if not end their careers.  The same theme over and over, if someone tries to expose any wrongdoing they are ridiculed, terminated, falsely charged with crimes, or otherwise removed as a threat in the system.  A perfect example of this is a lady in Pinal County.

After an 18 month investigation Daranne Tacker was indicted for theft of some $9,000.00 which supposedly happened when she was employed at the Pinal County Building Safety.  This theft was reported by the past County Manager Terry Doolittle and Ken Buchanan, assistant County Manager for Development Services.  After an 18 month investigation a grand jury indictment was handed down  on 8-27-09.  That same indictment was dismissed on 12-21-09.  According to sources within Pinal County the individual who committed the theft was sexually involved with superiors, thereby the cover-up and false accusations.  This case involved Deputy Pinal County Attorney Kristi Hunt who is also accused of lying to judges in other cases.  Ms. Hunt, being involved in the “establishment” has been protected until recently.  Ms. Tacker, as myself, have been ridiculed and caused severe financial hardship for no wrong doing what so ever.  She as myself have never even been offered an apology.  The sad part about this is the Arizona State Bar does nothing while lives are ruined.  Defending and clearing Ms. Tacker cost her and her family some $40,000.00.

Also find documents which show the complete disregard for disclosure and due process to attorneys who were brought in front of O’Neil as the Disciplinary Judge.  O’Neil purposely failed to disclose the relationship between Robert Gallo and himself in at least 5 separate cases, they were neighbors and business partners.  O’Neil has severely influenced cases involving myself as evidenced by the correspondence sent to the Pinal County Presiding Judge, Robert Carter Olsen with a follow up letter to Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Berch.

In my previous emails I outlined the difficulties in retaining legal council due to attorneys fear of retaliation from O’Neil and others.  A perfect example of this is in a ruling O’Neil just made on January 28, 2013 where he threatened the defense council in a case before him, PDJ-2012-9057.

Quoting from the ruling,

“Inasmuch as the Bar Prosecutor and other attorneys or other Bar personnel were present and witnessed the conduct of Respondent’s counsel during the disciplinary proceedings, the Panel Members do not believe that a referral or specific charge regarding Mr. Bemis is appropriate at this time. The record speaks for itself.”

“Her counsel’s conduct during the proceeding was, at the very least, often disrespectful towards the Panel members as well as the judicial process. Regardless, disbarment is not ordered.”

If this is not threats and intimidation what is.  When an attorney does his job and fairly represents his client but does not go along with the Presiding Disciplinary Judge he is threatened with disbarment.   Amazingly O’Neil seems to feel that he can order disbarment without any due process what so ever.  This record does speak for itself.  All of the exact same rules O’Neil has quoted in the “disciplinary” process, when applied to himself would cause the disbarment of William J. O’Neil.

Please look at what is being presented now and look at the remainder of what I have accumulated, this is just the tip of the iceberg, the State Bar needs to be reigned in.  Members of the Judiciary have to be held accountable. Since the Judiciary and the State Bar seem to be incapable of monitoring itself and abiding by the statutes set forth by the Legislature and signed into law by the Governor it is time for the Legislative branch to step up and protect the rights of individuals within the State.  A perfect example of this side stepping by the Judiciary is the recent Arizona Supreme Court ruling involving Marathon Funding where the Supreme Court found that we, the victims, have no action for secondary liability based on aiding and abetting others’ primary securities fraud.  Who put the whole scheme together other than the attorneys, they knew what they were advising in was illegal, and their job was to provide legal protection for illegal activities.  This, in essence, lets unethical attorneys off the hook for fraudulent activities.  This being the case the law firms who agreed to a 87 million dollar settlement for the Ponzi scheme involving Mortgages LTD., Wolfswinkels, Vintage Farms and others would be off the hook.  The system covering for itself.

This is a bipartisan problem which needs to be addressed for the good of all.  I , for one, am tired of seeing resources and money being thrown away, lives being ruined and people living in fear of retaliation only to cover up the activities and financial gain of a few individuals in power.  A good final statement would be, throw out all the case law and lets deal with black letter law, it’s fair, too the point, easily understandable, and lacks the loopholes attorneys and judges with an impure agenda love.  Make the whistleblower act really work in Arizona, find a management team that can overhaul CPS and get it where it should be.

Sincerely,
Mark Dixon
520-705-2945
md20033@yahoo.com

Join Our Mailing List

Stapley questioned by federal judge about criminal charges in lawsuit against Arpaio, 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

Thursday, December 27, 2012

Federal judge wants to investigate criminal charges against Stapley, won’t rubberstamp judgment for him
Judge also looking into real estate dealings of Stapley’s felon business partner Conley Wolfswinkel
Here are some excerpts from the Arizona Republic article:

Maricopa County Supervisor Don Stapley will have to answer more questions about property deals and criminal charges than he wants to, according to the U.S. District Court judge presiding over his lawsuit against Sheriff Joe Arpaio and former County Attorney Andrew Thomas.

Seven of the cases have been settled for amounts ranging from $75,000 to $975,000. (Payment of the latter to Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox is under dispute.)

Three remain involving retired Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe, because of criminal charges and a racketeering lawsuit filed against him, ostensibly as retaliation for court rulings and to prevent him from holding a court hearing over Thomas’ objections; Stapley, who was indicted twice alleging campaign-fund and disclosure crimes; and businessman Conley Wolfswinkel, whose offices were raided in a failed search for evidence against Stapley.

Stapley’s attorney, Michael Manning, had sought to limit evidence against Stapley to what was known at the time the indictments were filed. The intent is to keep defendants Thomas and Arpaio and their former deputies, Lisa Aubuchon and David Henderschott, from using this trial to try to prove the allegations they could not prove because the indictments were dismissed.

U.S. District Judge Neil Wake granted Manning’s motion but cautioned that certain evidence pertaining to Stapley’s reputation will be allowed at trial.

Among Stapley’s claims are that he was forced to sell certain property to pay his legal bills and that the criminal indictments tarnished his reputation.

But when Stapley faced the defendants’ attorneys in deposition earlier this month, Manning advised him not to answer questions about the property in question, which figured into the criminal charges against him, or about an analysis of the criminal charges done by Gila County Attorney Daisy Flores.

The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office had asked Flores to re-evaluate the evidence against Stapley. Flores wrote that there was indeed probable cause to charge Stapley with multiple felonies.

Late Friday, Wake ruled that the property was central to the case and that Stapley would have to answer questions.

Wake also ruled that even if Stapley didn’t want to answer questions about Flores’ opinion during the deposition, he would not be able to deny their content at trial. And if Stapley wanted to deny the allegations, he would have to explain why.

BUSTED! Yes on Prop 121 Committee stoops to new low with dishonest Robo Call

Committee’s dishonesty shows that Proposition 121 is nothing but a political scheme

Phoenix, AZ – This weekend, Paul Johnson and the Open Government Committee Supporting Prop 121 (Yes on 121) stooped to a new low. The Yes on 121 Committee sent a dishonest robo call designed to mislead voters to support Prop 121. The transcript of the call states:

“Tired of dirty politics, let’s clean things up with Prop 121. The top two open elections, open government initiative. 121 is supported by Republicans because it will help combat politicians who overspend and add to our deficit. That’s why the Democratic Party and Liberal politicians oppose it. Vote yes on Prop 121. Paid for by Open Government Committee supporting Prop 121. Major funding by Greater Phoenix Leadership, Professional Fire Fighters of AZ, International Association of Firefighters (an out of state contributor), Cali-companies Inc.”

To answer the question, yes, voters are tired of dirty politics. Voters are tired of being lied to and they are tired of political schemes, like Proposition 121, that over promise and under deliver.

The fact is that the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, Libertarian Party and Green Party are unified in opposition to Proposition 121 because it is bad public policy that will limit voters choice, increase the influence of special interests, potentially shut out minority candidates and essentially destroy independent and third party candidates.

To suggest that Republicans support 121 because it will “combat politicians who overspend and add to our deficit” is just shameful.

The call is designed to intentionally mislead voters. The Greater Phoenix Leadership, Professional Fire Fighters of AZ, International Association of Firefighters and Cali-companies Inc. should be ashamed to be associated with an organization that would try to intentionally mislead voters.

“This call is a desperate attempt by the Yes on 121 Committee to mislead voters away from the negative consequences that would take place if 121 is passed,” stated Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery. “Unfortunately for them, it shows just how desperate the committee is by blatantly lying about false support for their radical proposal.”

A recording of the robo call can be found here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/x4gzkednbtufhrr/Yes121-DishonestCall.mov

-30-

Luncheon with Andrew Thomas this Saturday

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, November 4, 2012

PARADISE WOMEN’S REPUBLICAN CLUB 

EVERYONE WELCOME


Saturday, November 10  

10:30 Social, 11:00 Business Meeting
11:15 Program, 12:00 Luncheon 

     

Gainey Ranch Golf Club 
 7600 Gainey Club Drive, Scottsdale  85258
_______________________________________________________

FEATURED SPEAKER

Former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas Biography _____________________________________

$25.00 per person
($1.06 additional if paid online)  
Regular Luncheon Menu

Corn Chowder
Braised Beef Short Ribs w/Sundried Tomato, Soft Polenta
Season Vegetables

Dessert:  Chocolate Mousse Cup with Fresh Berries

Vegetarian Luncheon Menu
Corn Chowder
Vegetable Terrine w/Roasted Garlic Aoili 
Dessert:  Chocolate Mousse Cup with Fresh Berries

Menu Options (Click Below)

 

Paid Reservations Required in ADVANCE
Contact President Susan Kay Schultz
(480) 945-1490 or detailshm@cox.net 

All checks payable PRWC.  Mail to:

Paradise Republican Women’s Club
P.O. Box 12070
Scottsdale, AZ   85267-2070  

Click here for more information

Join Our Mailing List

US Senate Candidate Richard Carmona Wants More ‘Perks’

Richard Carmona Disaster

As Surgeon General, Rich Carmona Handed Taxpayers The Tab For Weekend Travel To His Home In California

‘Traveled To Vacation Home Frequently, Had Driver Pick-Up Dry Cleaning And Run Errands’

…Carmona was taking advantage of official travel…” (“Testimony: Carmona Took Advantage of Perks of Office When Surgeon General,” The Weekly Standard, 11/1/12)

…Carmona took full advantage of the perks of his job as a federal employee…” (“Testimony: Carmona Took Advantage of Perks of Office When Surgeon General,” The Weekly Standard, 11/1/12)

“Traveled to vacation home frequently, had driver pick-up dry cleaning and run errands…” (“Testimony: Carmona Took Advantage of Perks of Office When Surgeon General,” The Weekly Standard, 11/1/12)

TESTIMONY: “I was extremely concerned about the number of visits…Dr. Carmona has a summer home in Coronado Del Mar, near San Diego… conveniently, a lot of these travels would be over weekends.” (Dr. Cristina Beato, Testimony, US House Committee On Oversight, 11/2/07)

TESTIMONY: “I got word that the driver was going around picking up his [Carmona’s] dry cleaning, okay? I about fell out of my chair. And on my watch, I wasn’t going to have anything like that happen.” (Dr. Cristina Beato, Testimony, US House Committee On Oversight, 11/2/07)

“‘So these were concerns both of cost and of appearance?’ the questioner in the testimony asks Beato. Carmona’s former boss responds,‘Well, yes, absolutely. First of all, as to the budget, it’s taxpayers’ dollars.’” (“Testimony: Carmona Took Advantage of Perks of Office When Surgeon General,” The Weekly Standard, 11/1/12)

Carmona’s Congressional Motive: ‘Perks… A House And A Car’

“If a past interaction Kyl had with Carmona reveals a motive for the present, it is that the Democrat is seeking the Senate seat for the ‘perks of the office.’” (The Weekly Standard, 10/26/12)

SEN. JON KYL: “He seemed more concerned about the perks of the office…” (The Weekly Standard, 10/26/12)

SEN. JON KYL: “…he specifically asked about a house and a car…” (The Weekly Standard, 10/26/12)

SEN. JON KYL: “…he also seemed to think that it was just a lot of work for just two years… he thought, well, a position in the Senate would be a lot better to hold.” (The Weekly Standard, 10/26/12)

Carmona Spent 6 Years ‘Working’ At Luxurious Resort & Spa 

Carmona: “This was a wonderful opportunity for me.”(“Carmona To Teach, Work In Town After Job As U.S. Surgeon General,” The Arizona Daily Star, 10/2/06)

Carmona: ‘Perfect Fit’ “Carmona, who has been a long-time patron of Canyon Ranch and sometimes gave lectures there, described the job as a ‘perfect fit.’” (“Carmona To Teach, Work In Town After Job As U.S. Surgeon General,” The Arizona Daily Star, 10/2/06)

…an international crowd of well-to-do health seekers…”(Fodor’s, Website Accessed 10/24/12)

…supreme comfort.” (Canyon Ranch Website)

“…the gold standard for luxurious, healthy vacations.” (Spa Week, Website Accessed 10/24/12)

Richard Carmona’s ‘Work’ On Arizona Board of Medical Examiners Scrutinized

Richard Carmona Disaster

Rich Carmona’s Term On Doctor Review Board Marked By ‘Steady Stream Of Criticism,’ ‘Inadequate Investigations’

Carmona ‘Spoke Out Against’ Discipline

Doctor Operated ‘On The Wrong Patient’ “…Dr. Loomis for administering anesthesia to the wrong patient and to Dr. Zerella for operating on the wrong patient.” (Arizona Board of Medical Examiners, Meeting Minutes, 2/25/2001)

Carmona ‘Spoke Out Against’ ‘Discipline’ “Tim Hunter, M.D. strongly recommended discipline for both MDs… Richard Carmona, M.D. spoke out against the motion.” (Arizona Board of Medical Examiners, Meeting Minutes, 2/25/2001)

“Richard Carmona, M.D. recommended an advisory letter be given the doctors…” (Arizona Board of Medical Examiners, Meeting Minutes, 2/25/2001)

Carmona Term Saw ‘Steady Stream of Criticism’

AUDIT: “…doesn’t discipline doctors, even when its own investigators discover cases in whichdoctors violated state statutes, the audit says.” (“Medical Board Still Too Lenient,” The Arizona Republic, 10/1/99)

“…the agency has come under a steady stream of criticism from legislators, good-government groups, patients and even some doctors – all charging that the board of medical examiners, or BOMAX, has not effectively policed errant physicians.” (“BOMEX Reform Still A Bit Wobbly,” The Arizona Republic, 4/18/99)

“Even though it has been through a complete overhaul, the agency that protects Arizonans from bad doctors still is too soft on errant physicians and takes too long to handle cases, the state auditor general says.” (“Medical Board Still Too Lenient,” The Arizona Republic, 10/1/99)

“…inadequate investigations of complaints, dismissed 144 of them against doctors during a special video-conference meeting Thursday in Tucson and Tempe.” (“Medical Investigators Dismiss 144 Cases,” Tucson Citizen, 7/24/99)

Arizona Medical Association Won’t Endorse Carmona

“It goes a long way to explain why the Arizona Medical Association, of which Carmona was a board member, has failed to endorse his Senate run. When those closest to a candidate fail to endorse, it’s a signal for the rest of us.” (“Dem. Senate Candidate Carmona Failed to Keep Bad Doctors Accountable,” Breitbart News, 10/30/12)

“Dr. Carmona skipped no less than 284 votes on disciplining doctors for delivering inferior care. Worse, he completely blew off 24 meetings of the BoMEx.” (“Dem. Senate Candidate Carmona Failed to Keep Bad Doctors Accountable,” Breitbart News, 10/30/12)

“…he generally blew off this responsibility.” (“Dem. Senate Candidate Carmona Failed to Keep Bad Doctors Accountable,” Breitbart News, 10/30/12)

###

HOW MUCH TO BUY A LEGISLATOR?

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, October 29, 2012

HOW MUCH TO BUY A LEGISLATOR?

 

Every man has his price. State Senator Rich Crandall’s price is about $25,000. That’s what State Senate President Steve Pierce spent out of the Republican Victory Fund (RVF) to assure Crandall beat conservative candidate, and sitting State Representative, John Fillmore in the LD 16 Republican Primary.

 This is slimy at several levels. The RVF was created and presented as a campaign fund to elect Republicans against Democrats-that happens in the General Election. But instead, Pierce wants to make sure he gets re-elected as Senate President by supporting moderates (like Crandall) in the Primary-against conservatives. And the latest reports are that Pierce is not supporting candidates in hotly contested-and winnable-races in the General except for those candidates who will vote for him. Slimy isn’t descriptive enough. First, it’s not his money; he shouldn’t have control over where it’s spent. Second, he’s using it as his own personal piggy bank against other Republicans to feather his own nest, instead of what it’s meant for-defeating Democrats. Third, he’s not spending it on Republicans who need the support in the General-he’s choosing only “buddies.” Double slimy.

Steve Pierce has got to go. We have enough problems in the state and in the Legislature without having to put up with this guy’s selfish, lowlife activity.

And just what’s with Rich Crandall? He owns homes in Mesa and in Provo, Utah (where his wife and family live). He rents an apartment in Apache Junction where only his mail lives; yet we hear no complaints about it from the press or anyone? Where’s the outrage? Where’s the investigation? Where’s Laurie Roberts? (Oh, yeah; Crandall is one of her “keepers.” Move on, nothing to see here.)      

This state needs some folks to step up and remove Steve Pierce from the Senate presidency. Where are you Adam Driggs, Nancy Barto, and Bob Worsley? You need to keep your integrity intact and vote against this slimily character. Moderates may not always agree with Senator Andy Biggs but they can’t question his integrity. Do the right thing and vote him in as Senate President. 

Four More Years?

YouTube Preview Image

Sometimes, we must see the future clearly to act boldly in the present.
Take a glimpse into the darkness of Obama’s America in 2016.
High unemployment. Record high gas prices. The Middle East in chaos.
Religion on the run. Record debt levels. America downsized.
America downgraded.

Day 14 of Kyrsten Sinema’s Refusal to Release List of Murderers She Defended

Arizona Republican Party

Sinema Not Yet Responding to Letter of Inquiry into Her List of Clients

PHOENIX – With just two weeks until election day, Kirsten Sinema’s campaign is still refusing to release the list of murderers she claimed to defend.

Kyrsten Sinema, running for Congress in Arizona’s Ninth District, once proudly boasted about her work as a “criminal defense attorney who represents murderers.” (Shawn Macomber, “The Marginalized Mainstream,” The American Spectator, June 14, 2006)

Today marks Day 14 of her receipt of a hand-delivered letter from Arizona Republican Party Chairman Tom Morrissey asking her to release her client list, including the murderers she claimed to represent. No response has been received.

“If you run for Congress, you shouldn’t be running from your past.” said Tom Morrissey, Chairman of the Arizona Republican Party which is headquartered in Arizona’s Ninth Congressional District. “Sinema is trying to erase her past and pretend she’s someone else, and we think voters simply want to know more about the deeds she’s done than she’s willing to reveal.”

Below is the letter Morrissey sent to Ms. Sinema asking her to stop hiding her client list.

October 9, 2012

Ms. Kyrsten Sinema
123 E Baseline Rd. D-202
Tempe, AZ 85283

Dear Kyrsten:

As the former Chief Deputy U.S. Marshal for Arizona, I strongly believe it is important for the people of Arizona and this Congressional district to know whom you stand with.

In a 2006 interview with American Spectator magazine, and while a member of the Arizona Legislature, you proudly boasted that you were a “criminal defense attorney who represents murderers.”

Your voting record is also troubling.

In 2009, you were one of five state representatives to vote against a bill (SB 1253) that adds drive by shooting to the list of specified felonies that are subject to the felony murder classification. This measure was passed in bipartisan fashion 50-5.

In 2007, you were the Prime Sponsor of HB 2278, a bill to end the death penalty for murderers and rapists. Luckily your bill wasn’t passed.

In light of your pronouncements of support for murderers I ask you to immediately release your entire client list of any murderers you have represented or currently represent.

Most sincerely,

/s/

Tom Morrissey
Chairman
Arizona Republican Party

###

Jim Sharpe exposes disciplinary judge who disbarred 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
Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Jim Sharpe radio show interviews former friend of Judge O’Neil  

Politically motivated disciplinary judge has lengthy questionable ethical history, should be removed from bench


In a special show about rooting out judicial corruption, the Jim Sharpe radio show interviewed Mark Dixon, a former friend of Bar Disciplinary Judge William O’Neil. O’Neil was specifically selected to preside over bar complaints against Andrew Thomas and disbar him. Dixon has been looking into some of the crooked activities of this judge, ever since O’Neil got involved with shady activities involving Dixon’s ex-wife, ruining Dixon’s life. O’Neil ghostwrote pleadings for Dixon, which is a violation of judicial canons, and ghostwrote a complaint against another judge for Dixon.

Dixon discovered that O’Neil arranged for a short sale of his mother-in-law’s home to his business partner. Meanwhile, his mother-in-law continued to live in the home and still does to this day.  O’Neil bought the home back and became 50% co-owner with his mother-in-law. At the same time, he took out a hefty loan from the credit union where Dixon’s ex-wife worked. All the liens on the home were forgiven. How many of us regular people get to save our homes like that? Complaints have been filed with the Arizona real estate commission and the FHSA, which has assigned it a case number.

Dixon used to take junk to a dump his mother-in-law had on the property. She charged members of the public money to dump garbage there. Turned out it was an illegally operated dump, and taxpayers ended up footing the bill to clean it up!

O’Neil has been presiding over disciplinary hearings of lawyers in Arizona. He sits on a panel composed of another attorney and a member of the public. But the rest of these panels are not independent and unbiased! Robert Gallo has sat on a hearing panel with O’Neil, and is listed as a public member from Maricopa County. But he is not from Maricopa County, he is O’Neil’s NEIGHBOR in Pinal County! He is a friend of O’Neil, not an unbiased member of the public. All of the attorneys who have been the victim of O’Neil’s power trips against attorneys should have retrials with a different judge and an unbiased panel.

When Dixon tried to seek recourse through the legal system, he was told privately by prominent attorneys that he would never get a fair trial in the courts as long as O’Neil was around. The only way he would ever get justice would be to publicly expose O’Neil. So far Dixon has not had much success. One of the local TV stations looked into his story, but backed off, obviously scared of taking on the powerful judiciary. The station told Jim Sharpe they were going to have to consult with their attorneys, and warned Sharpe that he better too!

Dixon contacted the organization Arizona Attorneys Against Corrupt Professional Regulation, and they told him this was typical corruption by the regulatory disciplinary agency in power.

At the end of the show, Dixon asks why Carmen Chenal’s license to practice law was reinstated, while virtually every other attorney who has been disciplined by O’Neil has not been able to get their license reinstated. After having her license to practice law suspended for multiple ethical violations in 2005, O’Neil reinstated her, and she was given a high-level position at the Attorney General’s Office by Tom Horne making $108,000. She is allegedly a mistress of Tom Horne. Tom Horne had a hit and run accident outside of her apartment. Was there a quid pro quo going on with Horne that we don’t know about?

American Post-Gazette wants to know: When is this corrupt judge going to be removed from office?

Click here to listen to the radio show

Join Our Mailing List

Judge O’Neil in Andrew Thomas disbarment LIED about prior involvement

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

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

More evidence coming out that Judge O’Neil was on a mission to disbar Andrew Thomas  

The ethical violations Judge O’Neil violated continue to mount

We’ve been following this case for awhile, and the apparent ethical violations committed by the judge who disbarred Andrew Thomas have become too many to list. By the time this has all played out, we’re going to make the bold prediction that Judge O’Neil is disbarred, and Thomas has his license restored. O’Neil was appointed as disciplinary judge at the exact same time the State Bar began prosecuting Thomas and his deputies, in 2010. He was put there for a reason, in order to ensure that Thomas was disbarred. He resisted every effort to recuse himself when clear conflicts of the judicial canons were found. He had ruled against Thomas previously on the EXACT ISSUES he disbarred him for!

Now we’re finding out yet another issue he had ruled against Thomas and Thomas’s other deputy he disbarred, Lisa Aubuchon. O’Neil disbarred Aubuchon in part for allegedly bringing charges against corrupt County Supervisor Don Stapley after the Statute of Limitations had ended. The truth is, Aubuchon brought felony charges against Stapley WITHIN the state of limitations, and the Bar tried to claim that a couple of the misdemeanor charges she brought against Stapley were brought after the Statute of Limitations because a non-prosecutor in the office discovered Stapley’s actions before Aubuchon did. Only by twisting the definition of the Statute of Limitations, to say that it starts running when someone who is not a prosecutor who does not understand criminal law discovers the actions, could you make the argument that the charges were brought after the Statute of Limitations had run. The results of the Grand Jury investigation into Aubuchon were turned over to the US Attorney’s Office. They threw out everything, exonerating Aubuchon a few weeks ago. This undermined O’Neil’s disbarment of Aubuchon.

In 2010, O’Neil was assigned to preside over a Grand Jury investigation by the Attorney General’s Office to determine whether the Statute of Limitations had run on the charges against Stapley. Aubuchon filed a motion to disqualify the Attorney General. At the same time, Aubuchon filed a motion to disqualify O’Neil from hearing her disciplinary case, for an obvious conflict of interest. O’Neil issued an order, which has only been unsealed recently, declining to recuse himself from Aubuchon’s disciplinary case. In it, he LIED and said he was not involved with the Grand Jury proceeding against Aubuchon! He wrote,

“This judge was and remains unaware of ever being assigned to rule on any “emergency motions to disqualify the AG’s Office” filed by or on behalf of Respondent nor does this judge recall any such motion filed by Respondent.” “Even if a grand jury was specifically investigating Respondent (and this judge is unaware of that) it would not warrant recusal.” He goes on to state among other things that “this judge has no recollection of ever being told by anyone that Respondent was or might be under investigation.”
Perhaps a competency hearing is in order? This liar and monster is on a power trip and must be removed as disciplinary judge. He is a willing tool of the biased liberal State Bar. Questions must be answered. Why was O’Neil’s order refusing to recuse himself sealed until now? The Judicial Ethics Commission needs to add this growing list of ethical violations to the investigation it is already doing of O’Neil. He is being investigated for things like ghostwriting legal pleadings for people, which is prohibited by the judicial canons. Read the affidavit here. We have also been told that a complaint has been filed with the Real Estate Commission for an unethical short sale O’Neil arranged for his mother, and it is being investigated.
Join Our Mailing List