Something to Say about SCA

I couldn’t help but comment on the post by Ray Stern on “Valley Fever” at the Phoenix New Times. Stern believes that Sonoran Alliance “doesn’t have a word to say about Steve Ellman, Dave Hendershott and the SCA.”

Speaking for myself, I have not had a chance to read up the connections between the aforementioned. It was not until today’s Googe alert that I was prompted to read Stern’s take on why conservative blogs like Sonoran Alliance are silent. So I might as well break any perception of silence.

At the heart of the controversy is an ad that was created during the 2008 election cycle in the race for Sheriff between Joe Arpaio and Dan Saban. The ad was a very personal attack on Dan Saban over misconduct and included a video clip of a deposition and questions regarding sexual activities.

Prior to the 2008 General Election a group called The Sheriff’s Command Association raised over $100,000. SCA then donated that money to the Republican Party which in turn, handed it over to another group which sponsored the attack ads against Dan Saban. (Does anyone know the name of this group?)

SCA’s involvement was questioned and challenged. The County Election Department interpreted SCA’s activities as those of a poltical action committee. That means that SCA should have filed a Statement of Organization and campaign finance reports with the County. My understanding is that that never occurred. According to an article written by Yvonne Wingett in the Arizona Republic on Wednesday, SCA’s Treasurer (was that title self-assigned or given by the Republic?) Joel Fox, never acknowledged his group as a political action committee. He therefore argued against any disclosure of the names of donors to SCA.

This last Monday, Fox reached a settlement with the County Elections Department which included the release of the donors’ names. On that list of donors was Sheriff Joe’s second in command, David Hendershott, Vice-Chairman of Freeport McMoran Copper & Gold, Inc, B.M Rankin, Phoenix real-estate developer, Steve Ellman and several others. (read Phoenix Business Journal article). Incidentally, if the ad was really an independent expenditure, anyone close to either candidate who gave to the effort for or against either of the candidates could be interpreted as violating campaign finance law. I’m not sure if any of the articles above even mentioned that.

Now it’s my turn.

First my credentials. I’ve sat on several political action committees and consulted many a candidate about the do’s and don’ts of campaign finance reporting and disclosure. Yes, I’ve even had to learn the hard way when it comes to filing deadlines and what to file. Independent expenditures are especially serious and sensitive and candidates and committees can get into a lot of trouble if certain people know about an “IE.” I am also on the record as opposing taxpayer-funded so-called “Clean Elections” which has included a legal challenge to the law (but doesn’t apply to County elections). But I also believe that as long as the system is in place, committees should use it to the best of their ability without breaking the law. Ultimately, I advocate for immediate and full disclosure with no limits on how much an individual gives. If Jim Pedersen wants to give $500,000 to Terry Goddard in his race for Governor, go ahead and let him but let’s make sure that the public know all about it the moment it happens. We have the technology to do that in 2009. And what makes this most important is that the media and alternate media reports it when it happens.

In early 2008, the Ellman company sought to fill a media relations position. I was told that it would have actually been broader than media relations. Nevertheless, as a recently unemployed county worker, I applied for the position. As you can guess, I did not land the position. End of story = no further connection. However, let me just say that if I had been in the position to say something about funding a borderline sexually-explicit political attack ad, I would have stood up and opposed it.

Dan Saban is a friend of mine. His family attends and works at my church – Cental Christian Church of the East Valley. The ad that was run against Dan was disgusting. As a political consultant, I adamantly opposed any form of ad that attacks a candidate’s personal life or family. If you recall, I was very vocal about the mail pieces that attacked Russell Pearce and his family. I even named names and one of the names was a major contributor to the pro-life and pro-family movement.

If Ray Stern seems to think that all the writers at Sonoran Alliance are “strangely silent” over SCA’s revelation, this one just spoke up.


Comments

  1. New Handle says

    Stern’s story is upfront about his journalism consisting of nothing more than reading this and some other blogs. Natch.

    I did appreciate the “Mustang Mecum” moniker, and that’s going to stick pretty well. Not sure if it refers to his vehicle…I mean his car. You’re not wearing a wire, are you?

    No one would hire a political consultant who refused to plan, research, and be ready to expose and exploit the opposition; personal life notwithstanding. I didn’t said willingly or enthusiastically, I just said “ready to.”

    Voters want to know if a candidate’s kid is in jail for dealing drugs. If her husband’s notoriously unfaithful. If his company has gone bankrupt. If the people he went to college with smoked pot with him.

    Voters not only want to know it, they deserve to know. And it’s the job of anyone with a political opponent to let us know the skinny so we can decide, like a jury, if the offense is bad enough.

    That being said, I thought the “masturbation” ad Pullen put together was stupid, not necessary, crude, and a big waste of money.

  2. The crickets I hear are those Arpaio supporters who haven’t stepped up claiming that Joe knew NOTHING about it. That’s bull. His top brass all gave thousands and did it through payroll deductions. Fox thought all along he could do it in silence and only under court order and threat of a $300K fine did he disclose. Maybe this will be what brings the old man down. No doubt about it, something shady was going on here.

  3. I think a lot of Republicans see Sheriff Joe like a pit bull. He’s great to have on your side but you never know when he’s going to turn around and attack you.

  4. The thing not considered in the accusation of conservative blogs, SA in particular is this, a post is a call to comment. And let me say…we do! Many of us screamed online that the ad was despicable, that Saban was a good man who did not deserve such horrible public exploitation of a tragic circumstance, and have long held Arpaio as a phony at what he really is hired to do.

    Not all of us with a conservative voice are caught up in the Joe love fest.

  5. Richard Wayne says

    Ann,

    It is not necessarily a love fest to recognize that an elected official is actually doing his job of protecting the citizens from an invasion of our country that is destroying our sovereignty and way of life.

    That ad was wrong on many fronts. It was reprehensible to personally attack Saban in that manner. The ad was politically stupid especially since Joe was never threatened by Saban. It was done in a manner that was legally improper.

    There are many areas where I disagree with the Sheriff. However,I am many times unhappy with the actions of family members, friends and associates, but I am unwilling to attack them in public. If we did not have Joe, Andy Thomas and Russell Pearce, just where do you naysayers believe we would be in this fight for our very survival?

    I recognize their weaknesses but I see no perfect replacements. Ann, if you can identify candidates who will be as strong in defending our state from the scourge of illegal immigration, while being perfect in all other areas of their public and private lives, please let inform the rest of us.

  6. Richard,

    If he went after the thousands of felons who also represent real dangers I would have no gripe. His office is overworked and undermanned as it is! The officers on the beat with no back-up for miles and miles…

    I do not want the illegals here either! I have to be honest and say, I am SO intolerant of the invasion that I have to check myself sometimes…racism is a poor excuse for honest indignation and at times, well…I have been disappointed in myself. But I also do not want the crimes to go unsolved, the felons to go free, and the lives of MCSO deputies needlessly endangered every time they go to work.

    There is much more to the job than being the illegal alien round-up patrol. Do that part and I am right there with ya’… otherwise he is a publicity seeking, self-promoting windbag. The tank is a good illustration of the reality that is Sherrif Joe.

  7. C’mon folks!

    Fess up!

    You hate Joe becuase he enfoces immigration laws which hinder your Banana Republican and Burger Baron benefactors!

    Stop the psedo sanctimoniousness, hire citizens and perhaps even pay them a living wage!

    (Although you’d rather dump them on taxpayers for benefits)

  8. Mea Culpa!

    pseudo-sactimoniousness!

  9. Carlist- I have 40 employees. E-Verified every single one. Big fan of employer sanctions although feel the economy has had a much bigger influence in the exodus.
    Joe does not have THE answer for inforcement and isn’t the only one doing anything about it as much as he’d like you to think. The numbers simply show that also.

    There are a ton of ways to skin a cat and Joe is just the most vocal on his. His isn’t the most efficient though and there are others who quietly go about their business.

    The sad reality is though that what Joe is doing has little to no effect on Maricopa County other than increasing jail costs.
    90%+ of illegals he arrests were simply passing through.

  10. Sorry Roger:

    But joe has been taking heat from people like you for the simple reason that he’s enforcing immigration laws on the street, and unlike appointed police chiefs cannot be manipulated by Chamber of Commerce flunkies and maids on City Councils.

    BTW Thanks for making use of e-verify. I trust you’re in the battle to retain it!

  11. Pricinct Committeeman says

    Joe’s high profile public attacks on illegal immigration have done much less to send the border criminals back to Mexico than the difficulty in getting jobs has done. The demand for verifying employment sent many of them packing – reducing costs for our schools, wait times in emergency rooms, and a reduction in crime in our neighborhoods.

    I agree that there is a crowd of fighters against illegal immigration that goes about their work quietly and without publicity. Joe isn’t one of those.

    Those who employ illegals are hurting all of us. Even those who stop by Home Depot to get some guys to help in the yard are at fault.

    Blogs like Sonoran Alliance help to overcome the Arizona Republic heavy-handed reporting about “hardships” for illegal immigrants and avoidance of mentioning the status of those border criminals when they commit another crime in our state. It shouldn’t be a matter of conservative vs. liberal to want a secure border and those who violate immigration laws to be sent home.

  12. Carlist, classic dodge when faced with facts or a relevant argument. That okay, we all can see through it. Whatever makes you happy.

  13. Richard Wayne says

    Ann,

    If you do not go after the areas where the largest percentage of crime is generated, you are not fulfilling your duty as a law enforcement officer.

    If the cities who are under the thumb of the Chambers, the catholic church that is seeking more money in the collection plate, the Pastor/Wilcox Mexican Mafia, the McCain Amnesty sympathizers and the California-bred Gascon enablers would join the MCSO in supporting the rule of law, the problem would be nearly corrected.

    Do you really think that it is a coincidence that the main smuggling routes have been adjusted to avoid Maricopa County? In addition, do you really think that the legislation passed by the legislature over the last few years has not had an effect? If not, you may be the only one who has that opinion.

    Roger, are you indicating that there are statistics that show the City of Phoenix, City of Mesa, Pima County Sheriff, Yuma County Sheriff, etc. are actively working to eliminate this attack on our sovereignty? I would like to see those stats, since even their PR offices do not make press statements supporting your premise.

    With a single digit percentage of the population and anywhere from a third to a half of the criminal acts being committed from the illegal immigration community, I want Joe to be joined by the city police, the DPS, an unrestrained Border Patrol, and the National Guard focusing on this problem.

    The sooner we do that, the sooner Arizonans will be safe and secure in their homes and on their roads.

  14. Roger:

    Hmmm!

    Stating basic facts about the lack of immigration law enforcement and those who impede it is now…..a dodge!

    Wow!

    And I thought Orwellian “spin” was restricted to the confines of the AZ Republic editorial offices!!

    You could do P.R. for the guv!

  15. Carlist, it’s obviously that you cannot be reasoned with since you will ignore when people point out facts.
    You said-“You hate Joe becuase he enfoces immigration laws which hinder your Banana Republican and Burger Baron benefactors!”

    I pointed out directly the opposite. I hate Joe because he actually hinders REAL reform because he thinks he has a monopoly on the method. Meanwhile, he wastes millions and millions of dollars while 90%+ of his arrests had a destination of somewhere other than AZ. He’s a joke and embarrassment to true law enforcement.

  16. James Davidson says

    For those of you in Rio Linda, the Sheriff is an incompetent old fool, a traitor to the Republican Party, a publicity hound of the first water, and a bully as evidenced by his treatment of Sandra Dowling (her door was kicked in, helicopters circled around her house, her little dog was kicked, and she beat every one of the charges the sheriff pushed.)

    In case you all in Rio Linda forgot, he betrayed the Republican Party and supported Democrat Janet Napolitano in the 2002 governor’s election, and even appeared in a commercial for her. She barely squeaked by in a cliff hanger that took three weeks to figure out the winner. Without the traitor’s support, Matt Salmon would have been governor and the state would not now be in bankruptcy.

    If you’ve heard him rsmble lately, you also might suspect he has the beginnings of dementia.

    How many warrants go unserved in this county? Thousands. How much has the county paid out in settlements? Many millions.

    He is no different from any run of the mill politician. His word is questionable. He broke it very dramatically. When he first ran for sheriff he pledged he would serve one term only. He now is in his fifth term. What kind of man gives his word and breaks it as soon as he is put to the test?

    He’s got you in Rio Linda fooled, but not the rest of us.

    This will be a real test of Andy Thomas’s integrity. The Sheriff Command Association affair gives the appearance of a scam to avoid campaign limits. Whether it was a scam remains to be decided. We’ll see what Thomas does about it.

    And you all in Rio Linda, don’t come back with the nonsense that he’s tough on illegal aliens. It’s all a show. Where was the sheriff on illegal immigration from the time he took office in 1993 to 2005. Nowhere to be seen. He jumped on teh bandwagon.

  17. Richard Wayne says

    He may have4 jumped on the bandwagon, but I, for one, am glad he did.

  18. Richard Wayne, I missed this comment earlier. You asked about statistics regarding other cities and counties. Yes that was exactly what I was indicating. Phoenix passes more illegals to ICE a year then MCSO with Mesa 3rd out the the 3.

    You hit directly on it. They don’t hold press conferences for every arrest they make and don’t have 9 full time six figured salary PR people wasting taxpayer money. They do continually release numbers, they just don’t make a spectacle about it

  19. What are the numbers, since you seem to have an inside track to them? Recognizng that the Phoenix Police Department is the largest law enforcement agency in the state, do you also have the numbers that were released by PPD due to the Phil Gordon Policy?

  20. Janelle, no inside track unless you consider reading the Republic or Tribune. Both have printed numbers. If I remember correctly Phx PD is around 7K, MCSO 4 or 5K and Mesa PD 3K.

  21. Roger:

    If Joe has a monopoly on methods of enforcement, it’s because he’s the only law enforcement official with the freedom to do so!

    And a motivating factor lied in complaints from rank and file field officers in metropolitan departments that they were hindered in enforcing immigration laws by their chiefs, who in turn, were pressured by Mayors and City Councilmen who rely upon campaign fund lucre from those who profit from illegal cheap, unskilled labor.

    And all the sophistry you and your cohorts spout will not cover this fact up!

  22. Please keep posting just like that Carlist. Rational people can see exactly what I mean. If you’re comfortable in your ignorance that is great, just go and live your life. The rest of us in the real world will actually work for real progress in the fight to secure our borders.

  23. Joel Fox says

    It’s obvious by the replies here that the “controversy” surrounding SCA is predominantly centered on Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and an attack ad on his opponent during the election.

    I may surprise you, but neither ever had anything to do with SCA.

    I started SCA, which is really nothing more than a bank account, in Late 2006. I was, and am, tired of the constant bashing and misinformation supplied by valley media maligning the good deputies and detention officers of MCSO. We are not racist; we do not murder inmates. We also do not finance attack ads.

    I told a few people about the account I set up, and my intentions. News of the account spread by word of mouth, and a few people within MCSO began direct deposits into the account. Word eventually spread outside the sheriff’s office to others, who mailed large donations to help fund my effort.

    When the worst of the attacks hit, during the summer of 2008, I began planning various types of mass communication to expose the lies being told in the media, but quickly realized that anything I put out could be considered campaign related, or even an in-kind contribution to Joe Arpaio. It was never my intent to aid anyone’s election, and frankly, Joe Arpaio didn’t need any help. He was solidly in the lead in any poll, and was widely expected to win the election. Much of the criticism over that ad was that it was unneccesary for this very reason. Joe Arpaio had also raised over half a million dollars for his campaign, which is more than any other person ever in a county race.

    Despite what the press might lead you to believe, I fully understand the speculation that would result if anything I did with the money could be remotely construed to be helping Arpaio. After researching the law, I felt that giving the money to the Republican Party was about the closest I could come (albeit still far away) to what I originally said I wanted to do, with no possibility of any ties to Arpaio (other than that he is also republican). The Repubican Party, in my view anyway, supports law enforcement, and the Democratic Party does not.

    The party felt my donation would be considered a partnership contribution, but I felt that I could not give them the names of SCA donors because I had not consulted with any of them prior to making the donation, and it would be Giving in the Name of Another, which is a felony, so the party sent the money back to me. I, in turn, returned it to the donors and told them what had happened, and some of them, on their own, decided to honor my decision, and sent their money to the party, in their name, on their own check, which is how it should be.

    The problem comes in when the party, while it held SCA money, decided to create an IE committee (Arizonan’s for Public Safety), transfer $78,000 to it, which in turn funded the ads this blog post refers to.

    The party also spent over $150,000 in non election related operating expenses while it had SCA money, too, but nobody seems to care about that. It’s just not sexy.

    And the fact that those who wanted to contribute to the party did so, in their own name, on their own check, shows that full public disclosure occurred, just like it is supposed to, on the party’s campaign finance reports.

    But there’s this suspicion still out there, fed largely by the media, and their well known bias against Joe Arpaio, that SCA money somehow secretly paid for those attack ads, and since David Hendershott, along with other top commanders of MCSO each gave about $2,000, for a total of about $12,000, that Joe Arpaio must at least be aware of it, if not behind it altogether.

    Those who are suspicious, however, conveniently forget that the county’s investigation found no link between SCA and those ads, and found no evidence of earmarking, either. Apparently, the grand conspiracy was to secretly collect money, give it to the Republican Party to make dirty attack ads, have the party return the money, and then have the original donors give in their own names, on their own checks so that their names could be hidden by having them reported on public campaign finance reports.

    It should be obvious to all those but the most biased, that any coordination with the party would most likely include the proper method for transferring the money to them, which could not have occurred in this case. Since there is no such coordination, my donation could not have been intended to pay for that ad.

    No conspiracy theorist yet has been able to overcome that obstacle, so instead they just seem to omit it, conveniently giving them the sexy story of high ranking sheriff officials “secretly” helping to fund Arpaio’s re-election by financing nasty attack ads against his opponent.

    The truth is so much more boring, but then again, the truth never gets in the way of a good story in this town.

    The press also likes to report that I struggled for months to avoid revealing the names of SCA donors, which is completely false. I struggled for months to avoid paying a fine of $315,450.00. I am a public servant and if I sold everything I own and two of my children, I could not pay such an exhorbitant and ridiculous fine. When the county included this fine on their compliance order, they virtually required an appeal. The fine was illegal and violated my due process rights, and the hearing judge agreed, but nobody seems to think that’s important at all.

    The only important thing is that Joe Arpaio somehow gets tied to this money, and this attack ad, so it can be used to malign him in the press and possibly reduce his public support, apparently by the comments here, so that he will stop enforcing illegal immigration.

    This argument should be about campaign finance laws, and the power of the government to intrude into the private lives of citizens to enforce those laws, but it has turned into an argument about immigration and attack ads that are completely unrelated…except in the minds of a few biased reporters.

    Illegal immigration and attack ads relate to this case only in that it motivates those who find crimes where none exist.

  24. James Davidson says

    Joel:

    Let me ask some questions:

    1. Do you repudiate the attack ad against Saban?

    2.Did you ever suspect there might be an issue with “others, who mailed large donations to help fund [your] effort.” Did you ever hear of the concept of the appearance of impropriety? Or to focus specifically on the case at hand, did you ever hear of the appearance of influence buying?

    2. When you realized in 2008 that there might be an issue with influencing an election, why give the money to the Party? Why not give it all back to the donors without it ever touching the Party’s hands?

    3. You say you started SCA in 2006. How much did your group spend before 2008?

  25. Sorry DSW, but you got it wrong on one major point. The ad may have been disgusting, after all, it dealt with a government employee swearing in a deposition that he was “self-molesting” while on the clock. Then again, I’m not sure how you can bring that up in an ad without it being fairly disgusting.

    But why give the free pass to your churchgoing buddy? You know, the guy who was actually choking the chicken while on the clock? How can you defend that on the basis of “leave their personal lives and families out of it”? If you’re flogging the dolphin while you’re on the clock and the taxpayers are paying for it, its NOT your personal life anymore. Its taxpayer-funded monkey spanking and you’re darn right that it disqualifies you from office, especially an elected position in law enforcement.

    I need to end my comment because I’m running out of metaphors for what that guy was doing to himself while collecting MY taxdollars. But still, the idea that a guy with that sense of right and wrong should be in charge of enforcing laws is absolutely nuts.

  26. Fox- answer me this one question. If this ha nothing to do with attack ads, why then did many of these out of state donors conveniently make first time ever donations to the AZ Republican Party after getting refunded their money? Some made donations larger than I have given combined in the last 5 years!
    Spin it all you want- this is too close to Arpaio for him to not know anything about it.

  27. Hey Rog!

    If my previous statements regrarding political/economic factors in the non application of the law regarding illegal immigration are so ignorant why not deal with the particulars.

    “Snot nosed” Country Club Condescension no longer “cuts it”!

    Let’s get to the heart of the matter, i.e. if you’re intellectually honest and not on someone’s p.r. payroll!

  28. I honestly don’t know what point you’re trying to make.

  29. Rog:

    To begin with, I’d encourage you to re-read my posts and the assertions I make within them regarding the operations of the Sheriff’s office and the reasons they’ve stirred opposition in certain business quarters. (Along with the political circles affected by these quarters!)

    Then respond and categorize the “ignorance” they display.

    And await my retort!

  30. Roger Coughlin uses e verify because all state employee’s must us it as part of the hiring process. I just didn’t know the Governors office had 40 employees. Should we suggest some cuts?

    First about the add in question. It was in extremely bad taste to say the least. Joe himself asked to have it stopped. He did not know about it until it was already out. No one questions if it was factual, just it’s inappropriateness.

    Next, whatever numbers you use, illegal aliens commit a disproportionate number of violent crimes. We have no way of knowing if the one Joe takes off the street would have committed violent crimes or not. Just that there is a large percent of crimes are committed by illegals. He has unquestionably saved lives and prevented attacks. The sanctuary policies in Phoenix have made us number one in the Country for kidnapping and other violent crimes. Most by illegals.

    I am personally offended to hear the argument that we need these people to work. American have always rolled up their sleeves and got the job done when it matters. We are losing our work ethic and that has to stop. American can no longer allow and invasion force of cheep labor to subsidize our laziness. We can and must get our work ethic back. Our forefather’s did not build this Country just to hand it over to someone else. They fought and died for our freedom. We are a nation of laws, built on the sacrifices of true patriots. Illegal means illegal. The Sheriff get it. The County Attorney gets it. Neither need offensive attack adds to get the public’s support. They are reelected because the majority of voters expect the laws to be enforced.

  31. My Post #9 pretty much sums it up. Joe isn’t the only one enforcing immigration laws. He’d like you to think that but the facts show otherwise. If the economy were not in the dumps, you wouldn’t see an exodus of residents. There is no work for them and employer sanctions has had more of an effect.

    The hard facts show that the cities of Phoenix and Mesa combined almost double the amount of illegals arrested without the waste of money and gazillion pointless press conferences.

  32. Billbo, you’re on crack if you really think that Joe was offended. If that were the case, why didn’t he reprimand his top brass for participating in the ad?

    I think I’ve sufficiently proven myself so the first paragraph is irrelevant even if it did make any sense.

    Illegals commit crime proportionate to their population. 90%+ of illegals Joe arrests were going somewhere other than Arizona so yes, you can dispute that fact. Please explain to me what “sanctuary policies” Phoenix has that encourage kidnapping?

    There are plenty of valid and coherent arguments you can come up with, none of which you have.

  33. James Davidson says

    I really am surprised how much of Rio Linda moved to Phoenix. He’s all for show. He’s just a big phony. Don’t you get it? What has he done to really fight crime in the County? I’d like to know. You Rio Linda supporters, come up with the stats that Traitor Joe is doing a better job than Phoenix P.D.

    I will never forget that he betrayed the Republican Party to put Big Sis in the Governor’s chair. We have bankruptcy to show for it. He’s conned You Rio Lindistas. Go back for a second or third helping. Not me. I accepted him breaking his word to the voters over the one-term pledge. I was through with him after he grovelled to Big Sis.

  34. Roger, I haven’t been on crack since you raised you prices. Stop playing stupid, we know who you are and what you are about. Illegals know they are relatively safe from deportation in phoenix, so they come in droves. Some bring the illegal drug trade you are so interested in promoting. They prey mostly on other illegals and the violence spills over to the rest of the community. Cops get killed doing their job protecting cowards like you. There is a reason Phoenix is #1 in these areas. It’s partly because #2’s like you are more interested to protecting the rights of people that broke into our country to benefit from what Americans give their lives to protect. I understand their desire and it is admirable. Just do it legally and we won’t have a problem.

    By the way, Joe did express his displeasure with the people involved in the add and ask that it be pulled. He did not need that kind of attack! Real people support him and will keep reelecting him until he decides not to run. Your boss will be out of work soon and you will have to return to prostitution full time.

  35. Speaking of Joe and “Big Sis” perhaps he picked up the idea from our Professional P.O.W. who can always be relied upon to push for Liberal Legislation (see McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy ad nauseam).

    As a matter of fact, little Mac was negotiating a party switch after his 2000 presidential run and auditioned for a spot on the Kerry ticket in 2004.

    Joe certainly has a template when it comes to partisan loyalty.

    And how bout the 8 House Reps who voted with the Dems to retain Sanctuary Cities (see Phoenix and think Phil Gordon!)

    To my knowldege Rio Linda isn’t a sanctuary city and its residents aren’t wanna be coyotes or ‘Banana’ Republicans.

    B.T.W. Mr Davidson, the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association comprised of real City Cops on the beat endorsed Joe, not the “Lizard Milker” during their two races!

    Who are you gonna dig up next time…Jack Harris?

  36. James –
    I thought those ads were despicable and unnecessary; thanks for asking.
    I never had any concern over any impropriety because I never thought SCA would be called a PAC. I acted alone, and it was not for the purpose if influencing an election. Your question implies that I collected the money to help Arpaio win the election and then spent it for that purpose all the while trying to hide it from the public, but this is absolutely not true.
    I didn’t return the money immediately to the donors because it was never supposed to be election related in the first place. Again your question implies that this was planned out and improper from the start, and it was not.
    SCA didn’t spend any money in 2006 or 2007.

    Roger,
    I thought I explained it in my original post, but some of the SCA donors gave money to the party after I returned it to them because I told them what had happened. Remember…I tried to give it to the party, they wanted the names of the donors, but I couldn’t give them, since they were not consulted, so the party gave the money back to me. I sent it back to the donors, told them what happened, and they sent it to the party in their own names on their own checks, if they wanted to.
    The party wanted their names in the first place, and the right way to do that would be to have them send it themselves, if they agreed, rather than for me to assign the donation to them, without their prior consent, and thereby commit a felony.

    Perhaps it was not a great decision to give the money to the party, but the only way to fix it at that point is to give the money back to me so I could return it to the donors and let them decide if they wanted to donate to the party or not.

    My decision, great or otherwise, to give the money to the party certainly does not transform me into a political committee, simply because I had collected money from others, especially after it was returned to them, to give in their own name, on their own checks, just like it should have been done in the first place.

    I researched the law and never thought SCA could be considered a committee, since it fails on both required prongs: multiple people and influencing an election. SCA only becomes a committee if you assume it paid for an attack ad, which has already been proven in the investigation and hearing to be false.

    If my contribution was improper, it was handled correctly, and just like any other improper contribution, when the money was returned, and the donors gave in their own name, on their own checks.

    Had this not been improperly associated to Joe Arpaio, nobody would have ever thought twice about it.

  37. James Davidson says

    Carlist:

    Two wrongs don’t make a right. I am no fan of the senior senator, and I hope a real conservative runs against him so we can get rid of him. Why don’t I like him? He’s betrayed too many conservative causes. (Rio Lindistas, betrayal is a theme you’re going to run into later in this post.) I am 100% against illegal immigration, and sanctuary cities. I firmly believe we have to secure the border. Jack Harris will never be my candidate for anything. Saban himself is not my candidate.

    I’m just sick of the con job, which anyone with sense can see right though. I learned a long time ago to watch what a politician actually does and not what he says.

    I have lived in Phoenix many, many years. In all this time I have never seen any politician break his word as the sheriff did with his one-term pledge, betray his party, as he did with his support of Big Sis that put her in the governor’s chair, be completely ineffectual, and yet retain support from some misguided conservatives.

    Look around you. Do you sense that illegal aliens have all fled to Mexico or their other home countries, or to other states, or do we still have an invasion in our midst? I don’t see much change at all, and what little there has been, resulted from the collapse of the construction industry.

    Since the sheriff’s support obviously comes from Rio Linda transplanted to Phoenix, let me spell it out for you. He’s a s-h-o-w-b-o-a-t. Ever see a player who grandstands for the fans but the players hate him because he whiffs when it counts?

    I’m still waiting for the stats on how he’s solved the illegal alien problem in this County. Last I heard, and I may be wrong, we were the kidnapping capital of the country.

    And we still have him to thank for Big Sis’s disastrous six years. She never could have won the first time without the sheriff’s support. Are you in Rio Linda grateful for the bankruptcy our state is in? The sheriff enabled her. He’s no good for it in my book.

    Joel:

    Thanks for the answers. But you’re wrong about one thing. My questions were legitimate and didn’t imply anything. The implications (and implications are not necessarily proof) arise from the amounts in question and the timing.

  38. Joel Fox, no offense but you are flat out lying. I understand, you have a lot to lose if the real truth gets out. There is no reason for the same SCA people who have NEVER given to the state party to all suddenly feel the urge to give to the party for the first time EVER. We’re not talking $500 donations- $5,000, $10,000 etc. This was to pay back the costs of the attack ad they were supporting in the first place. The facts are against you here Joel.

    Thank you James for spelling out exactly what many of us have been saying to no avail.

  39. Rog n’ James:

    Have also spent more than four decades in the Valley and most of those in, and around, law enforcement.

    To begin with, Joe Arpaio is hardly the first elected incumbent to decide to run for re-election after asserting self imposed limits. There were at least three GOP Congressmen who pledged themselves to 3 terms upon taking office 14 yrs ago! Only one did step down after the alloted time.

    Have you forgiven them, Jim?

    Did you forgive the late Barry Goldwater for supporting a Democratic candidate for Congress against the Republican Doug Wead a while back?

    Have you forgiven the gaggle of Republican hacks who started a recall election against an elected G.O.P. governor before he took office?

    These die-hard cronies of a defeated primary opponent allied themselves with the then R&G, Phoenix Forty ubermeisters and imported San Francisco miscreants to put Democrat Rose Mofford on the ninth floor!

    I agree with you Jim that two, three or four wrongs don’t make for a right but they do shed a light on complainant’s genuine motives.

    And btw, if you didn’t support Dan Saban who did you “write in” for Sheriff over the past two elections?

    And from what I can glean all too many of Joe Arpaio’s foes can be found in the same Central Corridor locales and Country Club links which provide sustinence and shelter for those involved in making fast bucks on the backs of taxpayers!

    Regarding street enforcement, I’d like to point out that the Sheriff’s Office, while the leading law enforcement entity within the county has primary jurisdiction only in unincorporated areas and incorporated entities which do NOT have public safety departments. Naturally this results in a huge discrepancy in arrests for any reason between M.C.S.O. and a major city dept such as Phoenix, Mesa etc.

    Nevertheless, when statistics are gleaned from raw sources, Joe comfortably leads his peers in percentage illegal alien arrests.

    As a matter of fact, over the years, his office has been asked time and again to intervene in municipal areas by residents who are appalled at the “see nothing”, “know nothing” “hear nothing” attitudes of their police chiefs, city councilmen and mayors who put the interests of campaign fund raisers over the public safety of their citizens.

    I believe that the former Mesa P.D. Chief, now safely and appropriately situated in San Francisco, had his trip to D.C. to testify vs. Joe paid for by LaRaza!

    But enough for now!

    Just a word of advice Rog n’Jim:

    Mow your own lawns!

  40. James Davidson says

    Carlist,

    You need to read what I write. I mentioned that I overlooked the sheriff’s welching on his word the first time. In my book, everyone gets one mulligan. It was his support of Big Sis that put me over the top with him. I was through with the sheriff after that, and I’m through with him now. I didn’t vote for him or Saban in 2004 and 2008. If the two parties only serve up crumbs, you don’t have to go with them.

    Goldwater is a poor example. In case you forgot, he became something of a liberal after he got real old and got married the second time. At any rate, he was long out of office by then and I quit paying attention to him.

    Don’t pull the country club stuff on me. I was born a poor kid, and make a good living with a small business. I never have hired anyone other than an American citizen and never will. I drive American made. I’ve never joined a country club or any other club. To borrow from Groucho, I wouldn’t join a club that has low enough standards to let me in.

    The sheriff’s real efforts to stop illegal aliens are a pimple on the problem. They’re still all around us, in case you have trouble seeing. I repeat, he’s a
    S-H-O-W-B-O-A-T.

    And no I don’t mow my own lawn. My son mows it, and he was born in this town of an American father, with roots that go back in Arizona for four generations, and of an American mother.

Leave a Reply