NEW: AZ Attorney General Brnovich Dips Toe In Post-Election Disputes, Pushes Validity of Legislative Subpoenas For Ballot Envelopes, Etc; Status Conference On Monday Morning (READ: Pleadings)

 Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich's office - including its Election Integrity Unit - has not indicated that its investigation has found any reason to seize ballot images/envelopes/software/equipment - from Maricopa County or any other county. However, it is today telling a Superior Court judge that he should let State Senate President Karen Fann and Sen. Eddie Farnsworth take such action against Maricopa County.

Meanwhile, Superior Court Judge Timothy Thomason has set a status conference for Monday morning (11:00am). 

The AG's Office asked to be allow to file an amicus ("friend of the court") brief in the heating-up battle between the lawmakers and their Republican colleagues dominating the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. After issuing the subpoenas to the County, the County filed the current case asking the Court to find them unlawful. (Fann and Farnsworth filed a separate suit, but that was dismissed.)

The AG's argument that the legislative subpoenas are lawful rests largely on the premise that Fann and Farnsworth have said they need to have the information to inform any new legislation that might be necessary in the future. Even though they also want the materials to prove alleged fraud and undermine the results in last month's Presidential election, the valid purpose of helping craft legislation, ahem, trumps that and the court should be deferential to the legislature's powers.

Yesterday, we pointed out that Fann/Farnsworth's attorneys ironically used the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Congress's subpoenas of President Trump's accountants to support the current subpoena. The AG's proposed brief similarly reaches to the federal level, quoting the words of President Woodrow Wilson about Congress's broad authority to investigate, and noting that "One hundred and thirty-five years later, President Wilson's words still ring true."

Here are the Attorney General's filings:

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits.  

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

BREAKING: Arizona Election Audit Subpoena Battle Is *On Again*, As State Senate Pres. Fann Files For Injunction; Fun Trump Subpoena Twist

 After a Christmas weekend break, Arizona Republican lawmakers have resumed their court battle to force Maricopa County to comply with subpoenas for broad swaths of ballots, information and equipment related to the November 3 Presidential election.

State Senate President Karen Fann and Judiciary Committee Chair Eddie Farnsworth answered the suit filed by Maricopa County on December 18. Fann/Farnsworth also struck back with their own suit (aka "counterclaim") and a new Motion for a Preliminary Injunction to force compliance. Both pleadings are published below.

Attorney Tom Basile tells Arizona's Law that today's pleadings make their previous lawsuit unnecessary. Judge Randall Warner had dismissed that case but specifically allowed them to file an Amended Complaint based on an Arizona law that they had not previously cited.

The new injunction request is primarily based on that statute, as well as constitutional grounds. And interestingly and ironically, it cites a U.S. Supreme Court opinion from earlier in the year where the Justices determined that President Donald Trump's accounting firm (Mazar's) was required to comply with Congressional subpoenas. 

As the United States Supreme Court recently reaffirmed in discussing the cognate power of the Congress and its committees embedded in Article I of the federal Constitution: Congress has no enumerated constitutional power to conduct investigations or issue subpoenas, but we have held that each House has power to secure needed information in order to legislate. This power of inquiry—with process to enforce it—is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function . . .The congressional power to obtain information is broad and indispensable. It encompasses inquiries into the administration of existing laws, studies of proposed laws, and surveys of defects in our social, economic or political system for the purpose of enabling the Congress to remedy them. Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, 140 S. Ct. 2019, 2031 (2020)

Given that “the power of the [Arizona] legislature is plenary . . . unless that power is limited by express or inferential provisions of the Constitution,” then the same prerogative must necessarily reside in Article IV of the Arizona Constitution.  (citations omitted)

While Fann and Farnsworth previously indicated that they wished to obtain the information and equipment from the County in conduct an audit before Congress convenes on Jaunary 6 to count the Electoral College votes - and, most Trump supporters are still talking about the need for the information before then - today's Motion is careful to stress that the reasons for the subpoenas are to help the Legislature make good laws for the future.

Superior Court Judge Tim Thomason has not yet set a hearing on the injunction request.

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits.  

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

"DANGEROUS TERRITORY": AZGOP Attorney Warns Judge Not To Show *More* Bias By Ordering Party To Pay State's Legal Fees For Election Audit Lawsuit (READ)

The Arizona Republican Party sent a warning to a judge last night, saying he is in "dangerous First Amendment territory into which the Court should not dream of treading". The AZGOP is trying to convince Maricopa County Superior Court Judge John Hannah not to order it to pay Arizona $18,000 in legal fees spent on the post-election lawsuit Hannah determined to be "futile" and "meritless".

The case alleged that Maricopa County had violated the law by hand counting ballots at 2% of the vote centers used on November 3 instead of 2% of precincts. (The difference in the number of ballots checked is minimal.) After hearing arguments from the parties, Judge Hannah found that the County (and several other counties) had properly followed the law and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Earlier this month, Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs asked the Court to allow it to recover her attorneys' fees from the GOP, pursuant to an Arizona statute (A.R.S. 12-349) designed to discourage inappropriate legislation.

The AZGOP's Response (below) begins by attempting to demonstrate why the party and the attorneys had a good faith basis for filing the lawsuit. (Here is the article containing the Complaint.) Noting that he had to file the case within hours of learning of the possible legal problems with the audit and that neither he nor the party knew that the hand count audit had already taken place.

 "(U)ndersigned counsel cannot emphasize enough that he was first approached about this case, and had to write up the Complaint and Application for Order to Show Cause, on the same night in between 6 PM and midnight, on November 11, 2020. Counsel was extremely mindful of the (infamous) elections-law case of Lubin v. Thomas (2006), in which the Arizona Supreme Court found that a filing was untimely even though it was filed within the statutory time limits, simply because the Court felt that it had “a very short time in which to review and decide the matter.”. In spite of this, the Application showed a well-reasoned (and certainly “debatable”) argument, which the Court chose not to accept; but to even contemplate sanctions on the basis of lacking substantial justification is wholly unwarranted." (citations omitted)

The Response then takes a turn towards the dark side, warning the Judge that he may have shown bias in last week's Minute Entry, when he described the decision about sanctions in a stark way.

"But more troublingly, there is a degree of bias in the way that the Court frames this issue – to “cast false shadows on the election’s legitimacy.” The Court has apparently concluded, even though it was not an issue to be litigated in this suit, that it would be “false”—and even constitute harassment—to doubt the legitimacy of this election. This puts the Court at odds with around a third of the general population, and around half of the Republican Party in this State, according to polls conducted by NPR, Reuters and Politico among others."

Upon further review, however, the Judge's use of the "false shadows" term was only in the context of stating what the Secretary of State would need to prove, not expressing his conclusion.*

The AZGOP Response ends with a strident political appeal that the judge look to the larger picture - even if that picture has been largely drawn by the President, his supporters and the ongoing parade of lawsuits:

Public mistrust following this election motivated this lawsuit, and there is absolutely nothing improper or harassing about that. Courts are intended to be a forum for airing democratic grievances and safeguarding the integrity of elections. These goals are not well served when courts are openly hostile to anyone who dares to even question an election, much less when courts equate widely-held political beliefs to mere “harassment.” Because in this territory, one man’s “harassment” is another man’s crusade; one man’s heresy is another man’s religion. This is dangerous First Amendment territory into which the Court should not dream of treading, both in order to maintain the appearance of impartiality of the Court, and to encourage like respect in the citizens that it serves as well as other hard-working officers of the court. (emphasis added)

Wilenchik asks Judge Hannah to set a hearing on whether or not attorneys' fees should be assessed against the AZGOP (and/or its attorneys). 

The Arizona Republican Party has several other lawsuits active in both the trial courts and the appellate courts. Wilenchik has an election contest stalled in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, Arizona's Republican slate of electors has their Arizona Kraken case stalled in front of the 9th Circuit, and they just filed a new suit in Texas U.S. District Court with several of the same attorneys challenging the laws governing next week's counting of the Electoral College votes.

* From the Order: "This order explains why the Arizona Republican Party’s case was meritless, and the dismissal order filed November 19, 2020 was required, under applicable Arizona law. What remains is intervenor Arizona Secretary of State's application for an award of attorneys' fees. That application will require the Court to decide whether the Republican Party and its attorneys brought the case in bad faith to delay certification of the election or to cast false shadows on the election’s legitimacy."

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits.  

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

DOUBLE TAKE: All 4 Arizona Congressional Republicans Split With Trump On Covid Stimulus Checks, While Supporting His Veto Of Defense Measure

Arizona's Republican Congressional delegation made a rare split with President Donald Trump today. The foursome of Paul Gosar (CD4), Andy Biggs (CD5), David Schweikert (CD6) and Debbie Lesko (CD8) all opposed raising the Covid-19 Economic Stimulus payments from $600 to $2,000, which the House approved with 44 GOP votes after the President's surprising pre-Christmas announcement that he might veto the relief package and that the checks should be larger.

The House managed to get the 2/3 vote necessary to agree with the President, passing it this evening by a 275-134 margin. All of Arizona's five Democrats voted "aye", although two Democrats from elsewhere opposed it.

The measure faces an uphill battle in the Senate, where at least one Republican is expected to oppose an effort to pass it by unanimous consent tomorrow. That will put it into a lengthy process that will be difficult in the GOP-controlled body.

Arizona's 4 Republican House members were also in the minority this evening in opposing an override of the President's veto of the National Defense Authorization Act. The override passed by an overwhelmingly easy margin of 322-87, which included a clear majority of Republicans. 

The veto was based chiefly upon the President's anger that Congress did not include provisions limiting a shield protecting internet companies like Facebook (Section 230) and that it requires the Pentagon to rename military bases/facilities named for Civil War Confederate leaders.

In explaining his support of the veto, Arizona Rep. Biggs stated "it (the bill) serves foreign interests, not American interests."

Interestingly, Arizona Rep. Lesko voted FOR the NDAA less than three weeks ago. She has not yet made a public statement about the change of position. Arizona's Politics has requested an explanation and will update if warranted.

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. 

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

BREAKING: Maricopa County Will Ask Court How To Comply With GOP Legislators' Election-Related Subpoenas

BREAKING: Maricopa County Will Ask Court How To Comply With GOP Legislators' Election-Related Subpoenas

UPDATE, 12/18, 1:10pm: The County Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 to file a legal action in Maricopa County Superior Court to determine what can and should be turned over to the State Senate in response to the election-related subpoenas. The vote came after approximately 7 1/4 hours of Executive Session deliberation time (Wednesday and today). (The Supervisors were not sequestered.)

UPDATE: Maricopa Supervisors Will Resume Considering Response To GOP Election Subpoenas Friday Morning (12/17/20, 10:00am)):

The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors will resume discussing their response to legislative election-related subpoenas Friday morning. The new meeting was posted Thursday morning after a 4 1/2 hour Executive Session on Wednesday failed to result in any agreed-upon action.

The special meeting will begin at 10am, and it is likely that the Republican-controlled Board will again quickly move into Executive Session. Any actions would be voted upon in public session, which will be live-streamed on their website.

We have now published a news analysis  about the existing election integrity-related laws in place which the County - and, the Legislature - have to abide by. However, it should be noted that one of the factors which could be complicating the Supervisors' decision-making process are the two legal cases brought by the AZGOP Chairwoman Kelli Ward. The AZGOP has appealed both of those cases.

Original article, 12/16/20, 10:00pm: "UPDATE: Maricopa Supervisors Meet For 4 1/2 Hours, Take No Action Regarding Election-Related Subpoenas"

UPDATE: After their 4 1/2 hour (approx) Executive Session, the @MaricopaCounty Bd of Supervisors took NO ACTION on responding to the subpoenas issued by State Sen. Pres. @FannKfann / Eddie Farnsworth re: collecting all mailed-in ballot images and forensic audit.

Taking no official action does not mean that the Superviors have chosen not to comply with the subpoenas. They apparently listened to the (GOP) legal counsel and discussed  the statutes already in place to protect the integrity of elections and their options, and there obviously was not yet agreement on how to respond. Chairman Clint Hickman announced: "There has been no action at this time. So, there is no vote at this moment."

Here are the audits the Supervisors were discussing.

No new Supervisors meeting has been noticed out as of early Thursday morning.

(This is a developing story. Please check back for additional details.)

AZ State Senate subpoena for Scanned Ballot Audit by arizonaspolitics on Scribd

AZ State Senate subpoena for Forensic Audit by arizonaspolitics on Scribd

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. 

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

BREAKING, "MISSED IT BY *THAT* MUCH: New Arizona Senator Mark Kelly Raised $99.4M During Campaign

Arizona's newest Senator nearly broke the 9-figure mark in campaign fundraising. Your contribution almost might have put him over the hump, as Mark Kelly's campaign raised $99.4M as of Election Day.

That figure dwarfed the $73M raised by his Republican opponent, Martha McSally - and she had the benefit of being in the office.

Kelly also took office this week knowing that he has $1.2M already in the bank for his re-election campaign in just two years. (He is serving the last two years of the late Sen. John McCain's six year term.) Arizona's Politics wrote about that upcoming battle here.

3:30pm: BREAKING: McSally Spent $67.5 MILLION In Losing Effort, Has $476,000 Left In Account

In the most expensive campaign ever in Arizona's history, Martha McSally lost her bid to win her U.S. Senate seat while spending a total of $67,498,294.30. (That does not include the tens of millions spent by outside groups to benefit her bid.)

After paying off late-incurred bills, McSally has $476,000 left in her campaign account, which could be used for future campaigns or refunded - but may not be used for personal purposes.

McSally narrowly lost to Mark Kelly (D), who was sworn in this week to serve out the remaining two years of the late John McCain's Senate term. His post-general finance filing has not yet been made publicly available.

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits.  

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

COMMENTARY: "The President’s help in a primary will nearly guarantee a general election defeat"

Here is Arizona Republican political consultant Chuck Coughlin's entire analysis for Arizona's Politics about the possible impact of outgoing President Donald Trump's involvement in Arizona's politics.

The rest of our News Analysis about the 2022 U.S. Senate race can be found here.

Coughlin is the President and CEO of Highground Public Affairs Consultants.

The question placed to Coughlin was "Do you think Trump's attacks on Ducey - combined with both Trump's praise of Ward at the rally in October AND Ducey's rapid response - signal the beginnings of a primary campaign battle, with Trump trying to flex his muscles?"

I take the President’s displeasure with the Governor for what it is.. self-centered egotistical behavior totally expected an unsurprising.  There are several  questions Trump supporters should be asking themselves;

 

If the President turned that quickly on the Governor and Senator McSally, how long before he treats me just the same? Given the President’s track record and his relationship to the truth, Do I want to stake my entire political fortunes on this one guy who just lost Arizona?

 

For me, I have concluded, absent a disastrous first two years of a Biden administration, that the President’s help in a primary will nearly guarantee a general election defeat.  Trump is  not on the ballot in 22, so his supporters won’t be nearly as enthusiastic.  Trump’s ability to raise money will be severely handicapped by his loss of the White House.   His endorsement will likely mean I cannot wholly rely on him for fundraising and his support will jeopardize my own ability to raise funds independent of him.

 

And, let’s remember, Kelly has the ability to largely control the narrative of this race.  If he stakes out, as Sinema has done, a center left voting record and avoid votes where he is tagged as a progressive, he will be harder to defeat , without a Presidential race at the top of the ticket.  Also there will be an open Governor’s seat and one new Congressional district on that ballot as well further diluting attention from the Senate campaign.

 

I could see a scenario where there are several Republican candidates for Senate and the Trump endorsed candidate being out fundraised by a better center right candidate who didn’t want to struggle with the Trump shadow and sought to run a campaign that included Trump supporters and other center right Republicans. 

 

Look at that, the curtain hasn’t even come down on 20 yet and we have a double feature going in 22!  Should be fun.

BATTLE For #AZSenate 2022 Is Well Underway: Mark Kelly Files For Re-Election, Republicans Jockeying To Oppose Him (Arizona's Politics News Analysis)

(Arizona's Politics is an independent, non-partisan political news blog. When we engage in analysis or commentary, we attempt to label it as such. This article may be classified as "news analysis" because it attempts to "provid(e) interpretations that add to a reader's understanding of a subject.")

Arizona's Mark Kelly is being sworn in as the newest U.S. Senator Wednesday afternoon, marking the unofficial beginning of his re-election campaign in just two short years.

Kelly won the special election last month to fill the remainder of the 6-year term that the late John McCain was elected to in 2016. Last week, he filed his Statement of Candidacy (below) to run for the full term.

Meanwhile, while no statements have been made on the GOP side, a battle is shaping up which could pit Arizona's Governor against the Chairwoman of his state party. And, outgoing President Donald Trump may have just chosen sides between those two great friends of his. An Arizona Republican political consultant thinks Trump's endorsement would most help Kelly win re-election.

Kelly's battle to unseat the appointed Martha McSally was the most costly campaign in Arizona history and one of the most expensive in the nation this year. 

He headed into the final weeks of the campaign with $11M in his campaign account. (The new Statement of Candidacy will permit him to continue raising money.)

Meanwhile, the Republicans are already jockeying to take him on in the next election.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee ("NRSC") - which spent more than $8.7M attacking Kelly in the just ended campaign - has already begun recruiting Arizona Governor Doug Ducey to oppose Kelly in 2022.

Chris Hartline, the incoming Communications Director for the NRSC, tells Arizona's Politics that “Senator (Rick) Scott has a good working relationship with Governor Ducey. As NRSC Chairman, Senator Scott’s goal is to recruit good candidates around the country who can raise money and get their message out. Starting in January, he will by hyper-focused on that goal.” Ducey's 2nd - and final - term as Governor concludes in two years and he has long been thought to be eyeing the Senate seat.

In fact, Monday's very high profile Twitter war between Ducey and outgoing President Donald Trump may have been the first public battle for the GOP nomination for that Senate seat. As part of his continuing effort to undermine confidence in the country's election laws and administration, Trump blasted Ducey by name for certifying Arizona's election results. (He did not mention Arizona's Republican Attorney General - Mark Brnovich.) The President then fired a fusillade of derisive tweets at the governor he had recently called "a great Governor and a great friend of mine."

Ducey fired back with a series of Tweets of his own, explaining why Arizona's elections were fair and the results accurate.

At the same time, Ducey was also being hammered by the Chair of the Arizona Republican Party, Kelli Ward. Ward traveled to Washington, D.C. earlier that day, and there were unconfirmed rumors that she was at the White House at about the same time that Trump began pounding Ducey.

In that same rally where Trump proclaimed his great friendship with Ducey, he also had noted that Ward is "a friend that is so loyal and strong" who would have been a Senator. He called her a "warrior and a fighter."

(Ward has also been angrily blasting Ducey for certifying the elections, and choosing to focus on him but not Brnovich.)

The AZGOP spokesperson would not confirm to Arizona's Politics whether Ward was with the President at the White House, who else she might have met there, and whether she was there on AZGOP business. 

However, Ward has already made it clear that she would like to be in the U.S. Senate, having run for the Republican nomination twice, in both 2016 and 2018. (McCain beat her with 51% in a multi-candidate primary in the former, and McSally won 54% in a two-way primary in the latter.)

Ward also could be preparing to run for a U.S. House seat, as Arizona will be gaining a 10th Congressional seat next year. Her term as AZGOP Chair ends next month, and it would be unlikely to run for office as Chair of the party, so an announcement is likely sometime within the next several weeks.

Given the current battle for control of the Republican Party, it would appear that Ward and Ducey are destined to end up battling for the Republican nomination to face Mark Kelly. If so, the outgoing President may have just decided to try to play kingmaker and has chosen sides. 

Longtime Republican political consultant Chuck Coughlin does not think it wise for any GOP candidate to stake his or her political fortunes "on this one guy who just lost Arizona". 

"Absent a disastrous first two years of a Biden administration, that the President’s help in a primary will nearly guarantee a general election defeat," Coughlin says. He notes that Trump's enthusiastic supporters will be less likely to turn out for an election without the Trump name on the ballot, and that he will be less of a fundraising support once he is not residing in the White House.

Coughlin's entire astute analysis can be found in this sidebar article.

Kelly Stmt of Candidacy by arizonaspolitics on Scribd

*

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. http://bit.ly/AZpDonate 

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

NEW: Republican Strategist: "A Majority Of Mormons Voted For Trump, But You Had a 10% Point Defection To Biden"

Longtime Republican strategist Tyler Montague thinks that the Arizona Republican Party's election contest filed last night based largely on supposed anomalies in the heavily Mormon portion of the East Valley and Queen Creek is "bull crap".

As reported earlier, the Complaint - filed as a proposed Complaint in order to permit AZ GOP Chair Kelli Ward's attorneys to begin discovery before the Contest can be filed following Monday's statewide

(photo from KJZZ/Will Stone)

canvass (aka "certification") - alleges that "the results in CD5/Queen Creek were strongly inconsistent with voter registration data (party affiliation) and with historical voting data (voting in previous elections including the 2016 Presidential election)."

Garrett Archer, a data analyst for ABC 15 who was formerly with the Secretary of State's Office, noted last week that one of the Queen Creek precincts showed an 8.9% point swing away from Trump this year. CD5 - which contains that portion of Queen Creek, as well as major parts of Mesa and Gilbert - also is cited as being an anomaly.

The precinct in Arizona (with over 1k voters) with the biggest swing away from @realdonaldTrump is in the GOP suburb of Queen Creek.
Trump 2016: 67.4%
Trump 2020: 58.5%
Swing: -8.9 pic.twitter.com/lSGKCX29hI

— The AZ - abc15 - Data Guru (@Garrett_Archer) November 19, 2020

Archer's tweet last week caught the attention of many Republicans, who have used it to bolster their (inconsistent, and evidence-less) claims of fraud. 

Ward herself cited it as "(a)nother reason we need PRECINCT LEVEL audits in Maricopa County." (This makes little sense because voters from that precinct cast Election Day ballots at any of a number of Vote Centers in the area and around the county.) State Rep. Warren Petersen (R-LD12) then said that "This is my district and I can't see how this could possibly happen."

However, Montague cited three main reasons that Donald Trump received fewer votes than he did in 2016: Mormons, growth in the area from out of state, and people who were upset at Trump's posthumous treatment of longtime Arizona Senator John McCain. 

"A majority of Mormons voted for Trump. But, you had a 10% point defection," Montague asserts. He says that many East Valley Mormons (including himself) voted for Evan McMullin four years ago, and that "Biden picked up those third party defections this year."

Montague says the state party has "been putting out all sorts of bull crap.... It's embarrassing as a Republican to see this. Let's go win it by connecting with people and talking about good policies."

The hearing on Ward's request to permit discovery is at 10:30a.m. on Monday. At 11:00a.m., Arizona's results are going to be canvassed (certified). Immediately after the canvass, anyone has five days to file a Complaint contesting the election for grounds specified in Arizona law.

(Tonight, at 6pm, tune into ABC15 to watch friends @TomRyanLaw and @ThePolitiKat discuss the new lawsuit.)

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits.  

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

LIVE: Trump Campaign's Arizona Court Challenge to Maricopa County Voting

We are live-tweeting today's evidentiary hearing and oral argument in the Trump campaign's court challenge to Arizona's voting. Click on the below tweet to follow the latest:

UPDATES on Trump campaign's Arizona election irregularities lawsuit:

— "AZ Law" (@arizonaslaw) November 12, 2020

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits.  

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

BREAKING AWAY: Snell & Wilmer Attorneys Dump Trump's Election Irregularities Case

As the Trump campaign's Arizona election irregularities case goes to trial tomorrow morning, the plaintiffs will be without two of the high profile attorneys who helped begin the case on Saturday.

Two of Snell & Wilmer's partners - Eric Spencer and Brett Johnson - had helped Donald J. Trump for President and the Republican National Committee successfully intervene in last week's so-called Sharpiegate case. When the plaintiffs in that case - represented by the conservative Public Interest Legal Foundation - dismissed the suit on Saturday, Snell & Wilmer and Statecraft Law immediately filed a new case on behalf of the Trump campaign, the RNC and the Arizona Republican Party. 

The case was filed only a few hours after most news organizations projected that Joe Biden had defeated the President. Less than 21 hours later and without any public developments, Spencer and Johnson filed a little-noticed withdrawal.

The attorneys not only withdrew, but they attempted to make it clear that they had not been representing either the Trump campaign or the AZGOP. (They did not file an after-the-fact withdrawal in the previous case, which makes it unclear if they had represented the President in that case.) Their withdrawal was only from representing the RNC.

Phoenix-based Snell & Wilmer is on the cusp of being one of the 100 largest law firms in the nation (measured by the number of attorneys). Spencer was Arizona's State Election Director under former Secretary of State Michele Reagan, and Johnson is one of the best-known election law attorneys in the state and has represented Governor Doug Ducey in a number of recent Covid-related legal actions.

Their withdrawal came just before the New York Times published an article reporting on the "Growing Discomfort at Law Firms Representing Trump in Election Lawsuits". That article lays out some of the pressures from other clients for the large firms as well as internal discussions about representing the Trump campaign.

"Some senior lawyers at Jones Day, one of the country's largest law firms, are worried that it is advancing arguments that lack evidence and may be helping Mr. Trump and his allies undermine the integrity of American elections," read one portion.

In Arizona's case, the Trump campaign and the Republicans are alleging that Maricopa County poll workers disenfranchised many Republican voters and that that may have cost the President "up to thousands of votes" for the President. (It turned out to be a maximum of 180 votes.)

Although Spencer and Johnson are closely associated with the Republican party, Snell & Wilmer attorneys were much bigger financial supporters of the Biden campaign than the Trump reelection effort. Federal Election Commission filings show that ten attorneys contributed $1,000 or more to the challenger while only one attorney gave $1,000 to the President. (It was neither Spencer nor Johnson.)

Arizona's Law requested comment from several people at Snell & Wilmer and will update if responses warrant.

The Trump and Republican case goes before Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Daniel Kiley on Thursday. Arizona's Law and Arizona's Politics will be there to cover it.

Trump Lawsuit - Notice of Clarification and Withdrawal by arizonaspolitics on Scribd

 

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. http://bit.ly/AZpDonate We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

UPDATE: CNN Clarifies Article About Maricopa County's Emergency Voting; Putting the Genie Back In the Bottle Is Harder

UPDATE, 2:00p.m.: In response to Arizona's Politics' article, CNN has corrected their earlier piece to better reflect that Maricopa County did not just "extend" Early Voting through this coming weekend, and to better reflect the difference between the Early Voting period that ends this Friday and the Emergency Voting period that runs this coming Saturday, Sunday and Monday.

Their initial headline is in our initial Fact Check, below. The new headline changes "Early voting" to "Pre-election voting" and the second sentence acknowledges that the plan was actually put into place in September (as we reported at the time).

Unfortunately, it is hard to put the genie back in the bottle. After protesting that their original article did not give the impression that something just happened, a CNN reporter - not one of the ones who had written the article - went on-air to say that Maricopa County's early voting "has NOW been extended...."

FACT CHECK: Maricopa County NOT Suddenly Extending Early Voting Through The Weekend; CNN Is Incorrect, Previous "Emergency Voting" Plan Still In Place, Says Fontes

CNN reported this morning that Early Voting in Maricopa County "will continue" through this weekend. However, that is incorrect, Recorder Adrian Fontes tells Arizona's Politics. There will be previously-planned "Emergency Voting" vote centers open around the county, but no changes have recently been made.

The CNN report - headlined "Early voting will continue through weekend in Arizona's largest county"   - gives the impression that the County Board of Supervisors approved the change due to the pandemic.

"That is wrong," says Fontes. "They will be open under the plan that was approved earlier."

Both Early Voting and Emergency Voting are both similar processes set forth in Arizona's statutes. By law, Early Voting ends the Friday before the election. Emergency Voting is in place for the next three days, and requires the Emergency Voter to specify that something unforeseen happened after 5pm Friday that makes it impossible for them to vote in person on Election Day.

The statement that Emergency Voters will sign states: "I declare under penalty of perjury that I am experiencing or have experienced an emergency after 5:00 p.m. on the Friday immediately preceding the election and before 5:00 p.m. on the Monday immediately preceding the election that will prevent me from voting at a polling place on Election Day.”

Those statements will not be available to party Poll Observers for challenging the voter's emergency status.

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits.  

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

GUEST COMMENTARY: Don’t play politics; retain Superior Court Judge Christopher Coury!

The political campaign to remove Superior Court Judge Christopher Coury has gained momentum. This is wrong, especially when it is based only on a sliver of evidence.

Arizona went to the judicial retention system to fix this politicization. Despite Judge Coury’s ruling in the Invest in Ed Initiative case, which Democratic literature claims was overly partisan, it is important to keep in mind that it was one opinion out of many.

From my personal experience observing Judge Coury’s courtroom during law school (while he was on the criminal bench), I was able to see a much different Judge Coury. I saw a fair, compassionate, and impartial judge who followed the letter of the law, and went above and beyond in faithfully executing his judicial duties. I learned a lot about criminal proceedings and the jury selection process because he took the time to explain and teach me.

I was further impressed by the weekly program for juvenile transfer offenders (JTOPS), which he ran. Through the JTOPS program, he helped to rehabilitate many juvenile offenders by offering them a chance to learn from their mistakes, staying out of the Department of Corrections system, and avoid recidivism. 

Overall, a judge's ruling in one case cannot possibly show a full and accurate representation of their ability to serve on the bench as a nonpartisan judge. I believe Judge Coury is an asset to the Maricopa County Court system and would be missed if he is unfairly voted out based on one ruling. 

(Aaryn Weich is a 2019 graduate of the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law in Phoenix.)

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits.  

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

BREAKING: Arizona voter registration deadline EXTENDED until October 23. READ Judge Logan's opinion

In a stunning last minute decision, a judge extended Arizona's voter registration deadline from today until October 23. U.S. District Court Judge Steven Logan issued the ruling in a case brought by Mi Familia Vota mere hours before the statutory deadline of October 5.

For a very good (and, quick) article on the ruling, please see the article by Andrew Oxford.

Here is the ruling itself. There is no word yet on whether the state will appeal to the 9th Circuit.

2020 1005 MiFamilia -Ruling by arizonaspolitics on Scribd

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits.  

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

BREAKING: Stop The Trump Administration From Arguing Against Obamacare - Sen. McSally Votes To Move Forward With Schumer Bill

Arizona Sen. Martha McSally (R-AZ) and four other vulnerable Republicans voted with Democrats this afternoon to move forward with a symbolic bill that would have prevented the Trump Administration's Department of Justice from arguing to repeal the Obamacare bill in the Supreme Court next month. 

The measure failed to move forward, on a 51-43 vote; 60 votes were necessary - and, it would have needed to be signed by the President. 

The one-sentence bill from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer stated that the U.S. could not "advocate that a court invalidate any provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act."

 McSally is trailing to Democratic candidate Mark Kelly in the special election for the seat previously held by the late Sen. John McCain. The question of the Affordable Care Act and its protections for people with pre-existing conditions has been a central one in the campaign.

Arizona's Politics has asked her office to comment, and to state how she would have voted on the bill if it had come to a vote. More from Politico.

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits.  

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

FACT CHECK: President's New Executive Order Re: Healthcare Explicitly Does...Nothing But Maintain Status Quo, Notwithstanding Sen. McSally Praise (READ Text)

Arizona Senator Martha McSally today lauded President Donald Trump's new Executive Order regarding healthcare, saying that it makes it federal policy to protect individuals with pre-existing conditions and "helps eliminate the surprise medical billing". 

Make no mistake—we will protect Americans with pre-existing conditions. The executive order @realDonaldTrump signed last night makes this federal policy & helps eliminate the surprise medical billing that is hurting so many American families. https://t.co/hn3pAmtRlA

— Martha McSally (@SenMcSallyAZ) September 25, 2020

However, the Executive Order itself says that the President had already made it federal policy to protect people with pre-existing conditions. "It has been and will continue to be the policy of the United States... to ensure that Americans with pre-existing conditions can obtain the insurance of their choice at affordable rates." (There is a distinction to be made in that statement, too, because the President, the Senator and many Republicans have tried to repeal the protection in the ACA that ensures people with pre-existing conditions do not have to pay higher premiums than others.)

The Executive Order goes on to encourage Congress to ask his Administration to work with Congress on the surprise billing issue, and to take administrative action if Congress fails to pass such a bill by the end of the year.

The rest of the Executive Order was more of a campaign document of all of the great things Congress and the Administration have done during the past four years, and orders that his departments "shall maintain and build upon" them.

Fact Check: The first part of Sen. McSally's tweet is proven FALSE by the text of the Executive Order. The second part is MOSTLY TRUE, because the exhortation can be read as "helping" push Congress along.

Read the Executive Order below:

NEW: U.S. Senate Moves To Confirm Tucson Judge, In Topsy-Turvy Battle

(This was initially published on our sister site, Arizona's Law.)

UPDATE 9/23, 1:45pm: Judge John Hinderaker was CONFIRMED by the U.S. Senate this afternoon, on a 70-27 vote. As expected, the vote was topsy-turvy, with almost all of the opposition to President Trump's nomination coming from Republican Senators. Both of Arizona's Senators voted "aye". (See below for statement.) 

This is a developing story and will be updated as warranted.

(UPDATE 9/23, 11am: This morning's cloture vote confirms the topsy-turvy nature of the Hinderaker nomination. Republicans cast 22 of the 26 votes against moving forward on the nomination, and Democrats' votes contstituted 42 of the 71 aye votes.)

(UPDATE 9/23, 9:35am: The Senate voted 71-26 this morning to close debate on the Hinderaker nomination. The vote to confirm him will take place this afternoon.)

President Donald Trump's nomination of Tucson Judge John Hinderaker to the District Court bench heads to the Senate floor on Monday after topsy-turvy behind-the-scenes maneuvering.

The Pima County Superior Court jurist was nominated for the lifetime position nearly one year ago. It has been stalled since March, after the Senate Judiciary Committee recommended his confirmation on a 16-6 vote. However, the six "no" votes all came from Republican Senators, apparently led by Missouri Senator Josh Hawley and concerns regarding the Second Amendment. Yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell filed the cloture motion to move it to the floor.

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) tells Arizona's Law that she is "pleased" to see the nomination moving to the vote next week. “Judge Hinderaker brings to the bench a wealth of legal knowledge, decades of litigation experience, and a stellar reputation for integrity and fairness. I’m pleased the White House worked with me to advance his nomination.”

If Hinderaker is confirmed next week, it will mean that Arizona's District Court bench will be at full strength for the first time in recent memory. Arizona's Senators did introduce a bill to increase the size of the Arizona bench, but it has not moved forward.

(thanks to Judicial Nominations Blog for the heads-up)

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits.  

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

BREAKING: Kanye Loses Arizona Supreme Court Appeal, Off the Ballot In Key Swing State

Sidestepping the issue of Kanye West's registration as a Republican in Wyoming, the Arizona Supreme Court nonetheless kept him off of Arizona's November 3 ballot. They instead based today's decision on the fact that the rapper/celebrity had not filed the legally-required Statement of Interest before collecting signatures to be placed on the ballot. That statute was recently enacted by the State Legislature.

The court challenge to West's last minute effort to get on the Arizona ballot was primarily based on the fact that both West and his slate of electors (for the Electoral College) were registered as Republican, and that he could thus not get on the ballot by collecting signatures as an independent candidate. The issue of the Statement of Interest became an after-thought, and the trial court judge did not address that requirement in his ruling last week.

To read the Supreme Court's Decision Order, please head over to Arizona's Law (our sister site).

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits.  

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

BREAKING: Arizona Political Consultants Owed $1.2M To Gather Iffy Signatures Nationally For Kanye West, Although West Lent His Committee $6.7M

So many updates on Kanye West's Presidential campaign, so little time on a pseudo-getaway afternoon.

1) Yesterday, Kanye's filing to get on the ballot in Arizona was rejected. His counsel immediately filed an appeal with the Arizona Supreme Court, and the Court required briefs by 1:00pm. Today. Kanye's counsel filed a short memorandum, below, while the challengers relied on their filings in the trial court.

The Supreme Court will decide the appeal by Tuesday afternoon, as that is the hard deadline for several Arizona counties to send their ballots to the printers.

2) In their trial court pleadings, West's team indicated that they were planning to file additional petition signatures by today's filing deadline. HOWEVER, the trial court's Thursday Order keeping West off of the ballot also instructed the Arizona Secretary of State from accepting any additional filings.

But, even though the injunction is still in place pending the Supreme Court's decision, West petition gatherers went to Secretary of State Katie Hobbs' office to turn in an additional batch of signatures. They previously turned in more than 57,000 signatures with a requirement that more than 39,039 need to be valid. Today's batch would have brought them to "roughly 100,000" signatures.

However, the Secretary of State's Office did not accept them and, according to West consultant Gregg Keller, their attorneys were informed that the petitions would not be accepted. Keller is now posting on Twitter that there are protests outside the Capitol and tells Arizona's Politics that "dozens" of people are there. 

Video Keller provided shows about two dozen people in "Kanye West 2020" shirts mildly interested in the situation.

Arizona Star columnist Tim Steller published a well-reported piece Wednesday detailing the methods used to obtain some of those Arizona signatures. Those shirts get a mention, in fact. Must read.

3) Kanye's campaign committee finally filed its first finance report today, and it sheds some interesting light on the efforts to get on the ballot. (More to come.)

 *

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. http://bit.ly/AZpDonate 

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

BREAKING: Kanye West Will NOT Appear On Arizona's Presidential Election Ballots In November, Judge Rules Today

Musician/celebrity Kanye West cannot appear on Arizona's ballot for President in November, a judge ruled this afternoon.

Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Scott McCoy heard oral argument, questioned the attorneys for both sides, and determined that because West is registered as a Republican, he cannot petition to be on the ballot and avoid the usual party primary system.

Kanye West has filed to run for President on the November 3 ballot in several states, running on the (newly-formed-yet-ubiquitous) "Birthday Party". He has made some references to still being supportive of Republican President Donald Trump, and many of the vendors and attorneys assisting him in various states have ties to the Republican Party. Here in Arizona, attorney Tim LaSota represents West; he has been counsel for the Republican party and many Republican candidates and groups.

The challenge to West is based on the surprising facts that both West and his slate of Arizona electors (for the electoral college) were registered Republicans. (After the case was filed on Monday, the electors re-registered as independents on Tuesday.) West is attempting to qualify for the Arizona ballot under a procedure for "any qualified elector who is not a registered member of a political party that is recognized". (A.R.S. 16-341(A). (The reason it limits persons from recognized parties is because those persons already have the opportunity to run in the Republican - or, Democratic - primary election.)

Plaintiff's counsel Joseph Roth and Josh Bendor (from the Arizona law firm of Osborn Maledon) told McCoy that Arizona's ballot access laws properly are designed to "avoid this kind of late stage chaos" and that allowing him on the ballot at this point would be "confusing to voters, unfair to voters."

Timothy Berg (from Fennemore Craig), representing the slate of West electors, countered that the term "qualified elector" in the statute only applies to Arizona residents and not to Presidential candidates from other states. 

(For some of the legal pleadings and further information, please visit Arizona's Law, our sister website.)

*

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits.  

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

BREAKING: Fox News Poll Shows McSally Headed In Wrong Direction, Now Trails By 17 Percentage Points; Trump Also Sliding (READ Poll)

In news that President Trump, Senator McSally and Arizona Republicans will not like to see, Fox News released its most recent poll showing that both top-of-the-ticket candidates are sliding among Arizona voters with just over one month before mail-in ballots go out.

The last time Fox News published an Arizona poll - three months ago - it caught people's attention both because Donald Trump trailed former Vice President Joe Biden 46%-42% and Martha McSally trailed then-likely Democratic challenger Mark Kelly 50%-37%. However, both Republicans have lost ground in the intervening time, with Trump now behind 49%-40% and McSally slipping to a 17-point deficit (56%-39%).

Some Republican supporters criticized the previous Fox News poll because it surveyed registered voters. Those people will be happy to hear that the new poll - closer to Election Day - filtered out "likely voters" from "registered voters". (The results were nearly identical between both sub-groups.)

Interestingly, as both parties work hard to get voters to sign up to receive early ballots, and more than 3/4 are on the Permanent Early Voting List, only 61% told pollsters that they plan to vote early (7% in person at early voting locations, and 54% by mail). 35% plan to vote on November 3 (24% in person, 11% dropping off their early ballot). Those numbers obviously do not add up to the large percentages on the PEVL (or receiving one-time-only mail-in ballots), but do jibe with Arizona's Politics' anecdotal conversations with many voters who like to feed their ballot into the machine or hand-drop it in the box.*

*

* In Maricopa County, if you have not returned your early ballot, you can still receive a regular - not a provisional - ballot at your Vote Center. Statewide, here is the link to request an early ballot. 

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits.  

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

NEW: Less Obvious Connections Between Arizona and "We Build The Wall", Arrestees Steve Bannon and Brian Kolfage

We all know the well-publicized connections between Arizona and the "We Build the Wall" effort. WBTW founder Brian Kolfage and Advisory Board Chair Steve Bannon were arrested this morning of defrauding thousands of contributors by funneling more than $1M for their personal expenses. Both have long and well-documented histories with Arizona.

But, here are a few of the lesser-known connections, which we just rattled off in a series of tweets:

1) @RepGosar tried to get taxpayers' $ redirected to WBTW (https://bit.ly/32dxVLI)

2) Bd member Curt Schilling (fmr resident, Dbacks star)

3) Rep. Warren Peterson (@votewarren, Maj. Ldr, passed bill thru AZ House to allow We Build The Wall to blow off county/city building permits, etc (https://bit.ly/328Bxig, stalled in Senate)) 4) Consultant Mary Ann Mendoza (Mesa) 5) Comms Dir. Jennifer Lawrence (previously worked for @AZGOP Chair @kelliwardaz Senate campaign) JLaw's cell phone(s) were seized this a.m. in Nevada.

6) Dustin Stockton, CEO of "America First Projects" and who had his cell phone(s) seized this a.m. along with spouse Lawrence (above); former Chief Strategist for the above-mentioned Kelli Ward. (h/t @TinPhx)

Of course, there are other spider web-like connections between some of these individuals, as well. For

instance, we do not know if Rep. Gosar was coordinating with Steve Bannon on the re-direction of U.S. funds for Bannon's private piggy-bank, but we do know the two worked together on wooing far-right politicians in Europe. Rep. Gosar was nervous enough about that that he hid the information from his required travel disclosure forms.

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. 

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

BREAKING: Supreme Court Reverses, Invest In Ed Initiative Back On The Ballot (READ Decision)

In a major decision, the Arizona Supreme Court has reinstated the Invest In Ed ballot initiative that will

place a surcharge on higher income earners to help fund education. The decision reverses the Superior Court opinion that removed the measure on the basis that the 100-word description was not comprehensive enough.

"The Court unanimously finds that the 100-word description did not create a significant danger of confusion or unfairness and reverses the trial court ruling."

The Justices did agree with Judge Christopher Coury that the incentives that the petition circulating company paid individuals who collected many of the signatures "did not warrant the invalidation" of the petition signatures, although recent statutes prohibit initiative circulators from paying by the signature.

Today's decision on the 100-word description will bode well for the other three ballot measures - all of which are currently in front of the Supreme Court on similar challenges.

A more complete Opinion will likely be published in the next couple of months.

*

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. 

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.

THEY'RE BA-ACK: DefendArizona Returns To Drop $1.9M To Attack "Millionaire" Mark Kelly (WATCH Ad)

DefendArizona is back today, spending $1.9M over the next two weeks on ads designed to pummel Senate candidate Mark Kelly as a "millionaire" who cannot be trusted. The one-candidate SuperPAC that spent $22.6M in 2018 beating up Kyrsten Sinema, makes its long-awaited (by some) return.

DefendArizona informed the Federal Elections Commission today that it spent $1.0M within the past 48 hours, but spokesperson Barrett Marson tells Arizona's Politics that the total budget through the end of August is $1.9M. 

DefendArizona hammers Mark Kelly for World View Enterprises, a company that he co-founded several years ago, but only retains a stock position in now. World View received monies from Pima County and the state. The new ad states "Kelly got paid", although it is unknown how much money he earned from the company. (He values his stock at being worth between $100-250,000.) The ad also argues that World View received a $1-2M loan (aka grant) from the pandemic-related Paycheck Protection Program, although Kelly is no longer involved with the company (that continues to operate in Tucson).

As in 2018, DefendArizona has started out with funding from Republican contributors from Arizona; it brought in $166,000 through June 30. Either it has raised another $1.8M from those givers since then, or it is following the 2018 playbook, when it became the Arizona vessel for the Senate Leadership Fund. SLF - a partly dark money group affiliated with Senate Majority Leader (and multi-millionaire) Mitch McConnell - contribute nearly all of the $22.6M in 2018.

*

If you would like to show your appreciation for Arizona's Politics reporting, please consider donating to our pool to support OTHER journalism-related nonprofits. 

We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com or call 602-799-7025. Thanks.