FACT CHECK X 2: Trent Franks, EMILY's List Trade Misleading Abortion-Related Fundraising Pitches; WATCH: Franks' Cong. Hearing On 20-Week Ban

Well, it has been a day for abortion-related fundraising pitches and a Congressional hearing on one of Arizona Rep. Trent Franks' (R-CD8) bills attempting to outlaw abortions.

It started with a subcommittee hearing chaired by Franks on his bill to ban abortions in the District of Columbia after 20 weeks.  (Video below) His passionate opening statement was followed by a disclaimer from Democratic Ranking Member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), and questioning of a mixed panel (three women/one man, three in favor/one against).

(Click on picture below for hearing page, then click on "video webcast button";  the hearing inexplicably begins only after about 8 minutes of silence - don't give up.  In fact, move the slider a few minutes in.)

Immediately after the hearing, Franks' campaign office sent out an e-mail (below the jump), trying to  raise funds based upon his pursuit of outlawing abortion and that "NARAL, Planned Parenthood and their pro-abortion friends have targeted me".

Within hours, EMILY's List, a group that raises money to support female Democratic candidates, struck back with an e-mail (below the jump) trying to raise funds based on the fact that all of the Representatives at this morning's hearing were men.

Both of the fundraising e-mails were deceptive.

Franks' missive repeatedly claimed that he is "a top target of the abortion industry", and that that is why he needs contributions to his reelection campaign.  The truth is that neither NARAL nor Planned Parenthood (nor others ideologically opposed to Franks' positions, for that matter) have spent a dime trying to defeat him in his last three elections (according to the Center for Responsive Politics).  The e-mail attached by the Franks' campaign, from MoveOn.org, does target the bill that Franks - and the rest of the Arizona Republican delegation, as co-sponsors - are proposing.

The EMILY's List fundraising e-mail is equally deceptive.  It tries to replay the success that women's groups had last year when House Republicans held a hearing on birth control issues without having any female witnesses on the panel.  (There was a large outcry, and they are trying to get this picture to "go viral", too.)

However, the panel was mostly women, including one who spoke against the measure.  Second, the membership of the subcommittee is all male; but, interested female members of the Judiciary Committee would likely have been welcome to sit in.  (Many of the males in that picture were Democrats who strenuously oppose the bill.)  Third, the subcommittee did not even take a vote on the bill today, as implied in the e-mail.

Abortion is, by definition, a very personal and emotional issue.  It is very easy for sitting Congressmen - and for women's groups - to veer away from facts and honest arguments when attempting to raise passions... and money.  That does not make it right.

GRADES:
Rep. Trent Franks:  "C-"
EMILY's List: "C-"

READ: Pro-Arpaio's (Klayman's/Burnell Smith's) Response To Recall Arpaio's Motion To Dismiss and For Sanctions: Our Lawsuit's Not Frivolous, Your Motion Is

David Burnell Smith, former Arizona lawmaker and local counsel for the pro-Arpaio Citizens To Protect Fair Election Results ("CPFER"), filed a response to the motion filed by the Respect Arizona ("RA") defendants.  His office was kind enough to forward a copy to Arizona's Politics, and it is re-produced below.

CPFER filed suit to stop RA's petition drive to recall recently re-elected Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.  RA has until May 30 to file more than 335,000 valid signatures to put the recall on the ballot.  CPFER claims that the recall effort is unconstitutional because it began less than six months after the Sheriff was sworn in for his sixth term.  While the Constitution is not clear whether the six month waiting period applies only to the first time that someone is elected to the office or whether it applies to each subsequent election, Arizona statutes clearly state the former.

RA filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, and asked for sanctions against the plaintiffs and their attorneys.  Here is CPFER's delayed response.

  Plaintiff's Oppositiopn to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss by arizonaspolitics

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.

READ: Court Hearing On Suit Against Arpaio Recall Day Before Filing Deadline

There will be a hearing on the lawsuit filed against the group attempting to recall Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and it will take place the day before the deadline to turn in the 335,000+ recall petition signatures.  (The Minute Entry is produced below.)

Unfortunately for Respect Arizona ("RA"), the recall proponents, Superior Court Judge Michael Herrod does not appear ready to rule on their motion to dismiss the case and to sanction the plaintiffs.  RA had requested an expedited hearing.

Nor does Herrod appear interested in ruling on Citizens To Protect Fair Election Results' ("CPFER's") - the Plaintiffs' - request for a preliminary injunction against the recall effort, and to prevent any signatures from being accepted by the County Elections Department before the May 30 deadline.

Instead, the judge has decided to simply find out "the current status of the case and for scheduling purposes."  The conference will be telephonic and is blocked on the calendar for 30 minutes.

Despite the court's designation, it is likely that both sides will try to argue the urgency of their motions.  However, it appears unlikely to matter much to either side 29 hours before the deadline to turn in the petitions.

Since shutting down the paid petition circulators that gathered the lion's share of the more than 200,000 valid signatures last announced by RA - for a 2nd time - the recall group has made little of a visible push with volunteers to collect the more than 90,000 signatures they said they still needed (in their May 17 e-mail).

Any boost that RA would receive from a favorable court hearing will come too late.  On the other side, CPFER (and their friend, Arpaio) is not as concerned about the petition drive without the paid circulators.  And, they have almost an equal chance to receive an injunction either before or after the filing deadline.

  Arpaio Recall suit Minute Entry 5/21/13 by arizonaspolitics

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.

WATCH: Arizona Rep. Gosar Accused Of Spouting "GOP's Crazy New Conspiracy Theory" Re: IRS Leaks; Watch Entire Line Of Questioning

Members of both Houses of Congress had a chance to take on former Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") Commissioner Doug Shulman today.  While most of the questioning focused on the recent mega-controversy surrounding the handling of applications for tax exemptions from conservatively-named organizations, Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar (R-CD4) gained some attention for expanding the battlelines.

The Huffington Post labeled Gosar's prosecutorial five minutes as the "GOP's Crazy New Conspiracy Theory", and attached the 31-second clip where Gosar asked Shulman about whether he investigated the 2012 claims by Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) that he had heard from a Bain investor that Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney had not paid any taxes for ten years.

When Shulman replied that he had not investigated it, Gosar forcefully declared, "Shame on you!  Absolutely shame on you!"  He then forced Shulman to repeat that he had sworn an oath of office.

The Harry Reid portion of Gosar's questioning was just the last of three examples where he asked Shulman whether he had initiated investigations of media reports of tax-related information becoming public from government sources.  The first two entailed allegations that Administration economic adviser Austin Goolsbee had spoken out of turn about the business structure of powerhouse conservative funder Koch Industries, and that the IRS had divulged pending applications from conservative groups to Pro Publica last year.

Here is the entire back-and-forth between Gosar and Shulman:



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.

WATCH: Rep. Trent Franks Gives U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder A Break!

Most people reading this blog are probably already familiar with the Congressional grilling that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder received yesterday about the IRS and AP controversites.  Arizona Rep. Trent Franks (R-CD8) gave him something of a break, using his five minutes to question Holder about the conviction of the abortion provider in Philadelphia and whether the Department of Justice had prosecuted anyone for violating the Partial Birth Abortion law passed by Congress in 2002.

Holder noted that the law has been on the books since the Bush Administration, and that he would look into whether there have ever been any prosecutions.


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 and READ: Recall Arpaio Group's Plug-Pulling Statement; Group Scrubs News On Its Facebook Page

Arizona's Politics reported earlier that the group attempting to recall Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio was pulling the plug on paid petition circulating.  Arizona's Politics posted the link on Respect Arizona's  ("RA's") Facebook page, so that volunteer (and paid) circulators would know of and understand this development;  not only did RA delete the link, but it deleted its recent posts exhorting volunteers and donors to step up.

Here is the text of the news release just sent out by RA:  On behalf of Respect Arizona, I am writing to inform you that we have halted the paid component of the petition circulating effort to recall Sheriff Arpaio. “Unfortunately, donors who had initially lined up to fund the final push have changed their mind. Unless other donors step up, with 14 days to go we must now rely exclusively on volunteers to collect the remaining signatures needed to recall Sheriff Arpaio. The absence of a viable candidate to defeat Sheriff Arpaio caused them to hesitate and reconsider” stated Lilia Alvarez, Co-Founder and Campaign Manager of Respect Arizona.


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, and READ: Recall Arpaio Lawsuit Inching Toward Hearing; Motion For Preliminary Injunction

Arizona's Politics has been following (most recent article) the slow-moving lawsuit filed by Joe Arpaio supporters to throw out the recall petition effort against the Maricopa County Sheriff.  The anti-recall Citizens To Protect Fair Election Results ("CPFER") has until tomorrow afternoon to file a response to the motion to dismiss the case and sanction the plaintiffs, filed by the group organizing the recall, Respect Arizona ("RA"). Also, CPFER has filed a motion for a declaratory judgment and preliminary injunction.

It is very possible that the Superior Court Judge will set an expedited hearing on RA's motions for next week, after CPFER's response - the Court had extended the deadline to respond upon CPFER's request.  A hearing will likely NOT be set on the preliminary injunction until plaintiff's completely follow the rules - they did not file the required affidavit and there is no accompanying motion asking for an expedited hearing.  (The declaratory judgment should have been part of the relief sought in the complaint.)

Here is the plaintiffs' new motion:

  Klayman Mot Decl Relief Injunction 9may2013

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: Recall Arpaio Effort Pulls Plug - Again - On Paid Circulators

Arizona's Politics has learned from two sources (circulators) that Respect Arizona - the group circulating the petition to recall Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio - has (again) pulled the plug on paid circulators.

With two weeks to go until the deadline to turn in the 335,000+ signatures to the County Recorder, it appears the controversial effort will have to try to rely on volunteers - who may be dispirited by the inevitable negative media coverage of today's development - to push the effort over the edge.  The last announced count was that they had more than 200,000 signatures;  most of those likely came from the army of paid circulators.

(If you have information relevant to this breaking story, please call or e-mail Arizona's Politics.)

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.