This morning, I changed the settings for the display and format of comments. I did this primarily because there is a good discussion taking place on my post titled "Arpaio Recall Challenge Spurs National Battle Of Birther Heavyweights; Some Upset Arpaio Has Not Filed Criminal Complaint Vs. Obama".I do not wish to get in the way of that discussion by requiring moderation. (Also, I have seen a no-doubt-temporary dropoff in the amount of spam comments, and Blogger now has a setting where you can require moderation on older posts but not on newer posts.)
To highlight the discussion and promote more commenting, I have also re-placed comments under the post - instead of the previous setting of a pop-up window that had to be clicked to open.
I welcome your comments and civil discussion. I reserve the right to remove comments, but will only do so if I deem them to be spam/offensive/personal attacks.
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.
Friday, March 22, 2013
Thursday, March 21, 2013
Ex-State Legislator/Birther David Burnell Smith Picks Up the Ball, Files Lawsuit Challenging the Arpaio Recall Effort; Smith: Is "Barack Obama True To His Name, Or Is He a Puppet?"; Also, Some Legal Analysis
Former Arizona Legislator David Burnell Smith - along with out of state attorney Larry Klayman - filed a complaint to stop the effort to recall Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The legal action not only challenges the constitutionality of the recall, but claims that the recall violates the constitutional rights (due process, equal protection) of everyone who voted in the Sheriff's race last November.
The lawsuit, filed in Maricopa County Superior Court today (and inexplicably listed as a "Lower Court Appeal"), LC2013-000137, lists two of the founders of Citizens To Protect Fair Election Results ("CPFER"), Jim Wise and Jeff Lichter, as plaintiffs, along with CPFER itself (for no apparently valid reason). Besides the Secretary of State (likely unnecessary) and Maricopa County (and officials), the recall committee Respect Arizona ("RA") and the officers who signed RA's organizational documents are listed as defendants.
Earlier today, Arizona Republic columnist Laurie Roberts went after CPFER's general counsel, Larry Klayman, for his "homo" comeback to RA's chairman. The remark was apparently part of an e-mail chain earlier this week after Klayman sent a final cease and desist demand letter to William Fisher; the e-mail chain was posted today on RA's website.
After Klayman and CPFER posted a plea for donations on national conservative website WND.com, well-known Birther (a term used to describe someone who believes that President Barack Obama misled Americans about his birthplace) attorney Orly Taitz called out the effort and Arpaio's failure to file criminal charges against Obama. In it, Taitz took shots at Klayman and noted, among other things, that he could not file a lawsuit in Arizona because he is not licensed here.
Taitz either did not know or pretended not to know that Klayman could file along with an Arizona co-counsel. Enter former lawmaker David Burnell Smith.
Smith left office this past January, after failing to make it out of the Republican primary last year. (Shortly after that primary loss, he made news headlines by being arrested on DUI charges; he handles DUI cases as part of his practice. The charges were transferred from Scottsdale City Court to another court in December, and it is unclear at this time what the status is in the new court. M-0751-TR-2012024408 )
Almost exactly one year ago, Smith appeared alongside Arpaio at a news conference and gave an impassioned support of Arpaio's investigation of Obama's birth records. Smith was particularly impressed with the Selective Service registration document that Arpaio showed him, and Smith called for Arpaio to keep pursuing the President.
"Sheriff, stay on him. Because we deserve an answer. The people of Arizona deserve an answer. And, the people of the United States of America deserves an answer as to whether Barack Obum... Obama...is true to his name or is he a puppet." (The rest of his 100-second statement is in the video embedded below.)
It is worth noting that Arpaio's investigation was done with the support of the same members of the Surprise Tea Party Patriots who are responsible for supporting Arpaio today by hiring Smith (and Klayman) and filing this lawsuit.
Smith did not speak at today's press conference (video below), but Klayman gave a reading from it and a synopsis.
As Arizona's Politics has previously noted, CPFER is relying on the provision of the State Constitution that calls for a six-month period before a recall can begin. The provision does not specify whether "held his office" means from the beginning of his first term in office or from the start of the most recent term. The Legislature enacted a statute that clearly defined it as the former. The plaintiffs' Complaint pretends that the Constitutional provision is completely clear and that the statute unconstitutionally contradicts it. The defendants will be trying to convince the court that the statute does not contradict that provision and that, in fact, the constitutional provision actually does seem to indicate that a subsequent term does not restart the six-month waiting period (e.g. 2nd sentence does recognize the concept of "terms" and did not use that in the first sentence.)
When the plaintiffs go on to add the counts about abuse of process and citizens' constitutional rights being violated simply by the conduct and content of this recall, they may be opening themselves up to Arizona's anti-SLAPP ("Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation") statutes. Other than the standard statutory protections against lawsuits designed to harass/delay/intimidate/etc., the anti-SLAPP provisions specifically address citizens' rights to circulate recall petitions. The section, A.R.S. 12-752, sets forth procedures for filing a motion to dismiss, and the damages that shall be assessed against the suing party.
(One minor note: the plaintiffs ask for injunctive relief. However, per the docket and the complaint, it does not appear that they have - yet - filed the proper paperwork to seek a hearing for that. Arizona law requires that the complaint or a separate affidavit be verified by the plaintiff(s) (not the attorney), and that a notice of hearing be filed (and served). That has not been done.
(Postscript analysis, 3/22/13, 7:50am: Thinking about the effects of this lawsuit on the big picture while running this morning and the possible ways this could play out, I kept coming to the conclusion that the lawsuit may actually end up backfiring. In light of the revelation this week that the recall group was short of money and that it might be difficult to finish the task relying solely on volunteers, this legal action - particularly if the defendants move quickly (they will likely get pro bono legal help) and get a judge to dismiss it and assess legal fees and costs, it may help recall proponents whip volunteers into a righteous frenzy. Not to mention that it may prompt an influx of donations locally and from around the country. Also, Arpaio efforts (paid or grassroots) to block the recall volunteers through legal action or by putting out their own "Support Sheriff Joe" petitions or Shadow Army could stir up more publicity for RA.)
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.
The lawsuit, filed in Maricopa County Superior Court today (and inexplicably listed as a "Lower Court Appeal"), LC2013-000137, lists two of the founders of Citizens To Protect Fair Election Results ("CPFER"), Jim Wise and Jeff Lichter, as plaintiffs, along with CPFER itself (for no apparently valid reason). Besides the Secretary of State (likely unnecessary) and Maricopa County (and officials), the recall committee Respect Arizona ("RA") and the officers who signed RA's organizational documents are listed as defendants.
Earlier today, Arizona Republic columnist Laurie Roberts went after CPFER's general counsel, Larry Klayman, for his "homo" comeback to RA's chairman. The remark was apparently part of an e-mail chain earlier this week after Klayman sent a final cease and desist demand letter to William Fisher; the e-mail chain was posted today on RA's website.
After Klayman and CPFER posted a plea for donations on national conservative website WND.com, well-known Birther (a term used to describe someone who believes that President Barack Obama misled Americans about his birthplace) attorney Orly Taitz called out the effort and Arpaio's failure to file criminal charges against Obama. In it, Taitz took shots at Klayman and noted, among other things, that he could not file a lawsuit in Arizona because he is not licensed here.
Taitz either did not know or pretended not to know that Klayman could file along with an Arizona co-counsel. Enter former lawmaker David Burnell Smith.Smith left office this past January, after failing to make it out of the Republican primary last year. (Shortly after that primary loss, he made news headlines by being arrested on DUI charges; he handles DUI cases as part of his practice. The charges were transferred from Scottsdale City Court to another court in December, and it is unclear at this time what the status is in the new court. M-0751-TR-2012024408 )
Almost exactly one year ago, Smith appeared alongside Arpaio at a news conference and gave an impassioned support of Arpaio's investigation of Obama's birth records. Smith was particularly impressed with the Selective Service registration document that Arpaio showed him, and Smith called for Arpaio to keep pursuing the President.
"Sheriff, stay on him. Because we deserve an answer. The people of Arizona deserve an answer. And, the people of the United States of America deserves an answer as to whether Barack Obum... Obama...is true to his name or is he a puppet." (The rest of his 100-second statement is in the video embedded below.)
It is worth noting that Arpaio's investigation was done with the support of the same members of the Surprise Tea Party Patriots who are responsible for supporting Arpaio today by hiring Smith (and Klayman) and filing this lawsuit.
Smith did not speak at today's press conference (video below), but Klayman gave a reading from it and a synopsis.
As Arizona's Politics has previously noted, CPFER is relying on the provision of the State Constitution that calls for a six-month period before a recall can begin. The provision does not specify whether "held his office" means from the beginning of his first term in office or from the start of the most recent term. The Legislature enacted a statute that clearly defined it as the former. The plaintiffs' Complaint pretends that the Constitutional provision is completely clear and that the statute unconstitutionally contradicts it. The defendants will be trying to convince the court that the statute does not contradict that provision and that, in fact, the constitutional provision actually does seem to indicate that a subsequent term does not restart the six-month waiting period (e.g. 2nd sentence does recognize the concept of "terms" and did not use that in the first sentence.)
When the plaintiffs go on to add the counts about abuse of process and citizens' constitutional rights being violated simply by the conduct and content of this recall, they may be opening themselves up to Arizona's anti-SLAPP ("Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation") statutes. Other than the standard statutory protections against lawsuits designed to harass/delay/intimidate/etc., the anti-SLAPP provisions specifically address citizens' rights to circulate recall petitions. The section, A.R.S. 12-752, sets forth procedures for filing a motion to dismiss, and the damages that shall be assessed against the suing party.
(One minor note: the plaintiffs ask for injunctive relief. However, per the docket and the complaint, it does not appear that they have - yet - filed the proper paperwork to seek a hearing for that. Arizona law requires that the complaint or a separate affidavit be verified by the plaintiff(s) (not the attorney), and that a notice of hearing be filed (and served). That has not been done.
(Postscript analysis, 3/22/13, 7:50am: Thinking about the effects of this lawsuit on the big picture while running this morning and the possible ways this could play out, I kept coming to the conclusion that the lawsuit may actually end up backfiring. In light of the revelation this week that the recall group was short of money and that it might be difficult to finish the task relying solely on volunteers, this legal action - particularly if the defendants move quickly (they will likely get pro bono legal help) and get a judge to dismiss it and assess legal fees and costs, it may help recall proponents whip volunteers into a righteous frenzy. Not to mention that it may prompt an influx of donations locally and from around the country. Also, Arpaio efforts (paid or grassroots) to block the recall volunteers through legal action or by putting out their own "Support Sheriff Joe" petitions or Shadow Army could stir up more publicity for RA.)
Arizona Senators Vote No On Continuing Resolution Averting Shutdown; Passed 73-26
Arizona's Senators were among the 26 who voted "nay" on the package to continue funding the federal government for the next six months. The Wednesday afternoon vote result was 73-26, and is expected to win approval from the House of Representatives on Thursday.
John McCain and Jeff Flake were on the losing end of the vote, but were with a slim majority of their Republican colleagues. The GOP split was 19-26. Although we have not received any statements from the Senators, it would appear that this Politico story hit on the reason for their opposition when it noted that "billions are shifted within Defense to help the military services cope with depleted operations accounts. But the Army is still left with 14 percent less than it had budgeted for the next six months."
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.
John McCain and Jeff Flake were on the losing end of the vote, but were with a slim majority of their Republican colleagues. The GOP split was 19-26. Although we have not received any statements from the Senators, it would appear that this Politico story hit on the reason for their opposition when it noted that "billions are shifted within Defense to help the military services cope with depleted operations accounts. But the Army is still left with 14 percent less than it had budgeted for the next six months."
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.
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Retired Rep. Jim Kolbe Hired By Pima County To Lobby For Federal Funding
Retired Arizona Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-AZ) has registered to lobby the federal government on behalf of Pima County. Along with Phoenix-based Capitol Strategies (Stephen and Karen Bloch), Kolbe will work to help implement the county's Aerospace and Defense Corridor and El Corazon de los Tres Rios del Norte projects.
The lobbying registration of Capitol Strategies was noted by Politico earlier today. It did not note Kolbe's involvement, likely because of Kolbe's "strategic alliance/partnership" with Capitol Strategies.
The Pima County Board of Supervisors approved the one year contract in February, and has agreed to pay up to $110,400 (at $250/hour).
Kolbe represented much of southern Arizona in Congress between 1985 and 2007, and was succeeded by now-retired Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ).
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.
The lobbying registration of Capitol Strategies was noted by Politico earlier today. It did not note Kolbe's involvement, likely because of Kolbe's "strategic alliance/partnership" with Capitol Strategies.
The Pima County Board of Supervisors approved the one year contract in February, and has agreed to pay up to $110,400 (at $250/hour).
Kolbe represented much of southern Arizona in Congress between 1985 and 2007, and was succeeded by now-retired Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ).
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. Grijalva Brings Progressive Back To Work Budget To House, Voted Down
(2nd UPDATE, 3:325PM: All 4 of Arizona's Republican Representatives voted for the more-conservative-than-Ryan Republican Study Conference budget/CR amendment. It was defeated 104-132, with 171 Democrats voting "present". Arizona's 5 Democratic Representatives split between "no" (Barber, Pastor, Sinema) and "present" (Grijalva, Kirkpatrick). Please see the Politico link below for more information.)
(UPDATE, 2:30PM: The Grijalva Amendment was voted down, 84-327. Grijalva and Ed Pastor (D-CD7) were the only Arizona Congressmembers to vote in favor.)
The U.S. House of Representatives is debating and voting on various budget and continuing resolution alternatives today. Among them was the Progressive Caucus' "Back To Work Budget," which was managed on the Floor by Caucus co-chair Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-CD3).
It was voted down, along with the conservative RSC budget alternative (which sounds like an interessting story, as well) this afternoon. Roll call votes are not yet available from the House.
Here are highlights of Grijalva managing the debate, as put together by the Congressman's office.
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, 2:30PM: The Grijalva Amendment was voted down, 84-327. Grijalva and Ed Pastor (D-CD7) were the only Arizona Congressmembers to vote in favor.)
The U.S. House of Representatives is debating and voting on various budget and continuing resolution alternatives today. Among them was the Progressive Caucus' "Back To Work Budget," which was managed on the Floor by Caucus co-chair Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-CD3).
It was voted down, along with the conservative RSC budget alternative (which sounds like an interessting story, as well) this afternoon. Roll call votes are not yet available from the House.
Here are highlights of Grijalva managing the debate, as put together by the Congressman's office.
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: Respect Arizona Not Backing Down On Arpaio Recall In Face Of Legal Challenge
Respect Arizona ("RA"), the group attempting to recall Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, did not directly answer Arizona's Politics' requests for a response to the final demand letter from Citizens To Protect Fair Election Results ("CPFER"). However, they did just send out an e-mail appeal for signatures and funds.
Not backing down, the e-mail claims that "news of our impending demise, to paraphrase Mark Twain, is greatly exaggerated." It calls Arpaio "the embarrassing, law-breaking sheriff." The complete text of the e-mail is below.
CPFER has promised to file its lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the recall tomorrow. CPFER's general counsel Larry Klayman issued a national appeal for funds today, which in turn spurred a public protest from well-known birther attorney Orly Taitz.
Here is the RA e-mail:
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.
Not backing down, the e-mail claims that "news of our impending demise, to paraphrase Mark Twain, is greatly exaggerated." It calls Arpaio "the embarrassing, law-breaking sheriff." The complete text of the e-mail is below.
CPFER has promised to file its lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the recall tomorrow. CPFER's general counsel Larry Klayman issued a national appeal for funds today, which in turn spurred a public protest from well-known birther attorney Orly Taitz.
Here is the RA e-mail:
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.
Arpaio Recall Challenge Spurs National Battle Of Birther Heavyweights; Some Upset Arpaio Has Not Filed Criminal Complaint Vs. Obama
The attorney ready to file a lawsuit against those in charge of the effort to recall Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio made a national appeal for funding today, sparking a protest by well-known Obama Birther attorney Orly Taitz. Taitz urged birthers not to support the pro-Arpaio effort until the Sheriff files criminal charges against President Barack Obama.
Local group Citizens To Protect Fair Election Results ("CPFER") hired nationally-known attorney Larry Klayman to issue a legal challenge to the recall committee, Respect Arizona ("RA"). Klayman told Arizona's Politics on Monday that he would file a legal action on Thursday challenging the recall's constitutionality if RA did not withdraw.
Today, he sent out a fundraising e-mail through the national conservative website WND.com (formerly World Net Daily), along with a donations page on WND's SuperStore.
Klayman's fundraising appeal got the attention of birther attorney Orly Taitz, and she was not happy. She took to her website to blast WND and Arpaio. WND was a primary backer (media and fundraising) of the Sheriff's Posse's investigation into the President's birth certificate. Today, Taitz writes: "Arpaio collected money for over a year and never filed a criminal complaint against Obama. Please, tell WND and Arpaio “we will not donate one cent until we see a criminal complaint signed by Arpaio and stamped by the office of the District Attorney of Maricopa county and the Attorney General of AZ.” "
Taitz goes on to claim that the primary reason people are pushing the Arpaio recall is that they are afraid that the Sheriff will actually go after the President, and that Arpaio has every right and reason to use taxpayer monies to pursue a criminal complaint (based on the information that she gathered and forwarded to Arpaio).
Taitz also took a few shots at Klayman, noting that he is not licensed to practice law in Arizona and will not be able to file suit against RA.
The Taitz blast is the first sign that Arizona's Politics has seen that some birthers have lost patience with Arpaio and his Cold Case Posse. Not coincidentally, the leaders of the Surprise Tea Party Patriots who have been instrumental in the Cold Case Posse investigation into the birth certificate are also leading CPFER.
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.
Local group Citizens To Protect Fair Election Results ("CPFER") hired nationally-known attorney Larry Klayman to issue a legal challenge to the recall committee, Respect Arizona ("RA"). Klayman told Arizona's Politics on Monday that he would file a legal action on Thursday challenging the recall's constitutionality if RA did not withdraw.
Today, he sent out a fundraising e-mail through the national conservative website WND.com (formerly World Net Daily), along with a donations page on WND's SuperStore.
Klayman's fundraising appeal got the attention of birther attorney Orly Taitz, and she was not happy. She took to her website to blast WND and Arpaio. WND was a primary backer (media and fundraising) of the Sheriff's Posse's investigation into the President's birth certificate. Today, Taitz writes: "Arpaio collected money for over a year and never filed a criminal complaint against Obama. Please, tell WND and Arpaio “we will not donate one cent until we see a criminal complaint signed by Arpaio and stamped by the office of the District Attorney of Maricopa county and the Attorney General of AZ.” "
Taitz goes on to claim that the primary reason people are pushing the Arpaio recall is that they are afraid that the Sheriff will actually go after the President, and that Arpaio has every right and reason to use taxpayer monies to pursue a criminal complaint (based on the information that she gathered and forwarded to Arpaio).
Taitz also took a few shots at Klayman, noting that he is not licensed to practice law in Arizona and will not be able to file suit against RA.
The Taitz blast is the first sign that Arizona's Politics has seen that some birthers have lost patience with Arpaio and his Cold Case Posse. Not coincidentally, the leaders of the Surprise Tea Party Patriots who have been instrumental in the Cold Case Posse investigation into the birth certificate are also leading CPFER.
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: U.S. Airways', American Airlines' CEO's Questioned By Senate Antitrust Committee
The Phoenix-based U.S. Airways CEO Doug Parker and his American Airlines counterpart answered questions yesterday from the U.S. Senate's Antitrust subcommittee (of the Judiciary Committee), and indicated that the merger would not adversely affect travelers in Arizona (and elsewhere).
Neither Arizona Senator was on the subcommittee, and no opposition to the mega-merger was expressed by the Senators. The Democratic chair (Amy Klobuchar, MN) and Republican ranking member (Mike Lee, UT) did, however, ask the GAO (Government Accountability Office for a report on the effects of this (and the previous) merger on ticket prices and service.
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.
Neither Arizona Senator was on the subcommittee, and no opposition to the mega-merger was expressed by the Senators. The Democratic chair (Amy Klobuchar, MN) and Republican ranking member (Mike Lee, UT) did, however, ask the GAO (Government Accountability Office for a report on the effects of this (and the previous) merger on ticket prices and service.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)