Notorious anti-immigrant sheriff Joe Arpaio is working with a husband-and-wife GOP lawyer team that was one of Bill Clinton's biggest tormentors during the 90s, to go after a local Arizona official. But critics are calling the effort a politically motivated fishing expedition. And the defense lawyer on the case knows something about politicized justice: he was one of the US attorneys improperly fired by Alberto Gonzales.
Here's the back-story. It's got a few twists and turns. But stay with us -- it's worth it:
Just over two weeks ago, Maricopa County supervisor Don Stapley was arrested in a Phoenix parking garage by deputies of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the county's nationally-known anti-illegal-immigration lawman. Arpaio's office charged Stapley, a Republican, with 93 felonies, centered on the claim that he had used campaign funds to pay personal expenses.
Stapley's lawyer, Paul Charlton, has argued from the start that the charges are bogus, because Stapley was running to be president of a private association of county officials. "He was running for a private organization, like the Kiwanis," Charlton told TPMmuckraker. As such, Charlton said, Stapley isn't bound by campaign-finance laws that would apply to those seeking public office.
Arpaio's "Inquisition"?
But there's also reason to question the motives of Arpaio, the limelight-seeking lawman known as "America's Toughest Sheriff" for his frequent publicity stunts designed to humiliate and intimidate illegal immigrants. "The real crime is the crime committed by Joe Arpaio and his inquisition of me," Stapley told a local news station. Whether or not that's true, there have been numerous signs that the effort wasn't exactly a textbook example of dispassionate, apolitical law enforcement.
Stapley had antagonized Arpaio and his ally, county prosecutor Andrew Thomas, by placing auditors in Arpaio's office to monitor spending, and by challenging Thomas's practice of hiring outside lawyers -- who were also Thomas's political backers -- to do legal work for the county.
And Arpaio and Thomas had already gone after Stapley once before. He was indicted last November for allegedly failing to disclose required information on his financial disclosure forms. But the case fell apart when it turned out that the county had never actually passed laws that required financial disclosure. Last month -- just three days before Stapley was arrested on the new charges -- the prosecutor on the first case filed a motion to withdraw those charges.
In addition, critics have questioned Arpaio's decision to order a probable cause arrest of Stapley, which generated news stories declaring Stapley had been jailed, and media images of his mugshot. A probable cause arrest is an unusual tactic in a white-collar case where the target of the arrest is neither a flight risk nor in the process of committing a crime. Indeed, the probable cause statement submitted by Arpaio's office and examined by TPMmuckraker appears to offer no argument for why the arrest was necessary. It's hardly far-fetched to suggest, then, that Arpaio -- who has famously forced illegal immigrants to wear pink underwear -- may have intended to humiliate Stapley rather than merely enforce the law.
My Kingdom For A Prosecutor
But despite the high-profile nabbing, it looks like Arpaio couldn't find a prosecutor to take the case. It should have gone to Thomas, as the county prosecutor. But because he works with Stapley for the county, making him vulnerable to conflict of interest charges, the case was passed over to Sheila Polk, the respected prosecutor for neighboring Yavapai County. Polk's office, however, declined to take the new case.
A spokesman for Polk told TPMmuckraker that the office didn't have the time or resources to take it on. But Charlton, Stapley's lawyer, questions that, declaring: "I know it's not true that she doesn't have the resources." Whatever the case, no prosecutor was present at Stapley's initial court appearance September 23rd, and no formal indictment has been filed. And the judge at Stapley's arraignment did not find probable cause to justify his arrest.
Enter Joseph diGenova and Victoria Toensing. On Monday, Thomas announced that he had hired the Washington-based Republican lawyers -- at a cost of $295 an hour for out-of-court fees, and $475 an hour for in-court fees -- as special prosecutors to investigate the allegations against Stapley, as well as two other cases that weren't specified.
Lovebirds To The Rescue
The husband-and-wife team -- neither of whom returned a request for comment from TPMmuckraker -- may no longer be household names, but they boast a lengthy resume as a premier Beltway GOP power couple (pdf). Most famously, they were ubiquitous presences on cable news in the late 90s, pushing the Monica Lewinsky scandal and even claiming that they themselves were the targets of vindictive investigations by the Clinton administration. Oh, and they're "madly in love with each other" and "both smoke cigars," diGenova told the Washington Post for a 1998 profile.
But diGenova and Toensing's hiring, especially at such a steep cost to taxpayers, has only intensified concerns that Arpaio and Thomas are improperly prolonging the case and waging a vendetta against a political opponent. "We now have an out-of-state prosecutor who is going to review these allegations at great expense," said Charlton, Stapley's lawyer. Charlton argued that Polk's decision not to take the case should have ended the matter. Short of that, he said, the case should have been referred to another Arizona prosecutor. "There are any number who would have done a fine job," he said. A spokesman for Thomas referred TPMmuckraker to Monday's statement announcing the hiring of diGeneva and Toensing, which did not address the issue of why the case, if it was to be prolonged at all, wasn't sent to another Arizona prosecutor.
Charlton would seem to be a good candidate to recognize missteps in the administration of justice. He was one of the US attorneys fired by the Bush Justice Department in 2006. A 2008 report (pdf) by the department's inspector general found that Charlton was dismissed primarily because he "irritated department leaders" by seeking a meeting with Gonzales to urge him to reconsider a decision to seek the death penalty in a particular case. The report concluded: "We are troubled that Department officials considered Charlton's actions in the death penalty case, including requesting a meeting with the Attorney General, to be inappropriate. We do not believe his actions were insubordinate or that they justified his removal."
Arpaio's office did not immediately return a request for comment from TPMmuckraker.

TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com

paulw
October 7, 2009 3:45 PM
More wingnut welfare?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
steves
October 7, 2009 3:55 PM
don't they have to be licensed to practice law in Arizona?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bushie
October 7, 2009 4:03 PM
So as the saying goes, we know what you are, now just negotiating the price. diGenova and Toensing are legal whores. And by the way, why are tax payers footing the bill on this witch hunt?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rumpole
October 7, 2009 4:08 PM
1. Believe it or not, those fees are not that high for the level of experience that they have. That's cheap.
2. Arapio is looking at his own 1983 lawsuit now, for false arrest.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
paulw
October 7, 2009 4:23 PM in reply to rumpole
Sure, the fees are not that high for qualified lawyers (albeit there's some question whether that descriptor applies), but when all the facially-qualified people you hire at nice fat fees just happen to be politically connected the alarms still start ringing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chucktrotter
October 7, 2009 7:30 PM in reply to rumpole
Vicky and Joe are the sleaziest of the sleazy! I watch C-Span Congressional hearings quite often. Many times, I have seen Vicky sitting directly behind and to the left of those giving testimony. Unless she is from K Street, I couldn't fathom why she was there. Then I woke up to reality...Face time! As a vampire thrives on blood this couple cannot survive without public recognition. I will spare you the lawyer humor...What is it like to be the lowest of the lowest?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
October 7, 2009 4:10 PM
Not these two wingnuts again. Spare me. Whores is right!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Metzengerstein
October 7, 2009 4:17 PM
But the people in Phoenix, they loves 'em their Sheriff Joe so much, they deserve to get ripped off. The rest of us, of course, don't deserve these clowns getting more power, money and attention.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Matt Jones
October 7, 2009 4:21 PM
Ol' Sheriff Joe is going to be facing a mighty tough crowd in jail if this goes badly for him...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lono65
October 7, 2009 4:26 PM
Yup. The state's broke, we're cutting social services and school funding like it's going out of style, but we've got enough money in the coffers to pay these two ass-hats to defend Sheriff Joke.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wood
October 7, 2009 4:30 PM
Metzenge... I live in Phoenix and don't "love me my Sheriff Joe"... we're not all hicks out here you snob.
Anyone want to know more about Sheriff Joe should hop over to the Phoenix New Times (http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/). They've been doing excellent work trying to dismantle Sheriff Joe's hold on power for years and years. Unfortunately, instead of recognition, they just get arrested. Joe is nothing if not consistent - he openly abuses his power to attack political opponents with regularity - It's just what he does, seemingly the only solution he has for whatever problem there is.
Regarding the pink underwear... it's not just for illegal immigrants, it's for every inmate of his jails, including the infamous Tent City.
I'm glad to see some of his antics getting more attention. I was hopeful that with Napolitano on a national stage, she might sic the dogs after old Joe. I think McCain might have, he and Joe aren't buddies.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Seafarer
October 7, 2009 4:48 PM
If this sheriff is constantly it appears being accused of all sorts of abuses of power, why hasn't anyone filed a high profile lawsuit yet, against him, his office, or the county?
If they did, what happened?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
aikbay
October 7, 2009 5:21 PM in reply to Seafarer
You obviously don't live in Maricopa County. Sheriff Joe is a publicity hound unlike any other in AZ. He has the guaranteed vote of the rednecks who are trying to keep "those Mexicans out" His other constitueny is old white farts, which unfortunately we have a lot of in AZ.
Joe is a scumball of pretty much the highest degree. He's cost the county a ton of money in lawsuits from relatives of dead or injured inmates. Stapley,however, is no angel. He's been involved in a bunch of shady real estate deals.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Seafarer
October 7, 2009 5:28 PM in reply to aikbay
This is all just further evidence that electing law enforcement personnel is a really stupid idea, as they cannot be easily fired.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bullsmith
October 7, 2009 5:50 PM
If I'm a Republican I look at twenty years of politically motivated witch hunts using the justice system, particularly prosecutors, to go after people who haven't broken the law, and all I see are Vicky and Joe got another gig. Ken Starr's doing fine.
This won't change till there is some kind of price to pay for abusing prosecutorial power. Anyone see any signs?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jeffgee
October 7, 2009 5:57 PM
It's been said in Arizona that the most dangerous place to be is between Joe Arpaio and a camera.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Resistance
October 7, 2009 6:31 PM
Arizona politics has been proven corrupt.
Follow all the events
http://localsearch.azcentral.com/sp?catId=&aff=1100&searchkeyword=&searchcategory=*&keywords=stapley+and+sheriff+Joe&address=
Stapley has his own reputation, as well as Joe.
When Sheriff Joe tried to open the books to investigate what appeared to be improper conduct, he was denied access.
Since that time, the Supervisors not wanting sunlight on their activities have been on a campaign to discredit Joe.
Every other prosecutor knows they don't want to touch this Hot Potato or they may find their budgets cut by these very same Supervisors, who don't like to be investigated.
Justice turns a blind eye when pinched.
Joe may have many faults, but he may be onto something here
Lets wait and see where the chips fall before we Judge Joe.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bullsmith
October 7, 2009 8:56 PM in reply to Resistance
What about judging paid political talking heads being flown into Arizona from D.C. as "special prosecutors" when the real prosecutors wouldn't take the case? Surely that seems objectionable?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rynato
October 7, 2009 6:59 PM
I live in Phoenix and let me tell you this is a hatchet job from conception to completion, start to finish. This is a power struggle between the county Board of Supervisors and Arpaio, and Arpaio is making it very, very, very personal.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rynato
October 7, 2009 7:06 PM
The article covers the following salient facts but does not give them the emphasis they deserve by placing them all together:
Some months back Sheriff Arpaio got county Attorney "Candy" Andy Thomas to file nearly 120 charges against county supervisor Don Stapley, related to campaign finance violations and such.
Roughly half the charges were tossed by a judge and without those more serious charges, the rest were on the verge of collapsing two weeks ago as well when Sheriff Arpaio took it upon himself to arrest Stapley as he was reporting to work in the county parking garage. He arrested him as if he were a dangerous felon and a flight risk, with overwhelming force (not quite the SWAT team but darn close). This was a totally ludicrous use of force.
What's more, Arpaio arrested Stapley on his own authority, without any prosecutor willing to sign off on the charges and take the case, as is normally done in cases like this. Arpaio's charges were a mish-mosh of felonies and misdemeanors related to the 1st mish-mosh of felonies and misdemeanors which were about to be completely dismissed.
Mr. Stapley is a member of the East Valley establishment, a developer and a Mormon in an area where Mormons hold an oversized amount of influence compared to their numbers. He's probably not 100% clean but let's be clear, this is not a crusade for justice; it's a vendetta by a petty, small, mean little man.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rynato
October 7, 2009 7:17 PM
A spokesman for Thomas referred TPMmuckraker to Monday's statement announcing the hiring of diGeneva and Toensing, which did not address the issue of why the case, if it was to be prolonged at all, wasn't sent to another Arizona prosecutor.
BECAUSE NO PROSECUTOR IN ARIZONA WANTS TO TAKE THIS STINKER OF A CASE.
Not even Arpaio's butt buddy Candy Andy Thomas. So Thomas fucks us taxpayers in the ass with these two disgusting right-wing freaks. I've heard DiGenova and Toensing on the radio, they are pure undiluted wingnut.
It's said Thomas has aspirations to run for governor. I hope this egregious waste of taxpayer money is thrown in his face again and again if he ever decides to run. I'm disgusted with this whole affair, especially the voters who just last year re-elected Arpaio yet again.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
NOSPAMFORMO
October 7, 2009 7:24 PM
Lead sentence - Notorious anti-immigrant sheriff Joe Arpaio
3rd para - Joe Arpaio, the county's nationally-known anti-illegal-immigration lawman.
So, which is it? Anti-illegal or anti immigrant?
Also, it is stated that "Arpaio -- who has famously forced illegal immigrants to wear pink underwear".
Yes he does. He also makes ALL INMATES wear pink underwear.
Now, we go to resources - "But Charlton, Stapley's lawyer, questions that, declaring: "I know it's not true that she doesn't have the resources."
Any proof, or just the word of the defense attorney?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fkaZk0sm0
October 7, 2009 11:02 PM in reply to NOSPAMFORMO
well, since it is a DIRECT QUOTE, it follows that it is the word of the defense attorney.
duh.
funny that you seem to think it needs to be 'proven' that polk has the resources but polk's claim that she does not have the resources doesn't require proof.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Wisca
October 7, 2009 7:41 PM
I haven't seen these two since the Geraldo show in his glory OJ days!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Resistance
October 7, 2009 9:00 PM
The County Board of Supervisors controls the purse.
That gives them an enormous amount of control. Enough control to suggest influence.
The Sheriff has had to keep repairing older vehicles spending resources, that he would prefer budgeting somewhere else, although; new Cars are available needing less money for maintenance. Except the Supervisors won’t release the new ones.
Imagine Sheriff Joe would like to budget more resources towards illegal immigration and the employers that hire them. Rather than repair expenses on cars that should be replaced.
For months, the Sheriff's Office repeatedly asked Maricopa County officials to dip into a fleet of 67 new law-enforcement vehicles sitting in a garage to replace high-mileage patrol cars that constantly broke down. [...] on Tuesday, the county's Office of Management and Budget added a last-minute recommendation to today's supervisors' meeting to approve putting eight new patrol vehicles on the road
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/azcentral/access/1851473561.html?dids=1851473561:1851473561&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Sep+2%2C+2009&author=Craig+Harris&pub=Arizona+Republic&edition=&startpage=A.1&desc=Latest+sheriff-county+spat%3A+Patrol+cars
But if the County board of Supervisors can keep Sheriff Joe broke, then funding for enforcement against employers who hire illegal won't happen.
Oh! How convenient for a Supervisor whose friends, enjoy cheap illegal labor.
The Sheriff having to fight vindictive Supervisors, who were caught using undocumented workers at County offices.
The landscaping company busted this week by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio on suspicion of hiring undocumented workers was trimming trees and mowing the lawns of the sheriff's own facilities, along with dozens of other county buildings.
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/azcentral/access/1688656401.html?FMT=ABS&date=Feb+13,+2009
Possibly sweetheart bids to friends who employ illegal undocumented workers, with possible kickback arrangements, undercutting legitimate business interests with an unfair competitive edge.
So you think if you were a powerful Supervisor, would you block and harass your antagonist?
If you were a County prosecutor, do you like your Job?
What makes you think if there was corruption it would be easy to bring to light?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jeffgee
October 7, 2009 10:53 PM
DiGenova looks like one of the Piranha Brothers in a Monty Python sketch.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fkaZk0sm0
October 7, 2009 11:08 PM
more recently the digenova/toensing sideshow was active in the bush administration's outing of covert CIA agent valerie plame-wilson.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
b4real
October 8, 2009 9:36 AM
Since when is enforcing immigration laws a bad thing?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JON M. STOUT
October 8, 2009 9:44 AM
If you don't like Sheriff Joe, why not vote for someone else? It is a free country.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
October 8, 2009 10:31 AM
"neither of whom returned a request for comment from TPMmuckraker"
Surprise surprise.
No doubt they'll be on Faox News soon enough. Unless I'm mistaken, DiGenova is actually a paid Fox consultant, so expect them to get the scoop, no matter how slanted.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SavannahGA
October 8, 2009 11:47 AM
Time to do more than lead defense for Mr. Stapley, Paul Charlton. When this legal mess is done with (or sooner if you'd like, I hope), it's time to do what your close friend & fellow purge-fired USA John McKay did up in Seattle- quit the Republican Party.
The Grand Old Poopdeck doesn't currently want ethics-driven lawyers like you, as McKay succintly noted before he quit the GOP this year.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Brittanicus
October 8, 2009 3:17 PM
This Sheriff doesn't pander for campaign contributions from the business communities, globalists or Internationalists? So because he doesn't comply with their demands, as they do, they desire him out of office? He is an ongoing danger and worst nightmare to the corporate agenda for illegal discount workers. Now he has a free hand to arrest and not no longer restrained by 287 G federal law, but can use the powers of state laws detain illegal aliens and the criminal elements amongst them. We need more Joe's tent cities and his inmate cuisine of bologna sandwiches, since being subjected to this type of incarceration will deter the most ardent inmate? Nationwide we need more inflexible officers of the law, who will not prostrate to the open border lunatics? Not the soft clean hands of manipulated cops who don't make waves, as they are contemplating looking towards an easy road to retirement. SEEING THAT OUR OWN ELECTED GOVERNMENT, REFUSES TO ENFORCE THE 1986 LAWS (IRCA), THERE OATHS TO PROTECT US FROM OUR ENEMIES FOREIGN & DOMESTIC. THEN COURAGEOUS POLICE OFFICERS MUST CARRY OUT DUTIES OF WHICH AMERICAN'S VOTED FOR?
However the corrupt lawmakers around the nation, have not been able to undermine E-Verify? AS YET? YES! Legal Immigration matters? We should announce to the world that newcomers are welcome, if they come through the front door? We only need those immigrants with specialized skills, such as computer engineers, scientists, doctors and those with highly recommended credentials as developed nations? America has a sovereign right who we choose to settle here? What we don't need is pregnant women slipping across our border, for instant citizenship of their child or destitute illegal aliens whose cannot exist without taxpayer welfare, chain family migration? We don't need in these country illegal recipients who need free health care, education when we already ignore our own people who live in poverty? We need to enforce the 1986 immigration reform law (IRCA), not cripple it for the sake of parasite businesses that live of the slavery of millions of foreign national workers. Seeing that the business world are screaming for more Guest Workers, they should take on the responsibility of paying for their health care and education, instead of dropping sick illegal labor of at the emergency room. to, leave the hospital bill for taxpayers. Instead of expecting the American people to pay for the enormous burden, they should pay separate expenditures for every illegal foreign national and their families.
We need to execute now, a complete war immigration chest containing mandated E-Verify for every worker--NOT REPRESSED--, or 287 G, local police arrest of foreign workers, the Rep.Duncan Hunter original national fence, instead of chopping it down to single line. We need enforcement of our laws, with harsh penalties for violating them. We need politicians we can trust, instead of those elected such as Sen.Reid, Speaker Pelosi, Feinstein and a whole list, who can be graded as Anti-American worker, anti-sovereignty, pro-illegal immigration and compromiser's of the Rule of Law. Submerge them in your anger and frustration at 202-224-3121 Find out the buried truth at NUMBERSUSA, JUDICIAL WATCH & CAPSWEB, for overpopulation facts.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wattpuppy
October 8, 2009 7:11 PM
Excellent job!! Thank you very much for your passionate and substantive post! You are a patriot!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
teufel piet
October 9, 2009 2:59 PM
Sooner or later somebody is going to file a §1983 case over in federal court. It would seem that the sheriff, under color of law, is infringing more than just a few civil rights (and no, I'm not talking about the policy of trawling for illegals - so what if Mexicans lawfully in the country are inconvenienced for hours trying to deal with what no cop on the street in this country has the right to ask - "prove to ME that you can be in this country.")
Uncle Joe has prosecuted Stapley for a crime that didn't exist (a little bit of a due process problem, maybe, huh?) and now is prosecuting a non-crime with the purpose of denying Stapley's right to free association, free speech - it goes on and on. And the taxpayers of Maricopa County will pay for it - times are booming there, of course, so nobody could possibly think of better things to spend money on.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Resistance
October 10, 2009 6:29 PM in reply to teufel piet
Just because Stapley got off of the original charge of failing to disclose, doesn't mean there was no quid quo pro
If it can be proven that Stapley used his power inappropriately; that’s the violation.
Just because one has knowledge of a mob boss doesn’t mean you have committed a crime. But the moment you and your crime boss friend conspire then you are complicit in a crime.
Disclosure tells you what; that there MAY be a conflict? There is no conflict if you recuse yourself. (To disqualify or seek to disqualify from participation in a decision on grounds such as prejudice or personal involvement.)
Disclosing the possibility of impropriety is for the publics benefit. If Stapley did something improper rest assured it was for Stapley's benefit and that's where the violation could have occurred. If Stapley failed to recuse himself to avoid the appearance from receiving any compensation, but instead he knew he was being rewarded because of a decision that benefited him because of his powerful position.
Almost like a politician who receives gifts from heads of State or lobbyists and then does not report the gift. Although the politician knows the law say’s gifts must be reported. Knowing individuals and offering favors is two different things.
Arizona must feel it redundant to say you must disclose any relationship, when instead it suggests you better not use your powers to benefit the relationship.
As a side note, I have been watching as Maricopa County expanded, an interesting development had always stood out. In every new subdivision the Mormon Church always had they’re buildings located in Prime locations.
It was stated that Stapley was Mormon. Imagine a developer having to go before the board in Maricopa County? Well in advance before rezoning and land use design stages, well before the public was aware that a developer was considering a land project and wouldn’t it be a nice gesture if the new developer allowed a Mormon Church to purchase the land, set aside for such amenities?
Insider information, undue influence knowing that wouldn’t this be a nice development and it would sure be a good location for a Mormon Church. With Stapley being a good Mormon, getting a lot of Mormon votes, because Stapley sure delivers the pet projects for his pet causes? A developer knows how to grease the wheels?
Now is that undue influence, considering ones religion should not be a disqualifier for office? Must Stapley disclose this fact or does he violate the law when he acts with partiality towards other faiths? Now I don’t know first hand if this occurs, but can we investigate if this does occur, without be branded being on a witch-hunt?
Maybe the land the Church sits on wasn’t purchased? Maybe it’s a gift to Stapley? Or maybe his constituents surely appreciate the fine work Stapley does in behalf of the faith, so lets keep him in power. Money that would have been spent on building a church; now funneled to the campaign?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?