BREAKING, FOLLOWING MONEY IN ARIZONA'S POLITICS: In Possible Two-Fer, Gov. Brewer Goes Robocalling In Montana; May Have Violated State and Federal Laws; Also, Dem Tweaks McCain

To contact us Click HERE
Governor Jan Brewer used her SuperPAC to robocall Montana voters in support of GOP Senatorial challenger Denny Rehberg shortly before election day.  In so doing, she may have violated both Montana  AND federal election laws.

On Tuesday, Huffington Post reported on the robocalls supporting Rehberg in what proved to be an unsuccessful effort to unseat Sen. Jon Tester.  Tester's campaign had posted the audio of Brewer's appeal on Election Day, along with scrolling text with the Montana law banning robocalls - even in the context of political races.


Huffington Post notes that the Montana law banning election-related robocalls is not being enforced because prosecutors do not want to risk it being found unconstitutional.

Federal elections laws require any last minute independent expenditures to be disclosed within 24 hours of the expenditure.  That law is enforceable.  As of this writing, JanPAC has not disclosed the Montana robocalls.

It is possible that the eponymous SuperPAC did not need to file a 24-hour report with the FEC, if the expenditure was less than $1,000.  A call to the JanPAC spokesman is out, and we will update upon receiving a response.

An interesting sidebar to the Governor's robocall is that it came fast on the heels of Sen. Tester taking a full-page ad out thanking and praising Arizona Senator John McCain (R-AZ) for fighting against the Citizens United Supreme Court decision permitting big money SuperPACs like Brewer's. (McCain had come to Montana to campaign for Rehberg.


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.

VOTE COUNT WATCH: 631,000 Arizona Ballots To Be Checked, Counted; National Journal Updates On Arizona's CD2 and CD9, Points Out Why Barber May Have Upper Hand

To contact us Click HERE
Minutes ago, Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett announced that there are still more than 630,000 early ballots and provisional ballots to be checked and counted.  459,000 of those are in Maricopa County, a significant number of which will impact the CD9 race.  About 94,000 remain in Pima and Cochise counties, a significant number of which will impact the CD2 race.

The National Journal just ran an update on the seven still-unresolved House races across the country.  Arizona trails California in that contest, but uncounted ballots could change that.  The two Arizona races still being watched are the CD2 contest between Rep. Ron Barber (D) and Martha McSally (R), and the CD9 battle between GOP nominee Vernon Parker and Dem. choice Kyrsten Sinema.

The new piece of analysis that the National Journal piece brings to the table is that the last two elections for CD2 (formerly CD8, with minor changes) have both broken the Democrats' way when early and provisionals are counted in Tucson (other counties are less critical than Pima).  That may very well be a pattern that indicates that Barber may re-pass McSally in the tally.

Here are the vote totals as of 2:24pm this afternoon:


In Pima County,

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.

Why Newt Gingrich Has "No Idea" Whether He'll Run For President In 2016; Hasn't Ruled It Out

To contact us Click HERE
Yesterday, Newt Gingrich, former Republican frontrunner for the GOP 2012 Presidential nominee and former Speaker of the U.S. House, indicated that he has "no idea" if he will run for President again in 2016.  And, an e-mail today from his campaign-turned-marketing-machine gives us the reason: there may not be an election (or, not a fair one)!

Today's e-mail is provocatively-titled, "THE SECRET BEHIND OBAMA'S THIRD TERM."  The "From" line notes that it emanates from "Newt 2012", although a disclaimer notes that the opinions belong to the advertiser and not the "Newt 2012 Campaign".

The e-mail from Porter Stansberry claims that "Most people believe the election was all about whether or not Obama will have a second term. But it was not.  What was actually at stake was whether or not he will have a third-term." Stansberry believes - seemingly incongruously - that Obama's secret plan to remain in power "through 2020 - or even beyond" will INCREASE the wealth and power of the U.S. in the world AND will enable the Presdient "to implement the most terrifying socialist policies in the history of our country." (emphasis added0

Gingrich is obviously not sure either whether there will be an election in 2016, or whether it would be winnable to go up against the surprisingly-powerful Obama.

Interestingly, there is evidence that the Gingrich campaign is well aware of Mr. Stansberry's views.  The week before the election, a previous Stansberry-via-Gingrich e-mail also predicted that Obama would go after a 3rd term if he won on November 6, ABC News reported on it, and a Gingrich spokesperson said that Stansberry was not supposed to be approved to pay Gingrich for the right to e-mail Gingrich supporters under the Gingrich family of for-profit e-mail lists.

Now, instead of mistakenly sending out the Stansberry e-mail to Gingrich's "Human Events" newsletter,  Gingrich's actual campaign has sent out the e-mail.  ABC News noted that Stansberry has been found partly liable in an SEC lawsuit for "an online newsletter scheme that defrauded investors out of more than $1,000,000."  (Which is why Arizona's Politics is not even clicking on the link from the Gingrich campaign.)

Gingrich has long been noted for his conservative cause money-making efforts (e.g. "Newt, Inc."); however, selling his supporters to operations touting unconstitutional conspiracies that are in direct conflict with his Presidential "ambitions" may be taking it many steps too far.  

(Arizona's Politics disputed Democrats who expressed views that President George W. Bush was going to try to remain in power beyond January 2009; it looks like we may spend the next four (lonnggg) years disputing Birthers-turned-dictator-preventers.)







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: McCain Preparing To Meet With Susan Rice, Declines To Take O'Reilly Bait Dissing President

To contact us Click HERE
NBC News and Fox News are reporting tonight that Arizona Senator John McCain (R) will be meeting with U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice tomorrow.  (Both note that Rice requested the meeting, which will apparently also be with Sens. Graham and Ayotte.) President Barack Obama is considered likely to nominate Rice to be the next Secretary of State, and McCain has been one of the loudest anti-Rice voices in the Senate.

McCain has blasted Rice for what he perceives as her untruthfulness when she appeared on Sunday morning news shows shortly after the terrorist attacks killing the U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others in Libya on September 11.  He memorably called her interviews "probably one of the worst  things I've observed in my entire life".  (Arizona's Politics laid out McCain's and Rice's video out side-by-side with the transcript, and noted that McCain had followed Rice on Face the Nation - in the same seat - and had declined to criticize Rice at that point.)

Tonight, McCain was on FoxNews' O'Reilly Factor, and repeatedly declined to take the host's bait and declare that Obama's likely nomination of Rice would be a "slap in the face" of McCain.  He also continued his walk-back of his strident rhetoric about Rice:  "I don't think it was a matter of dishonesty.  It was a matter of, again, responsibility."




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: McCain "Significantly Troubled By Many Of The Answers That We Got And Some That We Didn't Get"; Transcript Of Rice's 9/16 Comments

To contact us Click HERE
Arizona Senator John McCain (R) met with U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice this morning, and came out "significantly troubled" about how Rice had handled the interviews five days after the Benghazi attack and the intelligence community's handling of the run-up to that event, which took the life of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others.

The meeting had been requested by Rice, and was with Rice, McCain, Sens. Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte, and a Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.  The three Senators have promised to block Rice's nomination if President Obama chooses her to succeed Hillary Clinton as the Secretary of State.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Arizona's Politics has previously printed the transcript of one of Rice's September 16 interviews, and noted that McCain sat in the same chair moments later.  Here is more of that transcript, with some highlighting for emphasis:


BOB SCHIEFFER: And joining us now, Susan Rice, the U.N. ambassador, our U.N. ambassador. Madam Ambassador, he* says this is something that has been in the planning stages for months. I understand you have been saying that you think it was spontaneous? Are we not on the same page here?SUSAN RICE (Ambassador to the United Nations): Bob, let me tell you what we understand to be the assessment at present. First of all, very importantly, as you discussed with the President, there is an investigation that the United States government will launch led by the FBI, that has begun and--BOB SCHIEFFER (overlapping): But they are not there.SUSAN RICE: They are not on the ground yet, but they have already begun looking at all sorts of evidence of-- of various sorts already available to them and to us. And they will get on the ground and continue the investigation. So we'll want to see the results of that investigation to draw any definitive conclusions. But based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy--BOB SCHIEFFER: Mm-Hm.SUSAN RICE: --sparked by this hateful video. But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that-- in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent.BOB SCHIEFFER: But you do not agree with him* that this was something that had been plotted out several months ago?SUSAN RICE: We do not-- we do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned.BOB SCHIEFFER: Do you agree or disagree with him that al Qaeda had some part in this?SUSAN RICE: Well, we'll have to find out that out. I mean I think it's clear that there were extremist elements that joined in and escalated the violence. Whether they were al Qaeda affiliates, whether they were Libyan-based extremists or al Qaeda itself I think is one of the things we'll have to determine.BOB SCHIEFFER: There seems to be demonstrations in more than twenty cities as far as we know yesterday. Is there any sense that this is leveling off?SUSAN RICE: Well, on Friday, of course, I think that's what you're referring to-- there-- there were a number of places around the world in which there were protests, many of them peaceful, some of them turned violent. And our emphasis has been-- and the President has been very, very clear about this, priority number one is protection of American personnel and facilities. And we have been working now very constructively with host governments around the world to provide the kind of protection we need and to condemn the violence. What happens going forward I think it would be unwise for any of us to predict with certainty. Clearly the last couple of days have seen a reduction in protests and a reduction in violence. I don't want to predict what the next days will yield.BOB SCHIEFFER: The Romney campaign continues to criticize the administration. Paul Ryan was on the campaign trail yesterday saying that the Obama administration has diminished America's presence overseas and our image, a direct quote, "If we project-- if we project weakness, they come. If we are strong, our adversaries will not test us and our allies will respond to us." What's your response to that?SUSAN RICE: It's two-fold. First of all, Bob, I think the American people expect in times of challenge overseas for our leaders to be unified and to come together and to be steadfast and steady and calm and responsible and that certainly what President Obama has been. With respect to what I think is a very empty and baseless charge of weakness, let's be plain, I think American people know the record very well. President Obama said when he was running for President that he would refocus our efforts and attentions on al Qaeda. We've decimated al Qaeda. Osama bin Laden is gone. He also said we would end the war in Iraq responsibly. We've done that. He has protected civilians in Libya, and Qaddafi is gone. I serve up at the United Nations and I see every day the difference in how countries around the world view the United States. They view us as a partner. They view us as somebody they want to work with. They view President Obama as somebody they trust. Our standing in the world is much stronger so this charge of weakness is really quite baseless.BOB SCHIEFFER: Do you think Mitt Romney spoke inappropriately when he criticized and issued a statement so early in this turmoil?SUSAN RICE: Bob, I think you know, in my role, I'm-- I'm not going to jump into politics and make those judgments. That's for the American people to decide.BOB SCHIEFFER: Madam Ambassador, thank you for being with us.SUSAN RICE: Thank you very much.BOB SCHIEFFER: And joining us now for his take on all this, the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, John McCain. Senator, you've got to help me out here. The president of Libya says that this was something that had been in the works for two months, this attack. He blames it on al Qaeda. Susan Rice says that the State Department thinks it is some sort of a spontaneous event. What-- what do you make of it?SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN (R-Arizona): Most people don't bring rocket-propelled grenades and heavy weapons to a demonstration. That was an act of terror, and for anyone to disagree with that fundamental fact I think is really ignoring the facts. Now, how long it was planned and who was involved, but there is no doubt there was extremists and there's no doubt they were using heavy weapons and they used pretty good tactics--indirect fire, direct fire, and obviously they were successful. Could I just say that our prayers are with Chris Stevens and Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods and Sean Smith who gave their lives. I met Chris Stevens in Benghazi during the fighting. He was putting his life on the line every day. He was living in a hotel. I was with him on July 7th when the Libyan people voted and he and I were down where thousands of people were saying to him, "Thank you, thank you, America, thank you." So the last thing that Chris Stevens would want the United States to do is to stop assisting Libya as they go through this very difficult process of trying to establish a government and democracy.BOB SCHIEFFER: Why do you think the-- is there something more going on here than a difference of opinion when the administration spokesman today says that she believes and the administration believes this was just a spontaneous act?SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN: How-- how spontaneous is a demonstration when people bring rocket-propelled grenades and heavy weapons and-- and have a very tactically successful military operation, but there are so many things that we need to cover but the fact is that the United States is weakened. And, you know, it was Osama bin Laden that said when people see the strong horse and the weak horse, people like the strong horse. Right now United States is the weak horse.In Iraq, it's unraveling. In Iraq, al Qaeda is coming back. It is in danger of breaking up into Sunni, Shia, and Kurd. By the way Iranian flights are overflying Iraq with weapons for Bashar Assad. In Afghanistan again, you just saw, the worst thing for any military morale is these killing by your allies that continue to escalate. It's unraveling because all we tell the Afghan people is we're leaving. We are not telling them we're succeeding. We tell them we're leaving.***Even this morning, McCain is trying to portray Rice's September 16 remarks as being "incorrect" because she said that "it was a spontaneous demonstration", when in fact she clearly said "what BEGAN spontaneously... extremist elements, individuals, joined in with heavy weapons... and it spun from there...."  
Is there a significant difference in whether it started out as an attack or whether it started as a demonstration that terrorists used to launch an attack?  Was the difference significant enough for the Obama Administration and Rice to stick to what they may have already known was an incorrect intelligence report about the genesis of the attack?  And, do McCain and the other Republicans reap enough benefit by ignoring the nuances of Rice's remarks and continuing to pretend that she flat out denied that it was a pre-planned attack?

* "he" refers to the previous guest,  the President of Libya's General National Congress Mohamed Yousef Magariaf. He had expressed that he had "no doubt" that it was "pre-planned" by foreigners who entered the country to carry out this attack.  
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, FOLLOWING MONEY IN ARIZONA'S POLITICS: In Possible Two-Fer, Gov. Brewer Goes Robocalling In Montana; May Have Violated State and Federal Laws; Also, Dem Tweaks McCain

To contact us Click HERE
Governor Jan Brewer used her SuperPAC to robocall Montana voters in support of GOP Senatorial challenger Denny Rehberg shortly before election day.  In so doing, she may have violated both Montana  AND federal election laws.

On Tuesday, Huffington Post reported on the robocalls supporting Rehberg in what proved to be an unsuccessful effort to unseat Sen. Jon Tester.  Tester's campaign had posted the audio of Brewer's appeal on Election Day, along with scrolling text with the Montana law banning robocalls - even in the context of political races.


Huffington Post notes that the Montana law banning election-related robocalls is not being enforced because prosecutors do not want to risk it being found unconstitutional.

Federal elections laws require any last minute independent expenditures to be disclosed within 24 hours of the expenditure.  That law is enforceable.  As of this writing, JanPAC has not disclosed the Montana robocalls.

It is possible that the eponymous SuperPAC did not need to file a 24-hour report with the FEC, if the expenditure was less than $1,000.  A call to the JanPAC spokesman is out, and we will update upon receiving a response.

An interesting sidebar to the Governor's robocall is that it came fast on the heels of Sen. Tester taking a full-page ad out thanking and praising Arizona Senator John McCain (R-AZ) for fighting against the Citizens United Supreme Court decision permitting big money SuperPACs like Brewer's. (McCain had come to Montana to campaign for Rehberg.


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.

VOTE COUNT WATCH: 631,000 Arizona Ballots To Be Checked, Counted; National Journal Updates On Arizona's CD2 and CD9, Points Out Why Barber May Have Upper Hand

To contact us Click HERE
Minutes ago, Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett announced that there are still more than 630,000 early ballots and provisional ballots to be checked and counted.  459,000 of those are in Maricopa County, a significant number of which will impact the CD9 race.  About 94,000 remain in Pima and Cochise counties, a significant number of which will impact the CD2 race.

The National Journal just ran an update on the seven still-unresolved House races across the country.  Arizona trails California in that contest, but uncounted ballots could change that.  The two Arizona races still being watched are the CD2 contest between Rep. Ron Barber (D) and Martha McSally (R), and the CD9 battle between GOP nominee Vernon Parker and Dem. choice Kyrsten Sinema.

The new piece of analysis that the National Journal piece brings to the table is that the last two elections for CD2 (formerly CD8, with minor changes) have both broken the Democrats' way when early and provisionals are counted in Tucson (other counties are less critical than Pima).  That may very well be a pattern that indicates that Barber may re-pass McSally in the tally.

Here are the vote totals as of 2:24pm this afternoon:


In Pima County,

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.

Why Newt Gingrich Has "No Idea" Whether He'll Run For President In 2016; Hasn't Ruled It Out

To contact us Click HERE
Yesterday, Newt Gingrich, former Republican frontrunner for the GOP 2012 Presidential nominee and former Speaker of the U.S. House, indicated that he has "no idea" if he will run for President again in 2016.  And, an e-mail today from his campaign-turned-marketing-machine gives us the reason: there may not be an election (or, not a fair one)!

Today's e-mail is provocatively-titled, "THE SECRET BEHIND OBAMA'S THIRD TERM."  The "From" line notes that it emanates from "Newt 2012", although a disclaimer notes that the opinions belong to the advertiser and not the "Newt 2012 Campaign".

The e-mail from Porter Stansberry claims that "Most people believe the election was all about whether or not Obama will have a second term. But it was not.  What was actually at stake was whether or not he will have a third-term." Stansberry believes - seemingly incongruously - that Obama's secret plan to remain in power "through 2020 - or even beyond" will INCREASE the wealth and power of the U.S. in the world AND will enable the Presdient "to implement the most terrifying socialist policies in the history of our country." (emphasis added0

Gingrich is obviously not sure either whether there will be an election in 2016, or whether it would be winnable to go up against the surprisingly-powerful Obama.

Interestingly, there is evidence that the Gingrich campaign is well aware of Mr. Stansberry's views.  The week before the election, a previous Stansberry-via-Gingrich e-mail also predicted that Obama would go after a 3rd term if he won on November 6, ABC News reported on it, and a Gingrich spokesperson said that Stansberry was not supposed to be approved to pay Gingrich for the right to e-mail Gingrich supporters under the Gingrich family of for-profit e-mail lists.

Now, instead of mistakenly sending out the Stansberry e-mail to Gingrich's "Human Events" newsletter,  Gingrich's actual campaign has sent out the e-mail.  ABC News noted that Stansberry has been found partly liable in an SEC lawsuit for "an online newsletter scheme that defrauded investors out of more than $1,000,000."  (Which is why Arizona's Politics is not even clicking on the link from the Gingrich campaign.)

Gingrich has long been noted for his conservative cause money-making efforts (e.g. "Newt, Inc."); however, selling his supporters to operations touting unconstitutional conspiracies that are in direct conflict with his Presidential "ambitions" may be taking it many steps too far.  

(Arizona's Politics disputed Democrats who expressed views that President George W. Bush was going to try to remain in power beyond January 2009; it looks like we may spend the next four (lonnggg) years disputing Birthers-turned-dictator-preventers.)







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: McCain Preparing To Meet With Susan Rice, Declines To Take O'Reilly Bait Dissing President

To contact us Click HERE
NBC News and Fox News are reporting tonight that Arizona Senator John McCain (R) will be meeting with U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice tomorrow.  (Both note that Rice requested the meeting, which will apparently also be with Sens. Graham and Ayotte.) President Barack Obama is considered likely to nominate Rice to be the next Secretary of State, and McCain has been one of the loudest anti-Rice voices in the Senate.

McCain has blasted Rice for what he perceives as her untruthfulness when she appeared on Sunday morning news shows shortly after the terrorist attacks killing the U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others in Libya on September 11.  He memorably called her interviews "probably one of the worst  things I've observed in my entire life".  (Arizona's Politics laid out McCain's and Rice's video out side-by-side with the transcript, and noted that McCain had followed Rice on Face the Nation - in the same seat - and had declined to criticize Rice at that point.)

Tonight, McCain was on FoxNews' O'Reilly Factor, and repeatedly declined to take the host's bait and declare that Obama's likely nomination of Rice would be a "slap in the face" of McCain.  He also continued his walk-back of his strident rhetoric about Rice:  "I don't think it was a matter of dishonesty.  It was a matter of, again, responsibility."




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: McCain "Significantly Troubled By Many Of The Answers That We Got And Some That We Didn't Get"; Transcript Of Rice's 9/16 Comments

To contact us Click HERE
Arizona Senator John McCain (R) met with U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice this morning, and came out "significantly troubled" about how Rice had handled the interviews five days after the Benghazi attack and the intelligence community's handling of the run-up to that event, which took the life of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others.

The meeting had been requested by Rice, and was with Rice, McCain, Sens. Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte, and a Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.  The three Senators have promised to block Rice's nomination if President Obama chooses her to succeed Hillary Clinton as the Secretary of State.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Arizona's Politics has previously printed the transcript of one of Rice's September 16 interviews, and noted that McCain sat in the same chair moments later.  Here is more of that transcript, with some highlighting for emphasis:


BOB SCHIEFFER: And joining us now, Susan Rice, the U.N. ambassador, our U.N. ambassador. Madam Ambassador, he* says this is something that has been in the planning stages for months. I understand you have been saying that you think it was spontaneous? Are we not on the same page here?SUSAN RICE (Ambassador to the United Nations): Bob, let me tell you what we understand to be the assessment at present. First of all, very importantly, as you discussed with the President, there is an investigation that the United States government will launch led by the FBI, that has begun and--BOB SCHIEFFER (overlapping): But they are not there.SUSAN RICE: They are not on the ground yet, but they have already begun looking at all sorts of evidence of-- of various sorts already available to them and to us. And they will get on the ground and continue the investigation. So we'll want to see the results of that investigation to draw any definitive conclusions. But based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy--BOB SCHIEFFER: Mm-Hm.SUSAN RICE: --sparked by this hateful video. But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that-- in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent.BOB SCHIEFFER: But you do not agree with him* that this was something that had been plotted out several months ago?SUSAN RICE: We do not-- we do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned.BOB SCHIEFFER: Do you agree or disagree with him that al Qaeda had some part in this?SUSAN RICE: Well, we'll have to find out that out. I mean I think it's clear that there were extremist elements that joined in and escalated the violence. Whether they were al Qaeda affiliates, whether they were Libyan-based extremists or al Qaeda itself I think is one of the things we'll have to determine.BOB SCHIEFFER: There seems to be demonstrations in more than twenty cities as far as we know yesterday. Is there any sense that this is leveling off?SUSAN RICE: Well, on Friday, of course, I think that's what you're referring to-- there-- there were a number of places around the world in which there were protests, many of them peaceful, some of them turned violent. And our emphasis has been-- and the President has been very, very clear about this, priority number one is protection of American personnel and facilities. And we have been working now very constructively with host governments around the world to provide the kind of protection we need and to condemn the violence. What happens going forward I think it would be unwise for any of us to predict with certainty. Clearly the last couple of days have seen a reduction in protests and a reduction in violence. I don't want to predict what the next days will yield.BOB SCHIEFFER: The Romney campaign continues to criticize the administration. Paul Ryan was on the campaign trail yesterday saying that the Obama administration has diminished America's presence overseas and our image, a direct quote, "If we project-- if we project weakness, they come. If we are strong, our adversaries will not test us and our allies will respond to us." What's your response to that?SUSAN RICE: It's two-fold. First of all, Bob, I think the American people expect in times of challenge overseas for our leaders to be unified and to come together and to be steadfast and steady and calm and responsible and that certainly what President Obama has been. With respect to what I think is a very empty and baseless charge of weakness, let's be plain, I think American people know the record very well. President Obama said when he was running for President that he would refocus our efforts and attentions on al Qaeda. We've decimated al Qaeda. Osama bin Laden is gone. He also said we would end the war in Iraq responsibly. We've done that. He has protected civilians in Libya, and Qaddafi is gone. I serve up at the United Nations and I see every day the difference in how countries around the world view the United States. They view us as a partner. They view us as somebody they want to work with. They view President Obama as somebody they trust. Our standing in the world is much stronger so this charge of weakness is really quite baseless.BOB SCHIEFFER: Do you think Mitt Romney spoke inappropriately when he criticized and issued a statement so early in this turmoil?SUSAN RICE: Bob, I think you know, in my role, I'm-- I'm not going to jump into politics and make those judgments. That's for the American people to decide.BOB SCHIEFFER: Madam Ambassador, thank you for being with us.SUSAN RICE: Thank you very much.BOB SCHIEFFER: And joining us now for his take on all this, the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, John McCain. Senator, you've got to help me out here. The president of Libya says that this was something that had been in the works for two months, this attack. He blames it on al Qaeda. Susan Rice says that the State Department thinks it is some sort of a spontaneous event. What-- what do you make of it?SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN (R-Arizona): Most people don't bring rocket-propelled grenades and heavy weapons to a demonstration. That was an act of terror, and for anyone to disagree with that fundamental fact I think is really ignoring the facts. Now, how long it was planned and who was involved, but there is no doubt there was extremists and there's no doubt they were using heavy weapons and they used pretty good tactics--indirect fire, direct fire, and obviously they were successful. Could I just say that our prayers are with Chris Stevens and Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods and Sean Smith who gave their lives. I met Chris Stevens in Benghazi during the fighting. He was putting his life on the line every day. He was living in a hotel. I was with him on July 7th when the Libyan people voted and he and I were down where thousands of people were saying to him, "Thank you, thank you, America, thank you." So the last thing that Chris Stevens would want the United States to do is to stop assisting Libya as they go through this very difficult process of trying to establish a government and democracy.BOB SCHIEFFER: Why do you think the-- is there something more going on here than a difference of opinion when the administration spokesman today says that she believes and the administration believes this was just a spontaneous act?SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN: How-- how spontaneous is a demonstration when people bring rocket-propelled grenades and heavy weapons and-- and have a very tactically successful military operation, but there are so many things that we need to cover but the fact is that the United States is weakened. And, you know, it was Osama bin Laden that said when people see the strong horse and the weak horse, people like the strong horse. Right now United States is the weak horse.In Iraq, it's unraveling. In Iraq, al Qaeda is coming back. It is in danger of breaking up into Sunni, Shia, and Kurd. By the way Iranian flights are overflying Iraq with weapons for Bashar Assad. In Afghanistan again, you just saw, the worst thing for any military morale is these killing by your allies that continue to escalate. It's unraveling because all we tell the Afghan people is we're leaving. We are not telling them we're succeeding. We tell them we're leaving.***Even this morning, McCain is trying to portray Rice's September 16 remarks as being "incorrect" because she said that "it was a spontaneous demonstration", when in fact she clearly said "what BEGAN spontaneously... extremist elements, individuals, joined in with heavy weapons... and it spun from there...."  
Is there a significant difference in whether it started out as an attack or whether it started as a demonstration that terrorists used to launch an attack?  Was the difference significant enough for the Obama Administration and Rice to stick to what they may have already known was an incorrect intelligence report about the genesis of the attack?  And, do McCain and the other Republicans reap enough benefit by ignoring the nuances of Rice's remarks and continuing to pretend that she flat out denied that it was a pre-planned attack?

* "he" refers to the previous guest,  the President of Libya's General National Congress Mohamed Yousef Magariaf. He had expressed that he had "no doubt" that it was "pre-planned" by foreigners who entered the country to carry out this attack.  
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.

DOJ Gave Millions to Illegal Alien 'Sanctuaries,' Report Finds

To contact us Click HERE
DOJ Gave Millions to Illegal Immigrant 'Sanctuaries,' Report Finds

The Department of Justice has spent tens of millions of dollars this year to compensate more than two dozen states, counties and cities for their costs of jailing illegal immigrants -- even though those communities have adopted policies that obstruct immigration enforcement, according to a recently released report.

"Subsidizing Sanctuaries: The State Criminal Alien Assistance Program," a report from the Center for Immigration Studies, found that the federal grant program commonly known as SCAAP allocated $62.2 million -- more than 15 percent of its $400 million total -- to 27 jurisdictions that are widely considered to be "sanctuary communities."

Some of those jurisdictions -- including San Francisco, Chicago and California's Santa Clara County -- are even trying to opt-out of Secure Communities, a program that automatically alerts Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials when criminal illegal immigrants are booked into jail, according to the report.

Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies and a co-author of the report, said that the grant system as currently structured makes little sense.

"Basically, the federal government is subsidizing through this grant program jurisdictions that on the one hand are complaining about the cost of illegal immigration and demanding reimbursement from the federal government, while at the same time they have policies in place that make their locality a magnet for illegal aliens," Vaughan told FoxNews.com.

"And that's just illogical," she said.

According to Department of Justice figures cited in the report, five of the top 10 SCAAP grants to localities and two of the top 10 grants to states went to jurisdictions that are considered sanctuaries. That includes $14.2 million to Los Angeles County, $13.4 million to New York City and $88 million to the state of California.

Rather than award SCAAP grants to jurisdictions that incur costs of incarcerating undocumented criminal aliens, Vaughan said federal officials should use the grant program as an incentive for communities to participate in immigration enforcement programs like Secure Communities or the 287(g) program, which trains deputies to check the immigration status of individuals they arrest and has identified more than 180,000 illegal immigrants for deportation nationwide
since 2006.

In a statement obtained by FoxNews.com, U.S. Rep. Gary Miller, R-Calif., said he disagreed with funding sanctuary cities using SCAAP grants and called on the Obama administration to take action.

"In its lawsuit challenging the Arizona immigration law, the Obama administration claims that the law creates a patchwork of immigration enforcement," Miller's statement read. "If this is the case, then the Obama administration should also sue sanctuary cities, for their policies are arguably a 'patchwork' of immigration enforcement as well. It is time for the administration to end its double standard."

To that end, Miller has authored legislation -- the Loophole Elimination and Verification Enforcement Act, or LEAVE -- that would prohibit sanctuary communities from receiving both Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security funds.

"I hope the next Congress will take up this commonsense proposal and penalize sanctuary cities for their irresponsible policies," Miller's statement concluded.

In a statement to FoxNews.com, the Department of Justice said it administers the SCAAP grants in accordance with legislation authorizing the program and passed by Congress.

"Funding under this program is provided to any eligible jurisdiction that incurs costs associated with detaining criminal aliens," the statement read. "SCAAP does not inhibit, but rather supports the accountability process by reimbursing local agency costs for detaining illegal aliens who commit crimes."

The statement continued, "Making any jurisdiction ineligible for these funds could have an unintended consequence -- creating a disincentive to detain criminals who are greater flight risks and pose a danger to our communities. The Department of Justice is committed to providing support to our state and local partners to protect the safety of communities."

Bob Dane, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform
, suggested that the number of sanctuary communities would reduce significantly if the DOJ grants were discontinued.

"One of the best fixes is to deny state and federal funding to the places that harbor illegal aliens," Dane said. "The entire country is slowly but surely moving from a sanctuary mentality to a 'fix it' mentality, but you've got these remaining pockets of resistance, many of them in big cities."

Dane continued, "You hit 'em where it hurts, in the wallet, and maybe they'll get it. We're reimbursing cities for a problem of their own making."

Source - http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/11/12/doj-gave-millions-sanctuary-communities-report-finds/

VOTE COUNT WATCH: 631,000 Arizona Ballots To Be Checked, Counted; National Journal Updates On Arizona's CD2 and CD9, Points Out Why Barber May Have Upper Hand

To contact us Click HERE
Minutes ago, Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett announced that there are still more than 630,000 early ballots and provisional ballots to be checked and counted.  459,000 of those are in Maricopa County, a significant number of which will impact the CD9 race.  About 94,000 remain in Pima and Cochise counties, a significant number of which will impact the CD2 race.

The National Journal just ran an update on the seven still-unresolved House races across the country.  Arizona trails California in that contest, but uncounted ballots could change that.  The two Arizona races still being watched are the CD2 contest between Rep. Ron Barber (D) and Martha McSally (R), and the CD9 battle between GOP nominee Vernon Parker and Dem. choice Kyrsten Sinema.

The new piece of analysis that the National Journal piece brings to the table is that the last two elections for CD2 (formerly CD8, with minor changes) have both broken the Democrats' way when early and provisionals are counted in Tucson (other counties are less critical than Pima).  That may very well be a pattern that indicates that Barber may re-pass McSally in the tally.

Here are the vote totals as of 2:24pm this afternoon:


In Pima County,

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.

Why Newt Gingrich Has "No Idea" Whether He'll Run For President In 2016; Hasn't Ruled It Out

To contact us Click HERE
Yesterday, Newt Gingrich, former Republican frontrunner for the GOP 2012 Presidential nominee and former Speaker of the U.S. House, indicated that he has "no idea" if he will run for President again in 2016.  And, an e-mail today from his campaign-turned-marketing-machine gives us the reason: there may not be an election (or, not a fair one)!

Today's e-mail is provocatively-titled, "THE SECRET BEHIND OBAMA'S THIRD TERM."  The "From" line notes that it emanates from "Newt 2012", although a disclaimer notes that the opinions belong to the advertiser and not the "Newt 2012 Campaign".

The e-mail from Porter Stansberry claims that "Most people believe the election was all about whether or not Obama will have a second term. But it was not.  What was actually at stake was whether or not he will have a third-term." Stansberry believes - seemingly incongruously - that Obama's secret plan to remain in power "through 2020 - or even beyond" will INCREASE the wealth and power of the U.S. in the world AND will enable the Presdient "to implement the most terrifying socialist policies in the history of our country." (emphasis added0

Gingrich is obviously not sure either whether there will be an election in 2016, or whether it would be winnable to go up against the surprisingly-powerful Obama.

Interestingly, there is evidence that the Gingrich campaign is well aware of Mr. Stansberry's views.  The week before the election, a previous Stansberry-via-Gingrich e-mail also predicted that Obama would go after a 3rd term if he won on November 6, ABC News reported on it, and a Gingrich spokesperson said that Stansberry was not supposed to be approved to pay Gingrich for the right to e-mail Gingrich supporters under the Gingrich family of for-profit e-mail lists.

Now, instead of mistakenly sending out the Stansberry e-mail to Gingrich's "Human Events" newsletter,  Gingrich's actual campaign has sent out the e-mail.  ABC News noted that Stansberry has been found partly liable in an SEC lawsuit for "an online newsletter scheme that defrauded investors out of more than $1,000,000."  (Which is why Arizona's Politics is not even clicking on the link from the Gingrich campaign.)

Gingrich has long been noted for his conservative cause money-making efforts (e.g. "Newt, Inc."); however, selling his supporters to operations touting unconstitutional conspiracies that are in direct conflict with his Presidential "ambitions" may be taking it many steps too far.  

(Arizona's Politics disputed Democrats who expressed views that President George W. Bush was going to try to remain in power beyond January 2009; it looks like we may spend the next four (lonnggg) years disputing Birthers-turned-dictator-preventers.)







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: McCain "Significantly Troubled By Many Of The Answers That We Got And Some That We Didn't Get"; Transcript Of Rice's 9/16 Comments

To contact us Click HERE
Arizona Senator John McCain (R) met with U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice this morning, and came out "significantly troubled" about how Rice had handled the interviews five days after the Benghazi attack and the intelligence community's handling of the run-up to that event, which took the life of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others.

The meeting had been requested by Rice, and was with Rice, McCain, Sens. Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte, and a Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.  The three Senators have promised to block Rice's nomination if President Obama chooses her to succeed Hillary Clinton as the Secretary of State.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Arizona's Politics has previously printed the transcript of one of Rice's September 16 interviews, and noted that McCain sat in the same chair moments later.  Here is more of that transcript, with some highlighting for emphasis:


BOB SCHIEFFER: And joining us now, Susan Rice, the U.N. ambassador, our U.N. ambassador. Madam Ambassador, he* says this is something that has been in the planning stages for months. I understand you have been saying that you think it was spontaneous? Are we not on the same page here?SUSAN RICE (Ambassador to the United Nations): Bob, let me tell you what we understand to be the assessment at present. First of all, very importantly, as you discussed with the President, there is an investigation that the United States government will launch led by the FBI, that has begun and--BOB SCHIEFFER (overlapping): But they are not there.SUSAN RICE: They are not on the ground yet, but they have already begun looking at all sorts of evidence of-- of various sorts already available to them and to us. And they will get on the ground and continue the investigation. So we'll want to see the results of that investigation to draw any definitive conclusions. But based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy--BOB SCHIEFFER: Mm-Hm.SUSAN RICE: --sparked by this hateful video. But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that-- in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent.BOB SCHIEFFER: But you do not agree with him* that this was something that had been plotted out several months ago?SUSAN RICE: We do not-- we do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned.BOB SCHIEFFER: Do you agree or disagree with him that al Qaeda had some part in this?SUSAN RICE: Well, we'll have to find out that out. I mean I think it's clear that there were extremist elements that joined in and escalated the violence. Whether they were al Qaeda affiliates, whether they were Libyan-based extremists or al Qaeda itself I think is one of the things we'll have to determine.BOB SCHIEFFER: There seems to be demonstrations in more than twenty cities as far as we know yesterday. Is there any sense that this is leveling off?SUSAN RICE: Well, on Friday, of course, I think that's what you're referring to-- there-- there were a number of places around the world in which there were protests, many of them peaceful, some of them turned violent. And our emphasis has been-- and the President has been very, very clear about this, priority number one is protection of American personnel and facilities. And we have been working now very constructively with host governments around the world to provide the kind of protection we need and to condemn the violence. What happens going forward I think it would be unwise for any of us to predict with certainty. Clearly the last couple of days have seen a reduction in protests and a reduction in violence. I don't want to predict what the next days will yield.BOB SCHIEFFER: The Romney campaign continues to criticize the administration. Paul Ryan was on the campaign trail yesterday saying that the Obama administration has diminished America's presence overseas and our image, a direct quote, "If we project-- if we project weakness, they come. If we are strong, our adversaries will not test us and our allies will respond to us." What's your response to that?SUSAN RICE: It's two-fold. First of all, Bob, I think the American people expect in times of challenge overseas for our leaders to be unified and to come together and to be steadfast and steady and calm and responsible and that certainly what President Obama has been. With respect to what I think is a very empty and baseless charge of weakness, let's be plain, I think American people know the record very well. President Obama said when he was running for President that he would refocus our efforts and attentions on al Qaeda. We've decimated al Qaeda. Osama bin Laden is gone. He also said we would end the war in Iraq responsibly. We've done that. He has protected civilians in Libya, and Qaddafi is gone. I serve up at the United Nations and I see every day the difference in how countries around the world view the United States. They view us as a partner. They view us as somebody they want to work with. They view President Obama as somebody they trust. Our standing in the world is much stronger so this charge of weakness is really quite baseless.BOB SCHIEFFER: Do you think Mitt Romney spoke inappropriately when he criticized and issued a statement so early in this turmoil?SUSAN RICE: Bob, I think you know, in my role, I'm-- I'm not going to jump into politics and make those judgments. That's for the American people to decide.BOB SCHIEFFER: Madam Ambassador, thank you for being with us.SUSAN RICE: Thank you very much.BOB SCHIEFFER: And joining us now for his take on all this, the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, John McCain. Senator, you've got to help me out here. The president of Libya says that this was something that had been in the works for two months, this attack. He blames it on al Qaeda. Susan Rice says that the State Department thinks it is some sort of a spontaneous event. What-- what do you make of it?SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN (R-Arizona): Most people don't bring rocket-propelled grenades and heavy weapons to a demonstration. That was an act of terror, and for anyone to disagree with that fundamental fact I think is really ignoring the facts. Now, how long it was planned and who was involved, but there is no doubt there was extremists and there's no doubt they were using heavy weapons and they used pretty good tactics--indirect fire, direct fire, and obviously they were successful. Could I just say that our prayers are with Chris Stevens and Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods and Sean Smith who gave their lives. I met Chris Stevens in Benghazi during the fighting. He was putting his life on the line every day. He was living in a hotel. I was with him on July 7th when the Libyan people voted and he and I were down where thousands of people were saying to him, "Thank you, thank you, America, thank you." So the last thing that Chris Stevens would want the United States to do is to stop assisting Libya as they go through this very difficult process of trying to establish a government and democracy.BOB SCHIEFFER: Why do you think the-- is there something more going on here than a difference of opinion when the administration spokesman today says that she believes and the administration believes this was just a spontaneous act?SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN: How-- how spontaneous is a demonstration when people bring rocket-propelled grenades and heavy weapons and-- and have a very tactically successful military operation, but there are so many things that we need to cover but the fact is that the United States is weakened. And, you know, it was Osama bin Laden that said when people see the strong horse and the weak horse, people like the strong horse. Right now United States is the weak horse.In Iraq, it's unraveling. In Iraq, al Qaeda is coming back. It is in danger of breaking up into Sunni, Shia, and Kurd. By the way Iranian flights are overflying Iraq with weapons for Bashar Assad. In Afghanistan again, you just saw, the worst thing for any military morale is these killing by your allies that continue to escalate. It's unraveling because all we tell the Afghan people is we're leaving. We are not telling them we're succeeding. We tell them we're leaving.***Even this morning, McCain is trying to portray Rice's September 16 remarks as being "incorrect" because she said that "it was a spontaneous demonstration", when in fact she clearly said "what BEGAN spontaneously... extremist elements, individuals, joined in with heavy weapons... and it spun from there...."  
Is there a significant difference in whether it started out as an attack or whether it started as a demonstration that terrorists used to launch an attack?  Was the difference significant enough for the Obama Administration and Rice to stick to what they may have already known was an incorrect intelligence report about the genesis of the attack?  And, do McCain and the other Republicans reap enough benefit by ignoring the nuances of Rice's remarks and continuing to pretend that she flat out denied that it was a pre-planned attack?

* "he" refers to the previous guest,  the President of Libya's General National Congress Mohamed Yousef Magariaf. He had expressed that he had "no doubt" that it was "pre-planned" by foreigners who entered the country to carry out this attack.  
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 Makes Market Fall By Ruling Out Medicare Cuts

To contact us Click HERE
Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-CD7) prompted the New York Stock Exchange to drop today, demonstrating both the awesome power that the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the CNBC hosts hold as the country inches toward the "fiscal cliff".

Grijalva was on CNBC this morning.  During the first 3 1/2 minutes of his interview, the S&P500 dropped from $4.04 down to $5.92 down.  One of the interviewers then noted that Grijalva is stoking the fears by saying that he will not give on certain issues, and that the markets drop.  "Do you care that markets are selling off dramatically?"  "Of course I do," replied Grijalva.




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, FOLLOWING MONEY IN ARIZONA'S POLITICS: In Possible Two-Fer, Gov. Brewer Goes Robocalling In Montana; May Have Violated State and Federal Laws; Also, Dem Tweaks McCain

To contact us Click HERE
Governor Jan Brewer used her SuperPAC to robocall Montana voters in support of GOP Senatorial challenger Denny Rehberg shortly before election day.  In so doing, she may have violated both Montana  AND federal election laws.

On Tuesday, Huffington Post reported on the robocalls supporting Rehberg in what proved to be an unsuccessful effort to unseat Sen. Jon Tester.  Tester's campaign had posted the audio of Brewer's appeal on Election Day, along with scrolling text with the Montana law banning robocalls - even in the context of political races.


Huffington Post notes that the Montana law banning election-related robocalls is not being enforced because prosecutors do not want to risk it being found unconstitutional.

Federal elections laws require any last minute independent expenditures to be disclosed within 24 hours of the expenditure.  That law is enforceable.  As of this writing, JanPAC has not disclosed the Montana robocalls.

It is possible that the eponymous SuperPAC did not need to file a 24-hour report with the FEC, if the expenditure was less than $1,000.  A call to the JanPAC spokesman is out, and we will update upon receiving a response.

An interesting sidebar to the Governor's robocall is that it came fast on the heels of Sen. Tester taking a full-page ad out thanking and praising Arizona Senator John McCain (R-AZ) for fighting against the Citizens United Supreme Court decision permitting big money SuperPACs like Brewer's. (McCain had come to Montana to campaign for Rehberg.


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.

VOTE COUNT WATCH: 631,000 Arizona Ballots To Be Checked, Counted; National Journal Updates On Arizona's CD2 and CD9, Points Out Why Barber May Have Upper Hand

To contact us Click HERE
Minutes ago, Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett announced that there are still more than 630,000 early ballots and provisional ballots to be checked and counted.  459,000 of those are in Maricopa County, a significant number of which will impact the CD9 race.  About 94,000 remain in Pima and Cochise counties, a significant number of which will impact the CD2 race.

The National Journal just ran an update on the seven still-unresolved House races across the country.  Arizona trails California in that contest, but uncounted ballots could change that.  The two Arizona races still being watched are the CD2 contest between Rep. Ron Barber (D) and Martha McSally (R), and the CD9 battle between GOP nominee Vernon Parker and Dem. choice Kyrsten Sinema.

The new piece of analysis that the National Journal piece brings to the table is that the last two elections for CD2 (formerly CD8, with minor changes) have both broken the Democrats' way when early and provisionals are counted in Tucson (other counties are less critical than Pima).  That may very well be a pattern that indicates that Barber may re-pass McSally in the tally.

Here are the vote totals as of 2:24pm this afternoon:


In Pima County,

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.

Why Newt Gingrich Has "No Idea" Whether He'll Run For President In 2016; Hasn't Ruled It Out

To contact us Click HERE
Yesterday, Newt Gingrich, former Republican frontrunner for the GOP 2012 Presidential nominee and former Speaker of the U.S. House, indicated that he has "no idea" if he will run for President again in 2016.  And, an e-mail today from his campaign-turned-marketing-machine gives us the reason: there may not be an election (or, not a fair one)!

Today's e-mail is provocatively-titled, "THE SECRET BEHIND OBAMA'S THIRD TERM."  The "From" line notes that it emanates from "Newt 2012", although a disclaimer notes that the opinions belong to the advertiser and not the "Newt 2012 Campaign".

The e-mail from Porter Stansberry claims that "Most people believe the election was all about whether or not Obama will have a second term. But it was not.  What was actually at stake was whether or not he will have a third-term." Stansberry believes - seemingly incongruously - that Obama's secret plan to remain in power "through 2020 - or even beyond" will INCREASE the wealth and power of the U.S. in the world AND will enable the Presdient "to implement the most terrifying socialist policies in the history of our country." (emphasis added0

Gingrich is obviously not sure either whether there will be an election in 2016, or whether it would be winnable to go up against the surprisingly-powerful Obama.

Interestingly, there is evidence that the Gingrich campaign is well aware of Mr. Stansberry's views.  The week before the election, a previous Stansberry-via-Gingrich e-mail also predicted that Obama would go after a 3rd term if he won on November 6, ABC News reported on it, and a Gingrich spokesperson said that Stansberry was not supposed to be approved to pay Gingrich for the right to e-mail Gingrich supporters under the Gingrich family of for-profit e-mail lists.

Now, instead of mistakenly sending out the Stansberry e-mail to Gingrich's "Human Events" newsletter,  Gingrich's actual campaign has sent out the e-mail.  ABC News noted that Stansberry has been found partly liable in an SEC lawsuit for "an online newsletter scheme that defrauded investors out of more than $1,000,000."  (Which is why Arizona's Politics is not even clicking on the link from the Gingrich campaign.)

Gingrich has long been noted for his conservative cause money-making efforts (e.g. "Newt, Inc."); however, selling his supporters to operations touting unconstitutional conspiracies that are in direct conflict with his Presidential "ambitions" may be taking it many steps too far.  

(Arizona's Politics disputed Democrats who expressed views that President George W. Bush was going to try to remain in power beyond January 2009; it looks like we may spend the next four (lonnggg) years disputing Birthers-turned-dictator-preventers.)







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.

VOTE COUNT WATCH, FINAL: Observations, Continued

To contact us Click HERE
Before the holiday (hope you had a nice one), Arizona's Politics published some observations on the final vote count.  One comment generated several e-mails and deserves a quick follow-up observation.

We tallied the total number of votes that Arizonans cast for the nine Democratic candidates and eight Republican candidates for Arizona's nine seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.  We noted that the GOP slate received a lot more votes, but that the Democrats go to D.C. with a 5-4 delegation edge.  We suggested that that outcome is not that surprising when recalling how upset Republicans were about the districts set up by the IRC.

One e-mailer thanked me for backing his or her claim that the GOP got screwed, and another basically told me that that was just the way the ball bounced.  The Republic ran a lengthy article on Saturday on the numbers, and gathered some interesting comments from winning Congressmen and others.

The bottom line can be looked at like this:  there are six "noncompetitive" districts.  The GOP holds a baseline 4-2 advantage, which is more than they would deserve simply based upon the registration numbers.

The three competitive districts could/would - especially, in a Republican wave election - result in a 7-2 GOP-dominated delegation.  In a Democratic wave - almost like the one this year - it can result in a 5-4 Democratic advantage.  Anything in between could also happen.

If a Democratic wave election could result in a 7-2 Democratic-dominated delegation, that would be wrong.  But, it cannot.

It would seem to Arizona's Poltics that any Republicans comlpaining about this year's result are basically admitting that they cannot and will not be able to win those three swing districts.  Even though - as the Republic points out - registered Republicans outnumber registered Democrats in two out of those three districts.  A self-defeatist argument that none should try to make.


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: McCain Preparing To Meet With Susan Rice, Declines To Take O'Reilly Bait Dissing President

To contact us Click HERE
NBC News and Fox News are reporting tonight that Arizona Senator John McCain (R) will be meeting with U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice tomorrow.  (Both note that Rice requested the meeting, which will apparently also be with Sens. Graham and Ayotte.) President Barack Obama is considered likely to nominate Rice to be the next Secretary of State, and McCain has been one of the loudest anti-Rice voices in the Senate.

McCain has blasted Rice for what he perceives as her untruthfulness when she appeared on Sunday morning news shows shortly after the terrorist attacks killing the U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others in Libya on September 11.  He memorably called her interviews "probably one of the worst  things I've observed in my entire life".  (Arizona's Politics laid out McCain's and Rice's video out side-by-side with the transcript, and noted that McCain had followed Rice on Face the Nation - in the same seat - and had declined to criticize Rice at that point.)

Tonight, McCain was on FoxNews' O'Reilly Factor, and repeatedly declined to take the host's bait and declare that Obama's likely nomination of Rice would be a "slap in the face" of McCain.  He also continued his walk-back of his strident rhetoric about Rice:  "I don't think it was a matter of dishonesty.  It was a matter of, again, responsibility."




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 Disbarment That Never Happened: Fmr County Attorney Andrew Thomas To Speak At GOP Group's Annual Meeting

To contact us Click HERE
The Paradise Republican Women's Club ("PRWC") is holding their annual meeting the Saturday after the biggest election of their lives (per Romney), and they have chosen former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas to be their Featured Speaker.  Nothing wrong with that, he was not banned from public speaking - or, even public office - for life.  However, you would think that they would at least acknowledge that he was disbarred (not permitted to practice law) nine days after he resigned to run for Arizona Attorney General (in 2010).

The PRWC put up an updated (2012) bio of Thomas, noting that the U.S. Department of Justice "exonerated" Thomas (and Sheriff Joe Arpaio) and "specifically rejected allegations of wrongdoing that a state bar panel made against Sheriff Arpaio and Andrew Thomas."  Very cleverly worded, and totally avoiding the fact that the bar panel adjudicated those "allegations" and found them troubling enough to disbar Thomas; Thomas chose not to appeal the nearly-unprecedented action.




Other than speaking to the group, the biography notes that Thomas is working on two different things: writing his fifth book, and "campaigning for reform of our judiciary and to fight corruption in Arizona’s government."  He promised the latter in his statement declining to appeal the disbarment; however, he has not released any specific ideas for reform. (He was wise enough not to publicly weigh in on Prop. 115.)


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.

ANALYSIS: The Problem With Flake's Explanation Regarding Inaccurate Robocalls

To contact us Click HERE
(UPDATE, 5:45pm: The Flake campaign has sent to media a detailed refutation of the known instances of incorrect polling place information.  Most show that there are Republicans and Democrats with the same phone number (in their voter file) but different addresses.  This is a legitimate situation, using as an example where a child registers while they live at home with their parents, and later moves without correcting the phone number (not required).  

However, the examples also show that the Flake campaign could have - and/or should have - avoided many of these misleading robocalls by either inserting the targeted voter's name into the message, or by  having the computer check the phone number for address discrepancies and not call those.  

Both solutions would take additional programming or capabilities, but one (or, both) should have been incorporated given the serious consequences of directing voters to incorrect polling locations.

If you are interested in viewing the entire detailed response from the Flake campaign, please contact Arizona's Politics; the first example is reproduced at the bottom of this post.)

The Jeff Flake campaign has issued its response to the reports - and, the freshly-announced FBI investigation - regarding Flake robocalls informing voters of the wrong polling places.

To recap: Channel 12 aired a report yesterday, with very specific details about multiple calls with incorrect information given. 

This afternoon, the Arizona Democratic Party announced that it was requesting that the FBI and other law enforcement to investigate the robocalls.

The Flake campaign issued a more complete response than that theyhad provided to Channel 12 yesterday.  It is reproduced in full after the jump.  First, they blame the Carmona campaign for "grasping at straws", although there is no indication that the campaign had anything to do with veteran political reporter Brahm Resnik obtaining this story.  (The statement also blames Resnik for not providing them with "detailed information" prior to running the story.)

The Flake campaign then lists a few scenarios that could have led to the incorrect robocalls.

***
Analysis:  The Flake campaign's explanation is probably legit, but insufficient. IF you are going to give voters specific info like that, you are responsible for making sure that you are giving CORRECT info. 

To address the "same phone number" issue, they could have included THE VOTER'S NAME in the robo-call. To address the "voters had moved", they could have included THE ADDRESS. Likewise, to address the "adult children" scenarios.

The Flake campaign's experts and/or vendors KNEW (or should have known) of these possible issues. They chose to plow ahead and assume the risk, thus owning the inevitable fact that they would possibly disenfranchise voters. ANY voters, not just Democrats.Inexcusable, and much worse than the inadvertent mistakes by the County regarding the wrong date en espanol.

Statement from Jeff Flake on KPNX 12 Story

November 5, 2012 By Press Release Leave a CommentShare
Rate This
PHOENIX – Jeff Flake made the following statement in response to a story reported late Sunday night by Phoenix TV station KPNX 12:“Given the news that Democratic-leaning polling firm PPP released a survey Sunday that had the Democratic candidate down by five points, we expected the Carmona campaign to start grasping at straws.  That began late Sunday night when KPNX aired a story on voter information calls sent out by my campaign.“On Saturday we sent a targeted autodial call to over 120,000 Republicans, encouraging them to vote and informing them of their polling location.  The call clearly stated that it was from my campaign because it was intended for Republicans.  We received fewer than a dozen calls from voters with questions about the information provided, nearly all of which we were able to reconcile.  Some adult children were registered under their parents’ address.  In other cases, voters had moved but not updated their registration.“Had KPNX provided us with detailed information on their report prior to airing it, we could have informed them that the Democrat they interviewed received thecall because, according the voting records, she had the same phone number as a Republican who lives in the precinct we provided information for. Again, this autodial was targeted to Republicans.  Any Democrats who received the call (which in all likelihood was a small number) did so because of errant information in the database owing to circumstanceslike those detailed above.”###Flake campaign's detailed response to complaints:

Response to Democratic Complaint
Democrat Complaint:
Name: Mary Crecco
Contact information: 480-614-5687
Address: 17212 N Scottsdale Rd Apt 2240, Scottsdale, AZ
Polling Location voter was sent to: Emmanuel Bible Church (note: there
is no polling place with this name, although there is an Emmanuel
Presbyterian Church, 3839 E Shea Blvd, Phoenix)
Correct Polling Location: Copper Canyon School, 17650 N 54th Street,
Scottsdale, AZ
Move recently: No.
Note: She still has the message recorded on her answering machine.
Response:
Mary Crecco’s phone number (480.614.5687) is shared with three
registered voters: Mary Crecco, Concettea Crecco, and Samantha Moore.
The campaign was calling to reach Samantha Moore who we show living
at 6633 E Greenway Parkway. Samantha is a Registered Republican as
of 4/17/09 in the Horizon precinct and the polling information provided on
the call was correct for that precinct.






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.