TeaPartyWire.com – Tea Party News by and for Tea Party Members

County Supervisors’ shielding of corruption by asking for a Justice Department investigation ends in nothing except thousands of our tax dollars wasted.

Convicted felon and former business partner of Don Stapley is demanding a huge settlement from County taxpayers

The frivolous investigation by the Justice Department into Sheriff Arpaio and former County Attorney Andrew Thomas has finally come to an end. Arpaio and Thomas have been cleared of any wrongdoing in their attempt to prosecute corrupt County Supervisors Mary Rose Wilcox, Don Stapley and a judge who consistently ruled to protect the Supervisors’ corruption. The US Attorney’s Office issued a statement yesterday saying they were closing the investigation. This decision is even more significant considering it is coming from the Obama administration, which dislikes Arpaio because of his crackdowns on illegal immigration and his investigation into Obama’s birth certificate.

This will impact the Arizona State Bar’s targeting of Thomas and his deputies. The State Bar disbarred Thomas and punished two of his deputies due to them prosecuting the two Supervisors and judge. Now that Thomas has been fully cleared by a lengthy, ongoing investigation by the federal government, the State Bar’s actions are being called into question. Corrupt disciplinary judge Bill O’Neill, who was in the pocket of the State Bar, did what the Bar wanted (click here to read about his corruption on the case, which includes ghostwriting pleadings for friends, a violation of judicial ethics). Thomas did not appeal the disbarment, because the corrupt County Supervisors refused to fund his appeal. His two deputies are currently appealing their sentences pro se. No doubt this decisions will affect the decisions by the Arizona Supreme Court, which is hearing the appeals.

Sheriff Arpaio said at a press conference in response:

“They did their investigation, they didn’t find enough probable cause and they didn’t bring an indictment. We don’t go around framing anybody. My people are not crooks. I never had any doubt. … Once again, I send my appreciation to the federal government for their hard work in clearing my office. If I did something wrong, there would be indictments floating all over the place.”

Andrew Thomas reacted to the announcement:

“The Justice Department acknowledged the obvious: A jury of citizens simply would not indict a prosecutor who had done his job. This decision directly contradicts the State Bar’s claim that the taking of my law license could be proven “beyond a reasonable doubt.” The real losers in the political witch hunt that just ended are the people of Arizona. Prosecutors no longer attempt to fight corruption or illegal immigration in Arizona because they fear being targeted and disbarred. Though I have suffered a grave injustice, I will continue to campaign for reforms in our courts and elsewhere so the powerful and corrupt are not above the law.”

His Deputy prosecutor Lisa Aubuchon, was also disbarred by the Arizona State Bar, reacted,

“I am relieved this chapter of the witch hunt is over.  The findings on the perjury charge directly contradict the bar findings, a clear example of the trumped up charges that were pushed through the bar matter for political reasons.  My family has suffered greatly just because I was doing my job.  Average citizens charged with crimes are treated differently than politicians and judges- that is wrong.  Many people agreed with the filing of charges against Don Stapley, Mary Rose Wilcox and Gary Donahoe and it is unreal that the disciplinary panel could find that the guilt is not relevant to the proceedings preventing Andrew Thomas and myself from bringing forth all of the evidence we relied on.  If the bar decision is allowed to stand, the message is that a prosecutor can lose his or her license just because someone at the bar disagrees with charging decisions.  I am hopeful that either the Arizona or United States Supreme Court will right this wrong.”

A spokesman for the Arizona Republican Party, on behalf of chairman Tom Morrissey said, “It is good to see this witch hunt has come to an end. I find it bizarre when a man is hounded for doing his job by those who refuse to do theirs.”

The County Supervisors and their cronies have filed million dollars in lawsuits against the County over the prosecutions. Let’s hope this shuts down these abuses of our tax dollars. Arpaio and Thomas tried to prosecute Wilcox for violating county ethics rules by voting to award the radical left wing organization Chicanos por la Causa grant money while accepting a favorable personal loan from them. Stapley was prosecuted for spending $86,000 in campaign money raised for a race where he had no opponent on luxury items, including 3 lavish vacations for his family. One of the lawsuits demanding taxpayer money for “stress” is from Conley Wolfswinkel, a convicted felon and former business partner who was funneling Stapley $15,000/mth for a shady land deal. From today’s Arizona Republic:

County Supervisor Andrew Kunasek was furious about the decision, which he calls “an assault on our system of justice. That Hendershott and Aubuchon are walking away from this — I think it’s a scourge on the Department of Justice,” he fumes. “I am pissed at [U.S. Attorney General] Eric Holder. His inaction here is a terrible abuse.”

Read more at Fox News – http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/09/01/arpaio-criminal-investigation-closed-by-feds/ (We scanned through the entire New York Times today, expecting a print article about this, since the New York Times has been heavily covering the DOJ investigation into Arpaio with frequent front page headlines, but could not find a single mention of it)

Submitted by:

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N  S E N S E , in Arizona

Even the Arizona Republic’s columnist Robert Robb, no fan of Andrew Thomas, has written multiple times how the State Bar’s witchhunt against Thomas was wrong. Robb is not an attorney so he can safely speak out without fear of retaliation, unlike the poor attorneys who have dared speak up to defend Thomas. They have been retaliated against by losing their contracts with Maricopa County, having bar complaints filed against them, and losing their positions with the State Bar.

Robb recognizes that what is going on in Maricopa County government and the court system is mob behavior. First it was the kickbacks on the court tower; vendors who contributed heavily to Maricopa County’s golf tournament received pricey contracts on the court tower. Then it was smack down anyone who tried to investigate it. The smacking down continues, as anyone who dares to speak up about the corruption or stop it finds themselves under attack. This is nothing more than mob behavior running amok within our own county. The racketeering continues and escalates, as Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox awards herself $975,000 of our taxpayers’ money for “stress” over being prosecuted.

Here are some excerpts from Robb’s recent article:

“The kitchen-sink approach the independent investigator took in the Thomas charges undermined the public perception of the process’ fairness.

Parsing Thomas’ press releases rather than just focusing on the big stuff, like charging a judge with a crime without probable cause, created a sense that the game was rigged.

The disciplinary-hearing panel concluded that Thomas violated two criminal statutes. This is fundamentally unfair. Guilt or innocence of criminal offenses has no business being judged in a professional disciplinary hearing.

The state Bar is a trade-association advocacy group that takes aggressive positions on public issues and controversies. It also plays a central role in disciplining lawyers.

Thomas protested that this constituted a conflict of interest because, early on, the Bar was investigating complaints against him for behavior that Bar officials had publicly criticized.

But that doesn’t change the institutional question of whether these two roles are appropriately vested in the same organization. It’s not the case for any other profession.

Recent changes have reduced the role of the Bar in the disciplinary process. But it is still where lawyer discipline begins, so the question remains.”

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N  S E N S E , in Arizona
Thursday, July 19, 2012