SCA Donors Knew Their Money was Going to Sheriff Joe Arpaio -- and That Could Mean Trouble for the State GOP

Five little words just might prove to be the downfall of Sheriff Joe Arpaio's command staff — and the Arizona Republican Party.

"Vote for Sheriff Joe Arpaio."

That inscription appears on the memo line of a $25,000 check, written by an Alaskan investment company in December 2007. That check, made out to the "Command Officers Association," ended up in the shadowy SCA account started by Sheriff Joe Arpaio's command staff, and, eventually, in the coffers of the Arizona GOP.

For months now, party officials insisted it was pure coincidence that, just after they received a six-figure check from the mysterious SCA account, they funded an incredibly nasty attack ad aimed at Arpaio's opponent. And the sheriff's command staff, which raised the money, was equally wide-eyed. Oh, no, they said. The money donated by the sheriff's men was not earmarked for the sheriff.

There's a reason they said that. If the state party let the sheriff's men launder money through it, that would be totally illegal.

After all, there's a strict limit to what an individual can give a political campaign: $390. If the sheriff's wealthy friends got around that by giving tens of thousands each to a secret fund, and the state Republican Party accepted the money with the understanding that it would end up going to the sheriff anyway, they are all in huge trouble.

We knew this SCA scandal is ugly. As I reported last month ("The Ventriloquist's Dummies," July 23), nine months after county officials insisted that the fund's contact person list his donors, Captain Joel Fox finally did so in July. At that point, in July, we learned that Arpaio's top command staff, including Chief Deputy David Hendershott, had made direct payroll deposits into the fund. We also learned that Arpaio's friend Steve Ellman had donated $25,000, as had half a dozen other wealthy businessmen.

But we didn't know the whole story until this past Monday.

On Monday, county officials finally received copies of the actual checks written to the SCA account. And those copies make it clear just why the sheriff's commanders spent nine months resisting entreaties to turn them over.

The checks themselves strongly suggest that the money was earmarked for Arpaio from the beginning. The "memo" from the Alaskan donation is proof that donors knew exactly where their money was going.

The photocopied checks also point to a second potential illegality: Donations to the SCA included checks from limited liability companies. That's strictly forbidden by state law.

As the record now shows, two out-of-state companies donated to the fund:

• The SCA accepted $25,000 from WTG Investments in Anchorage — not a man in Anchorage named Tom Gimple, as Sheriff's Captain Fox had claimed.

• The SCA also accepted $10,000 from Liautaud Development Group, LLC, not an individual named James Liautaud, as Fox claimed.

There are other weird discrepancies. In every case, Fox misstated the dates he received donations. (Once, he was off by as much as nine months.) And he overstated the totals given by two donors — perhaps to conceal the fact that he'd omitted one donor entirely. Nicholas Fergis, a man with extensive local investments, apparently made a $10,000 wire transfer to the SCA fund in January 2008, yet Fox's previous filing with the county never mentioned him.

This story has been curious from the beginning, and it's getting curiouser. I can only hope that some law enforcement agency is taking this seriously.

They need to be questioning Joel Fox about why he faked information in his initial filing two weeks ago. They need to be questioning Sheriff Joe Arpaio about what he knew and when he knew it.

And, most importantly, they need to ask Randy Pullen, chairman of the Republican Party, about how $105,000 in donations apparently meant for Joe Arpaio ended up going to — surprise! — an ad that benefited Joe Arpaio.

I don't think anyone can explain this one away now. But boy, would I love to see them try.

 
My Voice Nation Help
40 comments
Former Republican 2
Former Republican 2

This very important comment needs to be seen by the newer readers since it got lost in the blog. arpaio and Hendershot should be handled like they handled Dowling. They are in positions of trust and violated it. Or is there a double standard?

"Wasn't Sandra Dowling, the former School Superintendent charged with a misdemeanor for the hiring or mis-payment of her own daughter? Why should Arpaio and Hendershott be treated differently than Dowling? Perhaps there will be much light shed on those types of issues when the lawsuit Dowling filed against the county comes to court - maybe the Sheriff himself will be looking down the defendants table at the same charges. Along with Hendershott.Comment by EnoughisEnough from Phoenix, AZ on Aug 15th, 2009, 22:29 pm"

Tina
Tina

Isn't it quite obvious by now that SCA stands for "Sheriff's Campaign Account" -- not "Sheriff's Command Association"?As I recall, "Sheriff's Command Association" is pure speculation by the press since Fox refused to divulge the acronym's meaning to anybody that asked.

Chad Snow
Chad Snow

Joel,

Also, you say "could (you) prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a donation sent in July, 2007 was made for the purpose of influencing an election?" Possibly, but I think even those bumbling idiots at MCAO could prove that a donation made by an out of state corporation in December 2007 that said "vote for Sheriff Joe Arpaio" was made for the purpose of influencing an election.

It's called circumstantial evidence, Joel. Although it might not fit into your rigid application of the statute, a trier of fact can draw inferences from the obvious - that someone donating $25,000.00 to a "PAC" carrying the title of an elected official, and run by the employee of that elected official, might be trying to influence an election. You're a lot closer to a Class 6 felony than you think. I should report that to MACE!!!

You have the right to remain silent - I'm surprised that you don't exercise it. Gotta go - the black sedans are pulling up!!!!

BTW, you never responded to my allegation that MCSO "has a file" on me. Why would they need a file on me? Say hi to Trombi for me - he actually seemed like a very nice guy. Too bad.

Chad Snow
Chad Snow

Joel,

You say "Arpaio has absolutely nothing to do with SCA" and expect people to take anything you say seriously??? It's the SHERIFF'S Command Association, is it not? Are you saying it has nothing to do with the SHERIFF? You are more delusional than I thought. And you still cannot answer why the SCA made a $105,000.00 donation to the Republican Party at the same time that (my former) party ran a sleazy campaign ad against the SHERIFF'S opponent.

Also, your assessment of the elements of the Class 6 felony listed above clearly shows that you've gone over your story with Wilenchik. You say "nobody gave money in excess of what is allowed by campaign finance laws." How about Hendershott's $2,900.00 to SCA, later given to the Republican Party for said ads against Arpaio's opponent. Or are you saying that spreading a story about your opponent's masturbation habits wasn't intended to influence an election? I guarantee you if I had given $395 to Saban, you would be throwing the full force of the MCSO against me.

You say, "I like Arpaio because he's a cop that enforces the law." Bullshit. You like him because he's your meal ticket. The East Valley Tribune and Goldwater Institute sure don't think he enforces the law too well. And he's a complete joke amongst other valley law enforcement.

You say "asking you to be objective is like asking Ray or Sarah to be objective. There is no profit in it for you." Is that what you think motivates me? Profit? Wrong. I haven't sold out like you and the others, Joel. How exactly am I profiting by speaking out against our corrupt sheriff? The way I see it, I'm placing myself and my family at great risk, the way you guys go after your critics. Can I expect black sedans with Mexican license plates to show up some night and rip me out of my house in front of my children? Is that how I'm profiting? Or are you just going to throw me in jail for a day or two and let me think about it like you did to Parraz, Pochoda, Theilen, Sandschafer, and the others? Answer that, Joel. You talk so much about "democracy" and "justice" - how do you explain that shit? How do you justify it? Do you want the kind of "democracy" where an elected law enforcement official can abuse his office to intimidate his critics? Do some soul searching and ask yourself if your job with Arpaio is worth your integrity and honor. The way I see it, you guys are the only ones "profiting" from all this.

Coz
Coz

I stand corrected, thank you.I believe it's more like 50 million now Bozo Joke has cost the tax payers with his never ending bullshit...

Not to mention there's another 8 million coming for the over time bullshit.

Tell me, is that the Health Services fault too ?

>>And Coz, I assume your reference to 45 million is the money paid out in lawsuits? You can't seriously be still holding on to that number.

Coz
Coz

And you Joel Fox, are one of the many lying Bozo Joke Arpaio clown's.

Nothing more and nothing less....

You are the only one here that doersn't see past you're bullshit and lies...

But by all means, keep working on it, we need someone to laugh at.

Maybe you'll get lucky and have you buddy Hendershot as a cell mate...

>>Your lack of objectivity clouds your judgment and stokes your anger to the point you can no longer see the truth.

Joel Fox
Joel Fox

Chad,I was not at the BoS meeting where you were "thrown in handcuffs", nor have I ever heard anyone talk about you getting arrested. I know Trombi, and have known him for quite a while, and have a hard time believing that he would push a frivolous charge, but like I said...I wasn't there, so I wouldn't know anything about it.I also have never done anything to Coz.

Your comments do indicate, though, that your opinion in this matter is not based on me, or the facts...it's based on your feelings about Joe Arpaio, who has absolutely nothing to do with SCA, whether you care to believe it or not.

As an attorney, you must have some sense of justice...or at least you were taught it at some point, and you can't believe that your circumstance at the BoS, or Coz's past have anything to do with me.

But, I suppose, asking you to be objective is like asking Ray or Sarah to be objective. Since there is no profit in it for you, you are not interested.

As for your assessment of Ray's suggested crime, I don't suppose you have considered the time frame of the donations to SCA? Do you think that you could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a donation sent in July, 2007 was made for the purpose of influencing an election?And which of these do you suppose SCA is:"the designating individual who formed an exploratory committee, an exploratory committee, a candidate or a candidate's campaign committee"

I don't know of any circumstances known to you or otherwise in which a corporation or LLC gave money for the purpose of influencing an election to any candidate or their exploratory committee.

And nobody gave money in excess of what is allowed by campaign finance laws. You're a lawyer. Check the law before you comment.

And Coz, I assume your reference to 45 million is the money paid out in lawsuits? You can't seriously be still holding on to that number. That number includes all lawsuits involving MCSO or the jails, some of which are the fault of Correctional Health (which is separate from MCSO, and not controlled by the Sheriff). Every other similar sized jail pays out way more than MCSO does. Do you remember the lawsuit against Phoenix PD by the family of Edward Mallet? It paid out 45 million in ONE lawsuit. Now, after 17 years and the 3rd largest jail system in the country, you fault Arpaio for having a TOTAL of 45 million?Certainly, any lawsuit is bad, but there isn't a government agency in this country that hasn't paid on a lawsuit. If you could be fair about your arguments, maybe more people would listen.

But you asked why I like Arpaio? Because he is a politician that does what the majority of his constituents want him to do. You, and Ray and Sarah and Chad and many others are in the minority, and that's no fun, but it doesn't justify your baseless and unfounded attacks on people that have nothing to do with your complaints. I've never cared about the accusations and complaints about Arpaio. In America, you should be allowed to voice any complaints about any politician. I only care when you don't tell the truth about the deputies and detention officers. I'm sure there are mistakes made, and you're welcome to capitalize on them for your political gain. Just don't lie about us.And I also like Arpaio because he's a cop that enforces the law. When you elect a law enforcement officer whether that be a Sheriff or County Attorney, I would hope that you would expect and demand that he or she enforces the law. It is the legislature's job to write the laws, the cop's job to enforce them, and the judiciary's job to decide them. The three prongs of the justice system work together in oversight of each other so that all those things you think are happening don't.

That's why, after all these years and all your incessant allegations, there have been no charges and no findings of any wrong doing. I'm not saying you have to agree with him, either. Go and spend all the time you want supporting another candidate that agrees with you. That is how democracy works. If you want change, change the elected officials. But if you are in the minority, don't expect to be successful at it, and don't whine later and hurl all sorts of baseless allegations just because you can't bear the fact that less than half the people agree with you.

You don't want justice. You don't want what is best for everyone. Coz, you want what you think is best for Coz, and nothing more. The same is true of Chad and his buddies.

Your lack of objectivity clouds your judgment and stokes your anger to the point you can no longer see the truth.

And you wonder why nobody ever takes you seriously...

bob gleder
bob gleder

Hey "Joel",Does "Captain Fox" know your posting using his name? Surely Joel Fox is smarter than the posts here indicate?

notwelltaken
notwelltaken

Chad, your experiences should be discussed with the FBI - have you considered contacting the local agent who is investigating this stuff? Please do so...it may help

Chad Snow
Chad Snow

Joel,

Class 6 felony sucks, dude. You wonder why I'm so militant against Arpaio and the rest of you weasels? Because I had the gall to show up at a Board of Supervisors meeting out of curiosity and, WITHOUT HAVING SAID A WORD, was thrown in handcuffs and taken to a room full of deputies in riot gear. My friend was thrown in jail and held all day on specious charges that were later dismissed. Then your buddy Trombi told me that they "had a file" on me. That's creepy, and that's shit that Joseph Stalin or Saddam would have done. I guess it could have been worse, you could have done to me what you did to Coz.

You guys won the election - should've just laid low for another 3 1/2 years and then revved up the slime machine just before the next election. Joe's ego couldn't stand that, though.

Chad Snow
Chad Snow

Joel,

You ask if I've "found a crime yet?" Actually, yes, Ray Stern linked to it last week: to save the taxpayers thousands of dollars for Wilenchek having to look it up for you, I'll paste it here:

16-919. Prohibition of contributions by corporations, limited liability companies or labor organizations; exemption; classification; definitions

A. It is unlawful for a corporation or a limited liability company to make any contribution of money or anything of value for the purpose of influencing an election, and it is unlawful for the designating individual who formed an exploratory committee, an exploratory committee, a candidate or a candidate's campaign committee to accept any contribution of money or anything of value from a corporation or a limited liability company for the purpose of influencing an election. This subsection does not apply to political committees that are incorporated pursuant to title 10, chapters 24 through 40 and political committees that are organized as limited liability companies.

B. It is unlawful for a labor organization to make any contribution of money or anything of value for the purpose of influencing an election.

C. A corporation, limited liability company or labor organization which violates this section is guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor.

D. The person through whom the violation is effected is guilty of a class 6 felony.

Chad Snow
Chad Snow

Joel,

Do you really think we are that stupid? The fact is this: many of Arpaio's top officers gave amounts well in excess of campaign finance laws to an account that was in turn given to the Republican Party during an election at the exact same time as a smear campaign against Arpaio's opponent was paid for by the Republican Party. And you say Ellman donates to a lot of charities - I'm sure he does, but why wouldn't he just give that money directly to the Republican Party? Why the need to launder it through SCA if there was no quid pro quo?

The walls are closing in, Joel. I'm not your lawyer, but I'd advise to you stop talking and save something to leverage a better plea bargain.

Coz
Coz

OK, I have a question...

What has Arpaio done other than waste incredable amounts of tax payers dollars on bullshit ?

We're talking real numbers here, as in dollars and cents....

45 million and climbing ?

Even YOU cannot dispute that,,,SO JUSTIFY IT !

Please...Tell me and the world why Arpaio is so great, in you're mind anyway.

>>Yes, the difference is subtle, but there are many people who would support Arpaio,

Joel Fox
Joel Fox

Sarah,I'm a Captain, which means I am salaried, which means I am not eligible for overtime pay. For example, when I was in Louisiana following hurricanes Katrina and Rita, working 18 hour days, every day, for several weeks in a row, I got paid for a 40 hour week.

You can speculate about any number of things, and you and others have been doing the same for 15 years now, with none of your predictions coming true. I can't imagine why you might have any faith in your predictions now.

Coz, yes it is funny, and that is the point. Of course the supporters of SCA are also supporters of Joe Arpaio, and it is asinine to have thought otherwise...or to try and make some kind of point out of it, like insinuating that because the SCA donors are also Arpaio supporters, it proves there must have been collusion, or that they intended to produce a "smear campaign" against Arpaio's opponent.

Supporting Arpaio and attacking his opponent are two very different things. Yes, the difference is subtle, but there are many people who would support Arpaio, but not support a smear campaign against an Arpaio opponent. Assuming that a person would do both is just foolish.

Coz
Coz

Now that's funny.....but I sure would donate 5 gallons of gas if they were on fire.

>>Did you figure that Chad Snow and Coz might have been on the donor list of SCA?

notwelltaken
notwelltaken

Joel, you said: " Most of the career folks at MCSO have nothing to do with politics, and never would. All they want to do is their jobs, and even though they work hard, fly straight, and do the right things at the right times for the right reasons, some flunky tabloid hack can still slander and trash them and poke fun and print their photo and call them liars or thugs or gestapo or murderers."

Then what the hell are you? A career folk, trying to do your job and working hard and flying straight? Not getting involved in politics but just serving the citizens? You're the origin of the SCA Campaign...what does the statement you made say about you?

Go fgure.

EnoughisEnough
EnoughisEnough

Wasn't Sandra Dowling, the former School Superintendent charged with a misdemeanor for the hiring or mis-payment of her own daughter? Why should Arpaio and Hendershott be treated differently than Dowling? Perhaps there will be much light shed on those types of issues when the lawsuit Dowling filed against the county comes to court - maybe the Sheriff himself will be looking down the defendants table at the same charges. Along with Hendershott.

FormerRepublican
FormerRepublican

Taxpayers of Maricopa County - did it catch your attention that David Hendershott's son recorded 936 overtime hours in one reporting period according to news reports? Not impossible, but he'd have to be superman. How are the others with last names that ARE NOT Hendershott feeling about the kinds of money he earned when they were not entitled to the same "benefit" - Joel, any response from you on that one? You seem to have the whole morale issue at the Sheriff's Office at heart - are you concerned about the morale problem this information has caused? Maybe you could open up another donation campaign for workers who weren't entitlted to the same treatment the Chief's son got. That way you are REALLY doing something good for the MCSO folks you so loudly proclaim to be concerned about. By the way, could you tell us how much overtime YOU PERSONALLY logged during that period?

FormerRepublican
FormerRepublican

Joel, is it true that a subpoena has been issued for your bank account records? I guess your word for it isn't good enough any more. Wire transfers into this account constitutes a possible FEDERAL violation, does it not? Also, can you explain what the connection is with the Texas folks and the Sheriff? Are they brokers of planes, etc? DOES THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE have any contracts or any purchases connected to any of these folks?? You can be sure that investigation has already begun. It's very fishy that a guy in Dallas TX would care about Joel Fox's campaign for a morale booster for MCSO personnel. There is a lot more to the story. Can't wait until they select a jury in your case. I'd love to get the final results on WHO had contracts with or supplied merchandise, etc. to the Sheriff's office. Care to educate the readers on that a little? Here's a hint...others are already investigating that angle, so you may as well roll over now.

FormerRepublican
FormerRepublican

What a joke! Joel Fox telling readers that terms like "thug" don't apply to many MCSO personnel. I believe he's referring to the Hendershott article recently. And he's defending Hendershott? Joel, you have some real serious issues facing you. Among them are lying to the court about the donors and the fact that you accepted company checks into this SCA bank account. You compounded those lies when you tried to cover up your dirty work by throwing around typical bs about no one knowing that they were donating to a smear campaign. You are the dishonest one, not the reporter. And as far as thugs go...your department takes the cake. Perhaps soon that will be coming to an end. With the FBI, the DOJ, the Department of Labor and now the State becoming involved in your case, I can only imagine what else will be uncovered. By the way, Joel...how WERE those checks endorsed? Did you endorse the checks with the Sheriff's Command Assn or Command Association name? Hopefully you are going to be charged criminally. I believe you can see that one coming, can't you? You may even have some company - boy are they going to be upset with you if what you say is true about them having no knowledge of where that money was going.As far as your future in law enforcement, I'm going to give that a big NEGATIVE. You will be tried in the court of press the way the Sheriff's Office does to every one they disagree with. Look at the judges, elected officials and all the county folks that have been slandered. You will be treated in the same manner with one exception - you really HAVE criminal issues.

Joel Fox
Joel Fox

What you fail to recognize, OMG, is that not all people are as cynical as you are. I don't know about the rest, but I do know that Steve Ellman is very involved in local charities, and regularly gives without anything in return. I would assume the same to be true about the others, at least until shown otherwise.

And, generally speaking, people support cops. MCSO regularly receives donated items, especially food, and there is nothing given in return. And there are a lot of people that know how bad the media is at telling the truth, and they don't like to see unfair treatment of men and women who work hard serving their communities. It is not right to treat MCSO employees with disdain and contempt simply because you don't agree politically with Sheriff Arpaio. Most of the career folks at MCSO have nothing to do with politics, and never would. All they want to do is their jobs, and even though they work hard, fly straight, and do the right things at the right times for the right reasons, some flunky tabloid hack can still slander and trash them and poke fun and print their photo and call them liars or thugs or gestapo or murderers.

So, despite your jaundiced viewpoint, there are many good people out there who selflessly give without any expectation of something in return. Your idea that these must be business owners who bought a free pass on employer sanctions enforcement is just plain foolish. Most of the donors come from outside Arizona, and while Arpaio may be well known across the country, his jurisdiction ends at the county line.

Just stop and think for just a second. Don't you realize that your conclusions are not based on the facts of this matter...they are based solely on what you already believed to be true (also without justification), and what you want to be true. You are so far away from objective that you are no longer even honest.

OMG
OMG

Aside from the 'fact' that Joel's postings and stories are unbelieveable on this issue, I don't believe they pass the smell test. Joel made suggestions about the motivations of people that would give $25,000 to the Sheriff or to the deputies. That illuminated it. Rich folk that aren't silver spoon rich have typically worked hard, taken risks, and reaped their rewards.

Almost to a person, such people that have made their fortunes will 'give' money willingly if there is a 'get' or something in return associated with the donation. They understand risk and reward.

My question is, if not to help influence the election and to assure that AARPaio stayed in power, what was the get for each individual contributor if they donated to help the deputies image. There is really nothing they would get. So why donate? However, if they could help influence or futher assure the election and AARPaio owed them a favor, the get may well be worth the investment.

Could such donations facilitate who can hire and keep illegal aliens on the payroll without concern for a Sheriff's raid? Could it be that Gold Canyon Candle Company was solicited for a donation and did not dontate. Maybe they were raided as a result?

I don't know any of these things to be true or false. I am just pointing out that money usually does not flow freely. There is usually some motivation that causes money to flow. If I hear a rumor about a checking account number, will I jump on the bandwagon to put my money in there when I don't know what it is to be used for? More importantly, when I don't know what I get for the money. I certainly would be more likely to donate to a checking account that was set up to pay for a child's transplant. At least there I get some satisfaction of helping someone.

Some force caused the donations to flow into the account. When we know what the donors got or expected to get, we will know much more of this story. One has to follow the money. Now that the money trail is pretty well known, we need to know the force or motivation to donate.

The balance is 'give' and 'get' We know the give, what was the get for the donors?

This story may have just begun to be told. I doubt that Joel knows what has really gone on. I believe he is just a patsy that has laundered money for others in their attempt to insulate themselves from cupability.

EnoughisEnough
EnoughisEnough

Joel Fox - how are Joe's supporters (namely Ellman, and some of the others who are now dragged through the mud) feeling about you these days? How is the Republican party reacting to you? Just wondered if you'll be hanging around to help "command" Joe's next campaign. That should be a real show. Are you still welcome on the 10th floor or have you been reassigned to the basement until your charges hit?

FormerRepublican
FormerRepublican

Okay Joel:

How did you ENDORSE the checks that were deposited in this dirty account? Were they endorsed "Sheriff's Command Association" or "Command Association" - because the viewers will have the check endorsement to view. Want to make clear your campaign name again before we all see the endorsements when you deposited the checks?

Joel Fox
Joel Fox

Geez, Sarah/FormerRepublican...you are awfully quick to judge for one who knows so little. You call it curious, but why? You're not curious...you're certain.

Chad, you don't have it straight. Thankfully, law enforcement in this town is conducted by people with more common sense than you. Have you even found a crime yet? Still need more time?

You want an explanation? ...as if it would make any difference...Here's a hint, though: Look at the signature on that check.Now, see if you can answer a very important question:Who wrote "vote for sheriff joe" on that check?

Whatever your wildest fantasies might be, even you surely don't think it was Joe Arpaio. So why would Joe Arpaio "go down" because some person wrote "vote for sheriff joe" on a check he's never seen?

How would the Republican Party be in trouble over a check they've never seen?

Were you thinking that the people who would send $25,000 to support deputies would also hate Arpaio? Did you figure that Chad Snow and Coz might have been on the donor list of SCA? Of course they wouldn't. Their bias and prejudice against Arpaio would prevent them from supporting anything even remotely close to Arpaio.

It only stands to reason that supporters of the deputies would also be supporters of Joe Arpaio. Why is that surprising in the least?

It isn't. And you know it isn't. But that doesn't stop you from leading people who hate Arpaio already into a cloud of confusion and assumptions and lies and fantasy.

The only one around here that should be ashamed is you, Sarah.

xxtra
xxtra

I have been waiting..for Holder to do a quick understudy of Janet Reno..consult the Clintons and Pull a "Get Rid of Ron Carey" type of manuever..Why isn't this..allegation of some kind of election fraud and funding.. any surprise at all..Dirty Dirty 1990's Deja Vu all over again!

FormerRepublican
FormerRepublican

Hey Joel,What type of work are you actually doing these days? Still working in the SWAT unit? Or too busy trying to get out of this mess to worry about that messy 4 letter word...WORK. I hope you're still in SWAT, because your name on ANY report will mean a free pass for anybody with whom you come in contact. If you wrote me a ticket on the street for speeding, I'd take you to task with the judge for your own lies and behavior. You have your hands full defending your own criminal actions - hope you aren't out there trying to solve any crimes...you have enough crimes to deal personally. You can't be trusted. You are not credible. You are a liar. You are not worthy of any certification by any law enforcement agency. Get out of town.

FormerRepublican
FormerRepublican

Fox keeps blogging and every word is a LIE. He can't even tell the truth in court under direct orders from a judge...he promptly failed to list an additional 10,000 wire transfer and was WAY OFF on the dates of donations for this smear campaign. He kept telling all readers that SCA had no meaning...yet ALL THOSE PEOPLE had the same name on the checks they made out...SHERIFF'S COMMAND ASSOCIATION.

What a pig and what a lying pig. He ought to hide his head in shame. He ought to be in the HALL OF FAME on the BRADY LIST. No doubt he'll end up there shortly. Fox needs to be charged, AND FIRED. He should NEVER be allowed to be called a law enforcement officer in this state or any other.

Robert Rodriguez
Robert Rodriguez

To Joel Fox and David Hendershott:"LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE"!!! And to all you sheriff Joe supporters: "What part of illegal don't you get"??? Sheriff Joe's world is crumbling around him and I'm loving every minute of it. You folks at New Times keep up the good work and dig ever deeper into corrupt mean ol' Joe Arpaio.

OMG
OMG

What would the response be if Stapley or Wilcox had such campaign finance irregularities?

I have to think that AARPaio and Thomas would be construction a gallows by now. Screaming MACE and Corruption!

Dave Symansky
Dave Symansky

The Arizona Republican party is the party of crooks, cranks, thiefs and liars. The party of Arpaio, and Pearce, and Symington, and the lipless wonder, Franks. It is no longer the party of Goldwater, and Barr.

chadsnow
chadsnow

Let's get this straight: we have an elected politician/law enforcement officer who pays outrageous salaries to his double dipping top lieutenants, who then have money direct withdrawn from their paychecks into a fund intended for his re-election, in amounts which clearly exceed campaign finance laws. The Sheriff, then, returns the favor back by paying exorbitant amounts of overtime to the lieutenants' family members (900 hours in one 9 month period to Henderschott's son, I believe). Also, one of these top lieutenants runs the shadowy political action committee, accepting 5 figure campaign donations from unknown out-of-state sources, which directly affects the outcome of an election. Anyone who dares question this obvious corruption is arrested, thrown in jail, forced to defend themselves in court (the charges never stick), and otherwise intimidated by the sheriff and his henchmen who have so much obviously to lose if they are exposed. Then, to top it all off, the county anti-corruption task force is headed by - none other than Mr. Henderschott.

Where is the FBI??? Where is Terry Goddard??? Where is the rest of the mainstream media??? Is there a rule of law in Arizona???

Coz
Coz

I doubt very seriously this was the brain child of Bozo Joke Arpaio....

I believe this was thought up by Hendershott and the rest of the command staff, Sands, MacInWeasel, Black, Sheridan, Munell, etc.

Fox probably wanted to be the point guy figuring he would make Chief if all went well and he proved his loyality to the command staff slimballs.

When you think about it, who really has more to lose than Bozo Joe does, specially on a criminal level when Bozo Joe is out of office and the real investigations begin.

HendershottSandsSheridanBlackMacInWeaseland I'm sure a few others.....

OMG
OMG

No Tommy, I don't believe it. I think AARPaio in mentally competent, knows right from wrong, and chooses not to care or to be held accountable for actions that are wrong or illegal.

After all, hs is untouchable. At least he has been.

CooperG
CooperG

No Tommy, a lot of us agree with you.

TommyC
TommyC

This blog article really does bring up a good point that I, like some others, tend to forget because we get too hung up on MCSO.

It's really not just MCCA and MCSO involved here, although they both stood to be primary benefactors in the last election due to the SCA 'donation' to the Republican party, with the very clear intent for those funds to pay for the damaging ads against Dan Saban, for the benefit of the MCSO sheriff's re-election effort.

Randy Pullen clearly understood the intent of the funds and he directed those funds funneled to a third fund for the damaging ads, then defended those ads after they had run for several days, then pulled the ads and 'refunded' the $105,000 to SCA once the conspiracy was made public, clearly knowing both civil and criminal violations had occurred, and leaving Joel Fox holding the smoking gun.

This was in addition to about $300,000 that the MCSO sheriff had left over from his last campaign. Then he and Andy ran "Public Safety Announcements" with instructions to call the county attorney with any information about drop houses. Those PSAs stopped immediately after the election and haven't been seen since.

Even with the saturation advertising of the Republican party Dan Saban still garnered 45% of the vote.

Just think how well he might have done if he'd had the backing of the state Democratic party, for which he ran.

All said and done, it's now time for the state Republican party and MCSO and MCCA to pay the pauper.

It seems obvious to me that no law enforcement official at the state level, including but not exclusive to Mr. Goddard, has the intestinal fortitude to actually investigate civil and criminal violations and take action against those involved.

I guess we will have to rely on those working at the federal level.

Am I the only one out here who thinks the MCSO sheriff is mentally ill?

Coz
Coz

They all need to go to jail, not just Fox, but Bozo Joke Arpaio and everyone else on the donation list for breaking the law.

Anybody else would be going to jail.

But one thing for sure, don't count on Candy Dandy Thomas to do anything about this. That F-en Bozo Jr. isn't worth a shit when it comes to ethic's or his daddy Bozo Joke Arpaio.

 
Phoenix Concert Tickets
Loading...