The Concept of the Whistleblower

• What it is and is NOT.
• The danger of not understanding it.
• A few words about the 6th Amendment
   

A “whistleblower” is someone who is afforded protection against losing his/her job for coming forth to provide evidence of wrongdoing. There is nothing in the whistleblower concept that indicates that such an individual is “anonymous.”

On the contrary, a government that accepts and uses evidence from an anonymous informant to prosecute wrongdoing need not protect an informant at all. After all, the informant is unknown. That being the case, why would such protection even be necessary?

Someone who can remain anonymous NEEDS NO PROTECTION—he or she is, by definition UNKNOWN.

MISUSE of WHISTLEBLOWER CONCEPT

If the Democrat/Media position on whistleblowers is correct, then US Government agencies could just begin to use 800 number lines, invite callers to “blow their whistles,” and then prosecute anyone they want based on anonymous messages.

The SIXTH AMENDMENT

Under the 6th Amendment, anyone accused in America has the right to:

• be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation;
• be confronted with the witnesses against him;
• have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and
• have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

The Democrats in Congress have thus far not only disregarded these fundamental concepts, they have shown aggressive contempt for them. This should be a very sobering moment for all Americans, regardless of political affiliation.

Trump may or may not have violated a law or committed some high crime, but whether he has or has not he must be afforded the same procedural protections afforded all other Americans.

Denying the Republicans the right of calling witnesses, or to cross-examine other witnesses represents a great danger to all of us, not just the minority in Congress, and not just Trump.

IN SUM

In our view, the Democrats and their media allies are attempting to change fundamental concepts about the American judicial system.

This represents a danger to civil liberties that extends well beyond any partisan political considerations. By ignoring basic components of due process, the Democrats are counting on the increasingly evident ignorance of millions of Americans, and, sadly, are also engaged in aggressively teaching ignorance to millions more.

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

This was written in the winter of 1788, but does it sound like today? You tell us.

We list 10 phrases written by Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 65.*

How many of these phrases do you perceive fit the current circumstances? Let us know your number. 

...the trial of impeachments...

1. "...They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL..." [Note: capital letters are from Hamilton, not NMPJ]

2. "...The prosecution of them, for this reason, will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community,

3. "...and to divide it into parties more or less friendly or inimical to the accused.

4. "...In many cases it will connect itself with the pre-existing factions,

5. "...and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side or on the other..."

6. "...and in such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt."

7. "...The difficulty of placing it rightly, in a government resting entirely on the basis of periodical elections, will as readily be perceived..."

8. "...most conspicuous characters in it will...be too often the leaders or the tools of the most cunning

9. "...[most conspicuous characters in it will...be too often [of]] ...the most numerous faction..."

10. "...[the most cunning] can hardly be expected to possess the requisite neutrality towards those whose conduct may be the subject of scrutiny."

* While Federalist 65 deals directly with the potential role of the Senate in a post-impeachment trial, it is also applicable as a means of evaluating the role and conduct of the House of Representatives in the indictment process, which is in fact "impeachment."

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

We received the following email from Albuquerque Attorney Pat Rogers, to whom we had credited the defeat of the so-called Democracy Dollars initiative, promoted by the progressive Left in the recently concluded Albuquerque municipal election.

Dear NMPJ:

Some high school pals sent me your recent Democracy Dollar article. I write, somewhat reluctantly, to give credit where credit is due.  Because I have done lots of other good things without any credit I admit I was tempted to leave the impression I whipped up on the Democracy Dollar advocates, single-handedly.

My old pals who commented about the article know me and remain convinced there must be more to the story. There is.

The Rio Grande Foundation, a free-market advocacy outfit in New Mexico, is responsible for the lion’s share of the $200 spent in opposition. The Rio Grande Foundation sponsored the first podcast against Democracy Dollars and that is still online at their site.  

They dreamed up the excellent website title:  “Go Fund Yourself”. Their website contains lots of background on the issue. Any of your readers interested in the details of the battle or the other free-market battles in New Mexico should check out the Rio Grande Foundation website.  

A worthy cause and source of information for anyone in favor of freedom and limited government.http://nowaynm.org/

Other individuals and the Bernalillo County Republican Party pitched in with letters to the editor and emails to friends.

The odds and forces aligned in favor of this latest bad idea from the coast were actually even more significant and one-sided than noted in the article.

The money that will be finally reported by the advocates of the wacky, wasteful scheme will be well over $550,000 because the leftist groups have yet to report the contributions and expenditures for the last days of the campaign, the time when the most dollars and time are usually expended.

More important, the usual suspects pushing this bad idea included OLÉ (formerly known as ACORN until a variety of illegal activities were exposed), Progress Now, Working Families, Common Cause and a host of the usual out-of-state coastal leftists that often don’t report accurately.

The last few days of the Democracy Dollar campaign also featured endorsements for Democracy Dollars by some nobodies named Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Andrew Yang, some Texas yahoo, and some others who should never be elected to any public office. Luckily their endorsements were ignored.

Thank you for your report on this significant victory for the taxpayers and voters. Occasionally, common sense prevails.  

Patrick J. Rogers

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

Watch this short video and see what California’s massive POPULAR VOTE will lead to in the rest of America.

Remember: We are NOT a direct democracy. And Direct Democracy leads to a California.

Click here:  https://www.facebook.com/craigneil/videos/10214966635135435/

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

The Demise of Democracy Dollars

Perhaps the biggest news of last Tuesday evening was the defeat of the progressive Democrats’ scheme called “Democracy Dollars.”

It was a plan that would provide everyone in Albuquerque with a $25 voucher (paid for by Albuquerque taxpayers) that each person could “donate” to the Albuquerque city council or mayoral candidate of his/her choice.

The proponents of the scheme, who are by and large Left-wing campaign consultants and so-called non-profit leftist activists, spent more than $550,000 to win the voters’ approval for what would have been a new source for an additional $14 million in public financing.

The proposal was riddled with loopholes and components that just screamed “fraud” and “scam,” but it had a nice name.

(Opponents pointed out that that name was highly misleading and that it should be called “Democrat Dollars,” since it was being pushed so hard by New Mexico’s dominant political party.)

Democracy Dollars Goes All Out—Leaving No Stone Unturned (and no turn unstoned)

The Democracy Dollars crowd pulled out all the stops: rallies on Civic Plaza led by far-Left Albuquerque politico Eric Griego, paid door-to-door campaigning, tons of mail, radio, television, celebrity endorsements, catchy slogans, and cool nicknames like "Burque Bucks." 

The money poured in from all over Left-wing America. They touted the support of the so-called "Common Cause" organization.

(The "common" in the name apparently comes from its "common," and in fact unanimous and unwavering support for every single Left-wing idea which is broached anywhere in America.) 

They had the support of the League of Women Voters, which, as we understand

One Lonely Opponent

Meanwhile, going up against more than a half-million dollars in advertising was the lonely voice of Albuquerque attorney Pat Rogers, and one or two other supporters who, combined, spent less than $250 (that’s right, two-hundred and fifty dollars).

Rogers published an Op-ed in the Albuquerque Journal excoriating the scheme and its flaws. He then went on a PBS show on KNME’s Channel 5 (which perhaps has 500-600 viewers in all of New Mexico) and calmly demolished the entire proposal, step-by-step. He spoke to a business forum, perhaps attended by 50 or 60 people, and he went on KKOB Radio 770 for an hour.

That was it.

The result?

                YES: 39,317 (48.7%)

                NO:  41,356 (51.3%)

Yeah, the Democracy Dollars crowd, despite enjoying a spending advantage of 2,200 to 1, actually managed to lose the election.

Go figure!

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

Commemorating the ultra stupid Texas “Clock Boy” hoax that bewildered so many Democrats—Obama invited the perpetrator, Ahmed Mohamed, to the White House, believing that he was some sort of budding “scientist” or “genius-like engineer.”

What is forgotten is that Mohamed’s father the creatively-named Mohamed Mohamed (it seems his family ran out of name ideas) tried desperately to make money out of the entire ordeal, filing a half dozen lawsuits.

New Mexico Republicans can be glad that the RPNM is now acting to ensure election integrity—albeit too late to save at least 70 ballots. Nonetheless, Steve Pearce is to be commended for taking action.

In response to our article, the RPNM swung into action late this afternoon. They filed suit against the three entities we had identified for them as having acted unlawfully:

• The Doña Ana County Clerk
• The Secretary of State
• The Absent Voter Precinct Board

With Las Cruces mayoral candidate Mike Tellez as the plaintiff, they went into district court in Las Cruces. We are proud to share highlights of this RPNM press release as they read almost verbatim from our article:

REPUBLICAN PARTY of NEW MEXICO and LAS CRUCES MAYORAL CANDIDATE SUE STATE OVER ABSENTEE BALLOTS

The Republican Party of New Mexico and Las Cruces mayoral candidate Mike Tellez have filed suit against New Mexico’s Secretary of State, the Dona Ana County Clerk and the County’s Absent Voter Precinct Board. The RPNM and Tellez claim the defendants are ignoring a 2019 law that requires absentee voters to provide their name, address and date of birth.

The lawsuit charges that The AVPB had been instructed by the County Clerk, who herself was acting on the advice of the Secretary of State Maggie Oliver, to count the ballots despite at least one of the three qualifications missing. The suit claims the defendants did nothing to fix this problem.

The Republican Party and Tellez are asking the court for an injunction to stop the counting of absentee ballots. The RPNM has learned at least 70 of these ballots have at least one of the three necessary pieces of information missing. The Plaintiffs want the ballots sequestered until a ruling.

The Party is also asking for a declaratory judgment to clarify the meaning of the 2019 changes to the statute. It wants the court to set a uniform statewide standard for qualifying and counting absentee votes for this non-partisan election and future ones. While this local election is non-partisan, there are many registered GOP voters in Dona Ana County.

“What’s happening in Dona Ana County is wrong and setting a bad precedent for future elections. Our Party must stand up to this. People who vote illegally are hurting the integrity of the system. We as a Party must raise a red flag when we see people ignoring voting laws,” said Steve Pearce, RPNM Chairman. “It’s our duty to call on the State to fix these problems.”

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

In the current local election taking place in Doña Ana County, the Doña Ana County Clerk, claiming to be acting on instructions from the Secretary of State, is—once again—violating state law.

Despite explicit direction given by the state legislature, Doña Ana County is once again accepting absentee ballots whose outer envelopes do not provide the identification information a voter must provide in order for his or her ballot to be accepted and counted. The outer envelope of a returned absentee ballot must show:

• The voter’s name
• The voter’s registration address
• The voter’s year of birth
• The voter’s signature

In other words, to vote by absentee ballot a voter must provide the same information that the early voter or the Election Day voter must provide as a condition for receiving a ballot. (Outer envelope shown at right.)

In the CD2 race last year, the Doña Ana County Clerk accepted hundreds of ballots which were missing one or more of the mandatory requirements shown above.

This past March, the state legislature passed legislation making it crystal clear (it was already clear but being ignored) by inserting new, unmistakable language mandating that the information identifying the voter had to be included for a ballot to be accepted.

What has the Doña Ana County Clerk Done?

She has ordered that ballots with missing signatures, years of birth, and other omissions be accepted. Not only has she accepted the ballots, she has had the Absent Voter Precinct Board:

1)  open the outer envelopes (where the missing information is supposed to be attached)

2)  remove the inner envelopes—the ones with the actual voted ballots; and

3)  separate the inner envelopes from the outer ones, so it is now impossible to verify the voter

She has comingled all the ballots. This means it is impossible to tell legitimate, law-abiding and lawful voters casting legal ballots from those who don’t fit that category.

There are several categories of voters whose ballots may not qualify—that’s one of the principal the reasons for the existence of the Absent Voter Precinct Board. Some of those categories are:

• Voters who are qualified electors, but ineligible to vote in a particular district or contest
• Individuals who are committing vote fraud
• Voters whose names or addresses are being used by others who are committing fraud

By ignoring the law and by eliminating the role of the Absent Voter Precinct Board, the County Clerk—with the authorization of the Secretary of State—has created yet another New Mexico “goat roping” and substituted that for a legal election in which established lawful voting procedures are to be used.

[PLEASE NOTE: A decision taken by the Absent Voter Precinct Board to reject a ballot is not final and does not finally exclude anyone from voting. Instead, a rejected ballot is set aside and treated in much the same way as a provisional ballot. The voter may ultimately be able to show that his or her ballot should count--by providing a signature or correct information, etc., in which case the mailing envelope shall be opened and the ballot shall be counted.]

Where is the Republican Party of New Mexico?

The above-referenced violations of election law are setting the stage for the 2020 Presidential Election year in which all congressional seats, a US Senate race, and the entire New Mexico legislature will be contested.

And here we have the same violations committed by the same people in the same city and county where the 2018 violations took place.

We have it on good authority that State Chairman Steve Pearce was notified of these ongoing violations, but did nothing. As a result, no injunction was filed and this morning the ballots were finally opened and comingled, despite the illegality of the entire procedure.

If these kinds of violations are allowed to continue, then not only do Republicans have no hope whatsoever of seeing a Republican presidential candidate carry New Mexico, they have very little chance of winning all the other elections.

What Does the Applicable Law Say about Absentee Voting?

1- 6- 8. Mailed ballot envelopes.

C. The reverse of each official mailing envelope shall contain a form to be executed by the voter completing the mailed ballot. The form shall identify the voter and shall contain the following statement: "I have not and will not vote any other ballot in this election". The official mailing envelope shall contain a space for the voter to record the voter's name, registration address and year of birth. The envelope shall have a security flap to cover this information.

1- 6- 9. Mailed ballots; manner of voting; delivery methods.

A. When voting a mailed ballot, the voter shall secretly mark the mailed ballot in the manner provided in the Election Code for marking paper ballots, place it in the official inner envelope and securely seal the envelope. The voter shall then place the official inner envelope inside the official mailing envelope and securely seal the envelope. The voter shall then complete the form on the reverse of the official mailing envelope, which shall include a statement by the voter under penalty of perjury that the facts stated in the form are true and the voter's name, registration address and year of birth.

6- 14. Handling mailed ballots.

A. At any time after mailed ballots have been sent to voters and until the fifth day before the election, the county clerk may convene an election board to meet during the normal business hours of the office of the county clerk to qualify the mailed ballots that are returned. Before opening an official mailing envelope, the presiding judge and the election judges shall determine that the required information has been completed on the reverse side of the official mailing envelope.

B. If the voter's signature or the required voter identification is missing, the presiding judge shall write "Rejected" on the front of the official mailing envelope. The judge or election clerk shall enter the voter's name in the signature rosters or register and shall write the notation "Rejected- - Missing Signature" or "Rejected- - Missing Required Voter Identification" in the "Notations" column of the register. The presiding judge shall place the official mailing envelope unopened in a container provided for rejected ballots.

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

He's giving a Medal of Honor to a Green Beret, but NOTHING to Hunter Biden for his 30 days’ solid service in the Navy Reserve before being discharged for failing a drug test.*

Hunter later went to New Mexico Tech and became an expert in Petroleum Engineering. He then parlayed those skills into huge million-dollar “consulting fees” as an international expert. (Wait. No. He just used Clintonesque pay-to-play techniques.)

This is—very sad to say—how far the Democrats have sunk. Previous Democrats, like Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, or Senator Henry M. “Scoop” Jackson, or Senator John F. Kennedy, would have safeguarded US secrets. 

But in the modern Democratic Party there is no one left who will not leak classified information for partisan political purposes.

READERS' RESPOND

• Juli Adcock The president made a wise decision not to tell them and doncha know that they're eating their hearts out over it.
  TENOR
•  
•  
  Frank Drinkwinre Communists

  Jan Hinkle Adam isn't doing his job.
•  
•  
•  
• Jackie Sanders We the people can't trust democrats ! They hate our America , and our freedom
  Nolan Gonzales Did they get Baghdadi nuf said now next
•  
• Billy Dalton Interesting Read...??
  LET THEM GO AHEAD AND IMPEACH TRUMP ... HERE'S WHAT HAPPENS THEN...... CHUGGA CHUGGA CHOO CHOO
  By: Hyram F. Suddfluffel, PhD, (Political Science)
  
  I have a degree in Political Science, and I am a card-carrying Libertarian. I've been studying politics and political history for the past 30 years. My specialty is U.S. Presidents. That said, I hope that the House of Representatives impeaches Trump. Let me tell you what will happen next!
  
  1. The House can pass articles of impeachment over the objections of the Republicans and refer to the Senate for trial.
  
  2. The Senate will conduct a trial. There will be a vote, and the Republicans will vote unanimously, along with a small number of Democrats, to not convict the President. Legally, it will all be over at that point.
  
  3. However, during the trial, and this is what no one is thinking about right now, the President's attorneys will have the right to subpoena and
  question ANYONE THEY WANT! That is different than the special counsel investigation, which was very one-sided. So, during the impeachment trial, we will be hearing testimony from James Comey, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr, Glenn Simpson, Donna Brazille, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, Christopher Steele, Hillary Clinton, John Brennan, James Clapper, and a whole host of other participants in this whole sordid affair and the ensuing coverup activities. A lot of dirt will be dug up; a lot of truth will be unveiled. Finger pointing will occur. Deals will start being made, and suddenly, a lot of democrats will start being charged and going to prison. All this, because, remember, the President's team will now, for the first time, have the RIGHT to question all of these people under oath – and they will turn on each other. That is already starting.
  
  4. Lastly, one more thing will happen, the Senate will not convict the President. Nothing will happen to Trump. Most Americans are clueless about political processes, the law, and the Constitution. Most Americans believe that being impeached results in removal from office. They don't understand that phase 2 is a trial in and by the Senate, where he has zero chance of conviction. Remember, the Senate is controlled by Republicans; they will determine what testimony is allowed -- and *everything* will be allowed, including: DNC collusion with the Clinton campaign to fix the election in favor of Hillary, the creation of the Trump dossier, the cover up and destruction of emails that very likely included incriminating information. They will incriminate each other for lying to the FISA court, for spying and wiretapping the Trump campaign, and for colluding with foreign political actors, especially George Soros. After the Senate declines to convict the President, we will have an election, and Trump will win. It will be a backlash against democrat petulance, temper tantrums, hypocrisy and dishonesty. Even minorities will vote for Trump, because, for the first time, they will see that democrats have spent 2+ years focused on maintaining their own power, and not doing anything at all about black murders in Chicago, homelessness, opioids, and other important issues that are actually killing people. And, we will spend the following four years listening to politicians and pundits claim that the whole impeachment was rigged.
  
  So let's move on to impeachment.

  Annie D. Cook He didn't tell you Nasty Nancy because you would have leaked it....traitor

  ---

  Email us with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

  Intelligent Political Discourse—for the Thoughtful New Mexican

  

Republicans in Albuquerque are getting outspent $500,000 to $0 by outside groups. That’s not a typo, nor an exaggeration. 

Back in the day, under previous leadership—including former State Chairmen Allen Weh and Monty Newman, along with Governor Susana Martinez—the Republican Party of New Mexico (RPNM) recognized how important municipal elections could be.

And the Republican National Committee has long preached the need for a “bench”, an all-out effort to attract Republican candidates for local offices, school boards, etc. (Just as Democrats have—it's where people like Martin Heinrich came from.)

In those days, the state party spent money in municipal races, targeting specific precincts, trying out different messages, with different demographic groups and interest groups, seeing where the vote trends were migrating in the Democrats’ favor while identifying places where Republicans might have opportunities to make inroads. And—most important—targeting campaign messages in support of those Republican candidates who were willing to put their names on the line.

This kind of attention to detail, combining tactical thinking and strategic planning, paid big dividends. In Heather Wilson’s last congressional campaign, her 861-vote margin of victory (105,986 to 105,125) was directly attributable to precise targeting in decisive Albuquerque precincts.

It was based on crucial information that had been gleaned by the state party from its activity in the previous year’s city election.

Today’s RPNM? Nothing Happening at All. Leaving Republican candidates on their own.

Unfortunately for Republicans, those kinds of skills and expertise no longer exist within the RPNM.

Today, the current Republican Party of New Mexico is doing nothing at all while Democrats spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to elect their candidates. 

In addition to the $500,000 they have reported spending on the ground, California radical environmental groups are even pouring in cash. KOAT recently reported that “two California-based environmental advocacy groups have contributed a total of $50,000 to help support a City Council candidate

 "It's not illegal but it definitely does not look good,” said Paul Gessing, president of the taxpayer watch group Rio Grande Foundation. “It is a lot of money coming into a city council candidate from outside our state."

Candidate Maurreen Skowran has received $40,000 in taxpayer money for her campaign. “Public records show that the Sierra Club, based in Oakland, California and Green Advocacy Project located in Palo Alto, California, both donated $25,000 to a separate political action committee with the express purpose of helping Skowran.

Trudy Jones, Skowran's opponent, is calling foul.

"This is skirting around the system,” she said. “It is blatantly skirting the system.”

RPNM response: Crickets chirping in the evening silence.

DEMOCRAT DOLLARS—Things are about to get a lot Worse!

If the progressives’ most recent scam—the ballot question they have named “Democracy Dollars”—ends up passing, Republicans are in for a lot worse. The real name for the proposal that is on the ballot should be “Democrat Dollars.” If passed, this initiative would provide each “resident” (not just registered voters) with a voucher worth $25. That could amount to some $14 million in taxpayer dollars being diverted to political campaigns.

The term “resident” makes everyone eligible—all ages, citizen or non-citizen, convicted felon or not, temporarily here or not. Albuquerque is a sanctuary city and its increased population of non-citizens will simply give OLÉ more “voters” (legal or not) to round up and skim money from.

The ballot measure is being supported by sleight-of-hand “contributions” being transferred from pot to pot to pot by the likes of “ABQ Democracy Dollars,” the Left-wing front group that goes under the name “Common Cause,” the so-called “Working Families Party,” and OLÉ—the new name for the infamous “ACORN” group, the Obama-led organization that registered hundreds of thousands of fraudulent voters, and whose members ended up in jail.

These groups have reported having over $450,000 as of mid-October.  

Where is the Republican Party of New Mexico on all of this? Nowhere. The Democrats are playing Chess, while the Republicans are playing “who threw paint on the wall of our building” and other ridiculous diversions. (The answer, by the way, is a couple of Pearce-Tinnin recruits.)  

Democrat Dollars is such a bad idea that the progressives may have an uphill battle getting it approved by voters. But the progressives are smart in pursuing the ballot measure aggressively—because they understand that even if "Democracy Dollars" were to fail, their Left-wing city council candidates will be benefiting from the massive investment in voter turnout that is part of the ballot measure push.

In other words, they may get some Lefties elected even if the ballot measure fails.

CONSEQUENCES?

It takes a certain amount of courage to run for public office—to expose oneself to criticism, unfair attacks by both opponents as well as the media, and the potential humiliation of losing, or losing very badly at the ballot box. For Republicans in places like Albuquerque, all those risks are doubled—with the city migrating steadily leftward.

In other words, if there’s any place where the state Republican Party organization needs to show support and encouragement it is the Duke City. You can't leave candidates hanging out to dry.

By being disorganized, and completely unaware and uninterested in city elections, and leaving Republican women and men exposed to unrelenting attacks and overwhelming spending from a united hard-Left coalition, the Republican Party of New Mexico is forever discouraging intelligent, dedicated Republicans from running for office.

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

The Alamogordo Daily News has reported that the "Cowboys for Trump" is supposedly under investigation by the State Auditor, Brian Colón. This has to do with supposedly questionable travel reimbursements surrounding a trip made by the organization's leader, Otero County Commissioner Couy Griffin. 

There has been much upheaval and consternation both in the local newspaper as well as on social media, no doubt causing a good degree of anguish within the Cowboys for Trump circle. Griffin, for his part, has engaged in very reasonable, indeed much-praised lobbying and advocacy in support of his constituents.

Regarding mismanagement by the federal government on such issues as the federally-sponsored infestation of wolves, poor forest management, and a whole host of property rights issues, Griffin articulates the views of not only Otero County residents but also those of rural New Mexico at large.

Activities Must be Presumed Legal: Long-Time Republican Leader is Griffin's Treasurer

The Daily News quotes Griffin: 

Griffin said after consulting with Otero County's attorney and manager about possible violations of established travel requirements, it was the "right thing to do." The money returned to the county was first donated to Griffin from area businessmen, according to an Oct. 18 Facebook post on the Cowboys For Trump page.

We are bewildered at the suggestion there is a problem, mainly because Griffin's financial adviser and the treasurer of his only campaign account has been steeped in the ins and outs of political committees for some 30 years.  

 

His treasurer is Rocky Galassini, the long-time de facto leader of the Republican Party of Otero County. Galassini has also led the county's Republican Women, as well as a series of splinter groups she has created to compete with the official Republican organizations during those periods of time when the regular Republicans have deposed her. 

 

Galassini is the individual who recruited Couy Griffin for the job of County Commissioner and she became his treasurer and financial adviser. With her three decades' experience in politics, it is not only reasonable for Griffin to believe Galassini knows what she is doing, it is inconceivable to us that she can have steered him down a path of questionable conduct, let alone any suggestion of illegality.

 

After all, her daughter, Anissa Galassini Tinnin, is the Executive Director of the Republican Party of New Mexico. Given Galassini's day-to-day oversight of Griffin's campaign account, as well as

 

her close and immediate connections to tons of expertise in the persons of both the Chairman and Executive Director of the State Republican Party, we have to presume that Mr. Griffin has a significant defense and explanation for what may well be entirely appropriate arrangements and activities.

 

After all, the Galassini's have reviewed all 13 of Griffin's campaign reports and have advised him now for years. He has no doubt trusted their advice and counsel. It seems incomprehensible that they could leave a political newcomer exposed to such criticism and attacks.

 

We certainly hope that is the case. Otherwise, because Griffin supports Trump and also a number of conservative New Mexico causes, the Left and their allies in the media will seize on any matters about which they can try to discredit him. For our part, should any such blame game occur, it would seem unfair that the political novice should be the one to shoulder it. 

---

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

---

Intelligent Political Discourse—for the Thoughtful New Mexican

 

IN THE DEMOCRAT DEBATE #4, which took place this past Tuesday, October 15

The CNN "moderators" actually posited a question to Joe Biden like this:

CNN: Trump has totally lied about you and your son regarding your son’s work in Ukraine and China. Do you have anything to say about that?

Biden took that softball and knocked it out of the park, effectively saying:

In the debate, California Senator Kamala Harris stated that neither Kavanaugh nor anyone else could name a single law that tells a man what he can or cannot do with his body.

We disagree. Here are some examples:

• Every single drug law is a law that tells men (and women) what they can do with their bodies.
• Every single anti-suicide law does the same thing.

And we would also add "the draft," which one reader (shown below) pointed out was another way in which the government can and has exercised total control over men's bodies.

The thing about the word "body"

Well, here we are, with only 141 days left until the Iowa Caucus, and 149 days till the New Hampshire Primary. Of the 27 Democrats who declared for their party’s nomination, 8 have dropped out, and 19 remain. Of those, the Democratic National Committee has decided that only 12 can be on the stage tonight.

The most recent Real Clear Politics average has Biden in the lead with 29.4%, followed by Warren (23.4), Bernie (15.6), Buttigieg and Harris both at 5.2, O’Rourke (2.6), Yang (2.4), Booker (1.6), Klobuchar (1.6) Steyer (1.4), Castro (1.0). Bennett (0.8), and Gabbard (0.8). However, Bennett did not qualify for tonight’s debate, while Gabbard did.

We are on record for many months now as having said that neither Elizabeth Warren nor Joe Biden will be the nominee. We know that goes against the grain, but we have stated our reasons. We also go against the conventional wisdom in believing that Bernie Sanders was not eliminated due to his heart attacks.

We are not saying he is going to win the nomination, but we believe he’s still in it. Our view is that the nominee will emerge from the pack (like betting the field in craps. Biden is probably like betting on 7, and Warren more like betting 8 or 6. But we digress).

As we get closer and closer to Iowa and New Hampshire, the odds increase dramatically that one of those in the pack, maybe in the back of the pack, will speak out about the obvious weaknesses of the frontrunners (discussed below). It could happen as early as tonight. The only constraint would be among those who see themselves as vice-presidential candidates and who will be more reticent to attack their future "running mate."

OUR UPDATED THUMBNAIL SKETCHES

Joe Biden:  As we said some eight months ago, he won’t make it. While he has recently been seriously harmed by the Ukraine business, and the obvious corruption involving his son, we have always believed that his garrulousness—the single word that best describes him is “garrulous”—will play a role in his downfall. It’s just a matter of time until he utters something catastrophic. It could happen tonight. Odds: No Line.

Elizabeth Warren:  As we noted almost exactly a year ago, her fake Indian story will ultimately destroy her. And since then it has gotten worse: It’s been shown that she has repeatedly lied not only about how much she used her “Native American” status to advance herself, she’s also been caught in lies about losing a job because she was pregnant. She won’t make it. Odds: No Line.

Bernie Sanders:  We still believe he could emerge. He has a loyal following, and many people believe in socialism, especitaly in the Democrat Party. Odds: 7-2

Pete Buttigieg:  He’s smart. He pretty much only wants to talk about his sex life, but he’s articulate when he (almost always factually incorrectly) addresses issues. He’s able to speak to issues in ways that appeal to Democrats. But mostly he just likes saying, “I’m Gay.” Odds: 5-1

Kamala Harris:  She’s not done. She’s been to the mountain top, or near the summit, seen the other side, then slipped and rolled back down the defilade side. But she got a taste, and she’s hooked. She may be the one to again take on Biden, or Warren. Odds: 5-1

Robert Francis O’Rourke:  Toast City. A real joke. Odds: 750-1

Andrew Yang: Intriguing still. But too easy to lampoon. Odds: 50-1

Cory Booker:  Megalomaniac and narcissist, consumed by his own fascination with himself and his brilliance. Odds: 30-1

Amy Klobuchar:  One of those from the field who could conceivably catch a spark. Odds: 15-1

Tom Steyer:  Never count out anyone who can spend a billion dollars or buy whole elections. He also has a real niche within the Democrat Party. Odds: 25-1

Julian Castro:  Whining bawl bag of a candidate. Comes across as way too harsh. Can’t quite get the right tempo or style. Odds: 75-1

Tulsi Gabbard:  We’ve always kind of liked her. Don’t get us wrong—she takes pretty much just as lunatic a position on virtually every single issue. But she has real style. And she may be best suited to make the comments that take down either Biden or Warren from their artificially lofty perches. Odds: 10-1

Well, this pretty much takes care of THAT issue.

“We did absolutely NOTHING wrong, and we won’t ever do it again. So there. So let’s get back to the Trump impeachment thing.”

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

There is a certain amount of absurdity in the debates among the six candidates vying to become the next Prime Minister of Canada.

No moderator will stop the candidates from talking over each other. You can’t hear a word any the candidates say. They make US debates look relatively civilized by comparison.

What is it about the parliaments and political traditions of all the [de facto] British Commonwealth nations that make their political discourse so damned rowdy?

We have reviewed the debate among the 6 party leaders fighting to become the next prime minister. The election is 8 days from now, Monday, 21 October.

We could hear enough to determine that several candidates mimic the very same clichés and catch-phrases used by their US equivalents.

The Green Party candidate, Elizabeth May, the (frankly ridiculous) current Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the New Democrats’ Jagmeet Singh (who wears some sort of loud orange turban) are the most egregious—they all sound exactly like Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and, well, sadly, like the “new” Joe Biden, not to mention the rest of the Democratic Party’s field.

Euro-socialism, abortion at any point (maybe as late as a week after birth), massive taxes (to achieve “income equality”) stopping all “pipelines,” hammering Alberta’s oil and gas industry, giving money to the impoverished Maritimes and Quebec, are all the rage.

Another Country that Cannot Criticize the US Electoral College

Despite worldwide criticism of our Electoral College, the outcome of the Canadian election—as is the case in most democratic countries in the world who have adopted a parliamentary system—will not be determined by popular vote. Rather it is determined by which party wins a majority (or perhaps a near-majority) in the House of Commons. It is much like choosing the US president based on the number of Congressmen each party ends up with.

Unlike in the US, few Canadians pay much attention at all to the names or proposals of their own districts’ (called “ridings”) individual candidates for parliament. Instead, they vote almost entirely on who the national party leaders are, basing their decisions on who they want to see become the next prime minister.

The latest polls are the same as they have been for months, with the Conservative Party ( Conservative Party of Canada - Parti conservateur du Canada) and Liberal Party Liberal Party of Canada | Parti libéral du Canada) in a virtual dead-heat, each with about a third of the vote.

The Leftist New Democrats (Canada’s NDP / Le NPD du Canada) poll at about 15-20%, the hard-Left Greens (Green Party of Canada) get about 10%, the Bloc Québécois has about 6%, and the new People’s Party—running to the right of the Conservatives—are left with only about 2%.

But of course, just as in the US, the outcome is not determined by the final popular vote.

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

THIS JUST IN: NMPJ EDITOR EMERITUS, former State Senator Rod Adair will be on News Radio KKOB, 770 AM tomorrow at 1:00 PM, as a guest of Talk Radio Host Darren White, whose show follows Rush Limbaugh each weekday from 1:00 to 3:00.

Darren White wants to expand on a discussion he has been having about the possibility of New Mexico going for Trump in 2020: Is that a realistic thought? Is it Unrealistic? Is there an analytical approach to exploring the question? What do the state's electoral history and political demography reveal?

The show can be heard live over www.newsradiokkob.com. Thursday, October 10, at 1:00 PM.

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

Steve Pearce put something of a downer on an otherwise spectacularly successful Republican fundraiser in Hobbs this past week. The Annual Pig Roast is a major event for the Lea County Republican Party, and this year was no exception—but for the Pearce scare. 

Pearce Hogs Spotlight—Spoke Non-Stop for a Half-Hour—Arbitrarily Cut Speaking Time for Candidates

Former Congressman Steve Pearce was the emcee for the meeting, but rather than act as master of ceremonies, he took advantage of the position to speak for almost a half-hour. As a result of his speechifying, and the realization that he had taken so much time, Pearce then arbitrarily announced that the other speakers—the five candidates running for US Senate and US House—would be allowed only one minute each. (They had been told they would have three minutes.)

As one observer told us, "You can't say anything in 60 seconds." So Senate candidates Mick Rich and Gavin Clarkson, along with House candidates Chris Mathys, Yvette Herrell, and Claire Chase, all had to rush through what they had planned to say. Some (if not all) were visibly irritated by Pearce's last-second decision. 

BUT THE BIG NEWS: Pearce is Contemplating Another Run

With the backdrop of the five Republicans running for the two seats on Capitol Hill, Pearce talked with the Hobbs News-Sun, which reported:

"he's not ruling out running himself."

Pearce then went on to throw considerable shade on the five GOP contenders:

"There are people who have been encouraging me and I'm trying to stay in this position, but also I'm listening to what they're saying out of D.C..."I've had those calls, so we're trying to stay exactly where we are."

Of course this implies that people in Washington are taking a look at the two fields and are somehow begging Pearce to rescue the lot of them. This seems something of a stretch, especially with regard to the Senate race. Everyone in Washington and New Mexico knows that Pearce has been a disastrous statewide candidate.

However, could he win back his old house seat?  Well, maybe. Nine months ago we would have said yes, that he could easily beat Torres Small. But since then we have heard from gobs of people in Lea County especially about just how badly Pearce divided the local party there when he went against local favorite Monty Newman in the CD2 Republican primary, and went all out for Yvette Herrell.

That caused deep wounds that have not come close to healing—and some may never heal. One Republican official went so far as to tell us, "A lot of people here just flat-out hate Steve for what he did."

Our feedback, especially regarding any thoughts Pearce might have regarding any kind of statewide race, has been overwhelmingly negative. In fact the thought of such a run has lots of Republicans scared out of their wits. "He would do the same as he did before, and that spells disaster."

But Pearce may be very serious. This could explain why he hogged the mike for nearly 30 minutes and decided to limit his potential opponents to only one minute each?

A BEWILDERING PASSAGE in the HOBBS NEWS-SUN

One blurb in the Hobbs newspaper which caught a lot of people's attention was this:

"Pearce said he would prefer to continue his role as chairman of the Republican Party of New Mexico, rebuilding a party demoralized by a slate of losses in New Mexico in 2018..." 

This, of course, makes no sense at all. Pearce was one of the leading architects—if not the heart and soul—of the total destruction of the party. So having him "rebuild" the party makes as much sense as the Democrats bringing back Hillary Clinton to "rebuild" their party.

Party regulars know that in 2018 the Republican Party of New Mexico was ALREADY being operated by a slew of Pearce insiders and long-time Pearce team members: Harvey Yates and his Sancho Panza, Ryan Cangiolosi, along with John Billingsley and Mark Murphy. All of them have been together with Pearce for many years, united in their opposition to Governor Martinez—which of course sowed the seeds of discord and the disaster to which the group led the Republican Party.

Rebuild? He is still surrounded by the same gang. Only worse. They've hired people who helped steal emails from Republicans and who actively worked to defeat Republican candidates. They've hired women who 1) drove to Ferguson, Missouri to attack the local police there and participate in the completely fake "Hands up, Don't Shoot" demonstrations; 2) Mercilessly heckled former Senator Pete Domenici during his last public appearance; and 3) Led an assault on the Albuquerque Convention Center to try to disrupt a Trump campaign event; and 4) apparently perpetrated a ridiculous hoax, claiming the RPNM building had been "vandalized."

This is Pearce's "Rebuilding" Team? We don't think so.

What Pearce Owes ALL Republican Candidates—And All Rank and File Republicans in New Mexico

Our readerhship clearly believes that Steve Pearce needs to steer clear of trying to make any comebacks. However, if he is even remotely contemplating such a thing, he owes all Republicans an honest statement about his intentions. There should be no misleading of people, nor should he be seen as someone who is planning to undermine announced or unannounced Republican candidates.

And playing games, or making side-eye remarks to the Hobbs paper, makes Pearce appear to be doing just that, or to be thinking about doing that. That's not a good look for someone many regard as a statesman.

Pearce needs to give all current candidates—for US Senate and for US House—a firm, solid, honest warning about what he is planning do.

By making remarks as he made last week, he is at least hinting that he is implying that the current candidates are not up to speed, or that they are not worthy of the Republican nomination. That just isn't fair to them, or to the voters.

If Pearce goes against the views of most Republicans and decides he wants to run for something again, he needs to do the right thing and step down as party chairman and allow a situation to develop in which the party chooses a new chairman and a new executive director who will follow party rules, follow state law, and support all candidates equally without favor to one.

Such a change would also eliminate the overhanging fear that the party is going to unlawfully interfere in a primary. 

Coming Tomorrow: More News from the Hobbs Event

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

This is a perfect illustration, via cartoon, of what Governor Michelle Grisham and the Democrat Legislature are doing to New Mexico. (Cartoon By John Trever of the Albuquerque Journal.)

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

RPNM TAKES SIDES WITH YVETTE HERRELL LAST WEEK

We have received a lot of feedback from our story last week regarding the Republican Party of New Mexico intervening on behalf of Yvette Herrell in the Second Congressional District Republican primary. 

The RPNM definitely violated state party rules, and almost certainly has also violated state law. Nonetheless, they have apparently plowed ahead this week with the same kind of promotional activities on behalf of Herrell.

Just two days ago, headlines popped up all over the state with an Associated Press story pushing the "Herrell was wronged" angle regarding her Republican opponent Chris Mathys's advertising about the abortion issue.

That was no accident. It may be that Steve Pearce has a friendly contact (at least for this particular story) AP reporter inside the media giant, who is willing to push the story. 

After all, the AP leans very much to the Democrats, and with Xochitl Torres Small having already beaten Herrell once, the AP insiders may see it as "positive thing to do" to push Herrell to win the nomination a second time—rather than see the Republicans nominate a stronger candidate.

Who knows? We are merely trying to make sense of a very suspicious series of articles—all of which sound exactly like the Herrell/Pearce/Anissa Tinnin press releases issued almost simulaneously. The only thing we know for sure is that the articles are not a coincidental occurence. 

HOWEVER, the AP Contact Could Be Anissa Tinnin, Who has a long history of Working with Dems

Another explanation for the spate of favorable media stories for Herrell could be the RPNM Executive Director, Anissa Tinnin.

After all, Tinnin has a very long history of working very hard on a number of fronts to undercut Republicans. So she has to have developed a number of solid media contacts—most of which of course would be willing to undercut Republicans, given the chance. (Yes, Pearce knows all of this, and still hired her.)

A number of explanations may be in play here:

1) Tinnin and Pearce may actually believe that Herrell is the best possible nominee.

2) Tinnin and Pearce may be pushing her only because she's part of their clique—this (and not the well-being of conservatives) is the strongest motivation for the anti-Martinez crowd. (See the accompanying photos of the key clique.)

3) The AP may be playing Tinnin and Pearce, with the media outlet believing it's a "public service" to help Tinnin and Pearce push what the AP regards as a weak GOP nominee  

NO MATTER HOW YOU LOOK AT IT: PEARCE IS BENT ON CONTINUING TO DIVIDE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY

Through Pearce and Tinnin, the RPNM appears determined to divide Republican Party voters. There is no other valid explanation for their having weighed in so hard and so frequently to push Yvette Herrell on GOP primary voters.

The result could easily be a nominee who ends up with a second loss in the 2020 CD2 race—which will be the last opportunity the GOP has to capture the seat BEFORE the Democrat legislature tears the district boundaries apart in the redistricting session, set to take place in September of 2021. 

If that happens, New Mexico Republicans will be angrier than ever. They will be like the Democrats' Bernie voters, who were (and are) so steamed that the Democratic National Committee tilted the playing field so hard that they forced Hillary on the party—leading to their November 2016 debacle.

Right now, it is obvious to many of our readers that the RPNM is trying to force feed Herrell as the nominee. And they don't like it. 

To many Republicans' perceptions, the view is that Pearce's goal has never been to win anything. Rather, he is determined only to have folks inside his particular team, whatever that is.

We are Not Anti-Herrell. Not in any way. We are FOR Party Neutrality in Primaries.

As we have said, Mathys's "argument" or "debating points" make no sense, and are arguably just plain dumb, signalling that he has no business being a candidate. HOWEVER, in a primary, it is up to his opponents to take issues head on and make the case we have made about his "reasoning skills."

One entity to whom it is NOT left to referee a primary, let alone blow a whistle or call foul, is the Republican Party of New Mexico, or any other local Republican Party. They are supposed to remain neutral, not take sides.

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

FBI INVESTIGATION: WHAT THEY MUST DO

Since there is an FBI investigation of the Ford-Kavanaugh allegations, one part has to be Kavanaugh and his friends, but another, absolutely indispensable part of the investigation has to be a deep background look at Christine Blasey Ford. The FBI investigation will not be fair or accurate in the least UNLESS they:

1. Ensure that all of her friends and acquaintances are ALSO interviewed, with questions such as:

In our view, this is a direct result of the ideology and resulting attitudes that originated within the Obama Administration, mainly pushed and then encouraged by people like former Attorney General Eric Holder, Obama advisor Van Jones, Michael Eric Dyson, and other prominent Democrats like Cory Booker.

All these individuals, in our view, are—at best—ardent “racialists,” and—at worst—overt racists. Their work has confused, and in many cases poisoned, the minds of millions of young people.

In many cases, these same young people have acted out or attempted to approximate non-existent scenarios in a manner they apparently believe will validate (in some bizarre way) what they have “learned” about the "ugly, hateful, genocide-based, country" known as the United States of America.

And despite not being able to find such a place in real life, they are attempting to show that the America that is described by the likes of Barack Obama—or perhaps Michelle Obama—really and truly does exist. Even if they have to create it themselves.

Sadly and humiliatingly, they’ve now been caught hundreds of times. But even more sadly, the race-baiters who encourage these simple souls into making fools of themselves and their families are never held to account. Instead, they are rewarded either with TV shows of their own or ever-more exposure as talking heads and "experts on American culture" at venues like CNN and MSNBC.

As a result, the hating of America and the dividing of our nation continues unabated.

Are we wrong in our analysis? Are we missing something? Let us know. Please.

MEANWHILE, here is the dreadlock-gate story from the New York Times:

VIRGINIA GIRL RECANTS STORY of BOYS CUTTING off HER DREADLOCKS

The 12-year-old-girl’s story drew national headlines and a police investigation last week. Her family has apologized. (As well they should.)

By Niraj Chokshi, Sept. 30, 2019

It was a story bound to unleash a storm of news coverage: A black 12-year-old girl reported that three white boys had pinned her down in a school playground and cut off her dreadlocks.

It was the same private Christian school in Virginia where the vice president’s wife was a part-time teacher, which only fueled the social media outrage.

The police said they were investigating. The girl and her family gave interviews to TV networks and newspapers.

But in a matter of days, the story fell apart.

On Monday, the school announced that the girl had admitted the story was a lie, and that her family had apologized.

“While we are relieved to hear the truth and bring the events of the past few days to a close, we also feel tremendous pain for the victims and the hurt on both sides of this conflict,” the school’s principal, Stephen Danish, said in a statement.

He continued:

“We recognize that we now enter what will be a long season of healing. This ordeal has revealed that we as a school family are not immune from the effects of deep racial wounds in our society.”

[NMPJ Note: These "deep racial wounds," after some 50 years of genuine healing had taken place, have been re-inflicted to a large degree, by cynical race-baiting politicians and now media hacks over just the past decade.]

Mr. Danish also thanked the Fairfax County Police Department for its “diligent work” investigating the complaint.

The school also provided a separate statement from the girl’s family, in which they apologized for her actions and asked for forgiveness from the accused boys, their families, the school and the community.

“To those young boys and their parents, we sincerely apologize for the pain and anxiety these allegations have caused,” the family said.

“To the administrators and families of Immanuel Christian School, we are sorry for the damage this incident has done to trust within the school family and the undue scorn it has brought to the school. To the broader community, who rallied in such passionate support for our daughter, we apologize for betraying your trust.”

In an interview with The New York Times on Friday, the girl, Amari Allen, had said that she was attacked during recess on Sept. 23 by three boys who held her down, covered her mouth and cut her dreadlocks.

“They were saying that my hair was ugly, that it was nappy,” she said.

Cynthia Allen, Amari’s grandmother and legal guardian, said in an interview on Friday that Amari was reluctant at first to say what happened to her hair, but broke down crying on Wednesday and made the accusation against her classmates.

The family did not immediately return phone calls on Monday.

The school enrolls kindergartners through eighth-graders at its campus in Springfield, about 15 miles southwest of Washington. It was briefly in the news when Karen Pence accepted a part-time art teaching position there in January.

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

2016: All Republicans are deplorable.

2017: All Republicans are Russian agents.

Yesterday, the Republican Party of New Mexico (RPNM) sent out a notice which, while accurate in identifying incorrect statements made by GOP Congressional candidate Chris Mathys, was incorrect in signaling that the party's role in primary elections is to weigh in on disputes between candidates. This is what they said:

"...the party will hold to the standard of truth. When ads or mailers are untruthful, RPNM stands ready to speak out and condemn the ads and the actions by any candidate and their team."

The RPNM is just flat wrong on this point, and all political parties will always be wrong if they weigh in like this, because it not only violates party rules, it also violates New Mexico law. 

(One exception might be in a case where a candidate for a party makes racist remarks or otherwise sullies a particular party's reputation in a similar way—but such a case would have to be in an aspect of comparing a candidate to a party platform, and not be an opinion about a dispute between two candidates in a primary.) 

Mathys, as we covered the story yesterday, did make illogical claims about a state House bill concerning late-term abortions. So the party may be correct in concluding that, just as readers of NMPJ and all voters may reach the same decision. But individual voters making comments is one thing. It's an entirely different thing for a political party to do it. 

It's just not the RPNM's role to ride herd on the campaign literature, ads, or speeches of Republican candidates, or to give their opinion as to what candidates might or might not be telling the truth. 

RPNM WARNING IS OMINOUS

In its statement released yesterday morning, the RPNM gave its opinion that Mathys "has made intentional misstatements of the facts and untrue accusations." This is actually true—except for the "intentional" part.

After all, none of us has any way of knowing if his illogical view of a bill is an "intentional" thing that he has contrived, or if he sincerely believes (because his brain works in an odd way) that a vote to prevent abortions after 20 weeks means the voter supports abortion prior to 20 weeks.

(Many voters are illogical, and they are that way sincerely. This is one of the reasons why America and New Mexico have a number of incompetent public officials.)

The problem is that it is the job of Mathys's rival(s)  — and perhaps publications (such as NMPJ), newspapers, and individual voters or the entire press — to correct any false or misleading claims that he might make. It is not the role of the party. 

HERE IS WHAT NEW MEXICO ELECTION LAW SAYS

§  1-19-1  A. No contribution of money, or the equivalent thereof, made directly or indirectly to any political party, to any political party committee, to members of any political party committee or to any person representing or acting on behalf of a political party, and no money in the treasury of any political party or political party committee shall be expended directly or indirectly in the aid of the nomination at a primary election of any one or more persons as against any one or more other persons of the same political party running in such primary election. 

 B. Any person who expends money, or is responsible for the expenditure of money, in violation of this section is guilty of a petty misdemeanor.

The New Mexico Election Code definition of contribution includes this: "a gift, subscription, loan, advance or deposit of money or other thing of value, including the estimated value of an in-kind contribution, that is made or received for a political purpose...

There can be no doubt that the Republican Party of New Mexico expended time and labor in the development and writing of its "opinion," and then followed that up with the printing and graphic framing—electronic or otherwise—of its message, and following that up with its statewide distribution.

In other words, they materially contributed to the interests of one candidate as opposed to others in the same primary contest. Effectively, they carried out what New Mexico law calls a "coordinated expenditure."

The definition of a coordinated expenditure includes:

"an expenditure that is made: (1) by a person other than a candidate or campaign committee; (2) at the request or suggestion of, or in cooperation, consultation or concert with, a candidate, campaign committee or political party or any agent or representative of a candidate, campaign committee or political party; and (3) for the purpose of: (a) supporting or opposing the nomination or election of a candidate...

Yesterday's statements by the RPNM reflect all these components. Additionally, RPNM may have gotten themselves into hot water with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) because this is, of course, a federal race, which has its own unique disclaimers and requirements for disclosure, none of which accompany the RPNM's communique.

The Herrell Campaign & the RPNM End up Being Clumsy in Concealing their Mutual Interaction

Within five hours of the RPNM's attacks on Chris Mathys, the Yvette Herrell campaign sent this message out:

My opponent has been using lies to attack my record and those who co-sponsored House Bill 390 to end late-term abortion. The twenty-three co-sponsors of this bill and I are Pro-Life and are proud of our work in the legislature to protect the unborn. 

Today, the Republican Party of New Mexico sent the following message rebutting the fake attacks: 

CD2 Candidate Makes Untrue Statements Against Republican Legislators

...Chris Mathys, a candidate for the 2nd Congressional district has made intentional misstatements of the facts and untrue accusations about many republican [sic] legislators.

It would have looked much better if they had waited, say, a week or so. The way they rolled out the two complementary messages made the messages appear to be pre-planned and coordinated. Which, of course, is illegal.

Subterfuge as to Motive

The RPNM attempted to provide something of a cover story by claiming that at least part of its motive was to protect "Republican legislators." (As opposed to the more obvious motive.) But the reality is that Mathys has only attacked Herrell, and no other Republican legislators have suffered any "harm" at all. This makes party statement look rather ham-handed.

No one has even looked at who all voted for the bill in question, and even an average voter would not reach the illogical conclusions that Mathys is peddling and somehow end up holding a vote for the bill against a Republican lawmaker.

So it comes back to Herrell and the relationship developed between State Party Chair Steve Pearce and Herrell, who has long been viewed as an acolyte or disciple of Pearce. (We have been inundated with reports of how much damage Pearce did to the Lea County Republican Party by pushing Herrell over Monty Newman, who is from Lea County and is very well-liked there.) 

Additionally, there is the continuing specter of the RPNM Executive Director Anissa Ford Tinnin involved in all of this. Many question not only her competence in producing awkward communication blunders like this, but also how much she can possibly be trusted with the RPNM's sensitive information, sensitive issues, and internal communications?

And who is overseeing the party's communications which are supposed to remain scrupulously even-handed, with even-handed application of party rules, and with no favor toward any candidate? Someone who, by resume, is entirely unsuited to that task?

With regard to access to and the sharing of inside Republican political information and stolen emails, Tinnin has quite a long and questionable political rap sheet, having secretly worked alongside former Democrat State Chair Sam Bregman to undermine Republican fortunes and to promote Democrat ones.

It is well-remembered that it was her work with convicted felon Jamie Estrada which resulted in the use of sensitive information from the Doña Ana Republican Party that helped Doña Ana County District Attorney Mark D'Antonio defeat Republican Amy Orlando.

Many Republicans cannot help but believe that the continuous misdirection, detours, and blunders from the RPNM are not accidental. This most recent hiccup is just one of an ongoing series.

ADDITIONALLY, HERE ARE THE PARTY RULES—PEARCE & TINNIN NEED TO READ THEM

EMPLOYEES OF THE PARTY—RESTRICTIONS

"No money in the treasury of the Republican Party of NM, nor in-kind aid given directly or indirectly to the party or one of its committees, agents or representatives, shall  be expended directly or indirectly to aid the nominee of a primary election of any one or more persons as against any one or more other persons of the Republican Party running in such primary election."

There can be no doubt that in sending out yesterday's message on behalf of the Herrell campaign, the RPNM used its email list it had developed over the years, as well as its entire communication systems, internet servers, internet service. And it did so through its employees who are paid by the treasury of the Republican Party of New Mexico. 

Did an employee write or transmit this email? Of course one did. 

Pearce and Tinnin—and everyone at the state headquarters—need to read the party rules.

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

Chris Mathys of Las Cruces, who is one of three candidates who has declared an intention to seek the Republican nomination for the Second Congressional District, is under fire from numerous sides. The reason for that is his interpretation of a Late-term Abortion bill (HB 390) that passed the State House in 2015, with all 38 Republicans and four Democrats voting in favor of it.

The bill, sponsored by Representative Yvette Herrell (R-Alamogordo), one of his current Republican opponents, expanded the existing prohibition on late-term abortion by adding protections for "a viable fetus of twenty or more weeks gestational age."

We interviewed Mr. Mathys on August 15 in preparation for our article on the CD2 race which we published on August 16, https://bit.ly/2KJ4cS0. (We also reached out to the Herrell campaign via email, the only other candidate at that time, but received no response.)

In that interview, Mathys said this of his opponent:

 “There is quite a contrast on the issue of the unborn.  Yvette believes abortion should be legal through the fifth month of pregnancy. I believe life begins at conception. That’s a big difference.

This led to a discussion for several minutes in which NMPJ asked for the source of that conclusion. Mathys said it was the bill outlined above, and we pointed out that other bills with the same language in different years had also been introduced.

We also pointed out that his argument was illogical—that any legislator's attempt to reduce the number of abortions that might occur after 20 weeks of pregnancy does not mean—under ANY rationale or form of reasoning—that the sponsor of such a bill approves of abortions that might take place earlier. 

We pointed out that if someone were to support a bill that outlawed burglaries, robbery, or theft of certain legal descriptions, it would not mean the person approved of stealing of other kinds. 

Mathys responded by pointing to his Roman Catholic faith and his belief that life begins at conception. He said if he introduced such a bill it would not say "after 20 weeks of gestation," but would, rather, say "after conception."

We pointed out that that would be futile because of existing Supreme Court rulings, however wise they may be, that there can be no such prohibitions.

We also pointed out that Herrell's approach is the only kind allowed by current law, that is to say it works to impose certain conditions or restrictions without in any way trying to have a state legislature overturn a standing ruling of the Supreme Court by means of a bill.

We again reiterated that such an approach—regardless of one's view of abortion—would be a complete waste of time and would be seen as a mere stunt—to no purpose. 

But Mathys would not budge. 

We then pointed out the "Jerry Falwell approach," and asked if he had heard of the late pastor who was very much pro-life and anti-abortion. Mathys acknowledged he was aware of him. 

Falwell was once asked if he would support a bill to outlaw abortions except in the case of rape, or incest, or the life of the mother. Falwell responded that of course he would. Such a bill would save 11,999 of every 12,000 fetuses who are aborted. Only 1 abortion in every 12,000 occurs as a result of rape or incest. 

Support for such a bill, according to Falwell, was about saving babies' lives. It would make no sense to reject such an opportunity just because, like Falwell himself, one believes that life begins at conception. And it would also NOT mean that Falwell or other abortion opponents approved of abortions in the case of rape or incest.

Mathys seemed a little disoriented as this discussion came to a conclusion, and he stuttered a bit, but ultimately was bent on staying with what he said he believed was logical. We very much disagreed that it was logical, and also shared our view that it was not politically viable.  

In the end, we published his statement as he made it. 

The Republican Party of New Mexico, however, may be wrong, either legally, ethically, or in terms of its own party rules, by weighing on the CD2 race.

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

THE 1960 DEMOCRATIC PARTY v. THE MODERN (21st CENTURY) DEMOCRAT PARTY.

Over the past decade, we have several times pointed out how "No modern Democrat could possibly give JFK's 1961 Inaugural Address." Not only is it today the party of free stuff and handouts, in the 1980s it abandoned its original anti-communist roots and became the party of the "nuclear freeze" openly stating at their San Francisco convention in 1984 that the United States could not win the Cold War.

Reports coming into our office reflect a startling and troubling situation at the headquarters of the Republican Party of New Mexico. 

First of all, the Trump Presidential Re-election Team has made it clear that they see New Mexico as winnable in 2020 (more on that below).

However, they appeared to take one look at the RPNM staff and leadership and said: "We'll pass on this bunch." As a result, just this past week it was announced that the Executive Director of the Arizona Republican Party, Leslie White, will head up the Trump campaign in New Mexico.

Why did this happen?

First of all, as we have reported in our November 8, 2018 issue (https://bit.ly/2lVGCJc), with further analysis in our December 4, 2018 edition (https://bit.ly/2kQQL9S), NMPJ has set forth a historical narrative in which we have opined that the current team which is parked at the RPNM headquarters worked assiduously to destroy the New Mexico Republican Party, and to undo all that had been accomplished by former Governor Susana Martinez.*

What is well-known—to the Trump team as well as throughout the political world—is that just a few years back, the current Executive Director of the state Republican Party, Anissa Ford Tinnin, was working with the former Chairman of the Democratic Party of New Mexico, Sam Bregman, to undermine not only Governor Martinez, but the efforts of the Republican Party in New Mexico.

She colluded with Bregman to ensure the release of emails that had been stolen with her knowledge and collusion, solely for the purpose of embarrassing the governor and other Republican Party officials. She also used stolen information and worked very hard to defeat the sitting Republican District Attorney Amy Orlando in Doña Ana County. 

With all the spying, unlawful surveillance, and other efforts by so many people and agencies to undermine or destroy both the 2016 Trump campaign as well as the Trump Administration, it is little surprise that Tinnin comes off as "not someone we want to see involved." The same goes for the Republican Party State Chairman Steve Pearce.

Pearce knows ALL of this, yet he hired Tinnin.

PEARCE CLAIMS CREDIT for BRINGING TRUMP to NEW MEXICO 

In addition to other massive credibility issues, Pearce just recently claimed credit for bringing Trump to New Mexico. In a rambling interview with Politico, Pearce contradicted the Trump Team's assessment it was their own internal polling and the work of their own expert, Brad Parscale, that prompted the visit to Rio Rancho.

Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale had said an earlier rally in El Paso prompted him to add New Mexico to his watch list:

“I’ve continued to say the president’s policies are a win for Latino voters across America … and one of the first symbols of this was the El Paso rally,” Parscale told reporters on a call last week. “We saw in the data thousands of voters who did not vote for the president in 2016 show up to a rally, come listen to the president and register [to vote].”

“As we started doing polling there, we saw a dramatic increase from 2016 and I went over this with the president and he said, ‘Let’s go straight into Albuquerque,’” Parscale recalled.

The Politico article went on:

By Parscale’s telling, Trump — who hasn’t visited New Mexico since October 2016 — has long been eager to return. Campaign officials believe that Johnson attracted tens of thousands of would-be Trump voters during the president’s first White House bid. And if they can just win over those voters this cycle, it will bring Trump closer to having five more electoral votes in his pocket.

It wasn’t until mid-August, though, that Trump himself was convinced of the idea. 

BUT PEARCE CONTRADICTED THIS—CLAIMING THAT HE IS THE ONE WHO HAD THE INSIDE KNOWLEDGE

Pearce, who lost the state by 100,000 votes—one of the largest margins in state history—claimed, ironically, to be expertly reading the tea leaves. Not only that, he then threw the Trump team under the bus by claiming they wouldn't believe him.  

“I started talking to them — saying they shouldn’t write off New Mexico — in January. They didn’t believe that in the least,” Pearce said.

This is a pretty bold claim by Pearce, considering the fact Pearce was not able to convince the Trump team to allow him—or anyone associated with him—to head Trump's 2020 New Mexico effort.  Yet Pearce plowed ahead with these comments:

“Eventually Brad began to watch it, and three to four months ago he said he wanted to come into New Mexico and do a little something with the party, and that morphed into Don Jr. coming with him, and then the president started wanting to come about the time of his New Hampshire rally” in August.

Right. So Pearce was the teacher and mentor for the Trump folks? And eventually they came round to seeing his wisdom and insight, and sheepishly and belatedly decided he was a genius and they had darned sure better listen to him?

We somehow doubt that. We see the Parscale narrative as vastly more plausible than the Pearce tale.

Though it is almost certain that the Trump Team, if pressed publicly, will verbally deny that they have any problems with Pearce and his personal entourage which occupies the RPNM HQ, the reality, as demonstrated by the Trump campaign's decisions, speaks volumes about what they see in New Mexico.

The true bottom line is the Trump Team definitely doesn't want the current RPNM “leadership” anywhere near the helm in New Mexico.

*An attorney for Anissa Galassini Ford Tinnin sent NMPJ a heavy-handed, chilling letter, attempting to intimidate NMPJ by threatening a lawsuit. However, our repeated requests (ten of them) for her attorney to identify any errors or to provide any opinions contrary to our own have gone unanswered. As a standard policy, NMPJ always welcomes contrary opinions.  

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

THIS JUST IN:

NMPJ EDITOR EMERITUS, former State Senator Rod Adair, will appear on a live Town Hall Broadcast tonight on KOAT-TV, Channel 7 in Albuquerque.

KOAT has a series called "KOAT Community Comment." Tonight's episode is titled "Immigration and Employment."

The segment will air from 7:30 PM to 8:00 PM. Adair will appear with "immigration attorneys," ACLU representatives, as well as alongside Lt. Governor Howie Morales.

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

By Gerald A. Loeb, Special Correspondent to New Mexico Political Journal (see Gerald's website at the bottom of the story.)

Thirty thousand devotees parked in the prickly fields, climbed over fences and braved the gray threatening skies in Rio Rancho on Monday night as they waited patiently in line to see President Donald J. Trump make his second New Mexico appearance since winning office.

Although only a third of them got inside the Santa Ana Star Center, the rest watched the President speak on a JumboTron screen outside. Kelly and Kim Christensen from Jamestown, New Mexico said they made the journey and “made their own parking spot” because they believe in the man they voted for. “He is a good man and needs our support,” Kelly remarked.

Social media chatter before the event had raspy overtones of possible violence and intimidation by counter-protestors. One vowed to “kick the nasty Trumpers asses.” Only a few angry sign-waving lefties showed up, as the Rio Rancho Police and New Mexico State Police kept a watchful eye. Except for a few small verbal clashes with Trump supporters, there were no incidents at all. No arrests were reported and no tear gas was needed.

Compared to the President’s two other stops here in the Land of Enchantment, this was a relatively sedate affair. In May 2016, Democrat protestors clashed with Trump supporters in a full-scale riot at the Convention Center in Albuquerque. Protestors also disrupted another Rally in the Desert in 2017.

 This was much different.

It was a very New Mexican and Very American event. The smell of green chile mixed with the sounds of 20th Century, old-time rock and roll created an atmosphere of a 21st Century Trump version of Woodstock, minus the naked people dancing in ponds of water and smell of marijuana in the air.

New Mexico Proud Boys leader Bradley Burris was impressed by the event as he waited in line to enter the Star Center. “I don’t want to see violence. Nobody does. There’s already too much violence in society now.” He added his group, although only numbering in the fifties, is growing by the week and is "not a bunch of 'angry racists.' We have folks of all colors and races. We are just Americans fed up with a lot of things.”

Meanwhile, demonstrators yelled “No hate, no fear, immigrants are welcome here,” but were often drowned out by the loud rock music and virtually ignored by the rally-goers.  Twice the Rio Rancho police warned the counter-protestors to stay within a designated “First Amendment Area” and as the event progressed, they were generally held in check.

“We are here to show that we will not be bullied,” said a Resist member who refused to be identified. (Though it was unclear who was attempting to "bully" anyone.)

Zachary Davis, 16, said he showed up at the rally to support the president in his policies. “He stands for us, so we can stand for him. He is great for America. They are not,” he said as he pointed to the protestors.

Tanya Ansley said, “The entire state is on a Gimme Train here. It has to stop. If you take all the water out of the bucket, soon it will be empty.”

“With a turnout like this, we might have a chance to turn this state red,” commented Renee Weldon as she watched Trump give his speech on the jumbo screen. Others agreed with her and added this rally was a very good start.

“We love Donald Trump and we want him to know it,” she said.

“I am sorry the folks who are standing outside can’t get in here,” President Trump said at one point in his speech. “We have to get a bigger boat,” he added.

Judging from the response from the crowd and the high turnout, he might just be right.

Gerald Loeb website: http://www.themodernpoliticalderelict.com

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

TRUMP RALLY in RIO RANCHO: Covered by NMPJ

New Mexico Political Journal has a credentialed correspondent prepared to attend the Trump rally scheduled for 7:00 PM this evening in Rio Rancho, New Mexico. No one from the editorial staff, nor any of our regular writers or contributors will attend, but we do have someone who has filed a couple of stories for us. He has told us he anticipates some sort of hubbub, ruckus, or disturbance, possibly caused by an Antifa or BLM group, or possibly sponsored by the Democratic Party of New Mexico.

To AR-15 OWNERS: Please be civil and respectful when Beto shows up to confiscate.

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

And a major political party—the DEMOCRATS—actually SUPPORT this illogical proposition.

And they do so very aggressively—ALL of their PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES SUPPORT THIS!

(It could be part of the reason Trump is, more or less, hanging with them in the polls.)

Your thoughts?

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

“Women earn 80¢ for every $1 that men earn for exactly the same work.”

The US government is inviting lawlessness.

"Tulsi is home from Nat'l Guard duty overseas & hitting the campaign trail in Iowa! Our grassroots movement rests on small $ donors like you."

Tulsi Gabbard.

YOUR THOUGHTS?

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

Claire Chase of Roswell will run for the #CD2 #GOP Nomination to take on Democrat incumbent Representative Xochitl Torres Small.

For much more information, you can click on her announcement shown below.

As an aside, exactly six months ago, New Mexico Political Journal---without any contact with Chase or anyone associated with her---was the first news outlet to suggest that she would be a formidable candidate should she ever decide to run for office. (As always, stay tuned to this site for accurate analysis and insight you won't find anywhere else.)

MUELLER EXONERATED: “No Charges will be Brought” by DOJ AGAINST FORMER FBI CHIEF

(D.C.) Former FBI Director Robert Muller has today been cleared of all “wrong-doing” regarding the 22-month investigation he was long alleged to have been conducting.

A DOJ spokesperson said:

“We have concluded that Mr. Mueller is not only innocent of any crimes committed during the investigation, it is very clear he had no involvement, and indeed no knowledge, of any aspect of the effort.”

In November 2018, when all the dust settled and all the votes were counted in the CD 2 race, the final count looked like this:

So the Republicans had lost CD 2 for only the second time in 38 years.

News reports late into the night of the election announced that absentee ballots had been “found” in Doña Ana County. More than 8,000 to be specific. It raised suspicions, and eventually a review of the ballots and the entire procedures of the Doña Ana County Clerk’s office was conducted.

That review found a startling number of irregularities, and an election procedures compliance firm subsequently published a 44-page report which detailed what had taken place in the greater Las Cruces area.  

However, the study, which was limited only to Doña Ana County, and did not look at the other 17 counties, did not conclude that there were enough irregularities to overturn the election.

FAST FORWARD TO EARLY 2019

Almost immediately, Herrell announced she would run again. One of her 2018 primary opponents, the third-place finisher Gavin Clarkson, made it known he would switch to running for the US Senate. Then a former PRC candidate, Chris Mathys, announced that he would run. Mathys had lost the PRC GOP primary to former PRC Commissioner Ben Hall.

HERRELL 2018

In her 2018 effort spearheaded by Steve Pearce, a lot of legislators and party establishment figures lined up behind Yvette Herrell early-on and she secured the Republican nomination impressively, 49-32 over former GOP State Chair Monty Newman.

It is important to remember that Pearce’s aggressive campaigning over the previous 20 years and his willingness to debate and speak everywhere in CD 2 had allowed him to win huge swaths of soft Ds, so much so that he had racked up 25-point wins, by margins of nearly 60,000 votes.

The district was drawn to give an edge to Republican candidates (Trump carried it, despite losing the state overwhelmingly). And Pearce had built on that edge so much that many Republicans saw the district as un-lose-able.

But Yvette Herrell ended up running what many saw as a mediocre campaign, with Republicans expressing concern that she repeatedly refused to debate Torres Small. Democrats used that fact to assert that Herrell did not have command of the issues and could not go toe-to-toe with Small.

This appeared to have a decisive effect on independent voters and both the soft Ds and soft Rs that Pearce had essentially made part of his base. But they weren’t part of Herrell’s. It appeared that in the end Small simply ended up out-working her.

HERRELL 2020

As we noted last winter, we didn’t think Herrell had cleared it with Pearce before she made her announcement for a second-go at CD 2. In public appearances, he appeared taken off-guard, almost as if he didn’t think it was a good idea, or that he was, perhaps, considering stepping back in himself. (Recently, however, we have been informed there are personal considerations that have ensured that Pearce won’t do that.)

So Herrell has moved forward aggressively. The same group that surrounded her in 2018 have circled the wagons again. Her campaign has sent out a couple of very hard-hitting letters—one signed by Herrell and one signed by Republican State Representative Jim Townsend of Artesia. 

LETTER ONE: A VICIOUS ATTACK ON MATHYS

In the first letter, Herrell called her only announced opponent a “liar,” writing:

“Chris Mathys is up to his old antics.”

And: 

“Lying Chris has been spreading nasty and untrue things about me…”

(The words “old antics” seem odd in that Mathys has only run for office once, and the person he lost to by 27 votes is now his campaign chair and has said they had nothing but a positive campaign together.)

Herrell went on:

“Probably the most disappointing lie Chris has decided to spread is that I introduced a bill that would allow abortion up to 6 months…”

She closes with what appears to be a very impressive list of endorsements, which she claims is for her current campaign. The endorsements include such conservative luminaries as Congressmen Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows. She closes with:

"We are tired of the same, deceptive antics of my opponent. Lying Chris is so desperate to be elected to anything that he’s willing to put aside the truth…”

Ouch!

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Mathys has lived in New Mexico about five years and is a commercial lender, operating Chris Mathys Properties in Las Cruces. He has a B.A. and an MBA and has about $160,000 on hand, according to FEC reports. (Herrell has about $200,000.)

We asked if there were any differences between Herrell and him on any issues. He told us there were “about five” that he wanted to mention. They were:

• Veteran status: “First of all, I’m the only veteran in the race. And while I don’t believe it’s a requirement to have served in the military, I do believe there are special advantages and experiences that come from military training and service. New Mexico has 58,000 veterans, and many of them live in southern New Mexico.”

• Abortion:  “There is quite a contrast on the issue of the unborn.  Yvette believes abortion should be legal through the fifth month of pregnancy. I believe life begins at conception. That’s a big difference.”

• Business experience: “I am a businessman, I have met a payroll. I believe that managing a business is critical for someone in politics. I believe it’s one of the things that makes President Trump successful. It also appears that Yvette was partner in a business that received over $400,000 in rent from the state of New Mexico, and she did not disclose the income in her financial reporting disclosure when she ran for Congress. I have not and will not enter into any contracts with the state or federal government other than when I enlisted in the United States Army. We must make sure elected officials do not in enrich themselves when serving in public office.”

• Debates:  “Yvette Herrell turned down all four debates with Xochitl Torres Small. Why? No one knows. But it also hurt her very badly with independent voters wanting to know what she stood for and how she contrasted with Small. I guarantee you that I will debate Torres Small at any venue on any day.”

• Second Amendment: “With regard to gun ownership, Yvette is on record as favoring more background checks. I believe we already have sufficient laws on the books. We don’t need any more.”

 BACK TO HERRELL: AN UNUSUAL LETTER SIGNED BY REPRESENTATIVE TOWNSEND*

There have been rumors that the Herrell campaign is spreading misinformation about Roswell Republican Claire Chase, saying that she is considering a run for the US Senate, and will not run for CD 2. Along those lines, State Representative Jim Townsend's signature went out over some unusual language in a fundraising letter just a couple of days ago. It opened with:

“I am asking for your trust and support for Yvette Herrell to be the Republican nomneee in 2020.

All well and good so far.

It then listed a bunch of impressive endorsements. (Again, all okay.)

Then the letter goes off into what some will probably interpret as tacit admissions that the 2018 campaign was not very well done. To wit:

Let me share with you why the 2020 campaign will be different and will result in a victory next November:

... Her new team is ready for the fight in 2020. They have made substantial changes to the operation and she intends to:

• Challenge Xochitl Torres Small to debate, before ballots go out 
• Raise more money to combat the Democrat's out-of-state money machine
• Focus on grassroots development and getting our voters to the polls

This is about as straightforward an acknowledgment that the "old team" (whoever that was) had not done those things. The decision to debate (this time around) stands out pretty starkly. But while these are good things to do now, they also can end up raising serious questions about Herrell's strengths as a candidate.

But within the letter there were these—potentially even more troubling—passages:

"Unite to Win…It’s time we dispel the rumors and unite this party to win in 2020.  There are those who wish to judge Yvette's last campaign and create conflict.  Their goal is to divide our Republican party, and I am speaking out because we can't let that happen.  I am asking for your trust and support for Yvette Herrell to be the Republican nominee in 2020...

There is too much at stake to allow division in our party.  Let’s UNITE to win and restore Conservative values to Washington.  I humbly ask you to vote for my friend Yvette Herrell!

WHY THOSE PASSAGES ARE POTENTIALLY TROUBLING FOR THE REPUBLICANS*

We received some complaints from Southeastern New Mexico about the last phraseology.

It appears that the message the Herrell campaign is trying to send to Republican voters is that Herrell is the only candidate that is "acceptable," and that any other GOP candidate—whether it is Mathys or any other Republican who may get in—is stepping on the concept of “unity” and is creating "division."

Any number of political observers (you don’t even have to be an activist) may see that that’s quite a stretch. The overall message of the letter could easily be interpreted as saying, in essence:

“Hey, we got beat when we shouldn’t have, but we are going to do a lot of things differently this time, and we aren't going to be afraid of debating either. We are cleaning up our campaign, and we will win.  And, oh by the way, if anyone else is thinking about getting in, well, that would be “divisive.”

That would sort of be a pretty cool narrative if you could sell it. But it will almost certainly not go over big with a lot of Republican activists, donors, and primary voters. For many, this isn't their first rodeo. 

A number of key political actors—in both major parties—believe in "keeping your powder dry" so to speak. In other words, let's not go all-in from the get-go about any candidate just because he or she is the first, or second, to declare.

This is especially true if that candidate has lost the same race already. It is certainly logical for the Republican faithful to inquire: If Candidate A cannot beat Candidate B when there is no incumbent, why should Candidate A be able to beat Candidate B when Candidate B is now the incumbent? (This question is as old as politics itself. And we are sure it has occurred to people before.)

Forbidding a "Critique" of Your Campaign—AFTER Your Own Letter Critiqued Your Own Previous Campaign

So the second letter, trying to scare off any competition—by asserting that even the act of considering an alternative candidate is "divisive"—carries with it the very seeds of divisiveness that it purports to try to avoid. And forbidding any "critique" of the previous campaign while the candidate's own letter goes to great lengths to critique her own previous campaign seems somewhat strange, or at least awkward. 

This is without even mentioning that Herrell's campaign has very strongly attacked Mathys. These after-the-fact "prohibitions" and before-the-fact "warnings and admonitions" don't make a lot of sense. 

We certainly don't believe that Representative Townsend believes these things, but rather these confusing and self-contradicting messages appear to be a part of some sort of strategic effort by the "new team."

For our part, the old adage, keep your powder dry and see who all files come next February is probably the wisest course of action.

Herrell may in fact be the best choice for Republicans, who knows? But making that decision, and making it final and uncontestable in August—6 months before filing and 10 months before the election—certainly seems an unwise approach to the Republican primary.

* EDITOR'S NOTE: NMPJ reached out to the Herrell campaign for comment, but we received no response.

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

Elizabeth Warren TODAY: At a Native American Presidential Forum in Iowa:

We have it from a solid source that after a fundraising pitch, Republican US Senate hopeful Dr. Gavin Clarkson was turned down by a prominent eastern New Mexico banker—but not because of Clarkson's qualifications or ability. Rather, it centered on Clarkson's appearance, specifically the outfit he was wearing. 

On July 17, we received a call from a prominent eastside Republican, who informed us that the banker who has banking interests in three counties listened to about a10-minute spiel from Clarkson and then told him he sounded fine, but he wasn't going to give him any money for the campaign. He reportedly said:

"You just can't win, and can't be taken seriously in that outfit. And no real cowboy wears a hat like the one you're wearing."

We were amazed at the report precisely because we have said the exact same thing before. And over the past eight months, we have received no fewer than 20 comments from solidly loyal Republican activists—people who would unquestionably support him if he were to become the nominee—who have made either nearly the exact observation or something very close. 

We also happen to believe that Clarkson is qualified, intelligent, well-spoken, and articulate on all the issues of the day. And if he should be pitted against either Ben Ray Lujan or Maggie Toulouse Oliver, he would be the overwhelming choice as he is vastly more intelligent and cogent than either of those are, or can hope to become.

But, just like the eastside banker, we don't believe he can be taken seriously in his get-up. 

For those who are part of Clarkson's team, who may offer the cliché-driven pitch along the lines of "Oh, this is trivial stuff, it's the issues that matter." You would be wrong. Issues do matter, but voters frequently can't get to those considerations when their minds are blocked by other factors. This is one of those factors. 

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

“Hey guys, colonialism wasn’t all that bad!”

“Bring back the British!” 

We just heard that Epstein's guard, who was on break for four hours, was killed in an automobile accident tomorrow.

Stay tuned to this station for updates.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

Rosie Tripp, the long-time and much-beloved Republican National Committeewoman for New Mexico, has decided to retire from her position at the RNC following the 2020 Republican National Convention next year.

Tripp, who is from Socorro, was elected in 1996 following the resignation of Committeewoman Laree Estes Perez of Corrales. She has been re-elected five times, and will have served six terms, or 24 years in the position. She has been very popular throughout the state, and faced an opponent only once during her tenure.

Tripp has also let it be known she is supporting a current county chairwoman to succeed her at the RNC. (More on that below.)

The terms of Republican National Committeewomen begin and end at the end of the national convention, so even though Tripp’s successor will be chosen in June or July of next year, Tripp will continue to serve through the end of the Republican National Convention, which will be held in Charlotte, North Carolina from August 24th to August 27th, 2020.

ROSALIND FRANCES GIVENS TRIPP

Tripp, who will turn 73 this October, moved with her family to Socorro when she was six-years-old. She attended the public schools in Socorro, graduating from Socorro High School in 1964. She later attended the New Mexico Institute of Mining & Technology in Socorro. At the beginning of her senior year in high school, she met Don Tripp, who had moved to town with his family from Ruidoso.

On Tuesday, August 13, they will have been married for 53 years. The Tripps have two children, six grandchildren, and three great-grandchildren. Rosie and Don own Tripp's, Inc., a jewelry manufacturing business based in Socorro. They also own a number of other business and real estate interests. (Don Tripp served as a state representative from 1998 to 2018. From 2015 through 2016, he was the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the first Republican to hold that position since 1954.)

POLITICAL CAREER

Rosie Tripp has always been an active, hard-working Republican, promoting and supporting Republican candidates and causes. She became Chairwoman of the Socorro County Republican Party back in 1987, serving until 1991. She has continued to be very active in the New Mexico Federation of Republican Women, and even served as Secretary of the New Mexico state FRW from 1993 through 1995.

She served as a member of the New Mexico Governor's Business Advisory Council from 1986 to 1990 under Governor Garrey Carruthers and from 1995 to 1997 under Governor Gary Johnson. She was also a member of Gary Johnson's Victory Club in 1995.

In 1996, Rosie was elected to the first of her two terms on the Socorro City Council, being reelected in 2000. And in 2002, she was elected to the first of two terms on the Socorro County Commission. For a brief period in 2003 and early 2004, she served in both positions simultaneously. She chaired the county commission for two years.

NATIONAL COMMITTEEWOMAN

Since her first election in 1996, Tripp has served on several RNC committees, including the Committee on Contests in 2000, the Site Selection Committee in 2004, and the Redistricting Committee in 2010. She also served as the Assistant Secretary for the 2008 Republican National Convention.

More recently she has been serving on the Temporary Committee on Elections, the Rules Committee at the 2016 National Convention, and the all-important Committee on Arrangements, which is tasked with the multiple logistical challenges of a national convention, including lodging, transportation, security, and the delegate experience.

2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

During the 2016 New Mexico GOP state convention, Tripp expressed support for 2016 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and encouraged party members to support Trump's campaign, saying:

"It’s essential for our chances in November that we coalesce around Donald Trump. Politics is a team sport and we can’t win unless we rally around all of our candidates.”

Tripp was an RNC delegate to the 2016 Republican National Convention from New Mexico and was one of 24 delegates from New Mexico bound by state party rules to support Donald Trump at the convention. She was also a member of the RNC Rules Committee, a 112-member body responsible for crafting the official rules of the Republican Party, including the rules that governed the 2016 Republican National Convention.

TRIPP SUPPORTING TINA DZIUK for NATIONAL COMMITTEEWOMAN

Rosie has come out in support of Tina Dziuk (pronounced jook—as in “cook” with a "j") to be the new National Committeewoman beginning in August of 2020.

Dziuk, who is originally from Valencia County, graduated from Belen High School in 1989, and attended both California State University, Chico and the University of New Mexico.

She is currently serving as Chairwoman of the Republican Party of Roosevelt County.  She is also currently on the Rules Committee of the Republican Party of New Mexico.

Dziuk, at 48, has had a long career in business, including a trucking company and commercial real estate interests. She is currently the President of White Rock Crushing, LLC, an aggregate processing company located in Portales, which makes road base for the construction of New Mexico highways.

Tripp noted Dziuk’s long activism in the Republican Party of Valencia County and her work, including grassroots door-to-door campaigning, on behalf of numerous Republican candidates.

Additionally, she serves on the board of LifeQuest USA, Inc., an Albuquerque-based, non-denominational Christian non-profit that mentors incarcerated and at-risk youths. Dziuk also serves on the board of the Roosevelt County Hospital Foundation. She has two grown sons and a 10-year-old daughter.

According to Tripp, New Mexico has a strong voice on the Republican National Committee:

“They listen to us, and Tina Dziuk is a firmly-grounded young woman who has the kind of background, education, and understanding of issues that can help us continue to have influence at the RNC.”

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

Brian Williams perpetrated one of the most infamous media personality hoaxes in world history—claiming:

“the helicopter we were traveling in was forced down after being hit by an RPG.”

Only in his dreams. Just as he dreamed up stories about his “experiences” in Hurricane Katrina and other fanciful events that never occurred.

"Poor kids are just as bright as white kids."

We have noted several times in our columns that Joe Biden—regardless of what the polls say—will not get the Democrats' nomination.

IS BETO THE FIRST-EVER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE TO OPENLY and PUBLICLY TAKE THE LORD’s NAME IN VAIN ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL?

We would really like to know.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

(Here is their consistent message)

TRUMP FINISHES UP DEADLY WEEKEND AT HOME

CNN/MSNBC—President Donald Trump shot and killed 20 people in El Paso, Texas, Saturday, while wounding 24 more before then boarding his plane for Dayton, Ohio, where he stopped off to kill another 9 individuals and wound an additional 27.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

DEER IN THE HEADLIGHTS AWARD WINNER

KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND

Caught flat-footed pondering something else (we have no idea what) and couldn’t respond for about 15 seconds.

BEST "NEW WORD" AWARD GOES TO:

Gov. Jay Inslee, for his incomparable

“anti-diluvenal”

Bill de Blasio:

“Kamala Harris and Joe Biden are the same as Trump. Nothing will change.”
(crowd bewildered)

MAYOR BUTTEGIEGE JUST SAID THIS:

"If you apply for a job and you are black you are less likely to be called just because of the name on the resume."

Are we the only outlet in America which believes that CNN Anchor Victor Blackwell’s tearful, semi-bawl-bag, “outrage” directed at President Donald J. Trump’s comments about #Baltimore was one big acting job? And not all that convincing either?

We not only thought it was fake from the very beginning, we believe it was merely another effort by media to join the Democratic Party in trying to claim that every single thing Trump—or any Republican anywhere for that matter—says is automatically and immediately “racist.”

This coming Wednesday, we will get a second opportunity to see if the Democrats have a longing for the candidate trumpeted as the first Asiatic presidential candidate in US history—Andrew Yang.

Shall we take mauls to all the malls of America? Smash them to smithereens?

NEW RULES—Next week there are hearings on the “new rules” being proposed by the New Mexico Secretary of State. We strongly recommend the three articles on those rules—posted yesterday by The New Mexico Justice Project.

The rules will adversely affect the information provided to voters and, as a result, the way in which voters are allowed to weigh their decisions about ballot questions.

Ballot questions are the up or down votes on Tax proposals, Bond Issues, Constitutional Amendments, Local Ordinances, and other Public Policy Decisions voters must make in the voting booth.

"Pundits Fry Mueller for ‘Shaky’ Performance" 

— Even CNN and other Leftish Commentators are Attacking the incomprehensibility of Mueller's responses and what appears to be an unfamiliarity with even the most basic components of his own report.

HERE IS WHAT EVERYONE IS MISSING:

MUELLER DID NOT COMPILE, RESEARCH, OR WRITE THE REPORT

As we have noted, warned, documented, and otherwise made known for over 2½ years, Trump's re-election has been in his own hands since the beginning of his term. But, frustratingly for many who support his administration and its manifold accomplishments, Trump has stubbornly refused to grasp the gold ring of re-election. Instead, he has continued to do everything in his power to leave it up to the Democrats.

What this means is that he has relentlessly continued to undercut his administration's achievements with his remarks, tweets, and personal interjections and asides. Almost unfailingly, at the very moment when he is riding a major success or his opponents are falling all over themselves with the almost daily permutations of the inanity and insanity that has become the Democrat Party, Trump will step on the story. 

He almost constantly draws attention away from the amazingly positive accomplishments of his first 30 months and refocuses the national attention on some sort of inaccurate tweet, statement, or unforced error of some sort. 

PLEASE NOTE: We are not in any way saying that the media coverage of what he says or tweets has been, is, or will be fair, balanced, or even remotely accurate. The media have not been fair, are not fair, and will not be fair in future. That said, Trump has had every opportunity to note and learn from that and take those very lessons to heart. But he hasn't. And it's pretty clear he won't. 

FURTHER NOTE: It is absurd to examine Trump's remarks to "The Squad" and then label them as "racist." It is also ignorant—no lexicographer, no philologist, no etymologist can or would credibly agree with that. Telling someone to "go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came" contains no "racial" connotation whatsoever. Like many many Trump statements, the media have to shape, describe, label, and finally force an interpretation of the remarks on the American people by dint of repetition. Doing that, despite the media's belief, does not, however, transform the remarks into something they are not. They may, however, do so for the most ignorant voters who never heard them to start with, or who allow the media to interpret events for them—and, sadly, there are more of the latter voters than is healthy for the democratic process.

FURTHER FURTHER NOTE: No, Trump's remarks were not "racist." But they WERE dumb. And ignorant. (And no, please stop with the "grand plan," or "brilliant strategy" arguments. It wasn't that either.) It was an unforced error based on the fact that he had not done his homework prior to speaking. (What else is new?) And another reason the remarks were super dumb—besides the inaccuracy—was that they (once again) took the focus away from the Pelosi-Squad intramural fight, and united them. 

THE LESSON FOR 2020 

What this portends for the election next year, is that the outcome will largely (if not totally) depend on what the Democrats do. On who they nominate. On what he or she says. On what they put in their platform or what they campaign on. 

If it were going to be about accomplishments, Trump would be at 60% in approval ratings right now, and would be headed for 50-52% of the popular vote next year (up from the 45.94% in 2016). His administration has been THAT SUCCESSFUL. Yes, it has. The reason he doesn't stand in that position right now is because he has refused to speak and act in a competent way that is consistent with the level of competence of the administration and its accomplishments to this point. 

All the major indicators are truly astounding in most cases and very successful in others: total employment, unemployment rates, employment by every single minority group possible, inflation rates, interest rates, growth rates, Middle East policy, the reversal of the stupid Iran deal, policy toward Israel, unprecedented talks with North Korea—leaving aside the fact that there is no concrete achievement yet (Democrats and media would be fawning over the dialog if it had been opened by Obama), immigration policy (everything that is happening at the border is, in fact, a result of the Democrats' aggressive efforts to tell the world we have open borders. 

The competence of the administration's achievements contrast sharply with the incompetence of Trump's personal conduct, speaking, and tweeting. Thus the explanation for the level of support not being where it is. 

TRUMPISTAS WILL DISAGREE

Trump's most intense supporters will angrily and wildly disagree. But what they don't understand, and refuse to understand, is that THEY are not the target audience. Trump had the Trumpistas at "hello." He still has them. It doesn't matter what he says or does. They will "analyze" everything he does or says as an act of genius. He has always had to expand his supporters beyond the combined numbers of the Trumpistas and the non-Trumpista Trump supporters in order to be able to win in 2020.

What is, always has been, and will continue to be Trump's target audience has been, is, and will continue to be the 5% to 8% of the electorate who habitually decide national elections. They are the most uninformed, least educated voters. And they are the voters who are least attached to any world view or philosophy or any logical coherent. 

Those voters are the most susceptible to media manipulation and, for them, verbal and Tweetal gaffes can continue to hold Trump down, even though his administration's record deserves more support.

DEMOCRATS TO THE RESCUE

In 2016, the Democrats nominated Hillary Clinton. She was the key to the outcome of the election. Guess what? The Democrats could very well do it again: Nominate someone who simply cannot put together an Electoral College majority. It is very possible they will do that. And at this point, it appears that is what the Trump supporters have to hope for. Trump continues, stubbornly, selfishly, and egotistically, to believe he can tweet or say anything that pops into his head. Speaking to groups of 15,000 or 18,000 in various arenas, feeds Trump's view that what he says is great. But he does not realize that those are radical fans, and are not his target audience. 

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

THIS JUST IN: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Channels the late Country Music icon Tammy Wynette: Sings D-I-V-O-R-C-E to the House Democrat Caucus:??

“Our D-I-V-O-R-C-E comes final today
Me and little A-O-C
Will be going our way
I love you all,
But she’s been H-E double L for me
I’ve wished that I could rush this
D-I-V-O-R-C-E 

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

We believe the DOJ should have stood by their own recommendation and should have pursued civil rights charges in the case of Eric Garner. Let a jury decide.

We also believe President Trump should weigh in on this issue and urge a second look. There are at least two reasons to do so.

ABSENTEE BALLOT DROP-OFF BOXES

This is the 9th in a series of articles addressing the changes made to the New Mexico Election Code during the 2019 legislative session.

Provided by: THE NEW MEXICO ELECTION INTEGRITY PROJECT (a task force sponsored by The New Mexico Justice Project). The New Mexico Justice Project began posting these articles on July 4 and has gained over 450 followers in the past 10 days. We appreciate the support and the opportunity to provide information on the New Mexico Election Code and the electoral process.

Article #9:

ABSENTEE BALLOT DROP-OFF BOXES

Changes to the Election Code enacted in 2019 will allow for absentee ballot drop-off boxes. The new statute, 1-6-9 (E) of the Election Code now provides new language that says:

E. The official mailing envelope may be returned by depositing the official mailing envelope in a secured container made available by the county clerk to receive voted mailed ballots for that election; provided that:

(1) the location of the containers and the days and times the containers will be available to receive ballots are posted by the county clerk at least ninety days before a statewide election or forty-two days before a special election;

(2) the location of a secured container is considered a polling place for purposes of electioneering too close to the polling place in violation of Section 1-20-16 NMSA 1978;

(3) all secured containers shall be monitored by video surveillance cameras and the video recorded by that system shall be retained by the county clerk as a record related to voting pursuant to the provisions of Section 1-12-69 NMSA 1978;

(4) signage at the location of a secured container shall inform voters and those dropping off ballots at the location:

(a) that it is a violation of law for any person who is not an immediate family 
member to collect and deliver a ballot for another person;

(b) that electioneering is prohibited within one hundred feet of the secured container; and

(c) of the dates and approximate time[s] the ballots will be collected; and

(5) at least once a day, the county clerk or a full-time deputy county clerk shall collect the ballots from the secured containers, register the date and time stamp on each official mailing envelope and identify the location of the secured container in the ballot register.

Once again, the amendments that increased the security for these drop-off boxes were made at the urging of House Republicans. Republican Greg Nibert of Roswell particularly requested subsection (3), requiring that the containers be monitored by video surveillance cameras and that the video be recorded and retained as a public record under 1-12-69.

One of the objections to these types of collection boxes is that in New Mexico it is illegal to collect and deliver another person’s ballot unless you are an immediate caregiver or family member, and there are concerns about the containers being used to facilitate “ballot harvesting.”

“Ballot harvesting” occurs when groups, campaigns, or individuals go around collecting a bunch of ballots and turn them in to be counted. Our Election Code does not allow it.

Under the old law, absentee ballots had to be mailed in or delivered to the county clerk's office by the voter, the voter’s immediate family member, or the voter’s caregiver. So while legislators wanted to make ballot delivery more convenient for voters, in the process of doing so they did not want to enact a provision which would open the door to illegal ballot harvesting.

With today’s technology, these “secured containers” could become something more than just old-fashioned drop boxes. New Mexico voters should support the adoption of rules with will require the collection boxes to be equipped in such a way that the delivery of a ballot into the box results in an automatic date and time stamp on each ballot. This same process takes place when ballots are hand-delivered to the county clerk's office. Automation of the "drop-off" boxes would make the handling of ALL ballots uniform and non-discriminatory, which should be the goal in every step of the voting process.

Automatic date and time stamping in the drop-off boxes, combined with video surveillance of the boxes, will ensure that the new provisions in the Election Code do not lead to ballot harvesting or other forms of abuse or fraud. Or if there are attempts to violate the law, video surveillance evidence will exist to prosecute the perpetrators.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

Democrats have moved, almost unconsciously, to take increasingly Hard Left positions—without stopping to think or reflect.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

PRESIDENT TRUMP’S EXECUTIVE ORDER CREATING A CITIZENSHIP DATABASE—AND ITS POTENTIAL VERY POSITIVE EFFECT ON THE NEW MEXICO STATEWIDE VOTER FILE

[The 8th in a Series of Articles about Changes in the New Mexico Election Code]

President Trump announced yesterday that, by Executive Order, he is:

ordering every department and agency in 
the federal government to provide the 
Department of Commerce with all 
requested records regarding the number of 
citizens and non-citizens in our country. 
They must furnish all legally accessible 
records in their possession immediately.

The President said:

“We will utilize these vast federal 
databases to gain a full, complete, and 
accurate count of the non-citizen
population, including databases maintained 
by the Department of Homeland Security 
and the Social Security Administration.”

He also specifically mentioned the administration of elections, saying:

“This will greatly inform a wide array of 
public policy decisions...Elections 
administrators have long known that there 
is no available database which contains full 
information as to who is a citizen and who 
is not. There’s no such thing at the 
national level or the state level.

The President’s actions yesterday appear to be creating exactly such a database by lifting restrictions on data sharing between the Department of Homeland Security, the Social Security Administration, and the Department of Commerce, among other agencies, to allow for the creation of a database to generate an accurate count of the number of “citizens, non-citizens and illegal aliens” in the United States.

The President estimated that 90% of the information is contained in various federal databases.

NEW MEXICO ELECTION LAW AND OUR ABILITY to CROSS-MATCH WITH FEDERAL DATABASES

Prior to 2019, the New Mexico Election Code had a provision which allowed the Secretary of State to match information in the statewide voter file with information contained in the Motor Vehicle Division Database, as well as the database of the Social Security Administration.

But the provision was discretionary, not mandatory. This year, however, in House Bill 407, because of an amendment made by Republican House members, the “may” in paragraph C of that statute was changed to “shall.”

The statutes, 1-4-1.1 (B) and (C), now say:

[Note: CAPITALIZATION in the statutes has been added for emphasis only.]

B. The secretary of state MAY enter into a written agreement with an agency or political subdivision of this state or with a department of the federal government pursuant to which the state agency, political subdivision or federal department shall provide to the secretary of state information that is in the possession of the state agency, political subdivision or federal department and that the secretary of state deems necessary to maintain the statewide voter registration list.

C. The secretary of state SHALL enter into a written agreement with the secretary of taxation and revenue to match information in the database of the voter registration electronic management system with information in the database of the motor vehicle division of the taxation and revenue department to the extent required TO ENABLE EACH OFFICIAL TO VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON APPLICATIONS FOR VOTER REGISTRATION. Upon the execution of the written agreement, the secretary of taxation and revenue SHALL enter into an agreement with the federal commissioner of social security pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 15483 (now 52 U.S.C. Section 21083), FOR THE PURPOSE OF VERIFYING APPLICABLE INFORMATION.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE EXECUTIVE ORDER.

Should the executive order survive all legal challenges and go into effect, the result—it would appear—would be that the Department of Commerce will be able to develop a database which would provide the states with a critical resource that would allow them to verify the information contained in voter registrations.

Perhaps the most significant value coming from this database would be that it would prevent non-citizens from registering to vote. Non-citizens would be prevented from doing so regardless of whether they are legally present in the country or unlawfully residing in the United States.

This would provide important protection for non-citizens. As pointed out in a previous article, it is the non-citizens themselves, rather than the unscrupulous registrars who sign them up, who suffer the consequences of unlawful registration—by being disqualified from seeking citizenship, or even facing deportation or criminal charges.

And non-citizens who become registered to vote have usually been misled or just flat-out lied to about whether or not they are eligible to vote.

Additionally, absolute accuracy is critical to the integrity of the voter file. The ability to have a single, thoroughly cross-matched database would provide each state with the kind of critical resource that has been missing for years. Such a resource has always been needed in order to assure the voting public that their state’s voter file is a clean, honest, accurate reflection of eligible voters. At this time in our history, no state is truly able to say that.

REFERENCE TO THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION IN THE EXECUTIVE ORDER

If the executive order survives all legal challenges, it appears that the resulting database may become available as files that are maintained by the Department of Commerce and the Social Security Administration. This is especially ignificant because of the reference to the Social Security Administration in the 2019 amendments added to the New Mexico Election Code.

Under those recent changes (again with amendments by House Republicans) New Mexico is REQUIRED to match the voter file against the Social Security Administration database for the purpose of verifying information, including citizenship, on the voter registration application. This would make a dramatic difference in the accuracy of our database, just as it would in the other 49 states as well.

Several articles ago, we referenced the list of unregistered voters at MVD, and its use by the Secretary of State to confirm voter information. We cautioned that that list must not be used in such a way that the information becomes public information as part of the public voter file. Such usage could contribute to fraud and identity theft. The Social Security Administration database, on the other hand, already contains those types of protections for individual privacy and should not be vulnerable to the same concerns.

However, adequate protections must be in place to protect ANY database of personally identifiable information of citizens and voters, and ensure that the database is only used for legitimate purposes.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

Are all Democrats really that ignorant? 

Or are they just playing game after fraudulent game? 
Is it all just a big campaign scam which they believe will win them votes right now? 

Or is it because they fear they cannot win a majority among American voters, and have decided to import a new voter base for the years to come?

The Silver City Event Center was packed last night with Republicans, Democrats, independents, and leading citizens and voters of all stripes. The crowd was estimated at 630. The Republican fundraiser was mainly to support the candidacy of Republican legislative candidate Luis Terrazas who is challenging incumbent Democrat Rodolpho "Rudy" Martinez.

It is our understanding that Republican State Representative Rebecca Dow of Truth or Consequences was also a beneficiary of the event.

The stated ticket sales goal was a seemingly lofty 500, but as reported last night, event organizers had to scramble to set up even more tables for the overflow crowd. 

DEMOCRAT OFFICIALS in ATTENDANCE

Former Silver City Mayor Mike Morones, a Democrat, was in attendance, as well as current Democrat Sheriff Frank Gomez. Morones is even said to be the campaign treasurer for Terrazas.

Quite a Number of Sponsors

Local businesses acting as sponsors of the event included James Hamilton Construction, The Mixx Radio 95.1 FM, W & N Enterprises, Carter Bain, Southwest Concrete & Paving, Jalisco Cafe, and the Silver City/Bayard Food Basket. 

MORE on TERRAZAS

An article in the Grant County Beat describes Terrazas as a lifelong resident of Grant County who graduated from Silver High School in 1990. It says he attended NMSU and graduated from WNMU in 1993 with a bachelor's of business administration with an emphasis in accounting. He also earned a degree from Dallas Institute of Funeral Service in 1995. 

"He opened his first business, Silver City Auto Spa, in 1999 at 27 years old. In 2003, he started Terrazas Granite and Marble. Terrazas owns and operates Terrazas Funeral Chapels and Terrazas Crematory in the Silver City area, which he opened in 2005, and Terrazas Funeral Chapels in Deming, which began in 2008. He also owns Terrazas Granite and Marble in Las Cruces, which opened in 2010.

"A devoted family man to his wife, Mandee, and five children, he and his wife work at the funeral home together. His son, Luis Jr., is currently a funeral service intern with plans to attend mortuary science college in the fall to further his profession as a local funeral director in the family business. Alyssa is in college at California State University San Bernadino, studying biology. Ashley is serving in the US Air Force in San Antonio, TX. The two youngest, Allyson and Abraham, are in elementary school. 

"Terrazas serves on the WNMU Foundation Board. He has served on several boards including the advisory board for AmBank, Silver City Grant County Chamber of Commerce and Deming Luna Chamber of Commerce. He is active and supports many community activities. 

"He is fully dedicated to serving his district and considers it a great honor. He believes in strengthening his community and looks forward to building unity through finding common goals by listening to the needs of the people.

"Terrazas said he is ready for a positive campaign and '"hopes to earn your vote to fight for the important issues and values that we care so deeply about. By working together, we can build a better future!'"

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

Representative Rodolpho "Rudy" S. Martinez, D-Bayard, may be facing some serious trouble in his bid for re-election next year.

Our sources in Sierra County say that he has a very serious challenger in Republican Luis Terrazas of Silver City. Word on the street is that a fundraiser benefitting the Terrazas campaign has sold 250 tickets, at $100 each, for tonight's event. That's $25,000. State legislative incumbents seldom have such successful events, and challengers NEVER do. 

We don't know Terrazas, but he appears to fit a kind of demographic we have discussed for years: the traditional New Mexico Hispanic Democrat who has seen his party taken over by so-called "progressives" from out-of-state. Many long-time New Mexican Hispanic Democrats have caved into the national extremism of the party (or always wanted it to start with) and have simply joined in to make the New Mexico Democrat Party a radically Leftist entity, just like the national Democrats have become. 

Michelle Grisham, Ben Ray Lujan, Hector Balderas, Michael Sanchez, and many other native-born New Mexico Hispanics have done this, joining with outsiders like Udall, Martin Heinrich, Maggie Toulouse Oliver, Keller, Santa Fe Mayor Alan Webber, and countless others in radicalizing the party. Rudy Martinez has gone along with them.

A minority (thus far) of New Mexico Hispanic Democrats have balked at these changes. They are of the type who decided to support Susana Martinez against Diane Denish. But it appears that more and more are becoming disillusioned, and may end up joining the Republicans because of the kind of extremism exhibited by New Mexicans turned Californians and New Yorkers, in the manner of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Another rumor circulating is that Martinez's abandonment of traditional common-sense politics has caused him to appear to be a weak candidate for re-election, and that Governor Grisham is contemplating appointing him to some job so as to ease him out of the legislature, so she can replace him with someone who can compete with Terrazas. We don't know if this is true. But the story has bubbled to the surface. 

ABSENTEE BALLOTS AND VOTER IDENTIFICATION [Reprinted with the permission of TNMJP]

[NOTE; This is the 7th in a series of articles addressing the changes made to the New Mexico Election Code during the 2019 legislative session.]

Provided by: NEW MEXICO ELECTION INTEGRITY 
(a task force sponsored by The New Mexico Justice Project)

Article #7:

One of the key findings in the Herrell Report* regarding absentee ballots in Doña Ana County in the 2018 election was that a huge number of the ballots did not contain the required voter identification information.

Many of the ballots were missing the voters’ addresses and years of birth, or the information that was provided didn’t match the voter file.

This meant that absentee ballots—which has always been the least secure form of voting—had a lower standard for Voter ID than any other form of voting in New Mexico.

Armed with that information from the Herrell Report, Republican House members Greg Nibert (R-Roswell) and Rod Montoya (R-Farmington) pushed for new provisions for absentee voting that make it clear that any ballot that does not contain the correct, required voter ID must be rejected. (Their efforts are reflected in the language shown in ALL CAPS in the two passages shown below.)

The new provisions are found in NMSA 1978, Section 1-6-14. Subsection B now says:

"If the voter's signature or the required 
voter identification is missing, the presiding 
judge shall write “Rejected" on the front of 
the official mailing envelope. The judge or 
election clerk shall enter the voter's name 
in the signature rosters or register and shall 
write the notation "Rejected—Missing 
Signature" or "REJECTED—MISSING
REQUIRED VOTER IDENTIFICATION" in 
the "Notations" column of the register. The 
presiding judge shall place the official 
mailing envelope unopened in a container 
provided for rejected ballots."

The new language here is CAPITALIZED, and now requires the rejection of any absentee ballot envelope that does not contain the voter’s name, registration address and year of birth—the same identification that would be required to vote in person at an early voting site or on Election Day.

In addition, the lack of Voter ID on an absentee envelope can now be challenged by an appointed challenger. Again, the new language is CAPITALIZED.

Subsection C says:

"A lawfully appointed challenger may view 
the official mailing envelope and may 
challenge the ballot of any mailed ballot 
voter for the following reasons:

(1) the official mailing envelope has been 
opened by someone other than the 
voter prior to being received by the 
absent voter election board;

(2) the official mailing envelope does not 
contain a signature;

(3) THE OFFICIAL MAILING ENVELOPE 
DOES NOT CONTAIN THE REQUIRED
VOTER IDENTIFICATION; OR

(4) the person offering to vote is not a 
voter as provided in the Election 
Code”

Challengers who are appointed to absentee boards need to be aware of the new requirements and MOST IMPORTANT: any rules adopted by the Secretary of State must allow challengers to view all information contained on the absentee envelopes before they are opened by poll workers.

Based on the findings in the Herrell Report,* documenting the irregularities in the absentee ballots in Doña Ana County in 2018, this single change to the Election Code— requiring voter ID on absentee ballots—is a vital element necessary to greatly reduce opportunities for fraud in absentee voting in New Mexico.

The New Mexico Justice Project and the New Mexico Election Integrity Task Force applaud this change but cautions that challengers and election watchers must be vigilant to ensure that it is enforced. 
_____________________________________
* The Herrell Report is a 44-page analysis of voting procedure irregularities in Doña Ana County in 2018. The report was published in January 2019.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

We note that The New Mexico Justice Project has just published yet another incisive analysis of a recent change to the New Mexico Election Code. (And a couple of others since we last noticed.) This one is yet another examination of a previously unexamined portion of the new, so-called "Same-Day" voter registration—which TNMJP brilliantly points out is actually a "Same-Minute" voter registration (and vote) law.

We really urge all New Mexico voters to go to the site highlighted above and read the article concerning a "list" that the Secretary of State is supposed to create. It is interesting reading, and perhaps alarming for some. We also urge you to "Like" their page, and support their goals of free, open, and fair elections.

A Potentially Dangerous Provision in the New Same-Day Voter Registration Law —

IMPORTING THE LIST of UNREGISTERED but ELIGIBLE VOTERS from the MOTOR VEHICLE DIVISION (MVD)

This is the 6th in a series of articles addressing the changes made to the New Mexico Election Code during the 2019 legislative session.

Provided by: NEW MEXICO ELECTION INTEGRITY 
(a task force sponsored by The New Mexico Justice Project)

Article #6:

Senate Bill 672, which became law this year, has a provision that states:

“No later than June 30, 2021 and upon the approval of the voting system certification committee, the secretary of state and the secretary of taxation and revenue shall develop a procedure for importing the list of eligible but unregistered persons with a driver's license or state-issued identification card into the voter registration electronic management system prior to an election to facilitate processing a new voter registration pursuant to this section.” (This is now codified as 1-4-5.7 (I) of the Election Code)

Since this same bill also provides for automatic voter registration at MVD, the only people who should be on this list are people who declined to register to vote. Drivers who are not eligible to vote should not be on the list according to the definition.

The apparent purpose of this provision is to aid in registering voters during the same-day voter registration period by having the information of unregistered voters who have a driver’s license or state-issued ID card already in the voter file. That seems like something that should increase the accuracy of voter registrations by people who did not want to register at MVD when they got their license, but who have decided in the waning days of an election to go ahead and register. Fair enough.

But it leaves an open question: What about the people who register and vote on the same day, but who DO NOT have a New Mexico driver’s license or state ID card? Will their information be verified in any way before they are allowed to vote?

It is pretty clear that those who have qualified for a New Mexico driver’s license or state-issued ID, with its stringent “Real ID” requirements, are in one reasonably safe category. But the last-minute walk-ups, who do NOT have such an ID, present a different story.

If a person appears and wants to register and vote, but gives a false or incorrect social security number or a false or incorrect date of birth (which could indicate that the person may be an imposter), will the county clerk’s staff be able to catch the error before the registration is processed and the voter has already cast a ballot?

Maybe they can, but It seems unlikely that all such errors can be caught. After all, though it is titled “SAME-DAY” registration, in reality it will mean the “same-minute” that a such a new registrant will go ahead and vote. There is literally no time for verification.

There’s another issue with the Secretary of State developing this list of eligible but unregistered voters. Such lists—just like the statewide voter file—are most likely deemed a public record. But even if it is made an exception, and is not deemed a public record, what if that list were made public before the election, either as part of the voter file, or in some other release? The answer is that it would be a tremendous tool for unscrupulous people to use to commit vote fraud.

People working a for-profit, or a for-politics organization (or both) would have a list of names of eligible voters, complete with their addresses, ages, and mailing addresses. Such information could be used by these groups, a number of which operate under a “pay-for-registrant” incentive program (the now infamous ACORN operated on that basis), to register voters by mail, or perhaps online.

Such phantom voters could then mail in absentee ballot requests, or, perhaps even more easily, use the somewhat controversial electronic absentee ballot application.

We are not trying to be alarmist. And we are certainly not saying that such things will happen. But we are raising these scenarios because we do believe there are many, many unanswered questions regarding the way in which many of these changes to the Election Code will be implemented.

That is why we are emphasizing that it is vitally important that the “LIST” discussed above be used solely for the purpose of confirming the identity of a same-day voter by a county clerk’s office employee, and not for any other purpose.

An additional concern is that any use other than simply to confirm the identity of same-day registrants would likely be in violation of both state and federal driver information privacy laws.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

A New York-based coffee giant has threatened NMPJ with a lawsuit because of our inadvertent reference to the long-time coffee manufacturer.

When we accidentally described the 2020 Democratic Presidential field, which includes some 23 Left and very Hard Left candidates, as being "Chock full o'Nut-jobs," the Manhattan-based corporation hit us with a warning letter. 

We want our readers to know we are rethinking our assessment of the field. We strive to bring the best coverage of politics that we can, but if our characterization of events—regardless of our accuracy and precision (which is almost always pinpoint)—leads to trouble, well, then we have to reassess. 

All suggestions are welcome. We are here to serve. And, as always, your comments and recommendations are solicited.

Congressman Eric Swalwell, to whom truth was an obscure and unrecognizable stranger in the dark, has up and quit the Democratic PartyPresidential sweepstakes. Hardly anyone knew he was running. Known best for lying relentlessly on TV, Eric Swalwell could not catch on simply by dint of obfuscation, deception, and demagoguery—the lanes are filled with that kind of traffic. There were simply too many others practicing the exact same tactics, but with more money to make them work. Bless his heart.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

No Party-Switching During the new Same-Day Voter Registration Period (the final 28 days before an election).

This is the fifth in a series of articles addressing the changes made to the New Mexico Election Code during the 2019 legislative session.

Provided by: THE NEW MEXICO ELECTION INTEGRITY PROJECT (a task force sponsored by The New Mexico Justice Project)

The 4th post in an extremely important series of articles on New Mexico’s new election laws—this one on “automatic voter registration—has been posted to The New Mexico Justice Project page. Please read it and then “Like” the page. Their efforts should be supported by all who want fair and honest elections in New Mexico!

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

THE NEW MEXICO ELECTION INTEGRITY PROJECT

(a task force sponsored by The New Mexico Justice Project)

PRESENTS the CHANGES to the NEW MEXICO ELECTION CODE which were ADOPTED in 2019

We have noticed that The New Mexico Justice Project has just posted a second article (in a series of articles) about very recent changes to the New Mexico Election Code—such as Same-Day Registration—which will affect the 2020 elections.

We urge everyone to go to their Facebook page (at the link above) and not only read the article)s), But also “Like” the page. It is bound to be a very important asset during the current election cycle.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

For those of you interested in the numerous changes to the New Mexico Election Code this past March, you can go to the Facebook page of The New Mexico Justice Project. That organization has begun a series of articles outlining those changes, including same-day voter registration and many other significant changes. We urge all New Mexico voters to go to the link above and read today’s first article. Very important.

There is remarkable similarity between the actions taken by today’s Democratic Party elected officials in jurisdictions like Portland, Oregon and those of their forbears during the latter third of the 19th Century in cities such as Memphis, New Orleans, and numerous others.

Today, as they did then, Democrats seek to use violence outright or the fear of violence (or its toleration) as a means of gaining the upper hand in terms of political disputes or winning public opinion on the issues of the day. They famously followed this tradition through the 1960’s, with Democrat National Committeeman Bull Connor of Birmingham, Alabama being the most memorable example.

At least two generations of Americans have been indoctrinated by ideological college professors and some of their fellow travelers in high schools that “colonialism” is the worst blight on humankind.

(Of course they have to hope that no one notices the obvious disconnect—our own development and the profound debt we owe our own colonizers. But not to worry—the last two generations miss a lot.)

Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver is at it again—she's gone off to do some more stuff on her own. This time she's created a "new-look" website for the Office of the Secretary of State. She says it's designed to help voters, candidates, and all sorts of people.

Maggie's new website has the 2015 edition of the Election Handbook—not the 2017 edition which includes the numerous changes made to the Election Code in 2017! It is only as accurate as the now four-year-old legislative session of 2015.

So if you are thinking about becoming a candidate...Well, don't rely on Maggie's new website or you'll get a 4-year-old version of the law that's two years older than the most recent handbook. 

Candidates would be far better off relying on the Supreme Court's site than they would be if they depend on Maggie to keep up with the changes in election law (which by the way, is supposed to be Maggie's job).

Maggie is now running for the US Senate, but she needs to get a handle on her current job before trying something new.

2019? Don't Even think about it!

Changes to the Election Code were significant in 2015 and 2017, but the 2019 Legislative Session took those changes to an entirely new level. The changes were massive. As far out of date as she is already, Maggie might as well wait about a month for the Compilation Commission to finish the 2019 Election Handbook. Candidates should be advised to go to the Supreme Court website—they will undoubtedly have the correct law on their site.

Biden and Swalwell

We are not big fans of Joe Biden—as is clear from our commentary and analysis—and he is in fact 76, as pointed out by Congressman Eric Swalwell. But the reality is that while Biden will definitely be 77 in November, unfortunately—barring a miraculous brain transplant—Swalwell will still be fairly stupid.

Biden and Kamala Harris

Kamala Harris is yet another one (of millions) in the Democratic Party who doesn’t have a clue about her party’s history. (Either that or she prefers to ignore it, hoping it will go away.) So she rails on Biden for talking with/working with segregationists. Why hell fire and damnation! — The Democratic Party was chock full of segregationists for most of their history—the last one didn’t kick the bucket till about 15-20 years ago. All Harris is succeeding in doing is—unwittingly—drawing attention to the Democrats’ segregationist history.

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

Julian Castro: “Transgender Women Should Have the Right to Abortion.”

Never mind that they can’t get pregnant, when it comes to the 2020 Democrat field there is NO limit to the pandering—no matter how ridiculous—the sky is the limit.

Twerp.

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

The Lineup

Elizabeth Warren: No actual indication of life or life form remains in this candidate, but her cyborg (or possibly hologram) continues to make noise, constantly seeking attention (and getting it) from the Mainstream Media who support her ideological bent. The Warren life form will continue to pound away tonight trying to pretend that the candidacy she killed last October is still alive. The media will say it is, but it isn't.

Cory Booker: Will seek to turn a phrase in some sort of dramatic fashion (remember "Spartacus") but he's playing for the crowd that wants to vote based on race, forgetting that that has already been done. Additionally, for those still motivated by that, or other forms of racialism, he is outflanked by Kamala Harris. 

Julian Castro: A twerp in twerp's clothing if there ever was one. He spouts racialistic, ethnicistic nonsense and meme-like cliches as if there is no limit to his bigotry. There may not be. But there's a limit to what the public wants to hear from him. This half-pint, lightweight, snippersnapper of a candidate has no place to go but back wherever he came from. 

John Delaney: He's been in the race longer than anyone—more than two years, so he says. But we've still never heard of him. We suspect very few voters would be able to pick him out of a lineup. We guess that he will try to hew to some sort of "moderate" pose tonight. Yeah, like there's room for that in the Democrat Party.

Tulsi Gabbard: This one is our sleeper. She has shown quite a degree of nimbleness during her career, has a more impressive resume than most Democrats (we know, we know, big duck on small pond) and is appealingly attractive as a speaker and engager. We expect her to impress. She may not, but this is her chance.

Jay Inslee: Another cliche popper—this one from Washington (the state, not DC)—who has never done anything of note. With that kind of resume, you need to have some kind of hook, and Inslee believes that staking out the biggest nutjob position on climate change is his ticket. Expect a barrage of climate change chit chat during his 3 minutes of fame tonight.

Amy Klobuchar: Another Democrat who will try to play the role of a middle-of-the-roadster. She has some appeal and a following with some Democrats who believe that is the best tack (as opposed to the actual policy positions, keep in mind). She of course has no record to match the moderation model, but she pushes the "idea of moderation" based purely on tone, not her actual record. She could score a point or two.

Tim Ryan: A congressman from Ohio, we think. Again, someone who allegedly doesn't like Pelosi being in charge. Okay. Not going anywhere.

Beto: Mr. O'Rourke reminds us of the Elaine Benes comments during the Seinfeld episode dealing with orgasms: "Fake, fake, fake, fake, fake." Robert Francis O'Rourke is handsome, in the Kennedy-esque sort of way—all teeth and hair. But he has not yet uttered a single, solitary, intellectually serious phrase in his entire career. It's all style. And it seems to have played out. 

Bill de Blasio: Idiot. Pure and simple. 

What to Expect?

If there aren't some serious fireworks we will be very surprised. After all, this debate (as opposed to tomorrow night's) has already been labeled as the "kid's table," so there will be some desperation present with candidates wanting to be considered part of the grownup table. There aren't that many opportunities on the horizon, and people have to be raising money hand over fist every single day. All of that leads to the need to make a name for oneself immediately, loudly, and attention-grabbingly.

Our expectation is that Tulsi Gabbard will gain the most attention in terms of possibly moving to the next level. Elizabeth Warren could be attacked pretty viciously because of the perception that she is a "leader" (the other candidates also don't realize that she is dead, being played only by a hologram). If one starts to do that, she could easily get pummeled for her dumbest moments. 

• ??I will not be out-aborted!
• ??I will not be out-illegal immigranted!
• ??I will not be out-Green New-Dealed!
• ??I will not be out-climate changed!
• ??I will not be out-student loan-forgiven!
• ??I will not be our-racismed!
• ??I will not be out-Gayed or Lesbianed!
• ??I will not be out-transsed!
• ??I will not be out gun-grabbed!
• ??I will not be out-spent!
• ??I will not be out-taxed!
• ??I will not be out-demagogued!

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

Reports indicate that Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s Administration is arranging for the illegals she is already housing at taxpayer expense to receive EBT* cards with $1,000 credit balances. We have been unable to confirm this, as legislators we have interviewed have received ambivalent/obfuscatory responses from the Human Services Department.

However, such a policy—if it is being followed—is perfectly consistent with the now-evolved position of the Democratic Party, and is also in harmony with the positions of each of the 25 Democrats running for President.

* Electronic Benefits Transfer

Email us with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

Organized groups in New Mexico have submitted petitions to New Mexico Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse-Oliver, asking for referendums on a number of the bills passed in the last legislative session, seeking to exercise the rights reserved to the people in the New Mexico Constitution.   

A bill that bans counties from passing their own right-to-work ordinances, and another bill that bans coyote hunting contests are only two examples of legislation that the Secretary of State has decided cannot be submitted to the people of New Mexico for further scrutiny. She has ruled that these bills “provide for the preservation of the public, peace, health or safety.”  That being the case, she claims they are not subject to the referendum rights of the voters of New Mexico. 

The problem is that Oliver (who, by the way, is a Democratic Party candidate for US Senator to replace the retiring incumbent Tom Udall) uses almost exactly the same wording, and reaches exactly the same conclusions, on every single piece of legislation. In other words, no matter what the bill says, no matter what the subject matter is, no matter how you look at it, every single bill passed by the New Mexico Legislature and signed by Governor Grisham is exempt from any further scrutiny by New Mexicans. It's all good—at least according to Oliver.

Our Constitution says:

"The people reserve the power to disapprove, suspend and annul any law enacted by the legislature, except general appropriation laws; laws providing for the preservation of the public peace, health or safety; for the payment of the public debt or interest thereon, or the creation or funding of the same, except as in this constitution otherwise provided; for the maintenance of the public schools or state institutions, and local or special laws.

This important reservation of power to the voters of New Mexico is being blocked by Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse-Oliver. In Ms. Toulouse-Oliver's opinion, the reason the bills cannot be disapproved, suspended, or annulled by the voters of New Mexico is her reliance on a 1956 legal case decided by the New Mexico Supreme Court.

In that case, Otto v. Buck, 1956-NMSC-040, the Court said:

"It is generally agreed that these questions are factual in the sense that a legislature may not, by declaring that a given act is for the preservation of these public goods, foreclose a determination by the courts whether in fact it is such.” 

Okay, so just because the Legislature says a law is for the public good, doesn’t necessarily make it so. The New Mexico Supreme Court has also said this:

"...provisions for referendum are to be liberally construed in favor thereof." 

The Otto v. Buck decision, that the Secretary claims to be relying on, says:

"...this forum examines the enactment of the legislature in the light of the history of the provision, including therein previous extant or repealed legislation on the subject; contemporaneous declarations of the legislature; the condition sought to be remedied by the act, as reflected by the enactment and in other matters of which we may properly take judicial notice; and the consequences of any particular interpretation to be given the enactment. Stated most tersely, our work begins where that of the legislature left off."

In other words, any review of a bill—for the purposes of determining whether the people might have a direct say on the bill becoming law— requires serious analysis, an in-depth study of the history of the subject matter as it has been treated by the legislature, and its actual impact on the state and the people.

Oliver, by doing almost overnight, cursory, cookie-cutter "reviews," and issuing near carbon copy "instant rulings" on each and every referendum request, ignores the serious, intellectually demanding responsibility given to her office by the Constitution. Instead, she substitutes the kind of partisan, flippant approach she takes on virtually all issues—in keeping with her background as a hard Left campaign consultant and "community organizer." It is one of the many reasons that folks with that kind of background should never ever be elected to the office of Secretary of State.

Community organizers and others from highly partisan activist backgrounds should be able to run for governor or for the legislature or other offices that the public may decide to choose them for. But the Secretary of State is a very different kind of office.

That office is supposed to supervise elections and oversee matters which are to be subjected to the will of the electorate. It requires someone who is first and foremost committed to integrity in the electoral system, from voter registration to the last recount of votes cast. She also is required to pass judgment—intellectally sound, considered, reflective judgment—on matters of the nature discussed here. In all these areas of grave responsibility, the office should never be held by someone with her thumb on the scale.

Unfortunately, Maggie Oliver has her entire hand, arms, torso, legs, feet, and shoes on the scale. The people of New Mexico should take note.

UPCOMING: SB 85 – Banning County and Municipal Right to Work Ordinances

We will discuss her rulings in more detail.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

As we noted a couple of months ago, we are not part of the overwhelming conventional wisdom that says that Joe Biden will be the Democratic nominee. We have never believed he has much of a chance at all.

Our view has always been that Biden is perhaps the single candidate most perfectly reflected in the persona of a television character. That character is the clueless, gaffe-prone boss named Michael Scott on the TV series "The Office." The character is brilliantly portrayed by Steve Carell.

Exactly like Biden, Carell is completely and utterly oblivious to the grotesquely and discomfitingly embarrassing assertions, statements, recapitulations of events, interpersonal remarks, off-hand commentary, and all other utterances that simply flow from his remarkably unconscious and incognizant brain.

Bless his heart, Joe Biden is Michael Scott, and Michael Scott is Joe Biden. If you've never seen The Office, you should check it out and take at least 22 minutes to absorb one of its episodes. There is no clearer pop culture parallel to a current politician than that which can be seen in the character of Scott. You will be helped to understand Biden.

The show ran from 2005 to 2013 and is now in syndication on cable channels. 

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

WE ARE BACK! After a staff shakeup and reorganization, New Mexico Political Journal is back—to help you navigate the political, social, and cultural minefields of modern America and the State of New Mexico.

We feature an approach called “How to Look at” [the full range of issues]:

Issue # 1 How to look at:

Reparations—It probably won’t surprise any readers (since we first advanced this position early in the century) that we favor reparations to be paid by the Democrats and the Democratic Party—the only political party, the only political organization in American history to foster, promote, and defend slavery and the only one to ever run candidates who advocated on behalf of slavery and its follow-on institutions and policies:

• ?? Jim Crow laws
• ?? Segregation
• ?? Poll Taxes
• ?? Grandfather Clauses
• ?? White Primaries
• ?? Literacy Tests

and many other related ideas based on the Democrat Party’s long history of race-based politics. The Democrats, especially individuals like Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, and Kamala Harris, have a very difficult time coming to grips with their party’s history and the inequities, iniquities, and pure evil their party inflicted on African-Americans for almost 140 years.

It should be noted that Democrats did the same to other “minorities” as well—including their opposition to women’s suffrage—but thus far other racial or ethnic groups do not have the carnival-barker-like “professional [minority]” spokespersons (as opposed to minority professionals) hawking demands for reparations.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions, and ideas.

In a sharp departure from Governor Susana Martinez's focus on economic expansion and job growth for New Mexicans, Governor Michelle Grisham is reorienting the state's priorities to encourage more illegal immigration into the state, seeing it as an alternative form of economic expansion. 

Grisham has joined with Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller and City Councillor Pat Davis in diverting New Mexico taxpayer dollars toward encouraging illegal immigrants to settle in Albuquerque, claiming that the people wandering in from Honduras and other Central American countries are "asylum-seekers," akin to famous dissidents such as Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Andrei Sakharov. 

EXPO NEW MEXICO TRANSFORMED into a HOUSING UNIT for ILLEGALS

Expo New Mexico, the home of the New Mexico State Fair, is now prepared to house illegal immigrants on its 236-acre property in central Albuquerque. The families will stay in dormitories which had only been used by New Mexico children showing their livestock at the State Fair. More than 2,000 illegal immigrants have come through Albuquerque in recent months claiming to be seeking "asylum."

However, there are no actual asylum seekers identified thus far—none of the illegal immigrants have been shown to be dissidents, or to hold any standing at all of concern to the Central American countries from which they are emigrating.

Instead, they are abandoning their homes, essentially at the open invitation of US Democratic Party elected officials as part of their efforts to grow voter rolls—regardless of the cost to American taxpayers. 

As we have reported before, a number of otherwise intelligent voters we have interviewed, including attorneys and other professionals, have mimicked the lines used by Nancy Pelosi, telling NMPJ that what appears to most Americans to be an obvious crisis at the border is in fact "a manufactured crisis invented by Trump." 

Grisham promotes the same concepts in discussing the illegals, saying:

"These asylum-seekers are primarily women and children and are not a danger to us; they need rest, hydration and minor medical checkups before they resume their journeys,” she said. “I’m proud of the courageous nonprofit network that has done such incredible work on the border and in Albuquerque.”

But our own interviews with Border Patrol agents reveal a different story. Relatively few of the supposed "families" are in fact even related, as mules and coyotes and single men work together, linking abandoned children with unattached males and females to engage in the ruse of presenting a nuclear family—one of the requirements for obtaining refugee or asylum status.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

NEW MEXICO YOUTH ORGANIZATIONS TOSSED ASIDE BY GRISHAM and EXPO MANAGEMENT

By Tim Eichenberg, New Mexico State Treasurer*

Imagine the police officers in your hometown take an oath to serve and protect. But then instead of serving and protecting, they do the opposite and begin raiding the bank accounts and retirement funds of you and your neighbors.

And imagine if the bosses of those officers—the police chief, the mayor and the city councilors—know about the illegal pilfering of their constituents and do nothing: they turn a blind eye and keep silent.

There would be outrage and investigations everywhere. Newspaper editorials would be screaming for resignations and prosecutions.

It has been happening at the Public Employees Retirement Association of New Mexico, and the agency’s executive director, general counsel and several members of its governing board are the culprits. PERA’s executive director has basically given himself and other PERA employees tens of thousands of dollars in raises without full board of trustees approval.

In 2014, executive director Wayne Propst, who currently makes $166,290 a year, convinced the then-board chair to give him a $14,000 (or 10%) raise. The full board never voted directly on that raise. And Mr. Propst got two additional raises without full board approval. Overall, he received approximately $25,000 in raises without full board approval. In 2018, Mr. Propst handed out $633,158 in raises, promotions and salary adjustments to PERA employees.

I have called the raises illegal and have asked the New Mexico Attorney General’s office to investigate. Why do I say the raises were illegal, especially the ones Mr. Propst orchestrated for himself? Because of what state law says about how PERA is supposed to work:

“The Retirement Board shall employ professional, technical, clerical and other services as required for the operation of the Association. The compensation for employed services shall be fixed by the retirement board.”

Mr. Propst works for the board and has the same fiduciary responsibility to the retirement trust fund as do board members. The $25,000 in raises that Mr. Propst gave himself will amount to more than $600,000 in salary and retirement benefits for him over his lifetime. And every penny of that money comes directly out of PERA’s trust funds that pay retirement benefits to 40,000 retirees and, eventually, 50,000 current public employees.

Mr. Propst and the board members who choose to turn a blind eye to his pilfering of retirees’ pensions have a fiduciary duty to PERA’s 40,000 retirees. The definition: “The legal duty of a fiduciary is to act in the best interests of the beneficiary.”

It seems that Mr. Propst’s law school didn’t have an Executive Director 101 class that would teach, “When acting as a fiduciary, you don’t circumvent or disregard the law for personal gain.”

Mr. Propst will offer explanations for the raises he orchestrated for himself. But he can’t run from the fact that he has a fiduciary responsibility to the retirement trust fund and that he never should have taken the money without approval of the full board of directors.

PERA retirees and active members, the board’s next meeting is May 7. Our budget is on that agenda, and it includes another 4% raise for Mr. Propst and other PERA employees.

Retirees, what will you do? Active employees, what will you do? PERA Board of Trustees, what will you do?

*Tim Eichenberg is the New Mexico State Treasurer and a member of the PERA board of trustees. This column represents the opinion of Mr. Eichenberg alone, and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of New Mexico Political Journal (NMPJ). As has always been our policy, NMPJ welcomes opinions and discussions of issues of importance to the people of New Mexico.

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

42% APPROVAL for MARTINEZ = DEATH IMMINENT.

BUT 41% APPROVAL for GRISHAM = PRETTY DARNED GOOD

A Morning Consult poll last week found that Governor Grisham has only a 41% approval rating. For the following reasons, that's actually amazingly low. Here's why: 

Governor Michelle Grisham:

• Just got elected by a landslide and is in the honeymoon period
• Just 45 days ago got just about every single thing she wanted from a recent legislative session
• Just about 15 days ago finished signing a slew of bills with maximum fawningly positive press coverage
• Has received no scrutiny whatsoever from the media
• Had a dark money group spend hundreds of thousands of dollars supporting her for 60 days during the legislative session

All of that should have her in the mid- to high-70s—at a bare minimum. But the reality is that Grisham did quite a few things that could easily explain why she’s 35 points below where she should be. Grisham also did the following:

• Raised taxes as if we were in a world war and New Mexico had to pay for the entire thing
• Raised taxes despite being left with an all-time record budget surplus
• Attacked gun owner rights in a state where Hispanic Democrats and many independents believe in the 2nd Amendment
• Went all-out for abortion of actual live babies—well beyond “pro-choice” abortion arguments
• Gave away our electoral votes—allowing California to decide how New Mexicans vote

So, despite where she should be in approval ratings, she has a mere 41% approval rating. 

How did the New Mexico Press Handle Governor Grisham's 41% Approval Rating?

So how did the press handle Governor Grisham’s 41% approval rating? They defended and spun for her, of course. Apparently, when Grisham hired the Santa Fe New Mexican reporter who covered the election to be her communications director, she must have also got the rest of the paper as her surrogate spokesperson in sort of a package deal.

Now, we will openly concede that a single poll does not a trend make. Our interest is not in arguing the validity of the poll, but rather the disparity of the press coverage in how the press handled similar polls about Governor Martinez.

When Martinez had a 42% approval rating in 2017, during her second term, the media almost lost their minds in condemnation and attacks. The Santa Fe New Mexican wrote a story titled, “Martinez approval rating sinks in new poll.”

Heck, even when Martinez had a 55% approval rating in 2014, the headline of the Santa Fe New Mexican was:

“Poll: Gov. Martinez Approval Rating Dips"

and the lede was:

“A new poll published this week suggests Gov. Susana Martinez’s approval ratings are dropping.”

https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/legislature/poll-gov-martinez-s-approval-ratings-dip/article_e4cffe68-8bb9-5aa3-9abb-3f81a8b26e4f.html

But back to the coverage of the recent Grisham poll...

The Santa Fe New Mexican editorial page editor took a break from her non-stop promotion of Democrat presidential candidates (we think she has a crush on Cory Booker, by the way) to tweet that the poll just reflects how Americans are skeptical of everything and everyone these days.  Nothing to see here:

Inez Russell Gomez @inezrussell Apr 25  ‏ 

Another Santa Fe New Mexican correspondent, Steve Terrell, wrote a long column "splainin'" why the Grisham poll is, well, just plain meaningless, but how Martinez is, well, just plain terrible. This is the same Steve Terrell who covered Martinez’s 55% approval rating by saying it was a sign of weakness, and later pointing out that her 42% rating was a sign of political death!

The New Mexican Splainin'

In his "explanation" column, Terrell posited the notion that all governors get a honeymoon period and added the truly ridiculous throwaway line that he was (somehow) accused (by somebody) of being too soft on Martinez.

Right. During her first year, the New Mexican repeatedly accused her of corruption, and also attacked her continuously over the Downs at Albuquerque—for decisions over which there was not a shred of evidence to suggest any wrongdoing—and decisions by the way that completely revitalized Expo New Mexico.

Santa Fe New Mexican Accuses Martinez of Being a Virtual Illegal Immigrant

Most outrageously, the Santa Fe New Mexican actually concocted stories that Martinez's great grandfather was an illegal immigrant. We are not making this up. Their stupid story, in turn, created national stories and headlines. Their false story was later debunked when real reporters for real news outlets, and real editors, actually did the leg work to investigate—the kind of reporting requirements that never even occurred to the New Mexican. 

But why did the New Mexican do that in the first place? Because the paper itself has its own agenda, and near the top of the list was its support for driver's licenses for illegal immigrants. Susana was pushing to repeal that extremely stupid law, and it offended the New Mexican. Thus the motivation for making up their story. 

Scrutiny for Grisham?

Is there any scrutiny of anything supported by Grisham? No. Because the paper supports all of her agenda, no matter how hare-brained it may be.

Grisham says that there is no crisis at all at the border (something we heard verbatim when we interviewed a number of Democrat and independent lawyers recently—it's funny how people say the exact same things they hear on TV, but we digress).

Even Obama Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson says there is an enormous crisis at the border.

So Grisham pulls the National Guard from the border. But does any New Mexico media person ever approach Grisham and ask if she still stands by her position? Even after very far Left Democrats have done so? No. They don't.

The Double Standard in Many Reporters.

We Don't Want to pick on Steve Terrell—There are a Number of Others, but You Should Know some Things

As an aside, Steve Terrell, who wrote the "explanation" column, is the same reporter whose son was working for the Democrat candidate's campaign to defeat former Republican State Representative Conrad James…a campaign Terrell and the New Mexican were covering.

Terrell didn’t even disclose that obvious conflict until after the election—and AFTER all of the grossly negative stories about Republican Conrad James that the Santa Fe paper chose to write about an Albuquerque legislative race—stories and headlines that most conveniently showed up in Democrat attack mail against Conrad James. How did that happen?

We are sure the New Mexican would argue that it was "just a coincidence." No way a father was working to create attack mail for a son. Nope. Nothing to see here. (Also, did anyone wonder why there was little or zero coverage of any other Albuquerque races in the Santa Fe paper?  

(Here we go again with the New Mexican—it's no wonder why the New Mexican and the notorious Lefty/Bolshie "free" supermarket giveaway paper, the Santa Fe Reporter, are just farm teams for each others' "reporters." They both editorialize all of their stories, and there is zero separation between the editorial page and the "news" coverage. But we digress.) 

THE DOUBLE STANDARD

In any case, the existence of this double-standard is no surprise to us, and probably no surprise to most of our readers. We could write a column like this virtually every week. But what we still find stunning is how reporters and editors continue to claim that they are fair and unbiased.

The first step is admitting the problem. Until then, the press will continue to lose public trust and readership. And they will continue to have more polls come out that they’ll need to dismiss: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/trust-in-media-hits-bottom-60-percent-say-sources-pay-for-stories

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

It’s astonishing to watch members of the New Mexico press media bemoan their dying circulation and complain about how unfair it is that the public increasingly sees them as biased and inaccurate.

The first concern is understandable—and we sympathize. These are tough, changing times for print media. And we recognize the need for solid, fair newspapers’ existence. They play an important role.

However, the second complaint is baffling.  It’s as if they lack any self-awareness at all. Last week provided some incredible examples of the bias and double-standard that exists in the New Mexico press corps.

COMPARISON of the COVERAGE OF UNM UNDER MARTINEZ AND GRISHAM

We pointed out last week how the President of the UNM Board of Regents conceded in a public hearing that Governor Grisham had called and had pushed him to support a massive student tuition increase at UNM. The coverage of the role of Governor Grisham chatting up the regents was buried deep in an Albuquerque Journal article about the meeting. And it was treated as a ho-hum nothing burger. 

But hold on, that’s not how they covered the Martinez administration. If there was ever any hint that Martinez called any Regent, it was a scandal extraordinaire! The ensuing coverage was so breathlessly over-the-top that readers could have been forgiven if they assumed such actions were illegal—and that Martinez should have been brought up on charges!

But fast forward to Grisham. Not only did the New Mexico media give Governor Grisham a pass last week, in a move that stretches credulity to the breaking point, the Albuquerque Journal actually wrote a front-page story yesterday that once again trashed the Martinez administration for being too involved at UNM.