Contact
King to talk Friday about corruption cases
Gary King
Attorney General Gary King has invited members of the media to attend a Friday news conference at which he plans to talk about corruption cases.
The news conference will be held at 10 a.m. at King’s Albuquerque office. Because I’m in Las Cruces, I won’t be able to attend, but I’ll post an article directing you to others’ coverage of the news conference.
A news release says King will “address media representatives and respond to questions related to recent inquiries regarding the Vigil-Giron, Foy, Region III, and other cases.”
The news conference comes after a weekend editorial in which The Santa Fe New Mexican wrote that King has lately been “dragging his public trust to political depths previously unplumbed” with his handling of corruption cases and should consider “recusing himself from office.”
35 comments so far. Scroll down to submit your own comment.
Leave a response
You must be logged in to post a comment.
And we citizens are going to let this trip happen? Is he being paid while he is there?
“The Conference of Western Attorneys General, CWAG Chair New Mexico Attorney General Gary King and Hawaii Attorney General David Louie invite you to the 2011 CWAG Annual Meeting in Kona, Hawaii.” http://www.cwagweb.org/hawaii/index.html…July 10-13
The social agenda….http://www.cwagweb.org/hawaii/CWAG11_Social_Agenda.pdf
“Chair Initiative….Letter to Come” see: http://www.cwagweb.org/initiative.html
With unfinished business in New Mexico, delayed cases and the media and citizens demanding answers. Gary King’s Chair Initiative “Letter to Come” is the same as his answers for his prior actions. Still to Come.
This conference is enough to make a maggot puke.
This isn’t exactly a spin but it is definitely someone trying to change the topic and divert unwanted attention:
http://www.krqe.com/dpp/weather/wildfires/attorney-general-warns-of-wildfire-scam
Does the Attorney General really feel like this sort of scam is more important than criminal politicians not paying for their crimes? Yes, phone scams are horrific and wildfires are raging but really Gary King, is that all you got?
Spare us. I would rather be tricked by a phone solicitor than scammed (for four years) by another Republican President that you may be directly responsible for putting into Office. Please get with the program.
Qui Tam:
How is fact the same as “spin”? Spin would be something like the following: someone makes a claim that a papers that publish AP wire stories automatically mean that a story is being “picked up” on the “west coast and beyond”. You really are completely incapable of self-reflection, aren’t you?
JusticeP – I only sited one source but you are welcome. Next time I will just direct you to google where you can find more. IcarusPhoenix – I know who Susan Montoya Bryan is and I know how the AP works. Again your spin, this time condescending, did not work.
On a related topic, the former Governor of Illinois (Blago) was convicted today on several counts. One count for trying to sell a seat. It really is a big deal. AP is amazing in regard to keeping our country free and informed.
Karl Rove and the gang have started airing anti-Obama adds in New Mexico. Who knows what lies in store to that regard (and that is not a question). I believe Karl Rove got his start in the Nixon Administration and we all know how that Presidential tenure ended,
Qui Tam:
This is probably a good time to explain to you how the AP operates; Papers subscribe to the AP wire in order to fill the gaps in their statewide, national, and international coverage, and many of them automatically publish stories on their website that are from their own general region. Susan Montoya Bryan is an AP reporter who lives and works in Albuquerque.
…She’s one of the only AP reporters left in Albuquerque, mind you, but that’s a whole separate can-of-worms dealing with the decline of the AP and the generally poor way they’ve treated their reporters in the past several years.
Qui Tam:
Salt Lake City is hardly the West Coast and beyond.
Oh and JusticeP – it may interest you that it is “by Susan Montoya Bryan, Associated Press”.
“JusticeP
June 27, 2011 • 2:08 pm .Qui Tam:
Would you mind providing the source of the below information?”
Here is just one, there are more but this is from the same state Republican Presidential contender Huntsman is from:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700146908/New-Mexicos-top-prosecutor-defends-record.html
Qui Tam:
Would you mind providing the source of the below information?
June 27, 2011 • 11:28 am
After I made my 6:01 comment this morning, I learned that the King debacle(s) have already made news on the West Coast and parts beyond.
Qui Tam:
You are again assuming that an investigation will reveal actions that are illegal, rather than merely unethical, over which the US Attorney has no control. I ask again: if what you’ve already decided is true turns out not to be, what then?
NorthernPride:
I said approval ratings, not polling numbers. In a race where so many people actively voted split-ticket to give ten-point-margin wins to two Democrats and a Republican and twenty-point margins to two and one more, respectively, why are you cherry-picking the wrong numbers from only one race to try and make your point?
JusticeP:
First of all, I don’t know if your belief that the office holder was actually reviewing your statements was lacking in wisdom, per se; it seems more like a side-effect of an optimistic disposition, and in this field, there’s nothing wrong with that… so long as it is tempered by a certain pragmatism, of course.
As for the powers to appoint a special prosecutor, I shall have to reread that particular law, but, speaking from memory, I think the Vigil-Giron and Murphy cases are different animals, specifically in the matter of who has original jurisdiction. I’m fairly certain that since the case against Judge Murphy originated within the Third District, then-District Attorney Martinez was responsible legally and the Third District financially. Since the Vigil-Giron case originated at the state level, the Office of the Attorney General, having the legal responsibility, has to get the appropriation from the legislature. Whether DA Brandenburg has to do the same after the Joint-Powers agreement is in effect, I don’t know. The Murphy case, though, isn’t a state-level case, despite how high-profile it is – particularly to those of us who read this blog, so legislative appropriation isn’t a necessary step. I admit, my interpretation could be completely off base, but I’m fairly sure that’s what we’re looking at.
Certainly several members of the legislature have introduced bills to deal with public corruption (Senators Griego and Rue, to name just one example from each party), but they are frequently dead-aborning or die of neglect… and a lack of media attention. Corruption itself is a terribly sexy thing (from a media perspective) when it actually happens, but the legal minutia necessary to prevent it is far too dull for the cameras. The Attorney General, of course, is very much at fault for not going to the legislature and asking for more defined and expansive powers to tackle the issue. Auditor Balderas has done so many times (and been generally ignored), but to the best of my knowledge, the AG tends to ignore the legislature – a common failing among members of the Executive branch in any state.
As for myself, I haven’t been actively involved in a session in a couple of years (though, depending on which way the wind is blowing on redistricting, that may change with the upcoming special), and I never really got my hands into corruption issues or ethics legislation, preferring to concentrate on other things. I think, frankly, that I was demonstrating the same optimism (or, perhaps, lack of wisdom) as you were and always figured someone else would get to it. There are plenty of people in my job who feel the same way, and our lack of action from below doesn’t really speak any more to our credit than the lack of action from above by most elected officials. I also don’t doubt there are plenty of people who fervently hope that others won’t get to it.
As for examples, I shall start with the Medicaid fraud cases: There are several indictments made by the AG’s Medicaid Fraud and Elder Abuse Division against both individuals and companies. The largest one pending is against Counseling and Mediation Services, LLC, in Doña Ana county, who allegedly forged staff credentials to bill the Medicaid system. There is another investigation going on in cooperation with the US Attorney against our own Human Services Department; in this one, the internal inspector general’s office for the Medicaid system (known as the Medicaid Integrity Group) are claiming that HSD actively hindered the AG in his investigation of the earlier cases; there are further allegation by the AG that HSD’s obstruction cost taxpayers over $30 million. There’s also a case that was filed under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act in 2009 – which has since been taken over by the Department of Justice – alleging that a Tennessee company filed false claims on behalf of three New Mexico hospitals for extraneous Medicaid funds. I don’t know the status of that case.
Our human trafficking law is almost pathetically young, having only been passed in 2008 – though, in our defense, that still puts us ahead of nineteen other states, and really not that far behind most of the other thirty. It’s rather surprising how genuinely new an issue “human trafficking” is (speaking of hopeless optimism…). The AG’s office did work quite hard to get this passed – thus proving that they can indeed work with the legislature and raising the question of why they don’t do so more often. The bill became law later that year, and investigations commenced immediately. The first man convicted under the law was sentenced to three years this past April. The law also came up this week when the “Southwest Connections” ring was broken up.
DWI is, or course, something of a tricky issue in our state. Anytime you have a situation like ours – a large, mostly-rural state with a high rate of alcoholism – you’re going to have a DWI problem. As much as the cities have done an adequate job of alternative forms of transportation to alleviate the problem, it’s not within the cities that we’re having the worst problems, and as long as you have several reservations where alcohol sales are mostly illegal but alcohol abuse and a genetic-predisposition to alcoholism are common, you’re going to have a problem of people driving into cities and towns, getting drunk, and then getting on the highway to get home. The current AG’s office does have a higher conviction rate than any of their predecessors – in part due to the alleviation of the workload that an extra prosecutor brings – but that is, admittedly, damning him with faint praise, and this is another political no-win situation; there will always be failures when the problem is this bad, and every failure is worth more than dozens of successes. Indeed, one of the disadvantages to higher office is you can get blamed for the failures of people more local than you and over whom you have little-to-no statutory control (in this case, District Attorneys), but because you don’t control them, you don’t get any credit for their successes. It’s a regrettable Catch-22. (Also, I have to check, but I think the new DWI prosecutor may be one of the women who are suing him for pay-discrimination). My personal opinion is that the solution to our DWI problem isn’t going to be found in the purview of the Attorney General and the courts; we’re not going to really make inroads into curbing the problem until we come up with effective treatment and prevention programs.
From a strictly-electoral standpoint, I have to look at the failings of Gary King from a dispassionate (and frankly somewhat classically-Machiavellian) position. The self-created tarnishing of his reputation is both a potential advantage and disadvantage to the party. If Governor Martinez’s approval ratings three years from now are as anywhere near as good as Governor Richardson’s were five years ago, then the Attorney General’s recurrent desire to run for governor is an absolute advantage to the party; if she’s going to win anyway, he becomes the Democratic Party’s sacrificial lamb candidate, but he’s high-profile enough so that it doesn’t appear that they’re throwing the race. If, however, the Governor appears beatable, then the Democratic Party still has to find a candidate, and then that candidate has to make it through a primary in which they will almost certainly be running against Gary King.
After I made my 6:01 comment this morning, I learned that the King debacle(s) have already made news on the West Coast and parts beyond.
Attorney General King your resignation may save the Party and the White House. Time is of the essence.
Icarus Phoenix:
Communication is a skill that cannot be overstated. My thoughts in a forum like this saying what you mean is more than choosing your words and stating them. You must balance what you mean with the words the reader thinks you mean. You are dealing with the reader’s various levels of skill and experience with the topic discussed. It is up to you to choose the language that conveys the message and the meaning. Sometimes using language that makes the listener work to understand what’s being said is not the best policy. However, I enjoy with much satisfaction and learning in looking up the words you use that I do not know their meaning or checking what I think a word means to understand why you applied the word. You should not be accused of passive aggressive communication. Your use of descriptive words and examples clarify you messages quite well.
I for one like to remove the Republican/Democrat political implications in addressing a solution. That may be a short fall of mine but truth is truth regardless of the party affiliation.
I personally have encountered issues relating to Bill Richardson, Gary King and Gov. Martinez (when she was a district attorney). I have said in this forum and others my discontent with the actions of the above as it related to me personally. What I have come to realize in the last few weeks are my comments in my assertions about them directly may be misplaced. The factual allegations should have been directed to the office of each party, not the party themselves. My perception that certified mail, emails or regular letters where reviewed and the substance entertained by the office holder is probably lacking in wisdom. It does not negate a wrong was done by personnel in the office, but it does not say the office holder is aware of it with an opportunity to address the issue. My assertions that the top party of the office did not address the issue were more than likely misplaced.
The general public and many that write in this and other forums do not comprehend the difference between illegal and unethical. They see it as one and the same. Both are wrong. One is criminal in nature and the other civil. Criminal has no immunity and the civil most generally has immunity. The general public finds it difficult to understand why a prosecutor will not bring charges against a public official for the same kind of conduct they prosecute the general public for. As any CEO knows, the supporting staff determines how the public views the company or agency. Notwithstanding Gary King’s ego–his selection of staff and some of the state’s lawyers are not leading to a good perception of his office. More than likely those selections will lead to his further downfall. Although the evident King ego in pushing the staff lawyers aside in the Bullcoming v. New Mexico cause so King could grandstand before the United States Supreme Court, the Supreme Court made the right constitutional decision. Further their decision addressed questions to the integrity of some of the state’s prosecution methods in which Mr. King is responsible for his prosecutors. In my opinion Mr. King’s presentation was lacking in knowledge of law and/or procedures. A sad reflection on New Mexico’s Attorney General’s Office. You can listen to the oral argument before the Supreme Court by King. http://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2010/2010_09_10876.
However, there is an issue I would like to address and seek clarification on. (Vigil-Giron) “As he [King] pointed out, he can not directly appoint a special prosecutor without the go-ahead from the legislature.” and “Brandenburg said state law prohibits the Attorney General from appointing a special prosecutor, which is why a joint powers agreement with her office was necessary.” Is this statement saying ONLY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL must seek permission from the legislature? Did District Attorney Martinez have to seek permission from the legislature when she appointed Matt Chandler? Did Ms. Martinez obligate the Third Judicial District Office for the payments to the Judicial District of Matt Chandler in the Murphy cause? Do all special prosecutors have to be approved by the legislature and for appropriation of funds for the prosecution?
I also wonder why the Republicans and the Democrats have not introduced bills that will address public corruption directly. Also, why has King (or yourself) not introduced the same, as his office has authored many a bill for presentation to the legislature?
“…to multiple successful cases against abuse of funds of our Medicaid system and fraud against its recipients, the addition (and successes) of a new DWI prosecutor, convictions against human trafficking,…”. Some examples of these would be helpful to me, please.
As to the other issues you respectfully addressed, I perceive your dissatisfaction in the way they are being handled or were handled. I think this is honorable from a person addressing their opinions of shortcomings of someone in their own party. I perceive this as a person wanting change to be effectively apparent.
Again, I thank you for your response and hope it helped others as much as it helped me.
Really? My question is did you pay attention to the race at all? Chandler joined the AG race in Feb. 2011 and had less than 20% name id to over 95% by King. Kings poll #’s never had him below 50% (2 ABQ Journal polls & his own poll) and he won with 53% of the vote not 55%. And yes, I did see the #’s in southern and eastern NM. Chandler was dealing with a candidate who has far reaching ties across the entire state. King has been in politics over 30 years!!
I am not sure at what point the race was Chandlers to lose, but I know darn well King felt it at the end. Why else would you release an op-ed stating that he guessed that the public wanted him to do more with corruption. It amazes me how there are so many people who call themselves “political consultants” or “strategists” now a days.
Given the US Attorney for New Mexico is a Democrat it will be interesting to see if NM Attorney General Gary King is indicted after all the facts are investigated and learned. If not, look for New Mexico’s corruption problem to hit the national stage during the Presidential race in 2012. I believe New Mexico and it’s unprosecuted corruption may hand the White House back to the Republicans. (gee thanks New Mexico)
NorthernPride:
Take a look at the returns from southern and eastern New Mexico, where Chandler should have done far better than he did simply by virtue of not being a Democrat. Also, you should consider this; A fifty-five percent win for an Attorney General whose approval ratings were in the mid-forties at the time? That’s not just people voting for the incumbent. If ten percent of voters ticked the box next to the guy they actively disapproved of, it’s a pretty good bet that they’re voting against the other guy. Admittedly, I’m over-simplifying matters, but that election was Matt Chandler’s to lose, and lose it he did.
IcarusPhoenix:
I will respond to your very professional reply tomorrow. Thank you for stating what I sincerely believe your perception of the history of each issue. I believe your have stated what you believe should of been.
Thank you and looking forward to more exchanges in communication.
Qui Tam:
I’d like someone with a demonstrated history of reasoned and mature debate to make that assessment – like, perhaps, JusticeP, the person whose question I was answering. I’m not really going to eliminate statements of fact and compromise my principles to suit the neediness of someone who has apparently decided to follow me around pretending to be clever – and, for that matter, who obviously didn’t actually read what I wrote; If you think that constituted “spin”, you are once again using terms of which you have no clear understanding.
On a related note, since you seem so intent on obsessing over every little thing that I write – and that you don’t understand – and since you seem to do so by misusing the same rather limited set of words ad infinitum, then I think it only fair to point out that the sentence, “Try again,” is known as an imperative sentence; another word for this would be a “directive”.
Icarus Phoenix said, “Also, I would point out that part of the reason he was reelected was less because of the voters’ perception of his abilities and more due to his opponent’s almost comical inability to disguise the fact that he intended to use the office to systematically destroy the Republican Party’s political enemies, and not to enforce the actual laws of New Mexico.”
As a democratic political strategist that is the best you could come up with? King was the incumbent in a predominantly democratic state, he is the son of a former governor and he “was” also being looked at as a possible 2014 governor candidate. This is what pulled King across the finish line. Chandler had less than 15% name id when the race started. Your comments confirm the fact that all democratic leader were very afraid that Chandler would win that race and start cleaning up the cesspool of corruption running rampant in our state.
We live in a state that is riddled with corruption from the city level up to the state level and it is because our democratic leaders feel that anyone who wants to look into corruption is “witch hunting” and anytime someone talks about ridding our state of the corruption it is comical. Its a shame that in 2014 corruption is still going to be the main topic of the AG race. All due to the incompetent AG we have in office now.
IcarusPhoenix – that spin in response to JusticeP didn’t work. Try again.
JusticeP:
Here is the promised response. First of all, I noticed I failed to answer to a question in your earlier comment; I specialize in communications (which is why I always appear to be trying my hardest not to break into metaphorical hysterical laughter every time someone harps on semantics). I am not a lawyer, but I have to take great care in my job to understand both the laws and their political implications, and I have (successfully) lobbied for more than one law currently on the books.
As for the Attorney General’s actions, I present you with the following (which, it turns out, was a reply to NorthernPride rather than AstuteObserver). I have edited and updated it from the original to include both more recent developments and (to make it more relevant to the question-at-hand) a little bit of political analysis (in italics).
-Former Governor Richardson: No investigation anywhere (of the many that have been performed at the constant insistence of state Republicans and utilizing a great deal of taxpayer money) has ever managed to indicate that he did anything illegal. The AG’s office lacks the authority to prosecute “unethical”.
-More than any other issue, this is the one that has done the most amount of preventable damage to Gary King’s reputation. Frankly, he could have cut the damage in half by saying exactly what I wrote above. Instead, he became distant, bombastic, and allowed Phil Sisneros to respond to the Republicans in a manner that really does come across as ignoring concerns about the matter rather than addressing them.
-Former Secretary of State Vigil-Giron (and associates): Have been indicted after a Federal audit and a lengthy investigation by the AG’s office.
-Since I originally wrote the above statement, this has become a case-study in Gary King’s ego. Rather than immediately turning the matter over to someone else to handle, he decided to waste a great deal of time analyzing the vagaries of his Constitutional authority, which is, admittedly a bit unclear in situations like this (making the AG both defense to the Executive branch and prosecutor of public corruption cases, but not defining when those two conflict and whether he should recuse himself in such a situation). Trying to maintain a hold over a case against someone who you used to defend was never going to look good, and it was stupid of him to try, both legally and politically.
Additionally, this was the one thing of actual substance he addressed in Friday’s press conference. As he pointed out, he can not directly appoint a special prosecutor without the go-ahead from the legislature. If the Republicans (and the Democrats, for that matter, but they’re not the ones alleging intransigence) are so concerned about public corruption, why have they introduced zero bills to do just that? Of course, the Attorney General waited until a press conference that was otherwise completely devoid of substance to make this argument, and then only as a generally-ignored drop-in. He should have made it over two years ago and hammered it home repeatedly until it sunk in, rather than trying to maintain an iron hold over a case that he should never have been dealing with in the first place.
-Former Secretary of State Herrera: Is still being investigated, in an investigation that the AG quite willingly made public during an election… hardly a “for the good of the party” move there. Come to think of it, refusing to do the same thing to Democrats in 2006 is something that the members of the GOP fired David Iglesias for.
-Another situation that has done little to improve the Attorney General’s reputation simply by virtue of its existence, and another example of complete failure to exploit a situation to his benefit. He could have easily turned this into a win and a demonstration of his offices’ dedication to weeding out public corruption simply by conducting a more comprehensive investigation in full-view of the public, rather than obfuscating at every turn, an instinct he really needs to learn how to resist.
-Former PRC Commissioners Jerome Block, Sr. and Jerome Block, Jr.: Both indicted in mid-April of 2009, trial on hold; after several charges were eliminated by a judge, the Attorney General filed an appeal to have the charges reinstated.
-This one is both a no-win situation and (thankfully for the AG’s office) a fairly low-profile one. The delay is judicial in nature, and not the fault of the AG’s office, but there’s really no way to win this politically, since by the time you’re done explaining it, the citizens have moved on in their mind to something – anything – far more important – though he could have at least tried to win this one by pointing to the appeal to reinstate all charges as an example of “dedication”. As usual, the opportunity was wasted.
-Former Housing Authority Director, Region III Vincent Gallegos: Indicted in mid-2009 for money laundering, fraud, and embezzlement.
-And that was that last time that case moved at all, and the Attorney General has been generally unwilling to discuss the matter more.
-Former Las Vegas schools employee Roberta Vigil: Convicted for misuse of public funds.
-Which is well below the radar of public interest, to say nothing of being several years old.
This is all in addition to multiple successful cases against abuse of funds of our Medicaid system and fraud against its recipients, the addition (and successes) of a new DWI prosecutor, convictions against human trafficking, and the successful halting of the White Peaks land swap for clear violations of public auction laws (the only case involving a Republican elected official).
Of course, it is also in addition to constant very public feuds with Auditor Balderas – who has the advantage of being right, both in the eyes of the law and the eyes of the voters – obvious violations of public records laws that he is theoretically supposed to be upholding, and a decade-and-a-half old issue of obvious gender discrimination in pay that, rather than fixing (something that would have been easy), he dismissed as “unimportant”, and is now suprised that the office is being sued for it.)
Ultimately, I think Gary King’s biggest problem is that he wants so badly to be his father, he forgot that the best way to do that was to actually emulate him.
JusticeP:
I am going to be busy much of today, but if I get a moment, I’ve already got an itemized list somewhere that answers that very question (an old response here, actually, I think to AstuteObserver, though it will need to be updated and I wish to make it more comprehensive). If you don’t see it today, expect it tomorrow morning.
Icarus Phoenix:
As “a professional Democratic political strategist”, your expertise excels in which definition of activity, may I ask? I read that you have addressed the herein from a political standpoint, but I see the legal one as void. For clarification purposes would you mind stating with particularity all requisite actual evidentiary fact(s) that the overwhelming majority of the criticisms leveled at Attorney General King are unfair, unsubstantiated and/or politically-motivated, and precisely include the criticisms that are substantially and materially false? In addition, please provide in detail what and how King has done more to weed out corruption than his predecessors and the results of those actions.
As always I respect your views posted in this blog. I do not always agree, but that is okay. I gain perspective from others allowing me to double check my points of view. For this reason I am asking the above questions. I hope you don’t mind the responding as I am sure others will enjoy it also.
IP, once again your expert views and insights are correct about King and his handlers wrt PR and image, in my opinion anyway. I would also add it appears Dr. King, being a rich and priviledged scion of a political dynasty type family, has not had to put much effort and work into his jobs and life, that shows. I also would say his resume around legal issues and the law is very thin for an AG, he has never prosecuted anything in court for instance. Overall, a very weak sister to be going after corruption and crimes as the state’s top prosecutor, and thus having to rely on his underlings and appointees, where as you pointed out, he seems to lack good judgement in personnel selections.
ClearYourMind:
I have made many of the same defenses of the Attorney General made in the blog you linked to and more. However, I am also a professional Democratic political strategist, and am thus forced to look at this from a political standpoint as well as a legal one. Are the overwhelming majority of the criticisms leveled at the Attorney General unfair, unsubstantiated, and politically-motivated? Of course. Has the Attorney General done more to weed out corruption than any of his predecessors, focusing almost exclusively on his own party? Yes. But is AG King’s ability to handle his own image and reputation remarkably inept? The answer is also a resounding “yes”. As for Phil Sisneros, the fact that the Attorney General even hired – and continues to employ – a man whose handling of the media has been amateurish at best is merely a further demonstration of the Attorney General’s disrespect for the press and by extension the people of New Mexico (though this latter disrespect is, in my opinion, entirely unintentional).
Also, I would point out that part of the reason he was reelected was less because of the voters’ perception of his abilities and more due to his opponent’s almost comical inability to disguise the fact that he intended to use the office to systematically destroy the Republican Party’s political enemies, and not to enforce the actual laws of New Mexico.
That “PRESS CONFERENCE” was a JOKE. Blah, Blah, Blah. I think King should take his role as an “acting” prosecutor and try out for the teacher in Charlie Brown.
Well you may not like it but the people of NM believe in Gary King and that is why he has the job. That is how our voting system works. I am sure that whatever he says is already publicly available and will not effect the outcome of the case. The Mallot thing, give me a break, it’s just some paper filing and was closed years ago. Even if they reopen it, and they wont, it’s like a $50 fine. There was no crime and Mallot agrees. I am sorry but villainizing our public officials is not the answer. Maybe we will get some real facts to research at: http://nmago.blogspot.com/
Alright, I take it back. It seems that no one actually bothered to even ask him about the Malott signature issue, even when Malott’s name came up in a related matter.
(Full disclosure; I have not yet watched the whole conference, so it’s possible I missed the question, but as it stands now, I don’t think anyone actually asked… does anyone have better information on this?)
Justin:
Personally, I’m going to assume the answer to both questions is “yes” – assuming you meant the phrase “pleading the fifth” metaphorically, of course. The excuse used will either be “executive privilege” (improbable), or, “It was an ‘oversight’ beyond our control” (very likely).
Will the media ask AG King about signing Bruce Malott’s signature, without his knowledge or permission, in his US Congress treasurer reports as reported by the Abq. Journal? Will he plead the 5th from the podium?
JusticeP – because Fridays are news dump days?
Justice P:
Because that’s the definition of a press conference?
Why only members of the media?
So let me get this straight. The man who chastised former AG candidate Matt Chandler for talking about King’s corruption cases because it would “compromise” them is now going to spill his guts on these same cases?
In my opinion, the biggest mistake voters made last year was to not vote in a proven prosecutor who has the experience in obtaining “convictions” in corruption cases and who does not hang his hat on “indictments”. I can’t wait to hear what excuses Mr. King has this time. It always seems to be someone elses fault.
Will his next news conference be one in which he resigns?