« Well, you can add extortion to your list of abuses | Main | I'll Be on Square Off This Sunday at 8:00 AM on Channel 12. »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I have known Andy Kunasek for nearly 10 years and I have always found him to be a dedicated and trustworthy public official. Frankly, our country would be much better off if there were more Andy Kunaseks willing to serve the public. As a person who used to work in county government, the contents of his letter do not surprise me in the least. The tactics used by certain county officials are reminisent of Huey Long's Louisiana in the 1930s. I hope circumstances will change come election day. Thank you Andy for your service to Maricopa County.

WOW! I bet dollars to donuts that Thomas is indicted days after the primary.

There's no way anyone is going to let this guy become the AG. If he loses the primary, it may come a bit slower. If he wins the primary, the Democrats have the ultimate silver bullet and he will be charged with crimes.

I only hope Rotellini wins the primary for the Dems so there's a solid choice. All the other Dems are pathetic, especially Loony Lujan.

Abuse of governmental authority tears the very fiber of our nation. It deserves a life sentence.

A neat Law and Order type story, but there are a couple holes in the plot. Thomas had either resigned or was about to when this "free talk" happened. Obviously, Kunasek did not give in to the political pressure he says he felt from Aubuchon, who unlike Thomas maybe wanted to keep her job. But in the end Thomas resigned and Romley was appointed by the supervisors. Why would Thomas resign if he knew his exit plan was going to fail?

Seems to me the story is about the investigators negotiating and trying to get one of the supervisors to become an informant. Not sure I would call that extortion. Also for extortion to exist Kunasek has to believe the threat is credible, and he clearly doesn't, which is why he called Aubuchon's bluff.

In order to run for AG, Thomas was required to resign by law.

... and just because the extortion teerms are a failure, doesn't mean it wasn't attempted.

I can't wait to see who Thomas tries to sue after he loses the election. His campaign is already claiming last-minute attacks by the Repulsive.

There's a recording of this? Wow. If this is true (and I REALLY hope it is) he'll be indicted without question.

I bet they will even extend to him a courtesy that he never extended his own victims: due process, a presentation of actual evidence, etc...

Hopefully you don't misunderstand what I'm about to say, because you obviously have trouble understanding what you are reading. Thomas' plan, according to the letter, was to seek an indictment of the supervisor in order to delay the appointment of a new county attorney if it wasn't the person he wanted to be appointed. It was not a "bluff," as you called it. Thomas went after him just as he promised. Obviously the threat is credible. Next time you feel the inclination to comment, read what the other person said a couple times. Read it out loud if you need to. Then, read your response out loud. Finally, highlight your entire comment and press delete.

Concernicus, I see your intent here and appreciate your irony. We have a couple levels of heresay. Kunaksek in the letter is telling us what Aubuchon said. Not Thomas. Aubuchon. (see, I'm reading it out loud as you suggested). He's speculating, or Aubuchon is, or both are, about Thomas' plan, if there really is one. My take, feel free to disagree, is that it makes no sense for that to be Thomas' plan, if he has a plan at all. He's resigning at that point to run for AG. If he really wanted to control the prosecution, he'd stay. You can't have it both ways. It just doesn't fit.

So Aubuchon attempted to extort Kunasek, even though she knew that the attempted extortion would be recorded, and that the recording would belong to Kunasek?

I call bull****.

I mean, really--that's so implausible on its face, I have to wonder if I'm misunderstanding something. If I am, please explain to me where I have gone wrong.


You're right, a rational person would understand you can't have it both ways. There is little evidence, however, that Andy thomas has been a rational man the last couple of years. His twin objectives were becoming AG (even though he would have to resign from his county post), while still controlling the investigations at the county level by preventing Romley from taking his position. All his actions were perfectly consistent with those objectives. Occam's Razor tells us that in most cases, the simplest explanation is the most likely.

Special Agent Johnny Utah
I believe you are overlooking the role of hubris.

Read the only page of the transcript that Kunasek gave the New Times and show me how Thomas is guilty of anything. Since Greg said Arpaio and Thomas would be indicted months ago I think he is just mad he is so very wrong. He objectivity with Arpaio and Thomas is nonexistent.

This is last minute political bull**** being pulled by Kunasek to sway votes...otherwise he would have brought this up a long time ago when it happened...give me a break. I will be glad when all the present Board of Supervisors are gone along with their crooked management.

Had this been only a political move, perhaps a better time to do it would have been right before early balloting. By now, it's pretty much too late to really have an effect on the election.
@Comment: I think Thomas believed that he could have it both ways. I think he thought that he could be AG and have his pick of his replacement at the County Attorney's office. So, if there was no plan, I just have one final question. With no evidence whatsoever (evidenced by the fact that the grand jury dropped the case), why go after Kunasek at all? What was the motive for that move?

Concernicus, mock it all you want but there are principles (invoked by Kunasek and Thomas alike) at stake here. Justice and public confidence and all that. Leaving aside your personal interpretation of the grand jury process and the evidence (or lack of, as you say), you equate a prosecutor with a person who would "go after" someone as if it's some kind of personal motivation for revenge. You may not believe it, but you have to accept the possibility that Thomas is actually right and has been all along.

You asked me for Thomas' motivation, and I'd say it's justice. Take all the time you need to work through the law and the facts, but you can't question the premise of his actions. Oh, wait. Unless you think he's completely insane. That's the alternative. I'd say it's not corruption, not Narcissism, not ego, not power-hunger, not a decadent attraction to mischief or disruption. He's either insane or he's not.

I'll take insane for $500.

There's probably more evidence for Thomas' insanity than Kunasek's corruption.

The comments to this entry are closed.