RenziGate Roundup 3/5

Dick made his initial appearance before Federal Magistrate Judge
Valasco in Tucson on Tuesday and pled ‘Not Guilty’ to all 35 charges. Mug shots and fingerprints were taken at the U.S. Marshall’s office, and Dick was released on his own recognizance. Trial is set
for  April 29th and Dick’s attorney, Mr. Weingarten, said the defense was "not going to drag our feet." Dick says, "I have a lot of faith in my attorneys, I’ll be OK." Glad to hear you’re keeping your chin up, Dick.

Turns out that the FBI spent 26,000 man-hours on this case. You think they just chasing their tails and wasting precious investigatory resources? I don’t.

AZ Republic journalist Bob Robb analyzes RenziGate on Horizon:

John Shadegg won’t call for Dick Renzi’s resignation because system should be allowed to work and a special election would be expensive (not to mention disadvantageous for his party’s candidates). Shaddegg claims to be "offended that there are members of Congress on the other side who
are currently being tried on criminal charges, and they not only have
not resigned from Congress, but they continue to serve on their
committees." He’s referring to Congressman Jefferson of Louisianna. I, too, am offended by Rep. Jefferson’s continuing presence in the House. I assume that Shadegg is equally offended by any Representative under indictment not resigning, regardless of party, so Renzi’s continuing presence in the House must also offend him. Duly noted. Hey, Dick, John Shadegg is offended that you haven’t resigned.

Rep. Tom Cole (R – OK), head of the NRCC, refused to call for Dick’s resignation, deciding to take a much less hard line than Minority Leader Boehner. Cole invoked the suddenly-sacred Presumption of innocence, behind which a multitude of sins are concealed. Cole, in a moment of unaccustomed frankness, told The Hill, "I don’t tell people that they ought to resign, and I wouldn’t share that kind of discussion, honestly, in a public venue anyway." It’s refreshing to see that Cole is honest about being dishonest in public venues… or maybe he is not being honest? Who can know?

Renzi and McCain are both taking heat from White Mountain and San Carlos Apaches on the federal land swap deal that is likely to land Renzi in jail. The Apaches characterize the land swap favoring the Resolution Mine as “a display of profound disrespect for a cherished feature of the
Apache’s original homeland as well as a serious violation of our Apache
traditional, historical and religious beliefs.” They allege the swap would enable the mine to bypass U.S. environmental and Native American cultural protection laws. Renzi is often touted as having cultivated excellent relationships with Native American nations and voters in his district. I guess not so much, any more.

In the "you can’t make this sort of thing up" category, one of Dick’s co-defendants, Andrew Beardall, who served as President and General Counsel of Dick’s insurance company and is accused of assisting Dick in embezzling $400K, has his own lawyer. His name is Lucius T. Outlaw III. No, I’m not kidding. Say it out loud. Wearing a pair of suspenders and handlebar mustache. It’s really fun.

My Take: Look for the proof in the polling. Dick’s date with destiny is April 29th, if his defense lawyers keep their word and don’t postpone the trial – I would be tempted to make odds on that, if betting on litigation weren’t illegal. A complex criminal trial beginning on April 29th means there is no realistic possibility of his being convicted prior to the May 4th deadline for a special election to be held. So, the real indicator for Dick’s continuing tenure in office will be the early polling in the district on his replacements.

If GOP candidates are seen to be losing ground in the polls between now and Dick’s trial, there will be a strong incentive for the GOP to cut bait and get a special election out of the way before their position erodes further. If the GOP candidates are holding their own, the incentive will be to await the general election and look for a McCain bump to hold the district for the GOP.

In any case the GOP is again doing what is best for the GOP and for Dick, not what’s best for the citizens of CD 1. They will bellyache about how much a special election will cost, but it is merely a drop in a bucket of red ink of their own making, and a wise investment in allowing the citizens of CD 1 an active voice in Congress. They really haven’t any excuse for their behavior and Dick’s other than their naked partisan hope to hold the district.

Doing what is best for CD 1 – holding a special election to give voters a crack at effective representation until November – certainly does tend to favor Democrats. Such a course recommends itself as being of primary benefit to the voters of CD 1, not just the partisan advantage of one party.

If the GOP is able to make any argument that not having a special election would be of advantage to CD 1 voters, I haven’t heard it. All I’ve heard is the specious and self-serving argument about the cost of a special election. Since when did the cost of democracy dictate how much of it we get? Maybe that’s the GOP’s new messaging strategy:

"The GOP: democracy, if you can afford it"