Constantin Querard's Taxpayer-Paid Bootlickers David Gowan, Steve Montenegro, Carl Seel, Steve Smith, and Kelly Townsend Do Their Master's Bidding

The bill also places restrictions on warrants for financial information to be used in criminal cases, once again giving the suspect a heads up that he or she is a target of an investigation. Though with a warrant, the target would have to be notified within 90 days.

With either a warrant or a subpoena, a financial institution would not be allowed to release a customer's records until the government agency involved "certifies in writing that it has complied with this article."

By which time, any scam artist worth his salt would be taking a sun bath poolside in Puerto Vallarta, sucking back margaritas by the bucketful.

Which explains why the Arizona Attorney General's Office has objected to the bill in the past, as has the Arizona Department of Public Safety and the Arizona Corporation Commission.

Also, the Arizona Department of Economic Security seems worried that the bill, as is, could hamper DES' ability to chase down money owed by deadbeat dads.

Shamelessly, Querard admitted that his bill will cause various government agencies headaches.

"I have no doubt that if you pass this bill, it will at some level make prosecution a little more difficult," he told the committee.

But this is about Querard and his needs. Screw law enforcement.

See, Querard has been trying to get this bill through a committee for years as a response to a scandal he endured from 2004-2006 when the Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission, the AG's Office, and attorney Tom Ryan, representing then Maricopa County Republican Chairman Tom Liddy, exposed Querard's shenanigans for all the world to see.

In front of the committee, Querard was fairly open about his reasons for wanting this bill to become law, describing that bygone investigation into his activities as "a fishing trip through my business," one that made "600 pages of my personal life" subject to public-records requests.

Querard portrayed himself as a victim, but the scandal was wholly of his own making. After all, despite his conservative pretensions, Querard is overly fond of milking the public tit in the form of Clean Elections cash, which, like all gub'mint handouts, comes with strings attached.

Naturally, Clean Elections and the AG's Office are obligated to investigate allegations of wrongdoing. And Querard exposed himself to an inquiry when in 2004 he used a mailer that looked like it came from the county GOP in order to obtain thousands of responses for early ballot requests.

Reportedly, Querard sold the data he mined from those returned mailers to his clients. County GOP chair Liddy accused Querard of "money laundering." Querard sued for defamation, opening himself up to further scrutiny.

"I'm the one that subpoenaed [Querard's] records first," Ryan told me when I called for a comment. "I subpoenaed the records as part of the underlying claim when he sued Liddy.

"I said, 'Fine, truth is an absolute defense [to a libel claim]. Let's take a look at [Querard's] bank records.' Then I turned them over to Clean Elections."

Ultimately, Querard lost his defamation suit, big-time, and the local press revealed Querard for what he is, a veritable font of slime.

Or, in other words, a successful political consultant.

Republican legislator and CQ puppet Colette Rosati was revealed to be a major ditz. CQ told her what committee assignments to seek, who to back for speaker, and whether or not she should send out Christmas cards.

Rosati even admitted to giving Querard a blank check once. An AG investigator found that she had sent Querard lump sums of cash without disclosing what the cash was for.

Clean Elections dinged her for $20,000, lowered the fine to $5,000 and finally allowed her to pay $2,500.

Another of CQ's candidates, Representative David Burnell Smith, was forced to resign because of Clean Elections violations.

Despite all this fertile ground to plow, the AG's Office under Terry "Do Nothing" Goddard, produced zero indictments.

Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help

I support bills that restrict the ability of the government OR private entities from going on fishing expeditions via subpoenas.  I'm pleased with any bill that gives overbearing government agencies "headaches" as well.  It should be difficult to subpoena bank records, ISP records and anything else.  Being given sufficient time to hire counsel to quash an abusive subpoena is a good thing.  Your bank records aren't going anywhere and con artists don't run off the Mexico, they just move to Florida and it isn't like our attorney general goes after con artists in the first place.

That the bill comes from a slime ball like Connie doesn't make it bad.

Just ask the Phoenix New Times what it is like to receive an abusive, fishing expedition subpoena.  Thankfully they had the time and money to oppose it.  That a New Times author would now suggest that people on the receiving end of a subpoena must be con artists or deadbeat dads is ironic.


Isn't this a conflict of interest? You vote for a bill that specifically benefits the person who you paid to get you elected? This stinks to high heaven. Great reporting!

david_saint01 topcommenter

anyone approving this bill is screaming to get recalled. This just sounds like they want to be able to screw the tax payers, and get away with it..typical. Tea party, oh tea party..where are you now??? 



It doesn't specifically benefit anyone.  Connie's issue with subpoenas was in the past.

Do you know what it would take for me to get your bank records, payroll records, list of every website you've visited and numbers of every person you called?  I only need to file a bogus lawsuit making some bogus allegation and follow it up with a subpoena to your bank, your ISP, your employer and your phone provider.  Guess what, they won't oppose the subpoena, they may not even notify you that they received a subpoena and instead just hand all that info over.  If you want to stop those subpoenas you have to file a motion with the court to quash those subpoenas and unless you are smarter than most people you'll have to hire an attorney to do so and before all those people fork over the requested information.

A subpoena is a government enforced demand for information.  People who believe that it should be HARDER, not easier to gain access to other people's private information support bills like this one.  Those who naively believe that only con artists and deadbeat dads receive subpoenas might support it, out of ignorance.



A voter initiative to put some teeth in election laws is needed, not opposition to a law that makes it more difficult for someone to subpoena your bank records.

dennis20 topcommenter

@marcy @Truth_To_Power This bill will change none of what you are talking about.  The civil liberty spin they first tried putting on it was so shallow they even let it go as a talking point. The bill is designed to help sleaze-balls like CQ get around campaign finance laws. 

Now Trending

From the Vault