Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne has attracted national headlines recently with his spirited appearance in litigation defending the “sanctity of marriage” by blocking basic benefits for same-sex couples. That defense however may be more theoretical for the top state lawyer. Horne was reportedly being followed by the FBI investigating alleged campaign finance violations. The agents say that they watched as Horne struck another car causing $1000 damage to avoid disclosure of an affair with his passenger. The passenger has been identified in news accounts as Carmen Chenal, who works for Horne.
Chenal is the former state superintendent of education and is paid $108,000 in working for Horne in handling foreign extraditions. Chenal has been described as a suspended lawyers with a history including “DUI charge pleaded down to reckless driving, a bankruptcy, and a history of mental and physical issues.” She has been suspended as a lawyer for four months and ordered to pay $2,500 in restitution to a client. She was later placed on probation for two years by the bar.
Horne was allegedly driving a borrowed vehicle and ran into a white Range Rover in the parking garage of a Phoenix apartment complex. According to reports, Chenal left the Attorney General’s Office that day in a Volkswagen she’d borrowed from fellow employee Linnea Heap. Five minutes later, Horne left in his own gold Jaguar and met Chenal in a parking garage. He switched cars and left with Chenal “wearing a baseball hat,” according to the FBI. When they could not get into the entrance of the apartment garage, the agents say that Horne “attempted to back up to exit the parking structure and hit the front passenger side of a white Range Rover with the rear passenger side of the Passat.” They then entered the resident entrance gate.
Horne was not exactly helped by statements from Amy Rezonnico, AG Public Information Officer: “It was a Monday morning. He came in and he looked like a ghost and he, um, um, I asked him what was the matter. I said why did you do that and um, he didn’t really have any good answer other than they looked and that there was they couldn’t see any damage.” That was the AG’s own public relations person.
Horne insists that he did not realize that he caused any damage — though he acknowledged that it caused damage to his car. He further denies that claim by FBI agent Brian Grehoski that he didn’t leave a note for the other driver in order to conceal an extramarital affair. He insists that a grand is nothing for him and he would have simply paid for the damage.
Horne has gone on the attack and asked why he was being followed and surveilled.
There is considerable doubt raised by Horne over the estimate for a little paint and scratches. Here is a statement published from Horne:
The FBI report states: “Montano [the owner of the other vehicle] advised that he was unaware that his vehicle had been hit by another vehicle until FBI Agent Grehoski called him to arrange for the interview. Montano advised that the black mark on the front passenger side of the bumper came from when his son was parking the vehicle in the garage.” The incident may have caused no damage to that vehicle. At worst, pictures show nothing but some scratched paint. “Hit and Run” is a misleading image for, at worst, paint scratches with no dents.
If I had been aware there was damage, I would have left contact information. The parking area is the main parking area for people who have lunch at Pita Jungle and other restaurants in the immediate area. Leaving contact information for a paint scratch in that area would have been irrelevant to whether there was a passenger or not, and the FBI agent’s speculations are without basis.
No one has explained why FBI Agents, investigating whether there were alleged campaign finance violations in 2010, were surveilling me in 2012.
That could very well be true, but the scratches might not seem as pressing a question for a family values politicians than the alleged affair with an employee with greater detail.
In August, Horne filed a lawsuit with the U.S. Supreme Court to defend the ability of the state to repeal the domestic partners insurance for state employees. Stripping these couples of basic protections in his view “furthers the State’s interest in promoting marriage.”
Indeed, he could add that such benefits do not even scratch the surface of the controversy.
Source: AZ Star
Bon appetit, whatever you are eating. And what is your recipes for toll house cookies? I asked that before.~Id
—————————————
I rarely do Toll house cookies anymore but when I did I would use the Nestle chip recipe on the pkg.
Oatmeal Cookies:
Ingredients
2 handfulls walnuts, chopped
1 cup smashed heathbars or other toffee chips
cranberries also work in this…in fact I throw any tasties in that are around….
2 sticks butter, at room temperature
1 cup packed brown sugar
1/2 cup granulated sugar
1 teaspoon vanilla extract
2 eggs
1 1/2 cups unbleached all-purpose flour
1 teaspoon baking soda
1 teaspoon ground cinnamon
1 teaspoon salt
2 cups old-fashion rolled oats, uncooked
—-
350degrees….12 mins or so…..eat 2-3 and hide the rest….. 😉
PatricParamedic
1, November 2, 2012 at 2:15 pm
—————————————–
I think I am not wrong in my description of the general publics take on horsemeat.
Those of extreme priviledge, rank or cultural liason will have different experiences than most. I am not a vegetarian but I would most certainly never eat a horse. Indians may have eaten horses but they did not raise them in an inhumane fashion in order to eat them. And most Indians hold horses to be an honored animal and unless fallen from the mores of their tribes would thank an animal for it’s life before eating it…Anything raised free range serves more than 1 purpose and is allowed a decent existance….
http://www.firstpeople.us/FP-Html-Legends/TheAlligatorandtheHunter-Choctaw.html
I still have a rather detailed memory of the Nixon years. Compared to those days, I don’t see anything about this story that I would describe as “Nixonian.” Kharma yes. Nixon no.
Woosty said:
“Horsemeat is a relatively recent phenom in this Country . . .”
Well, Woo, I’d say that depends on your definition of “recent.”
The Harvard University Faculty dining hall had horse meat on the menu up until 1985. George Bush dined on it more than once, I’m told. So did John Kennedy, and countless others of our fearless leaders.
And long, long before these fine fellows, horse meat was a major stable of numerous mild-mannered Native Americans. Both the Apache’s & the Comanches thought it was particularly keen to steal the settlers’ ponies, chop them up and cook them.
Woosty,
I like, partially, the last comment.
Do you think I threw out the horsemeat not aware of the flap it might cause. It is still in my fridge and am still wondering if I will get it past my basic prejudices and eat it.
But having cast the gauntlet that in fact is deeply engaged in the hypocrisy of raising to eat—whatever it is: bears or beets…, then I will pursue that line.
Raising animals as pets is essentially a self-serving task peculiar to humans. Using them as tools—ditto.
The same can be said for vegetables, etc all life forms. But that is what we do.
We ragulate these activities, ill or well, to be “humane” as we define it.
Is farm raising fish more morally despicable than catching them. Some would say it is more moral, as it does not destroy the ocean as a viable mileue as fishing does.
Now you are free to hold what opinions you wish. Most of them I find them pleasant as I have expressed before.
But I had hoped for a rational discussion on the dilemmas encountered by the need to feed ourselves. And our other uses of animals. Note well, the word animal has the root of animus, ie spirit. We all share that.
But rational discussion here is very seldom encountered. The general activity here is to find someone to attack or at least oppose—not seek someone to discuss rationally with. (And I have not forgotten my behaviour a long while after entering this forum…..or even now for that matter.
When attacking is the only game offered, how do you start a discussion?
I think I’ll give my horsefilet to the neighbor’s dog and make an omelette with my wild mushrooms instead.
Bon appetit, whatever you are eating. And what is your recipes for toll house cookies? I asked that before.
You did not comment the use of horsemeat to feed carnivorous pets. I presume you approve such use. ???
——————————–
I don’t approve of ‘raising’ anything JUST for meat. Nor do I approve of the disgustingly inhumane standards of care that an industry of that ilk fosters….
You illy become yourself now. Is this a new hatred of me or an old one which I have not noticed?!id
————————————
I don’t hate you Ideo….I don’t even know you….but I do hate that you eat horses….for whatever your reasons….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wo-3x2khwZ0
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wo-3x2khwZ0&w=560&h=315%5D
idealist707
1, November 2, 2012 at 5:03 am
Woosty,
Why thank you. That was one of the nicest things said to me yesterday.
While I love horses for their beauty, I realize that the horses who end up as meat (for cats and humans) are the culls who can not be kept as they will not develop the racing qualities desired.
…..
—————————————-
Horsemeat is a relatively recent phenom in this Country probably related more to the cultural soup and the taste of immigrants…or a need for greed…..that horses are seen only as ‘racing’ animals or ‘healthy’ meat is tantamount to the similar display of ignorance by those who believe that bear pancreas cures cancer or that rhino horns will raise a flaccid stang…. or that cock fighting is ‘sport’…
There are those who possess understanding and admiration beyond that base falsehood….
http://www.historynet.com/patton-rescues-the-lipizzaner-stallions.htm