Social media missteps are plaguing candidates and political operatives as the Republican primary races enter their final stretch. Christine Jones, a candidate for governor, and Bill Montgomery, a supporter of Attorney General candidate Mark Brnovich are taking heat and coming under scrutiny for their social media missteps.
Christine Jones has been haunted by comments made on social media sites involving President Barack Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
As a result, a group calling itself Veterans for a Strong America, with the assistance of political consultant Sean Noble’s group; DC London, who is working with the Doug Ducey campaign, launched an attack ad campaign on Jones featuring footage from Clinton’s testimony before Congress, according to the Arizona Republic. The Arizona Republic reports that it’s not “the first time the group has worked with the political consulting firm co-founded by Sean Noble, dubbed by some as the “dark- money man” who has distributed tens of millions of dollars in anonymous donations..”
Dirty tricks by dark money doesn’t make much of an impression on the more informed primary voter, however Jones has also been haunted by Facebook posts that conservatives have found even more galling. According to the Sonoran Alliance and the National Review, which picked up the story, Jones told her Facebook friends to “get excited “and “find a way to support the new president of the United States of America.”
Facebook posts are now problematic for another political operative; Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery, who is supporting Attorney General candidate Mark Brnovich. Disappearing from the prosecutor’s Facebook page are items posted between March 16, 2014 and July 30, 2014.
Up until July 30, 2014, Montgomery had posted prolifically on behalf of Brnovich. Brnovich is facing Montgomery’s political enemy Tom Horne, the current conservative Arizona Attorney General, who is disliked by the chambers of commerce faction of the Republican Party, due in large part, for his work on behalf of Arizona consumers in the U.S Airways merger.
The pro-Brnovich posts were made after Montgomery announced that his office would investigate Horne for campaign finance violation complaints brought by former AG employee Sarah Beattie, who is rumored to be closely associated with pro-Brnovich political operatives.
To delete or not delete?
Jones, who has made questionable claims about being a prosecutor in California, is clearly is smart enough to know better than to hide the evidence of her missteps; opting instead to explain them away. She held a town hall and offered awkward explanations for her comments.
Montgomery however, as the lead prosecutor in the largest county in the state, should understand the seriousness of destroying or hiding evidence. The posts were clearly prima facie evidence that Montgomery was anything but objective in the matter.
In the last post on Montgomery’s Facebook, dated July 30, Montgomery writes a self-serving disavowal of scorched earth politics in which he has engaged. However, when challenged by “friends” about his apparent hypocrisy, Montgomery becomes judge and juror. He posts: “….I have had nothing to do with Horne-related matters since the first campaign finance investigation where he improperly coordinated….”
Yet, Tom Horne was found to have not improperly coordinated campaign efforts by an administrative judge after a four day hearing. Even when he is trying to claim clean hands, Montgomery throws mud.
Christine Jones, who had once had pretty good shot at the governor’s spot in the General Election before the Facebook posts became known, might now regret not removing her posts. Bill Montgomery, who once had considerable credibility has a straightforward and honest prosecutor, might now regret having removed his posts.
Social media is tricky, and must be measured in terms of its value as opposed to its potential costs if it goes awry and a misstep is made. For Jones and Montgomery, the value surely is not outweighed by the cost.
The potential cost to the public, in terms of its liberty interests, should a prosecutor openly use his office for political gain without consequence, is incalculable.