Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
>> WE'RE BACK AT THE LINE TABLE WITH OUR FINAL TOPIC.
IN SANTA FE THIS WEEK, FORMER STATE SENATOR PHIL
GRIEGO PLEADED NOT GUILTY IN COURT TO TEN CRIMINAL COUNTS
OF CORRUPTION, INCLUDING FRAUD AND BRIBERY.
THE DAY AFTER JUDGE SARA SINGLETON RELEASED
MR. GRIEGO WITHOUT BOND, SHE WAS REMOVED FROM THE CASE BY
GRIEGO'S ATTORNEY UNDER PROVISIONS DESIGNED TO
ENSURE IMPARTIALITY. JUDGE DAVID THOMPSON BECAME
THE 8th JUDGE TO PRESIDE OVER THIS CASE THAT ACCUSES
MR. GRIEGO OF CORRUPTION OVER THE SALE OF A
STATE-OWNED BUILDING TO A PRIVATE BUYER.
JANICE ARNOLD JONES, WERE YOU SURPRISED, MY FIRST
QUESTION, WERE YOU SURPRISED BY THE NOT GUILTY PLEA?
DID THAT SURPRISE YOU AT ALL?
>> IT DIDN'T SURPRISE ME. I THINK IT MAY BE DIFFICULT
TO DEFEND. I THINK ANYBODY IN THIS
SITUATION REASONABLY SHOULD PLEAD NOT GUILTY, BECAUSE
THESE ARE SERIOUS CHARGES. >> TEN OF THEM, TOO, TO
BOOT, EXACTLY. RUSSELL, WE CAN ALL THINK
BACK TO THE TIME WHEN HE RESIGNED.
I MEAN, EVERYTHING IS SORT OF ROLLING AGAINST HIM AT
THIS POINT. BUT I AGREE WITH JANICE,
YOU'VE GOT TO PLEAD NOT GUILTY AND DO YOUR THING
WITH YOUR ATTORNEY. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, PEOPLE
ARE KIND OF OUT FOR BEAR NOW ON CORRUPTION AND
TRANSPARENCY. >> RIGHT.
THE SENATE REJECTED ANOTHER ETHICS BILL, AND WEEKS AFTER
WE HAD ANOTHER PUBLIC OFFICIAL FACE PRISON TIME.
THIS IS GOING TO COME UP AGAIN AND AGAIN, AND UNTIL
WE GET ETHICS REFORM AND EVERYBODY IS ON THE SAME
PAGE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS.
AND THE ARGUMENT THE LAWMAKERS ARE SAYING IS, WE
DON'T WANT A WITCH HUNT. WELL, I'M SORRY, IT'S OVER.
IT'S TIME WE GET AN ETHICS COMMISSION HERE, AND I THINK
WE'RE GOING TO HOLD PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE.
NOW, IT'S GREAT FOR US. I LOVE GETTING POLITICIANS
INVOLVED IN CORRUPTION STORIES.
IT'S A GREAT STORY, AND IT'S GREAT FOR MY BUSINESS.
BUT IN TERMS OF OUR GOVERNMENT AND THE PUSH FOR
TRANSPARENCY, I THINK THIS HIGHLIGHTS A CASE WHERE WE
NEED ALL THIS REFORM. BECAUSE REMEMBER WHEN PHIL
RESIGNED, WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT HE WAS RESIGNING FOR.
IT WAS ALL OF A SUDDEN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SESSION.
WE HAD SO MANY QUESTIONS. AND NOW WE'RE FINALLY
GETTING THOSE QUESTIONS ANSWERED MORE A YEAR LATER,
I THINK THAT'S A PROBLEM. >> MARSHA, AGAIN, NO ONE IS
EXPECTING THE MAN TO FALL ON HIS SWORD JUST TO MAKE US
ALL FEEL BETTER OUT HERE. HE HAS TO DO HIS OWN THING.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT SEEMS TO ME SOMEONE IS GOING
TO BE MADE AN EXAMPLE OF AT SOME POINT, TO RUSSELL'S
POINT. DO YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN?
SOMEONE IS LOOKING FOR REVENGE HERE STATEWIDE.
NOT AGAINST MR. GRIEGO PERSONALLY, BUT JUST AS A
POLITICIAN, HE'S IN A TOUGH SPOT NOW.
>> I THINK THAT EVERYTHING IS IN THE HANDS OF THE
JUSTICE SYSTEM NOW, AND WE HAVE TO ALLOW THAT TO TAKE
ITS COURSE. BUT WHAT I THINK THAT THIS
ALSO HIGHLIGHTS FOR US, AND YOU POINTED THIS OUT VERY
CLEARLY WHEN WE STARTED THIS DISCUSSION, IS THAT WE HAVE
ALL OF THESE JUDGES RECUSING THEMSELVES.
WHY IS THAT HAPPENING? AND IT LOOKS -- WHAT HAS
HAPPENED IN THE PAST IS THAT WE KEEP TREATING OUR
JUDICIAL SYSTEM LIKE ANOTHER STATE AGENCY.
THAT'S HOW THEY'RE BEING FUNDED.
BUT THEY'RE NOT A STATE AGENCY.
THEY'RE A THIRD BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT.
AND WE'RE GOING TO KEEP HAVING MORE JUDGES AND MORE
JUDGES HAVING TO RECUSE THEMSELVES FROM CASES LIKE
THIS, OR IF WE SEE THIS AGAIN IN THE FUTURE, OTHER
THINGS LIKE THIS, BECAUSE THEY ARE OUT THERE EVERY
YEAR TRYING TO GET FUNDING FOR THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM.
AND WE'VE HAD A DISCUSSION AT THIS TABLE ABOUT HOW
DESPERATELY OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM NEEDS TO BE FULLY
FUNDED. SO I THINK THAT THIS IS ALSO
AN OPPORTUNITY FOR LAWMAKERS, FOR CHANGE MAKERS
TO COME TO THE TABLE AND START STRATEGIZING ON, IS
THERE A DIFFERENT WAY FOR US TO FUND OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM.
IN REGARDS TO MR. GRIEGO, OR FORMER SENATOR GRIEGO, HIS
FATE IS IN THE HANDS OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND WE'VE
GOT TO LET THAT TAKE ITS COURSE.
>> PART OF THAT, TOM, THAT MARSHA MENTIONS IS THE NEXUS
BETWEEN THE AG'S OFFICE, AND HE AND HIS STAFF ARE LOOKING
FOR INFORMATION FROM THE LFC AND THE LEGISLATURE ABOUT
SOME COMMITTEE HEARINGS AND MEETINGS AND THINGS THAT
MR. GRIEGO HAD IN THAT RUN UP TO THAT SITUATION.
BUT OUR LEGISLATURE, I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT THIS TOO,
JANICE, AS WELL, BUT THEY'RE PULLING BACK A LITTLE BIT
AND SAYING, LOOK, WE'RE NOT AN ARM OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
HERE, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE ANOTHER ROUTE HERE.
WHAT IS YOUR SENSE OF THAT? >> ACTUALLY, I THINK THAT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL SERVICES HAS SAID, NO, WE'RE NOT
GOING TO TURN IT OVER, AND I THINK THAT THEY'RE IN THE
RIGHT ON THIS. THERE'S A LOT OF WHAT I
WOULD CONSIDER TO BE PRIVILEGED CONVERSATIONS
THAT TAKE PLACE WHEN A SENATOR IS DEVELOPING
LEGISLATION, OR A REPRESENTATIVE, OR WHEN
SOMEBODY IS DOING SOME RESEARCH, AND I THINK THAT
THERE IS A CERTAIN AMOUNT, YOU KNOW, THAT IS COVERED BY
THAT. YOU KNOW, WHETHER OR NOT IT
WOULD PROBABLY GO TO ANOTHER JUDGE WHO WILL DECIDE IT,
MORE RECUSALS -- AND BY THE WAY, THE RECUSALS ARE NOT A
BAD THING. IT SHOWS THAT THE SYSTEM IS
WORKING. THE JUDICIARY IS, YOU KNOW,
UNDER THE SAME KIND OF ETHICS AND CORRUPTION
CLAIMS, IN DIFFERENT CIRCLES, AND THE FACT THAT
WE'RE SEEING SO MANY JUDGES, IT'S A LITTLE UNFORTUNATE,
BUT I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT THAT AS A GOOD THING.
>> INTERESTING. THANKS FOR THE CORRECTION ON
COUNCIL SERVICES RATHER THAN LFC THERE.
YOUR THOUGHT ON THIS, SHOULD THE AG'S OFFICE BE ASKING
FOR THIS INFORMATION? OR MAYBE NOT SHOULD, BUT
SHOULD IT BE GIVEN TO HIM, IS PROBABLY THE BETTER
QUESTION. >> I THINK THE AG CAN ASK
ALL THEY WANT. I AGREE WITH TOM THAT IN
TERMS OF WRITING LEGISLATION AND WORKING THROUGH
PROBLEMS, THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS THAT IT SHOULD BE
PRIVILEGED, AND I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT SOMEONE IN THE
COUNCIL SERVICE PROBABLY SAID TO PHIL, YOU NEED TO BE
CAREFUL HERE, THERE'S A THIN LINE.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND YOU EVERY SESSION, EVERY
LEGISLATOR RAISES THEIR HAND AND SAYS, I WILL NOT USE MY
OFFICE FOR PERSONAL GAIN. I PROMISE THAT.
AND TAKING A WALK ON A VOTE -- IF YOU HAVE A
LEGISLATOR WHO'S TAKING A WALK, I SINCERELY SUGGEST
THAT YOU DON'T VOTE FOR THEM AGAIN, BECAUSE THE PROPER
COURSE HERE IS TO HAVE STOOD ON THE SENATE FLOOR AND
SAID, I HAVE A CONFLICT THAT I MAY GAIN PERSONALLY FROM
THIS AND I ASK TO BE EXCUSED FROM THE VOTE.
THEN IT'S OUT IN PUBLIC. BUT HE DIDN'T DO THAT.
>> VERY GOOD POINT. RUSSELL, WHAT DO YOU THINK?
>> AND IT COMES AT A TIME, AGAIN, WHEN WE DIDN'T PASS
THIS ETHICS REFORM. EVEN IF THEY HAVE THE LEGAL
RIGHT TO KEEP THIS INFORMATION, AT THE SAME
TIME AS THERE'S RESISTANCE TO ETHICS REFORM DOESN'T
REFLECT WELL ON THEM. I THINK WHAT THE PUBLIC IS
ASKING FOR IS, BASICALLY, WHAT MY WIFE WOULD SAY.
CAN I SEE YOUR CELLPHONE TO SEE IF YOU HAVE THE TINDER
APP ON IT, LET ME SEE YOUR TEXT MESSAGES.
IF YOU'VE GOT NOTHING TO HIDE, SHOW THE CELLPHONE,
AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE PUBLIC IS ASKING FOR NOW.
>> WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS. AGAIN, NOT TO PICK ON
MR. GRIEGO, CERTAINLY, BUT THE TIMING OF THIS IS
DIFFICULT, I THINK, FOR HIM. IT'S GOING TO BE A TOUGH
SLOUGH TO GET THROUGH. WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS.
THAT'S ALL THE TIME WE HAVE. JOIN US ONLINE FOR A
DISCUSSION WITH THIS GROUP ON THE STANDARDIZED TESTING
THAT BEGINS THIS WEAK FOR STUDENTS.
>> I'M GENE GRANT. THANKS FOR JOINING US THIS
WEEK FOR NEW MEXICO InFOCUS.
AND AS ALWAYS, WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND EFFORT TO STAY
INFORMED AND ENGAGED. WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT WEEK
InFOCUS. FUNDING FOR NEW MEXICO
InFOCUS PROVIDED BY THE MCCUNE CHARITABLE
FOUNDATION, AND THE NELITTA E. WALKER FUND FOR
KNME-TV, THE KNME-TV ENDOWMENT FUND, AND VIEWERS
LIKE YOU.