Attorney General Gary King (Photo by Heath Haussamen)
The Albuquerque Journal joined the criticism of Attorney General Gary King this weekend, calling his record “woefully inadequate” and questioning whether he has “the commitment and drive to actually deliver some results.”
The impetus for the newspaper’s editorial was the recent discovery by The Santa Fe New Mexican that, in spite of a prior statement from the AG’s office, an embezzlement investigation focused in part on the live-in girlfriend of a former Albuquerque mayor has been ongoing for more than three years.
King’s office initially said the office had received information about the alleged crime “several months ago,” but The New Mexican obtained records that proved otherwise.
King’s response to The New Mexican:
“I guess I do have to do a personal mea culpa to everybody that thinks that several months ago apparently means like three months ago or something like that,” King said. “I think it was meant to be indeterminate.”
But:
“I don’t think ‘several months’ was particularly descriptive of how long we’ve had the case,” King said. “But I don’t think it was a lie, either. Several months is not a good description based on human experience of how much several months is, but basically it was trying to be a way to say that we can’t make a specific comment on any particular case that is under investigation.”
The Journal called the situation “an absolutely surreal exercise in dissembling” and called King’s explanation “astonishing.” From the editorial:
“His ‘folks’ also haven’t tried to prosecute the case criminally — four years in. And that should prompt New Mexicans to ask what else have they gotten from this attorney general.”
King has long faced criticism
Of course, the criticism of King isn’t new. Last year, The Santa Fe New Mexican suggested that he should consider resigning. Here’s how I summed up King’s woes in ranking the criticism of him as the ninth biggest political story in New Mexico in 2011:
“Attorney General Gary King had one of the worst years of any elected official in New Mexico in 2011. The criticism was widespread (and included me), and it covered a range of issues including allegations that his office was “ineffective” in dealing with cop discipline cases, that it trailed those responsible for Medicaid fraud recovery in almost all other states, that he thumbed his nose at campaign contribution limits, that he gave Jerome Block Jr. an overly lenient plea deal, that he was playing fast and loose with Southern New Mexico’s water, that he declined to investigate bribery allegations against a state official the feds later indicted, that his office violated the Inspection of Public Records Act, and that he had a serious conflict with a corruption case his office was prosecuting.
“King has long faced criticism for his handling of corruption cases, but the condemnation of the job he’s doing was deafening in 2011. The Santa Fe New Mexican said King should consider resigning. I slammed King after he attempted to damage my credibility and intimidate me into silence by suggesting that I colluded with Republicans to deflect criticism away from the governor and onto him.
“If King doesn’t change some things, the criticism will continue.”
Journal adds to list of grievances
The Journal had its own list of grievances against King, and here’s what it added that wasn’t on my list:
“ • No criminal charges in the alleged pay-to-play practices involving state investments that have cost taxpayers millions — despite civil lawsuits laying the groundwork for criminal conduct. (Though in this case, King could reasonably point across the street to federal inaction as a mitigating factor.)
“ • A three-year dragging prosecution of former Secretary of State Rebecca Vigil-Giron and others in connection with millions in federal taxpayer cash that’s been unaccounted for since the 2004 and 2006 elections. Vigil-Giron and her co-defendants have yet to get their day in court; taxpayers have yet to get any answers to where their money went.
“ • A 16-month investigation into whether a State Investment Council contract that started out at $30,000 but ballooned over six amended versions to $5.1 million should have been put out to bid, as it exceeded the $50,000 threshold. The decision — yes — came after taxpayers had already paid the bill.
“ • …Six years of violating federal law by submitting federal campaign finance reports with the signature of a political committee treasurer (pay-to-play civil defendant and former Educational Retirement Board Chairman Bruce Malott) who left soon after King’s 2004 race for Congress failed.”
The Journal concluded that King’s list of positive accomplishments is “woefully short.” Read the full editorial here.