In a bizarre email dialog with Sen. Jack Harper-R, the LD4 pol dodged direct questions regarding an alleged contribution request (right) from the Senator’s office involving American Traffic Solutions, Hawkings /EZ Messenger process serving, as well as Taser International.
Here’s how the email tag went:
CameraFRAUD to Harper #1:
Recent allegations have been made regarding you accepting campaign contributions from American Traffic Solutions, an automated ticketing and tolling provider, as well as their primary process server company. Do you oppose all forms of automated ticketing (red light camera or
speed camera / photo enforcement)? If you oppose automated ticketing, why did you request or accept
contributions from ATS? Are you willing to return any and all donations received from ATS?
Harper then responds in a three-part email, ignoring all of the simple and direct questions we asked.
Harper to CameraFRAUD #1:
I do not remember getting a contribution from them. Was it an individual?
Harper to CameraFRAUD #2:
They never gave anything. I voted to repeal Photo Radar in Senate Finance. Burns never put Andy Biggs’ bill up for a floor vote in the Senate. I opposephoto radar.
Harper to CameraFRAUD #3:
I think you should go back and check with Andy Biggs. I offered the strike-everything amendment in Finance to repeal photo radar. You’ll notice that Mike Williams does not support me because I oppose photo radar. I am indifferent to red-light cameras. If the Republican PC’s take a position against it at the convention, like they did against photo radar, that will mean something to me. Stick with your friends, Camera Fraud.
Stick with “[your] friends, Camera Fraud”? What the hell is that supposed to mean? So we asked:
CameraFRAUD to Harper #2:
Thank you for your rapid response. I believe the point of contention was it appears you made a request to a consulting firm for them to attempt to raise money or supplies from the specified companies on your behalf (Taser, ATS, Hawkins / EZ Messenger Process Serving). Can you confirm whether or not the request was made, or if it has, has such a request been cancelled or unfulfilled?
Then came this random, entirely irrelevant comment from Harper:
Harper to CameraFRAUD #4:
Actually, Taser is the only one of those companies that I had knowledge of what they do AND support their position. I support tort reform for manufacturers and they agree with me on that issue.
Dodging the questions again, and throwing his support behind “Taser” and their “position…” whatever that may be. And “tort reform for manufacturers” usually means corporate amnesty against potentially justified lawsuits, but that’s for a different blog.
So we presented the questions again:
CameraFRAUD to Harper #3:
With all due respect, you avoided the pertinent questions:
“I believe the point of contention was it appears you made a request to a consulting firm for them to attempt to raise money or supplies from the specified companies on your behalf (Taser, ATS, Hawkins / EZ Messenger Process Serving). Can you confirm whether or not the request was made, or if it has, has such a request been cancelled or unfulfilled?“In addition, [we] didn’t understand your closing comment (“Stick with your friends, Camera Fraud”). Tone of voice is hard to determine by email, but that came across vaguely threatening. Please tell me I’m wrong.