Connect with us

Arizona

How an Arizona school’s response to a perceived gun threat upended a 12-year-old’s life

Published

on

How an Arizona school’s response to a perceived gun threat upended a 12-year-old’s life


Geighe Garcia arrived at his elementary school in Winslow on a Friday last April to what he described as a flood of police cars. 

“It was just flooded with police officer cars,” said Geighe, 13. “Just flooded all the way around.”

Alarmed, he turned around and walked home.

Advertisement

“I was like, ‘Hell no, dude, there must have been something really bad that’s gone on,’” Geighe said. “I was scared. I thought somebody got shot or something.” 

But when he got home and told his mom what happened — “I don’t know what’s going on; there’s cop cars all around the school,” he recalled saying — she repeated what she’d tried to tell him earlier that morning as he’d rushed out the door. 

“‘Someone said that you were gonna shoot the school, Geighe,’” he recalled her saying.

That was April 14, 2023. In the year that followed, Geighe’s life was turned upside down.

The threat Geighe was accused of making — by kids he said were bullying him — was not found credible. Still, he was excluded from months of in-person learning, including his first semester of middle school.

Advertisement

His experience offers a window into the pressure schools are under to take a hard line on perceived threats of gun violence — and the impact schools’ reactions can have on students. 

Student’s dream about school shooting leads to real-life accusations

On April 13, the principal of Geighe’s school called the Winslow Police Department after a parent reported that Geighe had threatened to shoot students and staff. 

After receiving the call from the principal of Washington Elementary about 6:30 p.m., the police department sent officers to Geighe’s house to speak with him and his mom, Consuelo Garcia. Geighe denied making threats against anyone and “stated he was talking about video games,” according to the police report. 

Advertisement

Consuelo said she didn’t get the impression the police visit was serious.

“The officers were so nonchalant about it,” she said.

Consuelo told the officers they didn’t have firearms, and the officers didn’t ask to search the house for weapons, she said.

Consuelo and Geighe, she said, just spoke to officers outside, “and that was it.”

“They had asked what happened earlier, if there was an incident earlier at school, and we were both like, ‘No, nothing happened,’” Consuelo said. An officer then told them that there were concerns that Geighe had made a statement that he was going to harm teachers, to which Geighe responded that he didn’t say anything like that, Consuelo recalled. 

Advertisement

The next day — the day of the flood of police cars outside the school  — officers went to Washington Elementary to speak with three students who said Geighe had made the threats. 

According to the police report, several of Geighe’s schoolmates had been discussing a dream that one of them had about a shooting in their school. The student who had the dream indicated that the shooter looked like Geighe but didn’t say his name. At the time, they were coming in from recess. 

Geighe, who had been standing nearby, then approached them and named a student and a teacher who would be first on his list if he were to shoot up the school, three students separately told officers from the Winslow Police Department. According to the police report, one of the students said they laughed it off at the time but “were weirded out.” 

Guns at school: A boy bringing an assault rifle to high school shook this Phoenix district into action

The parent who reported the incident told police that she did not want Geighe to “get into any trouble” but rather thought he “needed some kind of help.” When asked if she wanted to pursue charges, she declined. 

Advertisement

Geighe, who was 12 and in sixth grade at the time, denied making any of those comments. 

“I know it’s not funny at all to say that you’re going to shoot people,” Geighe said in an interview with The Arizona Republic. “It’s not cool at all.” 

When he found out the students said he made those comments, “it felt like someone just threw me into prison, right then and there,” he said. 

Principal recommends long-term suspension

Geighe was immediately given a nine-day out-of-school suspension and a thick packet of work to do at home. But he never completed it — he said it was work he had already done while he was at school, which frustrated him.

Advertisement

“I told myself … I’m not going to redo it because it makes no sense,” he said.

During the nine-day suspension, Geighe and Consuelo were informed that a hearing would take place to put Geighe on a long-term suspension for violating the district’s student conduct policy. 

The policy states that students “shall not engage in improper behavior,” then lists examples of improper behavior, which include “threat of harm to any person on District owned or controlled property” and “conduct or speech that violates commonly accepted standards of the District and that, under the circumstances, has no redeeming social value.” Any student that violates the policies “may be subject to discipline up to expulsion.”

That policy mirrors the model policy provided by the Arizona School Boards Association, which offers advice to districts across the state. 

The Washington Elementary principal recommended to the district’s superintendent that Geighe be given a 180-day suspension — the length of a full school year — citing eight previous write-ups during Geighe’s time in the district that were labeled as “aggression” and stating that long-term suspension was necessary because he had made a threat about students and staff, according to a copy of the letter provided by Consuelo. 

Advertisement

In the letter, the principal also noted that Geighe worked with a paraprofessional at school to help with his emotional issues and added that Geighe had made several statements that year about issues he had with students and family. 

According to a discipline summary provided by Consuelo, Geighe’s eight incidents labeled “aggression” were classified as minor aggressive acts. Each resulted in a detention, a warning or suspended privileges. All except one took place in 2018 or earlier, when Geighe was in kindergarten, first and second grade. The exception was at the beginning of fifth grade, more than a year and a half before the April incident.

Geighe acknowledged that he had disciplinary issues in the past, stemming from anger issues that came from problems at home and bullying at school, he said. He’d been working on it and thought things had been getting better: He had been attending counseling outside of school for about five years, and in fifth grade he started regularly volunteering at a nearby church packing food boxes. “I’m really glad I’ve changed,” he said. 

“I had … thoughts of what would happen if I kept going down this road,” Geighe said. “I told myself, ‘What would this do to mom?’ ‘What would dad say?’ What would grandma say?’” 

Advertisement

Consuelo said, “I think church had a lot to do with it, too.”  

The students who alleged Geighe named a student and teacher he would shoot had been consistently bullying him for two years, he said.

“It’s every day, constant,” Geighe said. “They’d pick on everybody, but mostly it’d be me because I have anger issues, and they just always want to get a reaction out of me.” 

“That’s why I usually stay around teachers,” Geighe said. “It’s just constant bullying and bullying. And then as soon as I do anything about it, then I get in trouble somehow.” 

He often visited the school’s paraprofessional when he needed to cool down. There, he could do schoolwork, use stress toys and work on calming techniques like counting to 10, he said.

Advertisement

“He keeps it kind of dark, but he puts on a light in front of you. He’s really nice about it. … It’s actually really cool,” Geighe said.

“It’s just like a place to escape,” he said. “He also does help you out a lot.”

‘Ill-advised comments’: Conclusions reached about alleged threat

Consuelo was told in a letter dated April 24 that she had the right to obtain legal representation for Geighe’s long-term suspension hearing, set for the morning of April 28. 

The letter requested Consuelo let the school know at least two working days before the hearing whether Geighe would be represented by counsel. “But I still don’t know where I was supposed to get it from,” Consuelo said. They went to the hearing without a legal advocate.

The hearing officer — who essentially plays the role of a judge  — acknowledged in his decision that Geighe, under oath, denied making any of the comments the students said he made, according to a copy of the hearing officer’s letter provided by Consuelo. He also acknowledged that Geighe merely joined a conversation already in progress about a school shooting dream rather than initiating it. 

Advertisement

But he determined that it was “more likely than not” that Geighe had made the comments because he thought it unlikely that the students would have given separate statements to the police officer that were “strikingly similar” if they were untrue. 

Still, the hearing officer wrote in his decision that what Geighe was alleged to have said was likely not a credible threat. 

He cited the police report — the officer “stated in his report that no charges would be filed against Geighe, presumably because there was not sufficient credible evidence of an actual threat,” he wrote.

“I would agree that it is more likely that Geighe might have made some ill-advised comments about the dream, rather than actually proposing a plan of his intent to harm others,” the hearing officer continued. 

Advertisement

But he recommended Geighe be suspended for the rest of the school year and for “a period of time less than through the remainder of the 2023-24 school year.”

The comments the other students alleged Geighe said were “inappropriate and resulted in student and parent unease, as well as a heightened police presence on campus after the incident,” he wrote. “This demonstrates the seriousness with which school administrators must view real or perceived threats made to or about others on campus.”

Due process for students ‘isn’t always clear,’ legal expert says

All students who face suspension from public schools across the country are entitled to due process, according to Diana Newmark, an associate clinical professor at the University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law. 

“But what that actually means isn’t always clear,” she said. State law usually provides more detailed information, but in Arizona, there are not many mandated requirements, she said.  

Arizona law requires school districts to provide notice and a hearing for any student suspended for more than 10 days and says that suspensions can only be imposed for “good cause.” But how and why suspensions are given out often depends on policies established by a school district’s governing board, Newmark said.

Advertisement

Newmark leads the Education Advocacy Clinic at the University of Arizona law school, which provides free counsel for students at suspension and expulsion hearings in the Tucson area. Usually, students in Arizona are allowed to be represented by counsel at disciplinary hearings, she said. But she said it can be difficult for families to find representation because of how quickly hearings happen.

“It’s really enormously difficult for families to find an attorney who’s available at short notice,” Newmark said. If they can find someone, it’s often hard for families to afford representation, she said.

School discipline hearings also are unlikely to have the hallmarks of due process that one might expect in a court of law. A hearing, for example, might be based entirely on hearsay, Newmark said.

“There might not actually be a witness to the events at the hearing who saw what happened or knew directly what happened,” she said. 

Advertisement

In her experience, schools in Arizona typically don’t identify who the witnesses are. “A student can’t challenge, necessarily … if they don’t even know who it is who’s making an accusation,” she said.

The hearing officer is also not necessarily a neutral party like a judge — they are often someone from within the school district, Newmark said. 

Winslow Unified officials said they do not comment on discipline of specific students, citing the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. But Jennifer Sanderlin, the administrative secretary to the superintendent and governing board, said the district takes alleged gun threats “extremely seriously.”

Once a principal is notified, officials begin an investigation and inform the superintendent, a school resource officer or the local police department, according to Sanderlin. Students, staff and other involved parties are interviewed, and the principal “makes a plan of next steps.” 

Washington Elementary’s 2023-24 student handbook states that for the first incident of harassment or threats — along with verbal abuse, ethnic slurs, bullying and slander — the minimum discipline can be a detention, while the maximum can be a recommendation of expulsion. Threats are defined in the handbook as a “statement of action which intimidates or indicates future injury to another person.” According to the handbook, “school threats” have a minimum discipline recommendation of a long-term suspension. 

Advertisement

Newmark said schools will sometimes impose suspensions for statements where there’s no intent to harm anyone. 

“The question is really whether something is a true threat,” she said. “Maybe it’s a child or a teenager blowing off steam,” making a bad joke or engaging in dark humor. 

Sometimes, she said, a school understands students aren’t making a real threat of harm but still disciplines them.

“Schools are going to take potential threats of violence seriously,” Newmark said. “They might respond with police presence or other security. And so, given this, schools might really be tempted to discipline a student who makes that kind of threatening statement even if there’s no actual intent to harm anyone.” 

‘Just so hurtful’: First semester of middle school lost to suspension

A couple of weeks after Geighe’s long-term suspension began, Consuelo enrolled him in an online school she saw an ad for on Facebook. She didn’t want him to fall behind, and the school district doesn’t give work to students on a long-term suspension, according to Sanderlin, the Winslow Unified administrative secretary. Alternative in-person options were slim: aside from Winslow Unified, which is the only public school district in the city, there’s one private Christian school.

Advertisement

But enrolling Geighe in online school broke Consuelo’s heart, she said. It made her sad to think about what he would lose as he missed the in-person transition to middle school: sports, extracurriculars, field days, spirit weeks, more engagement with his classmates and teachers. “That’s a big step up,” she said. 

“For this opportunity to be taken from him and to be left with a computer in front of him is just so hurtful,” Consuelo said. “It’s not like he can get that back.”

In October, she said it was a “struggle” to get Geighe out of bed in the morning to do his online schoolwork, whereas before, she would have no trouble waking him up for school. “There’s no more light in his eyes for school anymore at all,” she said. 

According to Newmark, a long-term suspension can affect a child in several ways, most immediately through lost learning opportunities and disengagement with the school community. There are also the pressures that having a child at home can have on parents and caregivers, she said. And research has consistently shown that “long-term suspensions and expulsions correlate with a host of negative life outcomes, like higher rates of incarceration and an overall lowered earning potential,” she said. 

Geighe said that online school was “not that bad.” It took up about 30 minutes of his day each day, and he spent his free time doing chores around the house, visiting his grandparents and playing basketball with his two closest friends at a nearby park after they got out of school.

Advertisement

But he said the online school was just giving him the basics. Consuelo agreed: “He’s really smart. I think he needs to be challenged,” she said. “He’s not challenged with this online at all.” 

And Geighe missed seeing teachers in person and having something to keep him busy. 

“I just like being there,” he said in October. 

The school district agreed that Geighe could return in early January, roughly nine months after being suspended. 

As the start date crept closer, Geighe was nervous. After all, he would be starting at an entirely new school halfway through the seventh grade. 

Advertisement

“The other kids, they got a head start from me because I didn’t go to the first day of school,” he said. “I don’t have the first day or the second day. I don’t know where the bathrooms are. I don’t know where anything is.”

He worried that he might be held back and anticipated being crowded by classmates with questions about where he was, which he planned to respond to with a joke about having been out of the country. 

Still, he said, he was going to try his best. And he was excited, too. “I just want to be inside the school,” he said. “I just like the new school feeling.” 

‘I really missed it’: Back in school after nearly nine months away

The first few months of middle school were hard for Geighe — homework, especially. “All the kids, they had a preview,” he said in early April. “They just threw me in.”

And it was hard to see the kids he had issues with before he was suspended. He avoided them, he said. “I just tell them, ‘Leave me alone,’ because I’m not trying to get in another situation like this again,” he said.

Advertisement

He missed a few days in March, which prompted a call from the school. He was exhausted and struggling to eat and sleep, but he didn’t really know why. “I was really out of it,” he said. “Stress, I guess.” 

But by April, Geighe started feeling excited to go to school again. Homework was still hard, but he became comfortable asking his teachers questions at school. He started waking up on time by himself. He began attending tutoring twice a week after school, and he started volunteering weekly at church again. His favorite subjects are now math and science — he likes being challenged, he said. 

“I really missed it,” he said. “I don’t want to wake up at 12 o’clock all over again, every single day, for forever.” 

Going to school “makes me feel really good,” he said. 

“I still have to make a 100% recovery, but — my best guess — I’m at 50% at this point,” he said. 

Advertisement

Reach the reporter at mparrish@arizonarepublic.com.



Source link

Arizona

Arizona’s ‘QAnon Shaman’ denounces ‘slush fund’ for Jan. 6 rioters

Published

on

Arizona’s ‘QAnon Shaman’ denounces ‘slush fund’ for Jan. 6 rioters


The Arizona man known as the “QAnon Shaman” said Wednesday that President Donald Trump’s new Anti-Weaponization Fund is an abuse of power by a would-be “king.”

Jacob Angeli-Chansley – the face of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot with his red, white and blue face paint and horned fur headdress – denounced the $1.776 billion program as a “slush fund” for Trump to reward his loyalists.

The Justice Department announced the fund on Monday as part of a settlement with Trump, who had sued the IRS for $10 billion over the leak of his tax returns. The settlement included an assurance that the IRS will drop all audits and claims for back taxes against Trump, his family and businesses.

“You think I’m gonna take a f—ing dime from Trump and the government after he’s using this thing to cover him and his family in perpetuity for all of their crimes?” he told Cronkite News by phone. “You think I’m gonna take a dime of that blood money?”

Advertisement

Trump pardoned more than 1,500 people who participated in the Jan. 6 riot the day he returned to the White House in January 2025. Many had been convicted of assaulting police officers.

Cronkite News reached out to 17 of those defendants with Arizona ties. None besides Angeli-Chansley responded.

Thirteen were convicted or pleaded guilty to crimes related to the attack. Four of the cases were dismissed after the pardon. The charges included assault on federal agents, physical violence at the Capitol and seditious conspiracy.

See our previous coverage of the Anti-Weaponization Fund and “QAnon Shaman” in the video player above.

Angeli-Chansley pleaded guilty to a charge of obstruction of an official proceeding. He served 27 months of a 41-month sentence. He was released from federal prison in March 2023.

Advertisement

During the riot, he carried an American flag fastened to a spear and used a bullhorn to call other rioters to the dais in the Senate chamber.

“He stated that ‘Mike Pence is a f—-ing traitor’ and wrote a note on available paper on the dais, stating, ‘It’s Only A Matter of Time. Justice Is Coming,’” according to prosecutors.

At a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing Tuesday, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche defended the compensation fund, saying it will be open to anyone victimized by a politically motivated prosecution, not just Jan. 6 defendants.

“It’s not limited to Republicans. … It’s not limited to the Biden weaponization. It’s not limited to, in any way scope or form, January 6 or to (targets of special counsel) Jack Smith. There’s no limitation on the claims,” Blanche said. 

He rejected Democrats’ assertions that the fund is a massive, taxpayer-funded attempt by Trump to whitewash the assault on democracy.

Advertisement

“I think it’s telling that everybody on the left and … the liberal side of the media immediately says it’s a slush fund for President Trump’s friends,” Blanche said. “If anything else, that’s an outright admission that they know that the people that really had this Department of Justice weaponized against them were President Trump and his friends. But … that is not what the AG order that I signed yesterday says.”

Blanche, who served as Trump’s private attorney in several cases – prosecutions over election interference and classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago and allegations of hush money paid to an adult actress ahead of the 2016 election – faced strong criticism from Senate Democrats.

“You are acting today like the president’s personal attorney and that’s the whole problem,” said Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, who also noted that a huge banner with Trump’s portrait was draped over the front of the Department of Justice building in February.

At a homeland security committee meeting Tuesday, Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego called for legislation barring establishment of a fund of the sort proposed by the Trump administration.

He called it outrageous to provide compensation to “traitors who attacked the Capitol.”

Advertisement

“No president, Republican or Democrat, should be able to use the federal treasury as a personal checkbook,” he said.

Angeli-Chansley now refers to himself as the “American Shaman.” He was heavily involved in the QAnon movement, which centered on a conspiracy theory that Trump was fighting a cabal of Satan worshippers who engage in child sex trafficking.

He was a strong MAGA supporter when the pro-Trump mob stormed the Capitol, interrupting congressional certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election.

Angeli-Chansley has since become disenchanted with Trump. He has also repudiated the QAnon movement.

In a rambling phone conversation with Cronkite News, he repeatedly cited Trump’s connections to Jeffrey Epstein, a wealthy financier and convicted sex offender who died in jail in 2019 while awaiting federal trial for trafficking young women and girls for sex.

Advertisement

He reiterated his anger with Trump for resisting the release of the Epstein files.

And he criticized Trump for attacking Iran and supporting Israel, among other things.

Angeli-Chansley sued Trump for $40 trillion in September 2025, asserting he is the true leader of the free world and vowing to use the sum to wipe out the national debt. The lawsuit was dismissed. He later filed a lawsuit against the CIA, FBI, World Bank and others in Maricopa County.

He urged fellow Jan. 6ers to “reject that … money.”

If courts allow the fund to operate, Angeli-Chansley said, it would mean that Trump “can do whatever it is that he wants.”

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Arizona

Arizona school board member’s Nazi salute horrifies teacher union

Published

on

Arizona school board member’s Nazi salute horrifies teacher union


play

School teacher unions are calling for the resignation of a Deer Valley Unified School District board member after she made a “Nazi salute” and said “heil’ at the end of a public meeting on May 26.

Advertisement

Boardmember Kimberly Fisher stretched out her arm, making the salute motion and repeating the word “heil” twice after the board president called for a vote to adjourn the meeting.

Fisher defended her actions in a Facebook video after the meeting, stating she made the gesture because she felt that the board had been under a “dictatorship” led by Board President Paul Carver and the district’s superintendent.

“All I could think of tonight was Hitler, so that’s why I said heil or whatever,” Fisher said in an eight-minute-long video.

Prior to the motion, Fisher and the board members were speaking on scheduling future meetings to discuss changes to district boundaries. Superintendent Curtis Finch stated they could not discuss the topic because it was on the meeting’s agenda. Then Carver quickly called for a vote to end the meeting, which prompted Fisher to make the salute.

The board members did not immediately react or acknowledge Fisher’s salute at the May 26 meeting.

Advertisement

This was not the first time Fisher has recently come under scrutiny. In October, she was slammed with a violation of Open Meeting Law by the Arizona Attorney General’s Office, The Daily Independent reported.

Fisher could not be immediately reached for comment.

How the community is reacting to Fisher’s Nazi salute

The local chapter of the Anti-Defamation League, an organization focused on advocating against antisemitism and hate, denounced Fisher’s use of the salute.

Advertisement

“We unequivocally condemn this behavior that glorifies Nazis and Hitler. Regardless of intent, these actions instill fear in the community and are unbecoming of officials entrusted with educating children,” said Sarah Kader, the deputy regional director of ADL Desert, in a social media post.

The Arizona Education Association and the Deer Valley Education Association are calling for Fisher’s resignation.

“Kimberly Fisher should apologize to the DVUSD community and step down,” the state union group wrote on X.

The local teacher union wrote in a Facebook statement that they were “horrified and disgusted” to see Fisher’s actions.

“Any leader who uses a Nazi salute during a School Board meeting is unfit for public service. There is no justification for this behavior,” the union wrote.

Advertisement

Boardmember Stephanie Simacek, in a statement, said “this is what antisemitism looks like when people get comfortable” and called for an “immediate censure.”

“I am calling for accountability. And I am calling on every parent, educator, and elected official Republican or Democrat — to stand up and say clearly: THIS HAS NO PLACE HERE,” she wrote in the statement.

Simacek is also a house member in the Arizona State Legislature and is running for a state senate seat.

She wrote, “What happened in that room was not a joke.”

Advertisement

The school district “does not condone, support, or endorse gestures or language associated with hate, discrimination, intimidation, or violence in any form,” said Kayla Pologa, a spokesperson for Deer Valley, in a written statement.

“As an elected official, Mrs. Fisher speaks and acts independently,” Pologa wrote.

She said Fisher’s views don’t reflect nor should be attributed to other board members or members of the school district.

Who is Kimberly Fisher?

Fisher has been a Deer Valley School District parent for 24 years, according to her biography on the district’s website. She had two children graduate from the district and her third is being homeschooled in his final year, her biography states.

She had previously served on the board from 2015 to 2018.

Advertisement

In 2017, Fisher was the school board president and was criticized for a social media exchange with a teacher.

She was reelected in 2020. Fisher’s current term ends in 2028.





Source link

Continue Reading

Arizona

Mark Lamb allegations: Arizona congressional candidate faces misconduct claims

Published

on

Mark Lamb allegations: Arizona congressional candidate faces misconduct claims


Former Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb, the Republican candidate for Congressional District 5, is facing new criticism following a recent report published by The Arizona Republic. 

What we know:

Advertisement

The article cites unidentified sources who allege Lamb engaged in racist and homophobic text exchanges and sent inappropriate and threatening messages to women. 

There are a few things working in Lamb’s favor, which are his name recognition combined with an endorsement from President Donald Trump. 

Big picture view:

Advertisement

Analysts said it ultimately comes down to what voters decide at the ballot box.

“People have weathered worse,” Stan Barnes said.

Advertisement

Barnes is a political consultant and former Republican state senator. He points to other figures, like former President Bill Clinton and current President Trump, who both faced high-profile misconduct allegations.

“The American people said, all right, but we still want to vote for him, and Mark Lamb could be in the same situation,” Barnes said.

What they’re saying:

Advertisement

Lamb has largely kept quiet on the issue, a strategy Barnes said can work for candidates.

“He might decide, you know what? It’s salacious, it’s unprovable,” Barnes said. “A lot of people won’t believe it, people aren’t paying attention, and name ID and Trump endorsement’s going to carry me through.”

Advertisement

Inquiries were made to Lamb’s campaign. They responded with a statement, saying in part: “The Arizona Republic admitted that their article was based on a 10-year-old text from a person that couldn’t be located, or might not be a real person. Not exactly what one would call quality, independent journalism.”
However, the allegations could present challenges for his path to Congress.

The other side:

“The problem for Mr. Lamb and his candidacy is that his opponent will attempt to remind voters,” Barnes said.

Advertisement

Lamb’s Republican opponent, Daniel Keenan, spoke out against the former sheriff following the report.

“This story only adds to a pattern of disqualifying, disgraceful, and embarrassing behavior unbecoming of a congressman,” Keenan said in part.

Advertisement

Dig deeper:

Noble, a political data researcher, said the accusations could hurt Lamb with moderate voters.

“There’s really no strong candidates running in that primary because he’s cleared the field,” Mike Noble said. “It’s going to hurt him with women, it’s going to hurt him with independents, self-identified moderates, those that have a high school or less education.”

Advertisement

In a heavily Republican district, Noble said if the accusations gain traction, it could help the opposing party.

“It could potentially be fatal for him in the general election and actually give Democrats an opening in the general election, which normally they wouldn’t,” Noble said.

Advertisement

What’s next:

On the Democratic side, there are four people running in the primary for Congressional District 5. The primary election is scheduled for July 21.

The Source: This information was gathered from the article from The Arizona Republic, a political consultant and Lamb’s campaign. 

Advertisement

Pinal CountyArizona PoliticsNews



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending