Glendale City Council hired Gilbert’s town manager, Patrick Banger, who created the town’s censorship department.
Banger will receive base compensation of $400,000, subject to adjustments based on factors including performance, the market, and cost of living. This makes Banger one of the highest-paid administrators in the Valley, not including the other perks that come with the position.
The city’s human resources and risk management director, Jim Brown, said they settled on Banger after undertaking a “nationwide search.” The current city manager, Kevin Phelps, intends to retire.
Council member and Alhambra Elementary School District member Jose “Lupe” Conchas Jr. said Banger aligned with their values of commitment to growth and serving residents with distinction. Councilmember Bart Turner, who has been accused of walking in lockstep with Conchas, was reportedly advocating “hard” for Banger.
“This vote isn’t just about selecting a new city manager, it’s about the future of Glendale for the next decades to come,” said Conchas. “I’m confident that Mr. Banger’s leadership will help us continue the path forward.”
Banger will assume the city manager position on January 12 of next year. Banger will depart Gilbert after 15 years with the town.
Banger beat out one other top candidate, Vicki Rios, Glendale’s assistant city manager and a longtime resident. Rios is credited with the city’s “dramatic financial turnaround” after she saved the city from bankruptcy upon entering the administration in 2013 by refinancing debt and building up cash reserves.
Behind the scene, conservative council members and city residents have vowed to keep Banger in line when it comes to aligning with Glendale values — and not importing those of New York.
AZ Free Newsreported last year that Banger credited former Democratic New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg as his inspiration for town management, and caused his creation of the Office of Digital Government (ODG).
“One of the things that I’d been doing for quite some time is following what Mayor Bloomberg was doing in New York,” said Banger.
ODG was a department within Gilbert that monitored the online speech of employees and elected officials to ensure alignment with progressive ideologies. Department salaries cost the town over $1.1 million annually.
The former lead of ODG hired by Banger, Dana Berchman, resigned following reporting on ODG activity. Berchman now runs a communications firm, Oh, hi! Communications.
While managing Gilbert, Banger oversaw a $2.2 billion annual budget and nearly 2,000 employees. Banger is credited with generating nearly $400 million in investments and over 700,000 square feet in new construction in Gilbert.
While all those benefits to Gilbert were felt, residents may be more quick to recall Banger’s leadership during the “Gilbert Goons,” a group of mostly wealthy teens who committed a series of crimes and terrorized the community from 2022 onward that ultimately resulted in the murder of a boy in 2023.
The Gilbert Goons and their Halloween murder quickly became a national story, with much scrutiny over the city’s handling of the teens’ crimes leading up to the murder.
ODG control over city communications led to what former employees and residents believed to be the cause of delays and scarcity in communications on the Gilbert Goons.
Banger is also president-elect of the Arizona City/County Management Association. He was formerly chairman of the Maricopa Association of Governments Management Board and an Honorary Base Commander at Luke Air Force Base.
Before taking over as town manager for Gilbert in 2011, Banger’s roots were in Missouri, where he was a consultant, home builder, city administrator, and city financial analyst.
Watch Glendale City Council discuss and vote on Banger’s hiring here:
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
The National Endowment for Democracy (NED), created in 1983 as a “resource for information related to democracy worldwide,” has found itself in the crosshairs of Arizona Congressman Eli Crane (R-AZ02). Crane has introduced the Defund the National Endowment for Democracy Act of 2025, a measure designed to strip the private institution of all taxpayer funding on the basis that it “evolved into a key contributor to global censorship campaigns, domestic propaganda, and regime change politics.”
In a statement released Thursday, Crane told supporters, “I’m proud to introduce this sensible measure to ensure that American resources are no longer used to support this organization’s anti-American objectives. Hardworking citizens should not be forced to foot the bill for anything that undermines freedom of speech and liberty.”
He continued, “The National Endowment for Democracy has strayed far from its original mission. We owe it to the American people to protect their interests and put an end to this disgusting waste of their money.”
In an in depth investigation published in August 2024, Tim Meisburger wrote for The Heritage Foundation that although the NED is required to be bipartisan, “[it] is led and staffed almost entirely by Democrats, and its board members and ‘experts’ have sought to delegitimize the Republican party.”
The report laid out in detail that through a series of grants, the NED “has supported development of the international ‘disinformation industrial complex’—including one grantee that sought to censor and suppress conservative speech in the United States in advance of the 2020 and 2022 elections.” It also added that starting in 2019 during the hotly contested 2020 Presidential Election, the endowment’s budget nearly doubled, exploding from $180 million annually to $300 million.
The report further observed the integration of the NED within the bureaucratic ecosystem of the Department of State, which during the first Trump administration maintained a character largely hostile to the president. Meisburger wrote, “Legislation requires the NED to ‘consult with the Department of State on any overseas program funded by the Endowment prior to the commencement of the activities of that program.’”
Statements from prominent board members Anne Applebaum and Rachel Kleinfeld cited in the report from Heritage are particularly alarming, with Applebaum saying of Republicans that “they aren’t even a legitimate political party.” While Kleinfeld wrote, “The embrace of violence and intimidation as a political tactic by a faction of the GOP will cause violence of all types to rise—against all Americans.” She added, “I am a Democrat, and I believe that that is very important right now: because the Republican party is in thrall to this anti-democratic force.”
Of the ostensibly Republican members of the board, which is statutorily split along partisan lines, only a single member donated to President Trump’s campaign “while others made significant contributions to Never Trump political action committees and candidates,” suggesting a strong sentiment against Trump-supporters.
Today, I introduced the Defund the National Endowment for Democracy Act of 2025.
Hardworking Americans should not be forced to foot the bill for anything that undermines freedom of speech and liberty.
The brutal stabbing of 19-year-old Mara Daffron by fellow ASU Student Kaci Lenise-Charlie Sloan on September 19th raised questions about censorship and even possibly a coverup after the story languished for eight days before being reported on by the establishment media. According to ASU professor Dr. Owen Anderson, writing on his Substack, “Last week there was a stabbing at ASU West. Have you seen any news about it?” He observed, “It is very hard to find. It took the Dean of the campus 5 days to send out an email about it. Why the cover up? I have some knowledge of what happened and I can take an educated guess.” He promised readers, “I’m going to stay on this for you.”
By the time Anderson had written, the first mentions of the story (notably by AZFamily) were less than a day old and the story had very little traction. In the initial breaking story, AZ Family reported that Sloan had carried out a premeditated attack against Daffron, having decided the night before to go through with it believing that hurting someone would make her problems “go away.” She told police during an interview that she chose between Daffron and another student she identified as “a veteran,” deciding on the young woman because she was “an easier target.”
By September 27th the story was international, and the heroic intervention of another student, Navy Veteran Matthew McCormick, who fought off Sloan and prevented further injury to Daffron, came to light. As reported by the Daily Mail, McCormick told reporters, “As she was going for a third attack, I was able to grab her wrists and apprehend her before further damage could be done.”
“I just did what needed to be done and I think everybody has the capacity to be able to do that,” McCormick told 12News.
He added, “It was a great job by everybody that was in that room; by the EMTs, the paramedics and police. Everybody responded really, really well. 9-1-1 calls were pretty instantaneous and everybody seemed pretty locked in and knew what to do.”
Sloan was arrested and ASU Police recovered the 12-inch blade she repeatedly stabbed Daffron with.
Daffron, recovering at Banner Thunderbird Hospital in Phoenix, told AZ Family, “I’m just scared because I don’t know why the f**k she would stab me.”
Sloan’s ultimate motive remains unclear. Court documents uncovered by 12News revealed that Sloan, “admitted she came to class to hurt somebody and was planning the attack since the night prior,” the documents say. “This planning included placing the knife used in the attack in her backpack to bring to school. The defendant told detectives she knew the victim’s first name but did not know anything else about her. She knew the victim from a prior class and shared a class with her this semester.”
Dr. Anderson noted in an update, “There is national and international coverage now of the stabbing at ASU. I’m still looking for news from ASU itself.” He also offered to begin instruction in jiu jitsu on campus to help students defend themselves in future attacks.
In another post, he theorized that anti-white hatred could be responsible for the attack:
“Any time there is violence and attempted murder on a university campus we expect to see it covered in the news. It is an important way for parents and students to know if a university is a safe place to attend.
But what if universities aren’t safe places to attend? What if students are taught by their humanities professors to hate each other? ASU has required employee training that teaches about the problem of ‘whiteness.’ Why is ASU requiring employees to learn that?”
An ASU spokesperson told Fox News in a statement, “ASU Police continue to investigate a Sept. 19 on-campus stabbing of a student. Kaci Sloan was immediately detained and arrested on suspicion of first-degree attempted murder; aggravated assault with a deadly weapon; interfering with an educational institution; and disorderly conduct. She is being held on a $250,000 cash only bond. ASU and the entire ASU West Valley community are deeply saddened by what happened. ASU West Valley is a close-knit campus of students, faculty and staff. Counseling support is available to all.”
Attorney General Kris Mayes is fighting to continue government’s collusion with social media to control online speech.
Mayes joined a 21-state coalition of Democratic attorneys general to oppose a federal decision prohibiting federal officials from coordinating with social media companies to control speech. In a press release, the attorney general stated that control over free speech is paramount to public safety, implying that the government’s interest in maintaining this safety outweighed the constitutional right of speech.
“Social media companies and government officials must have open communication in order to ensure the safety of Americans online,” said Mayes. “A pillar of the U.S. government is to ensure the safety and wellbeing of its citizens. The lower court’s decision impedes on this protection and means federal, state and local officials cannot contact social media companies about dangerous online content.”
In an appeal led by New York, the 19 other attorneys general hail from California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia.
The coalition’s brief characterized speech control as “content moderation,” and argued that the federal government should maintain the ability to do so since it’s been doing it “[s]ince the advent of social media.”
“[I]n the experience of amici States, information-sharing and dialogue have not been coercive, but rather, helpful in ensuring that social media companies make fully informed decision about their own content moderation policies,” stated the brief.
The Louisiana Western District Court issued a preliminary injunction last month that barred the federal government from colluding with social media companies to regulate speech on their platforms.
Arizona leadership from both parties have either called for or participated in censorship.
Last March, Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer worked with the federal government on tactics to control online speech. Richer met with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Cybersecurity Advisory Committee (CSAC) Misinformation & Disinformation (MDM) Subcommittee, all under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
Last September, Maricopa County rolled out a press pass program to control which outlets and reporters could gain access to government proceedings and property. Last November, the county launched a disinformation center and further limited press access. In April, Maricopa County paid a $175,000 settlement for denying press credentials to a reporter under their press pass program because his work didn’t constitute truth in their eyes.
This past March, Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) asked the Federal Reserve, Treasury Department, and the Federal Deposit and Information Corporation (FDIC) whether they could work with social media companies to censor information in order to prevent a run on the banks.
Gov. Katie Hobbs, while in her former capacity as secretary of state, used the Center for Internet Security (CIS) as a middle man of sorts to censor online speech. Although requests were made for an investigation into the relationship, the transition of power in the attorney general’s office effectively made those requests dead on arrival.
Arizona government workers have also been trained by the Aspen Institute: the liberal think tank behind the coordinated cover-up of the Hunter Biden laptop story. The institute launched its first Arizona-based leadership program last year with startup funding from Walmart.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
A Pew Research poll released July 20 found that 70% of Democrats think the government should restrict what appears on social media, a dramatic change from five years ago when a majority of Democrats supported a free marketplace of ideas.
It’s no wonder, considering the drumbeat of warnings from leftist politicians and their liberal media allies about “disinformation” and “misinformation.”
But be warned: Democracy cannot survive for long if one of the nation’s two major political parties wants to put blinders on the public, limiting their access to information and canceling political opponents. That’s a rigged system. Ask the Iranians, Russians or Chinese.
A House hearing on July 20 held by the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government showed that the Biden administration is already censoring social media on a massive scale, putting blinders on all of us.
Hearing witness D. John Sauer, special assistant attorney general for Louisiana, described preliminary findings by a federal judge that Biden staff in the White House, the FBI, the Department of Health and Human Services, and almost every other executive department meet regularly with social media executives and pressure them to remove or demote criticisms of Biden economic and energy policies, Biden family members, and even items that depict the first lady in an unflattering way. According to Sauer, “millions of American voices” have been silenced in violation of the First Amendment.
Sauer cited some 18,000 communications from Team Biden to tech executives orchestrating a vast ongoing censorship operation.
Yet Democratic lawmakers were unfazed by this shocking evidence, and hardly questioned the witness. The U.S. Constitution and the future of our democracy be damned.
Rep. Stacey Plaskett laid out the Democratic Party’s distorted interpretation of the First Amendment, insisting that not all speech is constitutionally protected and offering hate speech as an example.
Plaskett and like-minded Dems need a refresher course on the Constitution and American history. The Supreme Court has ruled again and again that all speech, especially speech we like the least, is protected. That includes Nazi marches and cross burnings, as odious as these are. Who needs a constitutional amendment to protect speech everyone likes?
In 2017, the Court ruled unanimously in Matal v. Tam that the First Amendment requires “we protect the freedom to express ‘the thought that we hate,’” citing Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.’s dissent in the 1929 case United States v. Schwimmer.
Rep. Gerry Connolly aimed his wrath at witness Robert F. Kennedy Jr., whose views on vaccines and other pandemic policies were censored. Connolly said this censorship “was not big brother government trying to exercise its will on an innocent population. It was public health measures to protect lives.”
Connolly’s wrong. Censoring scientific debate was a lethal mistake. If competing scientific viewpoints, especially about masking and lockdowns, had been considered, harm to schoolchildren, business owners, and many others might have been prevented. Turns out, official government policy was based on “misinformation” and “disinformation.”
During the hearing, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, battered Kennedy with accusations of antisemitism and racism for his outrageous comments about the disparate impact of COVID on different ethnic groups. But when he tried to respond, she barked “reclaiming my time” and “ask the witness to stop talking.”
Whether you think RFK Jr. is loony or a viable presidential contender, as a witness he should have been treated with civility. Wasserman Schultz’s abuse is reminiscent of how Sen. Joseph McCarthy browbeat witnesses during the Army-McCarthy hearings in 1954. Those hearings ended abruptly when McCarthy was asked, “Have you no sense of decency?” Wasserman Schultz should have been confronted with the same question.
The attacks on RFK Jr. were a sideshow. The main event was the Democrats’ concocted defense of censorship. The Democrats’ own witness — civil rights attorney Maya Wiley — testified that “the ability of every person to have access to accurate and reliable information is a cornerstone of our democracy.”
Wiley’s slippery language is meant to evade the real issue: Who decides what is accurate and reliable?
Wiley was asked directly by Rep. Chris Stewart, “Do you trust the government to determine what facts and views the American people are exposed to?” She replied, “I think I’m struggling with the question.”
Tell Democrats the answer is a resounding “no.”
Trusting government to be your eyes and ears is crazy.
Betsy McCaughey is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation and a former lieutenant governor of New York and chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths. Follow her on Twitter @Betsy_McCaughey. To find out more about Betsy McCaughey and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.
