The Democrat running for Maricopa County District Attorney previously defended a man indicted of sexually assaulting a mentally disabled child by suggesting that the 12-year-old girl made the story up for attention — and has managed to snag an endorsement from Soros-backed advocacy group.
In 2009, Tamika Wooten became Jacob Payne’s criminal defense attorney after he was accused of repeatedly sexually assaulting a child, court records show. Before Wooten represented him, Payne pled guilty to kidnapping in 2004 after he admitted to restraining a 19-year-old girl as an accomplice murdered her, receiving five years in prison for his crime. Wooten, while representing Payne in 2009, said that “children with learning disabilities fabricate stories to get attention” to discredit the young girl who accused the freshly-released convict of assaulting her.
Wooten, who is running a platform of putting fewer criminals in jail by prioritizing “alternatives to incarceration,” secured the endorsement of Our Vote Our Voice Arizona on Sept. 20. The Soros family’s Open Society Action Fund in 2023 gave just over $1 million to the group, a significant sum for an organization that has had an average annual revenue of roughly $2.5 million since 2020, according to tax documents.
The girl who accused Payne of sexual assault claimed that he had repeatedly groped her and forced her to engage in sex acts, according to court filings. Hospital staff found blood on her underwear after one such assault — she had not been menstruating at the time, per police testimony.
Three of the girl’s siblings told the officer who arrested Payne that they had witnessed their sister come out of the room Payne was in while buttoning up her pants, according to court filings. The girl’s older brother called their mother and told her that his sister had been molested. When confronted by the girl’s mother over the phone, Payne hung up and attempted to flee the apartment.
Wooten, who moved to stop prosecutors from referring to Payne as a “predator” or “pedophile,” argued that the girl’s family members may have “coached” her into accusing him of assault because of their “dislike” for the man, court documents show. Wooten also said that the young girl’s inability to remember specific details about the assaults was evidence of her fabricating the story.
The girl had previously made a false sexual assault claim against her father, which led her mother to initially dismiss her allegation against Payne. Her mother took her daughter seriously after her siblings corroborated her claims.
Payne was indicted of sexually abusing a child again in 2013, this time being accused of molesting a six-year-old girl, according to court records. Prosecutors ultimately dropped the charges “in the interest of justice” but explicitly noted that their decision was not made because evidence was insufficient. He pled guilty to aggravated assault in 2020 and was then convicted of disseminating nude images he took of a woman without her consent in 2023.
The Soros family has made a broad effort to reform criminal justice in the United States away from incarceration and toward rehabilitation, spending tens of millions on criminal justice nonprofits and on electing left-wing prosecutors. Many large cities where the Soros network worked to install prosecutors aligned with their views saw considerable upticks in crime.
Many of the donors backing Vice President Kamala Harris also supported Soros’ efforts to elect liberal prosecutors.
Wooten, who has promised to fight mandatory sentencing laws, is running to unseat Republican Rachel Mitchell, who has focused on cracking down on organized crime and fentanyl, the Washington Examiner reported.
Our Voice Our Vote Arizona and Wooten did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s requests for comment.
In a since-deleted article, “Three Women-Led Organizations That Helped Flip Arizona Blue,” principal actors behind several of the most powerful leftist dark money organizations in the state bragged about engineering Democratic voter turnout in the 2020 election.
Vianey Olivarria, then-communications director and current executive director for Chispa AZ, credited work done by her organization and others to turn out Democratic voters. Olivarria also served as a director of Activate 48, a coalition of Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) organizations.
“Arizona turning blue is a victory a decade in the making and owed to the tireless work and dedication of Black, Brown, and Indigenous people who organize for justice and liberation,” stated Olivarria.
Chispa AZ is a 501(c)(4) project of the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), another 501(c)(4), and sponsored by Way to Win, a national donor network aimed at defeating Republican candidates. Way to Win served as the sponsor to Progress Arizona, formerly and once again led by Gov. Katie Hobbs’ ousted spokeswoman Josselyn Berry.
Per the IRS, a 501(c)(4) organization may engage in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to candidates so long as those activities aren’t the organization’s primary activity.
Discrepancies exist in various organizations’ tax returns disclosing contributions to Chispa AZ’s political arm, Chispa AZ PAC. Neither “Chispa AZ” or “Chispa AZ PAC” exist within the IRS database. Also, Chispa AZ has claimed the same EIN as LCV publicly; however, different organizations’ tax returns have cited multiple, nonexistent EINs for Chispa AZ.
In their 2018,2019, and 2020 tax returns, LCV listed an EIN number for Chispa AZ PAC that yielded no results in the IRS Tax Exempt Organization database. In their 2019 tax return, LCV listed an organization called Fuerte Arts Movement for the Chispa AZ PAC’s address, and listed the same EIN number from 2018. They used the EIN again in their tax return.
In the 2019, 2020, and 2021 tax returns from the California-based Grove Action Fund, a different address and EIN number from that used by LCV were listed for Chispa AZ PAC. The listed address was the correct address for Chispa AZ; however, the EIN listed also doesn’t exist in the IRS database.
Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona’s 2020 tax return listed that same nonexistent EIN number as well, and offered the Fuerte Arts Movement address.
Tax returns from the Green Advocacy Project (2020) and the Wilderness Society Action Fund (2019) also listed the nonexistent EIN given by LCV, but listed the correct address.
Publicly collected data reflects that Chispa AZ PAC has managed at least around $8.5 million in contributions since 2017. Yet, Chispa AZ has claimed to have total revenues of nearly $26.9 million, net assets of over $18.4 million, and expenses of over $18.9 million.
Chispa AZ is also part of MiAZ, a coalition of nonprofits focused on turning out minority voters.
Other Chispa organizations exist in Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Nevada, and Texas.
Chispa AZ isn’t the only dark money entity lacking a clear IRS status to have an outsized impact for Democrats in recent elections. There’s also the two Arizona Asian American Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (AZ AANHPI) related organizations: AZ AANHPI for Equity and AZ AANHPI Advocates. Although AZ AANHPI wasn’t featured in the deleted 2020 article, their communications director was: Alexa Rio-Osaki. She spoke on behalf of a different dark money nonprofit also part of MiAZ: Our Voice, Our Vote.
“We’re doing what we can to ensure everyone’s represented,” said Rio-Osaki.
Rio-Osaki has her hands in multiple leftist dark money organizations: in addition to AZ AANHPI and Our Voice, Our Vote, Rio-Osaki served as the director of Progress Arizona.
Recently, AZ AANHPI for Equity has engaged in lawfare against non-party conservative organizations, demanding transparency of private documents while operating in the dark itself.
AANHPI for Equity and AZ AANHPI Advocates have independent websites, social media pages, and staff, yet the pair are presented as one entity in multiple locations (for example, on the AZ AANHPI for Equity “about us” page). Both were founded in July 2020 by Jennifer Chau, who has served as the director for AZ AANHPI for Equity, an unspecified nonprofit, and executive director for AZ AANHPI Advocates, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit, since their inception according to her LinkedIn page.
According to the IRS, AZ AANHPI Advocates had its federal tax exempt status automatically revoked in mid-May for not filing any tax forms in the entire three years of its existence (EIN:85-2344934). The IRS issued its revocation posting earlier this month. No IRS records exist for AZ AANHPI for Equity.
Yet, both organizations’ websites continue to solicit donations and market themselves as nonprofits. The Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) awarded AZ AANHPI Advocates good standing for its status as a nonprofit in mid-July as well. No ACC records exist for AZ AANHPI for Equity.
Like Chispa AZ, AZ AANHPI has used EIN numbers of another organization in receipt of funds. In 2021, AZ AANHPI for Equity received $25,000 from Solidago Foundation and gave the EIN belonging to One Arizona, the 30-nonprofit coalition to which all five Arabella Advisors nonprofit arms issued funds. Also that year, AZ AANHPI made its name synonymous with “One Arizona” and used its EIN in its receipt of $35,000 in funding from Asian Americans Advancing Justice.
On its website, AZ AANHPI Advocates discloses that it receives funding from top leftist dark money organizations The Future We Need and Arizona Wins!. The listed address for The Future We Need is the same address for the Arizona Education Association and Progress Now Arizona (now Progress Arizona); yet, no such organization as “The Future We Need” exists per ACC, the IRS, the Federal Election Commission (FEC), or the secretary of state’s campaign finance databases. There does exist a similarly-named dark left political action committee (PAC) entity, “The Future We Want.”
In their entire three years of advocacy and fundraising, only AZ AANHPI Advocates had any campaign finance records filed within the state: just one receipt of $10,000 from Invest in Arizona in August 2021, for “signature gathering.” According to the secretary of state’s campaign finance database, AZ AANHPI has never filed any reports on their contributions or expenditures.
The deleted article was published by Supermajority News: a project of Supermajority and the Supermajority Education Fund, the latter a project of the Arabella Advisors’ New Venture Fund. Arabella Advisors is behind one of the biggest dark money funding networks in the nation; their shadowy dealings prompted the District of Columbia attorney general to issue subpoenas to the organization last month.
Along with their Arizona-based compatriots, Supermajority will also be working to turn out more Democratic voters in the upcoming 2024 election.
Last year, Supermajority reported turning out over 959,000 voters: nearly 116,200 in Arizona. The organization had over 8,000 active members in Arizona. Supermajority reported that they ensured the turnout of 30 percent of women ages 18 to 35 years old, specifically to ensure the re-election of Sen. Mark Kelly and election of Gov. Katie Hobbs. The organization disclosed that their approach consisted of contacting female Democrat voters that sporadically voted in presidential elections but hadn’t voted in midterm elections.
“At the state level, we were able to help elect and support progressive governors who would protect and expand women’s freedoms in their states,” stated Supermajority.
Supermajority took credit for Kelly’s re-election and Hobbs’ election, declaring that 92 percent of Kelly’s margin of victory was made up of their voters and that their 116,200-voter turnout far surpassed Hobbs’ 17,100-vote margin.
The organization also noted its plans for the upcoming 2024 election: contacting 432,300 female Arizona voters who didn’t vote last year, overcoming the projected 10,500-vote victory margin, and electing a Democratic senator to take independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema’s seat. The organization also plans to target Georgia and North Carolina.
“We need a Democratic senator in AZ who will work alongside Sen. Mark Kelley [sic],” stated Supermajority.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Benjamin Franklin once famously said, “[I]n this world, nothing is certain except death and taxes” — true, unless you’re a leftist political nonprofit. For many of them, taxation isn’t certain, even if they run afoul of tax-exempt status requirements.
Funding sources, expenditure recipients, and even those operating these nonprofits may remain secretive under the current state of lax federal enforcement. These tax-free and opacity perks are possible through two interrelated federal tax classifications: 501(c)(3), or “C3,” and 501(c)(4), or “C4.” There are over 27,000 C3s and just over 1,200C4s registered in Arizona. The big difference between the two classifications is that donations to IRS-recognized C3 organizations are deductible under our income tax code. And the Left has learned how to exploit this tax status for their political benefit.
In Arizona, many liberal C3 and C4 nonprofits work in tandem, each executing symbiotic duties while coordinating their activities and sharing data and resources. Sometimes, these C3 and C4 duos are “sister” organizations — meaning, they’re affiliated rather than independent entities allied over common goals.
These arrangements are legal so long as clear distinctions are made between charitable and non-charitable activities. Over the last several months, AZ Free News has conducted an extensive review of over a dozen different liberal nonprofits in the state, examining their websites, tax documents, and social media accounts. Our research has found that many of these organizations have blurred the lines on their political activities via various C3 and C4 groups. In some cases, there appeared to be no distinction at all, with some C3 organizations providing completely different accounts of their tax-deductible program activities to the IRS compared to what they shared publicly.
How the IRS Intended for C3 and C4 Organizations to Operate
C3s have two major qualifiers: they’re supposed to be nonpartisan and apolitical—meaning, they can’t expend funds or use resources to coordinate with political activity being conducted by C4s.
C3s must organize and operate exclusively for purposes that are one or more of the following: charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals.
The IRS defines “charitable” as relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency.
The IRS expressly prohibits C3s from being an “action organization”: those engaging in political or legislative activities. Political activities include the direct or indirect participation or intervention in any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any political candidate. The IRS also prohibits political campaign fund contributions or public statements of positions, either verbal or written, on behalf of the organization in favor of or opposing any candidate.
The IRS does condone voter education activities, such as get-out-the-vote (GOTV) efforts like voter registration. However, any evidence of political bias is forbidden: favoritism of a candidate, opposing a candidate in any way, or “hav[ing] the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates.” Lobbying is also largely forbidden.
Comparatively, the IRS classifies C4 organizations into one of two categories: social welfare organizations or local association of employees. The former concerns civic leagues or organizations organized exclusively for social welfare promotion, not profit. The IRS clarifies that social welfare promotion doesn’t include direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate. Those that do must not render that activity as their primary activity, and risk being subjected to taxation. The latter concerns membership-based organizations with net earnings devoted exclusively to charitable, educational, or recreational purposes.
How Leftist C3 and C4s Operate in Arizona
Our review of leftist C3s in Arizona appears to indicate that their activities are overtly partisan and political. They coordinate with politically active C4s to achieve shared, partisan goals, and receive political action committee (PAC) funding while doing so. Often, these leftist C4s have either direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to one or more candidates.
Progressive activists leading these C3s have effectively mastered the art of exploiting the IRS code for partisan advantage, helping to maximize liberal donor partisan impact with their dollars while still hiding their identity. The C3s will claim that their allowable vote (GOTV) efforts, such as voter registration, are nonpartisan. They will claim they’re reaching out to certain, “marginalized” demographic groups; however, these groups turn out to be known Democratic voter bases.
One example of this is Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, the C3 sister organization of Mi Familia Vota, the C4. The former admitted on their 2020 tax filing to coordinating political activity with the latter. The executive director of Mi Familia Vota Education Fund, Hector Sanchez Barba, has publicly advocated for the losses of Republican candidates.
“We will keep working to keep extremism, Trump and MAGA out of our democracy,” wrote Sanchez Barba. “@MiFamiliaVota.”
In response to a Politico article documenting the GOP’s underperformance in last year’s midterm elections, Sanchez Barba thanked Latino voters for having Democrats win.
Meanwhile, their partner C4s pay for media and partisan activities like ad campaigns for candidates. It’s uncertain whether the funding for these activities comes from their C3 partners since those grant or cost-sharing agreements aren’t public. The IRS requires that C3 funds given to C4s be restricted to charitable uses — not electioneering activity.
The C3-C4 duo targets certain voter demographics to achieve a partisan outcome. They contact Democrat-leaning voters to get their vote cast, convince newly registered voters to vote Democratic through mailers and ads supportive of Democratic candidates and causes, and publicly support certain partisan ballot initiatives.
The C3-C4 sister organizations thinly veil their efforts that a division exists between them. For example, Mi Familia Vota spent tens of thousands on TV advertising that advocated for the election of Reginald Bolding ahead of last year’s primary. However, they listed a staffer for their C3 sister organization, Mi Familia Vota Education, as the point-of-contact on that campaign filing.
As AZ Free News reported in Part One of this series, Mi Familia Vota receives funding from One Arizona, a C3, which in turn receives its funding from the Tides Foundation, George Soros’ Open Societies Foundation, and several different organizations under Arabella Advisors.
.@RealMarkFinchem, a MAGAmigo, lies, & says that the 2020 election was fraudulent. If elected, he would use his position to help Trump. We are fighting for free and clear elections this cycle. Our democracy is at stake in Arizona, we must fight back. We say #BastaFinchempic.twitter.com/WPVSjflt2L
Ahead of the midterm election last June, One Arizona advertised a job opening for an independent expenditure (IE) campaign manager. The position appears to be one for a political staffer, which would constitute prohibited electioneering.
While not a complete pitcure, the above graphic illustrates some of the connections in the left’s secretive infrastructure and how they relate to Arizona elections.
Leftist C3s also hire for both the C3 and C4, resulting in shared jobs and salaries. One Arizona (C3) and Arizona Wins (C4) co-hired staff including a field director, field program coordinator, and finance and compliance director. That shared salary should not be used for political work. One recent example of this was a job listing by Arizona Coalition for Change (C3) and Our Voice Our Vote (C4) for a data manager that would work within the duo’s political and grassroots lobbying arms.
These blurred lines surrounding co-hires don’t just apply to staff. Arizona Center for Empowerment (ACE, a C3) and LUCHA (C4) share an executive director, Alejandra (Alex) Gomez, as well as staffers. This relationship is further complicated by the fact that ACE listed LUCHA as its “Employer of Record” on their latest tax return. Under Gomez, both organizations have expressed their partisanship.
Last year, LUCHA launched an initiative to get Democratic candidates elected: “LUCHA Blue.” The nonprofit pledged to prioritize certain races and voter bases in its GOTV efforts. On its hiring page for the initiative, LUCHA disclosed that it would staff between 70 and 105 people.
“We believe that not all candidates align with the mission of LUCHA, and this is why we created a campaign not only to flip Arizona Blue — but LUCHA Blue!” stated LUCHA. “Overall, the goal of the campaign is to win these targeted races, increase Latin/Hispanic voter turnout, and educate voters on the voting process.” (emphasis added)
In one post following Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) winning re-election last November, LUCHA appeared to affirm that both it and ACE assisted in organizational efforts to assure Kelly’s victory.
Wealthy dark money donors have a greater financial incentive to back C3s. 75 percent of their donations can go to politics and qualify as tax deductible — effectively maximizing their gift-giving while affording them a tax break. C4 donations aren’t tax deductible.
The IRS has long been aware of the disparity between the lawful intent for C3 and C4 entities, and the current reality of C3-C4 relationships. As ProPublica revealed in 2019, the IRS essentially gave up on holding nonprofits accountable.
The following are some of Arizona’s liberal C3-C4 nonprofit duos: One Arizona and Arizona Wins, Arizona Center for Empowerment and Living United for Change in Arizona, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund and Mi Familia Vota Victory, Chispa AZ/League of Conservation Voters Education Fund and League of Conservation Voters, Arizona Coalition for Change and Our Voice Our Vote, Instituto Lab and Instituto Power, Rural Arizona Engagement and Rural Arizona Action, and Voto Latino Foundation and Voto Latino.
The relationships between these nonprofits and the awareness of their straining tax law will be further explained in the next installment of this series.
This is Part Two in a series on the Left’s secret infrastructure to turn Arizona blue. Be sure to sign up for our newsletter to be notified of Part Three in the series.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
