Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73105
For Immediate Release: December 14, 2011
South Oklahoma City lawmakers concerned Savage
could be charged by District Attorney
As a result of radio talk show host Michael Savage's offer
of $1 million to Newt Gingrich to drop out of the race for the Republican
presidential nomination, two south Oklahoma City lawmakers are expressing
concern over when the Oklahoma County District Attorney might suddenly
choose to file charges against Savage for offering a bribe.
A post on Savage's website (michaelsavage.wnd.com)
yesterday offered Gingrich 48 hours to accept $1 million in exchange
for withdrawing his candidacy. Sen. Ralph
Shortey said the offer appears to satisfy the District Attorney's
definition of bribing a candidate who already filed for office in Oklahoma
County to withdraw from that contest. Gingrich filed for Oklahoma's
Presidential Preferential Primary last week.
"There is a clear difference between this case and the proceedings
against Senator Leftwich and Representative Terrill - this situation
is an obvious and public attempt to bribe a candidate who has already
filed in Oklahoma County," said Shortey, R-Oklahoma City. "In
the Leftwich - Terrill case, Senator Leftwich never filed for office
and there appears to be very little evidence to support the charges.
Our concern is that no one knows what meets the District Attorney's
selective definition of bribery and his selective criteria for enforcing
"Savage's offer appears to satisfy all of the requirements the
case currently being tried by the District Attorney does not. If he
doesn't file charges against Savage, then why not?"
Rep. Mike Reynolds said it would, of course, be ridiculous to file charges
against Savage, but considering the District Attorney’s current
arbitrary actions it is certainly a real possibility. He also suggested
a closer examination of a recent change of leadership at the Grand River
Dam Authority may be needed.
"It is not the role of the District Attorney to tell legislators
the intent and purpose of legislation,” said Reynolds, R-Oklahoma
City. “The District Attorney's misconception and inconsistency
creates a dangerous situation where it is impossible to tell whether
he is enforcing the law or engaging in selective political persecution."
"Under the current circumstances, the District Attorney should
consider whether the appointment of Sullivan might be a bribe since
he accepted the post with the certainty that he would not seek reelection
as a candidate for office. We are concerned that this selectivity makes
it difficult to determine the District Attorney's threshold for what
can and what cannot be considered a bribe.”
For more information, contact:
Sen. Shortey: (405) 521-5557