Two years ago, Democrat Attorney General Terry Goddard prosecuted Republican stateTreasurer David Petersen for doing the exact same offense with which Board of Supervisor Stapley is charged by Republican County Attorney Thomas. Which prosecutor has the Republic gone on a rampage against denouncing? Read about Arizona's biggest current political scandal.

The Republic's recent editorial criticizing County Attorney Andrew Thomas for prosecuting the 118-count criminal indictment against Supervisor Donald Stapley is a masterpiece of intellectual hypocrisy and flip-flops.

The Republic claims that Thomas' office is prosecuting Stapley for "minor acts of carelessness." Our office strongly disputes this characterization. Regardless, the double standards here are truly amazing.

Two years ago, Attorney General Terry Goddard prosecuted state Treasurer David Petersen for doing the exact same offense with which Stapley is charged. Goddard also prosecuted state Mine Inspector Doug Martin for buying a vehicle for official use outside the procurement rules. Instead of accusing Goddard of prosecuting allegedly minor offenses, the Republic heaped praise on him. The Republic even devoted its op-ed page to a lineup of photos celebrating all the public officials he had prosecuted.

Goddard cited the Arizona Supreme Court's decision in the case against Governor Evan Mecham as clear precedent for an elected prosecutor serving as both prosecutor and civil attorney for government officials. That same analysis applies to Thomas. Yet the Republic now alleges Thomas is abusing his powers by prosecuting Stapley over the same offenses.

In arriving at this position, the Republic's editorial board has managed to contradict itself in less than a month. On December 4, the Republic urged everyone to wait to see the evidence in the case. The claim by Stapley's lawyers that the prosecution was motivated by politics, the editors noted, "sounds very much like blaming others for his predicament." Twenty days later, the Republic endorsed the claim of unfair prosecution.

By contrast, the Republic sees no abuse of power by activist judges. How else can one explain why the Republic continues to ignore mounting evidence that the judge assigned to the Stapley case is openly biased against the County Attorney's Office? Or why Presiding Judge Barbara Rodriguez Mundell personally selected the judge instead of using the normal, random selection process?

Likewise, the Republic ignores unlawful conduct by the county board of supervisors. The board has retaliated against Thomas for prosecuting one of their own, illegally hiring lawyers to replace him and seeking to strip Thomas' office of its civil litigation functions. It certainly doesn't hurt the board's cause that they recently hired a former member of the Republic's editorial board as their public information officer.

When the only way you can tell the Republic's editorial position on a given subject is to look at the names of the political figures involved instead of the principles at issue, that's everything you need to know about the ideologically motivated double standards at work. Sheriff Joe Arpaio and County Attorney Thomas did not seek the endorsement of the Republic this last election because the Republic reserves its praise for left-leaning politicians and establishment public officials who don't rock the boat. Arpaio and Thomas aren't afraid to rock the boat. That means they won't be receiving plaudits, or even fair treatment, from the Republic's editorial board. But it also means they're doing their job.