Do taxpayers want their state auditor removed from office by political consultants who are misleading voters through dark-money PACs?
Do taxpayers want their state auditor removed by lawyers who force taxpayers to pay for frivolous political lawsuits?
The Dark-Money Campaign from Political Consultants' PACs
Cindy's OPPONENT is benefiting exclusively from secretive political action committees that are
spending nearly a million dollars to remove her from office.
The dark-money PACs are blatantly lying to Republican voters.
The PACs claim that she was a lifelong Democrat who only changed parties before running for office.
She was not a lifelong Democrat who only changed parties before running for office.
Like Donald Trump and Ronald Reagan, she once was not registered as a Republican.
She is from a county with few Republicans, so she once registered differently in order to vote for the most conservative candidates who held office, but she changed parties several years ago, when only 13% of her county was Republican.
The PACs claim that her opponent is a supporter of President Trump.
Her OPPONENT did not vote in the presidential primaries when President Trump ran for election or re-election.
She voted -- for President Trump -- in both presidential primaries.
The PACs claim that her opponent is a lifelong Republican.
Her OPPONENT is not a lifelong Republican.
Her OPPONENT was a Democrat.
He was a registered Democrat in Tulsa County even after a majority of Tulsa County voters were Republicans.
The PACs claim that her opponent earned a 100% pro-life rating from Oklahomans For Life.
Her OPPONENT did not earn any rating from Oklahomans For Life.
She earned a 100% pro-life rating from Oklahomans For Life.
The PACs claim that her opponent audited a school district and prevented theft of its equipment.
Her OPPONENT oversaw Tulsa Public Schools' equipment
when at least $300,000 of it was stolen.
In response, he said,
"I couldn't tell you how it happens."
That theft was in just six years.
He worked there for 23 years.
The PACs claim that she supports a California education policy that limits parental choice.
She does not support California's education policies or policies that limit parental choice.
An audit report from her office noted that California prohibits for-profit companies from operating schools.
The largest public school in Oklahoma was founded by individuals who are funding the PACs' smear campaign against her after her office exposed their improper use of Oklahoma tax dollars for their California school.
The PACs claim that she stood with Nancy Pelosi and supported the leftist Equal Rights Amendment.
She did not support the Equal Rights Amendment, and she never has supported Nancy Pelosi.
A newsletter from her office once referenced the unsuccessful Equal Rights Amendment.
The PACs claim that her actions led to the installation of a BLM activist on the largest charter school's board.
She did not have a role in installing anyone on any school boards.
Her office exposed tens of millions of dollars in fraud by the founders of Epic Public Charter Schools, and some of the Schools' board members were removed or resigned.
She had no role in the replacements of any board members and does not know anything about any of their individual interests.
The PACs claim that she donated to a liberal Democrat.
She did not donate to a liberal Democrat.
More than a decade and a half ago, while working in the State Auditor's Office, she and many of her co-workers begrudgingly contributed small amounts to the re-election campaign of their boss, the incumbent state auditor (who was not a liberal).
At the time, employees of the Office were "expected" to contribute to the Democratic state auditor in order to keep their jobs, which they did in order to continue serving the taxpayers. That state auditor's corruption later was exposed to the public.
The Political Lawsuit Funded with Tax Dollars
A lawyer who represents at least one of the PACs targeting Cindy's re-election is forcing taxpayers to pay to defend against a frivolous lawsuit that he has filed against Cindy's office.
Voters should wonder if the people funding the PACs also funded a law firm involved with the lawsuit.
The lawsuit falsely claims that her office incorrectly withheld some records from another lawyer.
The lawyer filed the lawsuit nearly a year after Cindy's office provided numerous documents to him.
Political consultants are misleading Republican voters about Cindy through secretive political action committees.
The hidden individuals who are funding the PACs against Cindy became millionaires on the backs of the taxpayers before she exposed their misdeeds.