Energy Mom AZ

@RCMaxw3ll @CoffinItUp The reason I was primaried is because I would not do the bidding of a lobbyist which kept them from getting the donations. That was literally told to me in my office. Enough with the gaslighting already. The people aren't buying your nonsense anymore.

🚨 @DrRalphHeap is blatantly violating Arizona Clean Elections (@AZCCEC) law – come take a walk with me on this beautiful thread🚨 🧵 🧵 🧵 @consrevativdork, @reaganspriest, @WayneSchutsky, @jeremyduda, @MattRealest8, @MohaveFreePress @jeffreym_nelson, @MrDanTheMan1990

🚨 @DrRalphHeap is blatantly violating Arizona Clean Elections (@AZCCEC) law – come take a walk with me on this beautiful thread🚨 🧵 🧵 🧵 @consrevativdork, @reaganspriest, @WayneSchutsky, @jeremyduda, @MattRealest8, @MohaveFreePress @jeffreym_nelson, @MrDanTheMan1990

It's been an incredible honor to serve on the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) for the last four years. If you had told me 10 years ago that I would serve as ACC Chairman and play a leading role in ending the Green New Deal, accelerating new nuclear generation, approving a new generation of fossil fuel infrastructure and reducing costs for Arizona families, I wouldn't have believed you My journey started in 2016 when my family and I were targets of illegal service disconnection from a local utility. I dug into utility regulation and discovered that one person can make a difference. That led to a job working as a Commission policy advisor, then successfully running for the Commission in 2022 During my term, one of the most important lessons I've learned is that energy policy is too important to reduce to simplistic slogans and talkng points. The challenges facing the state are real, and require serious policymakers who are interested in the facts, not just scoring political points. With that in mind, I'm incredibly proud of the tangible work @votekthompson s and I have done to position Arizona for long term success by preserving and strengthening the reliability of our energy grid and water systems for families and job creators throughout our state. While last night’s results were not what we hoped, I look forward to working with my colleagues over the next 5 months to finish my term the same way it began - delivering conservative, consumer friendly results for ratepayers. My journey as a commissioner may be ending in January, but I will never stop fighting for Arizona families and the policies that will strengthen our great state. Thank you all for your support.

Part 3 of TPUSA's fraud playbook: Stacy Sheridan. And spoiler alert, she ranks higher than Bowyer or Kolvet. Stacy Sheridan is TPUSA's inside fundraising boss AND she owns the outside firm the charity pays to raise its money. She sits on both sides of the same check. More than $88 million in donations has run through her hands, and her private companies quietly kept ~$5+ million of it. She is the highest-scoring name in this series so far. Who is Sheridan? Stacy Sheridan spent two decades as a professional fundraiser at Pepperdine, the Reagan Foundation, and the Gary Sinise Foundation. Turning Point then hired her as its Senior Advancement Director on a salary north of $180,000. Her job was to raise the charity's money. So she did, into companies she owns. Three of them, GSM Strategy, then Lionrock Ventures, then Cloverstone Ventures. Each one billed the charity she already worked for. Each one traced back to her only through another state's corporate records and her own home address, never as the owner of those companies on the tax return itself. As each drew scrutiny, it went dark and the next one appeared. She turned a nonprofit's donor base into a private revenue stream, made herself almost invisible on paper, and made herself indispensable in person. Today she sits at the right hand of TPUSA's new CEO, Erika Kirk, closer to the money than she has ever been. What she is doing: the four signatures of an inside job This looks like an insider-controlled fundraiser, a specific and well-documented form of self-dealing. It has four signatures, and Sheridan hits all four. 1. Same hand on both sides: the employee who helps decide who gets hired to raise the money owns the firm that gets hired to raise it. She is the buyer and the seller of the same service, sitting on both sides of a table with no one across from her. 2. Custody and control: she does not just get paid, she holds the donations. The money lands in her company's account first, and she is the one who counts it and reports the number to the IRS and to the people who gave it. The insider who profits is also the one keeping the books. 3. The relay: not one company. Three, in a chain. Each terminated or gone dark the moment it drew a reporter, each reborn in a more sheltered state than the last. The entities keep changing names but the owner never changes. 4. Concealment: the return never says she owns the firm it pays. You only learn that in another state's records. In Minnesota, Cloverstone, whose sole officer is Sheridan, registered under oath as an independent outside professional fundraiser. Based on the record, it is not. Individually, each can have an explanation. But if I have taught you one thing, it's that stacked is where the real picture is and stacked, they are the textbook architecture of running a charity for the private benefit of an insider. Let's look deeper into Sheridan's red flags: 1) Stacy Sheridan is a salaried TPUSA employee, its Senior Advancement Director. She also owns Cloverstone Ventures, the charity's number-one outside fundraiser. Confirmed in state corporate records. WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: the cleanest way to take from a charity is to never take from it, just sell to it. You do not touch the donation. You own the company the charity hires to collect it, and you set the price. Buyer and seller are the same hand, and every "fee" is a check she writes to herself. 2) Cloverstone is a custody fundraiser. In FY2025 it held custody of $19.3 million in donations, forwarded $18.8 million to the charity, and kept $482,568. Sheridan is also listed personally as a custody fundraiser, another $3.1 million through her own name. Over five years her firm has had custody of more than $88 million in donor money. WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: custody is the whole game. A normal vendor sends an invoice. A custody fundraiser holds the account the money lands in before the cause ever sees it. She is not a vendor, she is a tollbooth on her own employer's donations, counting the cash and reporting the one number nobody else can see. 3) She is paid as a fundraiser three ways off the same donors: through Cloverstone, under her own name, and as a salaried employee. Across the years her private companies have kept roughly $5 million in fees (Lionrock ~ $1.4 million, Cloverstone ~ $3.5 million, GSM ~ $200,000), on top of a six-figure salary. WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: you never take one big number that trips an audit. You take modest cuts off many angles of the same transaction you also control. Salary for being staff, company fees for being the vendor, personal billing for the third straw in the same cup. Sliced up, each looks fine. Stacked, it is a faucet she controls. 4) It is a relay of shell companies. GSM Strategy, then Lionrock, then Cloverstone. California's records show Lionrock is now terminated, and Cloverstone never registered in California at all. WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: you retire the entity the second it gets named in a story and reopen another one in a more sheltered state. Each new shell resets the trail to zero and strips one more public record. The money never stops. Only the name on it changes. The constant across all three is her. 5) On the tax return, Cloverstone reads as an ordinary top contractor. The return never says its owner is the charity's own development director. WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: the trick is to make the insider read as an outsider. Book the payment to what looks like a third-party firm on the federal form, and keep the one document that exposes it, the ownership record, in a different agency in a different state. Two systems that never touch, so the conflict never surfaces in one place. 6) To raise from Minnesotans, Cloverstone had to register with the Minnesota Attorney General as a professional fundraiser, post a $20,000 bond because it takes custody of donations, and file reports certified UNDER OATH by both the fundraiser and the charity. Registration #02304, now lapsed. WHY BAD ACTORS DO EXACTLY THIS: pick the lie. Either the "independent fundraiser" she swore to the State of Minnesota is really the charity's own development director, or the federal return that treats it as arm's-length is the false one. Both cannot be true. She is on both. How a charity actually loses over this A 501(c)(3) has one iron rule: it must be run for the public, not the private profit of its own insiders. When an insider makes money off the charity through a company she owns, an examiner runs three questions. Was it disclosed on Schedule L, the section built for exactly these insider deals? Was it approved by an independent board with the conflicted person out of the room? Was the price fair, or did the firm charge more than a normal outsider would? Here is what it can cost them. First, the scalpel: excess-benefit taxes under IRC Section 4958, a 25% excise tax on Sheridan personally, rising to 200% if she does not pay it back, plus a tax on the board members who signed off. Then the real penalty: a 501(c)(3) is flatly barred from letting its earnings benefit an insider, which is private inurement, an absolute prohibition. If the IRS concludes the charity is run for the private enrichment of the people who control it, it can revoke the exemption outright. Donations stop being deductible. The custody detail is what turns a conflict of interest into an inurement case: the insider who profits is also the one holding and counting the money. Some CYA: A conflict of interest is not automatically a crime. An insider-owned fundraiser can be legal IF it was disclosed on Schedule L, approved by an independent board with the conflicted person recused, and priced at a true market rate. That was not on the 990s I saw, but that is exactly what a review would test. No government agency has publicly questioned, investigated, or charged Stacy Sheridan; the questions here are mine, drawn from public filings. And most of the money she had custody of did reach the charity; the issue is the structure and the fees, not a claim that she pocketed the $88 million. I am not saying she stole anything. I am saying this is the exact setup regulators are trained to look for, and donors deserve to know their money passes through an employee's private company before it reaches the cause.

@tylerbowyer @bacelc97 Is that why you gave me the Best Coalition Chair award, December 20th, 2025?