President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) J. Sonnenberg

(R) Ted Harvey

20%↑

15%↑

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

(R) Doug Bruce

20%

20%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

40%↑

20%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
December 27, 2012 04:26 PM UTC

Thursday Open Thread

  • 27 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“Never forget the power of silence, that massively disconcerting pause which goes on and on and may last induce an opponent to babble and backtrack nervously.”

–Lance Morrow

Comments

27 thoughts on “Thursday Open Thread

  1. Boehner has basically said he can’t do anything so the Senate has to lead and send him something. (And I guess he then asks his caucus if they’ll vote for it.) I think he truly is stuck.

    Reid has said that he’s waiting for something from the House that the Dems can support. And McConnell is silent (from all indications not talking behind the scenes either).

    Se we’ve hit the debt limit (we’re now in the extraordinary measures part). Taxes are set to rise. And government spending is about to take a big hit.

    And it looks like Congress is so dysfunctional that this cannot be addressed. So what happens now?

  2. On the boyles show, today, petey announced that the President has the power to issue an executive order banning the manufacture, sale and possession of assault weapons, but he has refused to do so because Obama wants to attack the entire Second Amendment.

    This is, of course, total bullshit.  The President has no such authority.  But, no one is allowed to be on his show if they contradict what boyles says.  The question is:

    Is boyles senile or is he paid to spread total misinformation?

    I know, I know, Jason, boyles is your sometimes BFF.

  3. Sadly for many of you this just isnt fair, not fair to Gregory or NBC. Unintended consequences …. is the political class’s term for the pain you feel in this case.

    On the other hand it is troubling, the Gregory children attend the same school as the Obama’s. Thankfully it’s a very slim chance that any school policy addresses potential sanctions to the Gregory’s.

    However, a felony conviction is certainly something that might damage Mr. Gregory’s security profile among the political class. The following story seems to make it look much worse for Mr Gregory, clearly worse then even I suspected.

    The trouble with Gregory’s showing off the gun clip is that DC’s tough municipal code prohibits possession of “any large capacity ammunition feeding device, regardless of whether the device is attached to a firearm.”

    It carries a maximum penalty of one-year in prison. DC police said they warned NBC against using the ammo as a prop.

    “NBC contacted (the Metropolitan Police Department) inquiring if they could utilize a high capacity magazine for their segment,” police spokeswoman Gwendolyn Crump said.

    “NBC was informed that possession of a high capacity magazine is not permissible and their request was denied. This matter is currently being investigated.”

    NBC refused comment.

    http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/tv/gregory_gun_trouble_WXh9jzbCi20pDNQTeUcS4I

  4.   From the Wikipedia:

    Mens rea is Latin for “guilty mind”.[1] In criminal law, it is viewed as one of the necessary elements of some crimes. The standard common law test of criminal liability is usually expressed in the Latin phrase, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, which means “the act does not make a person guilty unless the mind is also guilty”. Thus, in jurisdictions with due process, there must be an actus reus accompanied by some level of mens rea to constitute the crime with which the defendant is charged (see the technical requirement of concurrence). As a general rule, criminal liability does not attach to a person who acted with the absence of mental fault. The exception is strict liability crimes.

    In civil law, it is usually not necessary to prove a subjective mental element to establish liability for breach of contract or tort, for example. However, if a tort is intentionally committed or a contract is intentionally breached, such intent may increase the scope of liability as well as the measure of damages payable to the plaintiff.

    Therefore, mens rea refers to the mental element of the offence that accompanies the actus reus. In some jurisdictions, the terms mens rea and actus reus have been replaced by alternative terminology. In Australia, for example, the elements of the federal offences are now designated as “fault elements” or “mental elements” (mens rea) and “physical elements” or “external elements” (actus reus). This terminology was adopted to replace the obscurity of the Latin terms with simple and accurate phrasing.[2]

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

185 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!