Colorado GOP state senator ducks questions from Aurora victim’s father (via Raw Story )
The father of one of the victims of the July 2012 mass shooting in Colorado told Talking Points Memo on Friday that his state’s Senate Minority Leader, Bill Cadman (R), rebuffed him while sharing pictures of his son. “I walked right up to him, and I handed him one of the pictures, and I said, ‘…
Full story: Raw Story: Colorado GOP state senator ducks questions from Aurora victim’s father
As featured at Mugshots.com.
That is, unless you live in Grand Junction, Colorado. The Sentinel's Paul Shockley reports on the final disposition in the domestic violence case against newly sworn-in City Councilor Rick Brainard:
Grand Junction City Councilor Rick Brainard pleaded guilty Friday after a thwarted bid to end his domestic-violence case with something less than a guilty plea.
Brainard, 51, tried to plead “no contest” under a deal with the Mesa County District Attorney’s Office in which he would have been placed on a deferred judgment and sentence for 18 months, aside from a suspended jail sentence. Brainard sought permission to travel out-of-state…
“I will not accept a nolo contendere plea,” the judge said. “It’s guilty or not guilty.”
And with that, Brainard was left with little choice but to plead guilty to misdemeanor assault. He received an 18 month suspended sentence, with a domestic violence screening and community service. If Brainard successfully completes these requirements, he can get the conviction expunged from his criminal record.
As far as the public record is concerned, what's done is done.
Shockley reports that another contingent of taped-mouth women protesters was present as yesterday's hearing. It still appears Brainard intends to live this conviction down and remain on the city council, but either way the difference between a nolo contendre and a guilty plea wouldn't have helped his popularity much with them.
Laiche acknowledged his client “at some point and time needs to apologize to her.”
…When confronted by an officer with details about the incident, Brainard admitted he’d grabbed her, pushed on her chest, pulled her hair and slapped her on the left side of her neck and cheek area, according to the affidavit. Brainard told the officer he slapped the woman because she needed to “shut her mouth,” the affidavit said. [Pols emphasis]
This isn't some indiscretion in the distant past–Brainard assaulted this woman three days after winning office. As we've said previously, the indifference shown by Brainard in taking office after this is something we don't think would would be tolerated in many other parts of the state–and points to a, for lack of a better word, dysfunction in the culture of beet-red Mesa County, Colorado. Where are the civic leaders to say "enough, Mr. Brainard?"
Each day is a welcome fresh opportunity to prove us wrong.
Late this afternoon, the office of Colorado Attorney General John Suthers released a long-awaited technical guidance letter prepared for the Department of Public Safety on the implementation of House Bill 1224, the magazine limit bill. This technical guidance was requested by Gov. John Hickenlooper at the signing of HB-1224 into law, following the many objections raised by opponents of the legislation that the bill would "ban all magazines," or at least all magazines "with a removable baseplate" or other design feature that could hypothetically allow them to be expanded beyond the legal maximum of 15 rounds.
As we have reassured our readers over and over, but unfortunately local media has failed to clarify for an anxious and misinformed public–even helping spread baseless speculation–that is not going to happen.
Definition of "Large Capacity Magazine"
Under House Bill 1224, the term "large capacity magazine" is defined, in part, as follows: "a fixed or detachable magazine, box, drum, feed strip, or similar device capable of accepting, or that is designed to be readily converted to accept, more than fifteen rounds of ammunition."
The phrase "designed to be readily converted to accept more than fifteen rounds of ammunition" has prompted questions regarding the scope of the definition, particularly because some ammunition magazines include features, such as removable baseplates, that can be removed and replaced, or otherwise altered, so that the magazine accepts more than fifteen rounds.
The term "designed," when used as a modifier, denotes a feature that meets a specific function. This suggests that design features that fulfill more than one function, and whose function is not specifically to increase the capacity of a magazine, do not fall under the definition. The features of a magazine must be judged objectively to determine whether they were "designed to be readily converted to accept more than fifteen rounds."
Under this reading of the definition, a magazine that accepts fifteen or fewer rounds is not a "large capacity magazine" simply because it includes a removable baseplate which may be replaced with one that allows the magazine to accept additional rounds. [Pols emphasis] On many magazines, that design feature is included specifically to permit cleaning and maintenance. Of course, a magazine whose baseplate is replaced with one that does, in fact, allow the magazine to accept more than fifteen rounds would be a "large capacity magazine" under House Bill 1224.
Here's the full text of the memo, which also explains the meaning of the "continuous possession" language in the bill–and again, the plain interpretation of the bill does not lead to the wild unforeseen consequences Republican opponents insisted would be the result. With both of these provisions but particularly the language on whether magazines were "designed to be readily converted," it is obvious now that opponents like Jon Caldara of the Independence Institute were not telling the truth when they claimed that House Bill 1224 would mean "almost all guns in Colorado will never be able to get a magazine again." It means that every reporter who uncritically reprinted this lie now needs to write another story explaining how that wasn't true.
And folks, we're not going to forget this. The amount of misinformation spread about this legislation by opponents, and too often subsidized by reporters dismayingly willing to trade long-term credibility for short-term scoops, was totally unacceptable and needs to be called out. A lowly political blog should not be the only media source telling the public the truth about this bill, but that really does seem to be what happened in this case.
The people of Colorado deserved better. And we hope they finally get it now.
Full story: BREAKING: Sky Will NOT Fall When Magazine Bill Takes Effect
UPDATE: A photo forwarded to us from today's press conference announcing the lawsuit against Colorado's new gun safety bills, Dave Kopel of the Independence Institute on the right:
See the man in the black shirt on the left? That's Clint Webster, a 2010 GOP candidate for House District 24.
What's so special about Clint Webster, you ask? We reported on Mr. Webster as part of a 2010 release of the criminal records of a number of legislative candidates, mostly Republican:
Webster was arrested in 1987 for disturbing the peace, and in 1991 for assault. Webster pleaded guilty to felony assault and menacing. The arrest report obtained from the Jefferson County Sheriff shows that Webster was apprehended after firing two shots from a semi-automatic pistol at his ex-wife. [Pols emphasis] When asked by arresting officers what his intention was when he fired, Webster stated something along the lines that he had warned his wife to stop bothering him and had even threatened to kill her, yet she ‘showed up at his home anyway.’
The Denver Post's editorial board had this to say about Webster's 2010 bid:
Many of the infractions are examples of poor judgment that occurred during candidates' younger years. But some ought to take them out of the running. Take Republican Clint Webster of Lakewood, who is running against Rep. Sue Schafer, D-Wheat Ridge, for the House District 24 seat…
Though that charge was dismissed, a more troubling incident arose in 1991. Webster was arrested after threatening to kill his ex-wife and firing two shots at her and another person from a pistol as they drove away from his house.
Here's a video report from FOX 31's Eli Stokols on Webster's 2010 bid:
"I said I was going to shoot, not kill."
Now, what do you suppose Clint Webster, of all people, was doing at this press conference today?
We can't shake the sense of amazement: these same county sheriffs stood before the Colorado legislature this year and testified against Senate Bill 197, a bill to protect victims of domestic violence from partners with guns. Today, they're standing with one of the worst Republican mistakes of the 2010 election season, a man whose biggest claim to fame is having fired shots at his wife?
Hubris, folks. There's no other word to describe it. Original post follows.
WEDNESDAY UPDATE: Interestingly, the first national pickup for this story is from the conservative Daily Caller, which makes little attempt to defend Senate Minority Leader Bill Cadman–and includes a conciliatory quote from House Minority Leader Mark Waller, the other Republican legislator present at yesterday's forum.
While Tom Sullivan spoke, Cadman fidgeted with a notebook and appeared to be doodling or making notes. [Pols emphasis] Waller sat and listened…
Contacted later, Waller said he understood the emotion Sullivan displayed.
“You feel horrible that the guy lost his son. It’s terrible,” he told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “One of the things he said there is, ‘try to imagine what that’s like.’ And I’m thinking to myself, I’ve got two kids, I’ve got a 14-year-old son and a 10-year-old daughter and I can’t imagine what that’s like. I can’t imagine the pain of that loss.”
“The only thing I could think is I’d be just as angry as he is,” Waller continued, “but there’s nothing that can be said there that’s going to lessen his pain in any way.”
Full retreat has been sounded, folks. We await Cadman's apology.
—–
An extraordinary confrontation occurred today between the father of a victim of the Aurora shooting last summer, and GOP Colorado Senate Minority Leader Bill Cadman of Colorado Springs. If you were one of the dozen or so in the audience today at the Denver Post's wrapup discussion panel with Cadman and House Minority Leader Mark Waller, or the somewhat larger audience watching online, most of the hour-long discussion was uninspiring boilerplate and complaints you've heard many times. Republicans aren't happy with the results of this year's session. 46:00 into the discussion, Rep. Waller does get in an amusing quip about how he has no more control over crazies in his party than "Democrats do over what goes up on Colorado Pols." Touche!
And then, as the very last question of the panel, this happened.
Full story: Video: GOP Legislative Leaders Meet Aurora Shooting Father
The National Rifle Association (NRA) and CEO Wayne LaPierre were roundly criticized for their bumbling responses to both the school shootings in Connecticut and the subsequent discussions about finding a solution to gun violence. LaPierre's big "solution" to keeping kids safer was to put more armed guards in schools, an idea that brought immediate scrutiny from educators and others for a variety of reasons — among them the concern that adding more armed guards would just lead to more accidental shootings.
None of these concerns deterred Republican Sens. Scott Renfroe and Ted Harvey from introducing their "more guns in schools act" at the beginning of the legislative session. To no-one's surprise, the bill never made it out of committee. Concerns about accidental shootings were not overstated at the time, and Colorado is once again an example of the need for more gun safety — not more guns. As Fox 31 reports:
A student underwent surgery Monday night after an accidental shooting in the staff parking lot outside Rangeview High School.
Police spokesman Ofc. Frank Fania says a staff worker at the school accidentally shot the student in the leg in the staff worker’s car. The student was getting a ride home.
The gun accidentally fired while the shooter was putting it away in the glove box of his vehicle.
Fania says the staff worker has a second job as an armed security officer, so it’s legal for him to have the gun. He is not a teacher at the school and his job as a security guard is not associated with Aurora Public Schools.
Thankfully, it appears as though the student will be fine. While the school employee did not have the weapon for school-related security, it is nevertheless another reminder that increasing the number of guns in any situation will absolutely increase the likelihood of dangerous accidents.
Dave Kopel.
The Denver Post's opinion board released their list of winners and losers of the 2013 Colorado legislative session late Thursday. Without getting too far into the weeds criticizing yet another bizarrely skewed perspective on this year's legislative session, in which apparently recording devices only worked when Democrats said something stupid–we've already promised a more comprehensive look at this in a forthcoming write-up–we do have a few words to add to one of the Post's declared "winners," Dave Kopel of the conservative Independence Institute.
David Kopel. This Independence Institute researcher and University of Denver law professor emerged as gun rights supporters' go-to guy for Second Amendment information and technical knowledge on guns.
It's true that Kopel's profile was higher than ever during the reinvigorated post-Newtown debate over gun safety legislation, testifying both in the Colorado legislature and in Washington, D.C. and providing "expert" backup for Republicans unsuccessfully (in Colorado, anyway) trying to stop the bills from passing. In terms of sheer increased exposure, sure, he's a winner. But only if you don't pay attention to the results of the gun safety fight in Colorado–or what he and the organization for which he serves as "research director" actually said.
There are 65 members of the Colorado House of Representatives, and 35 members of the Colorado State Senate. The Colorado legislature as a whole is a representative body, with each Senator representing about 143,691 constituents, and each House member standing for 77,372 Coloradans.
The Colorado Constitution outlines the makeup and duties of the state legislature, but it is a guarantee in the United States Constitution that every state shall have a republican form of government (with representatives elected by the people), rather than a direct democracy governed by the citizens.
Even Dawson didn’t cry as much as Colorado Republicans in 2013
Why the brief history lesson? As the legislature closes out its 2013 session, Republicans and some political pundits are busy accusing Colorado Democrats of "overreaching" for passing a lot of progressive pieces of legislation, yet they seem to forget that this "republican form of government" is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Members of the Colorado legislature are elected by popular vote, the purpose of which is to see that the majority of Colorado citizens are not overruled by the minority. It is a logical extension of the process that the minority may not be happy with the results of an elected body chosen by the majority.
To put it bluntly, that's kind of the point. The system is working as designed.
But don't tell that to Colorado Republicans. Take this recent press release from the Colorado House Republicans titled: "ICYMI: Democrats continue to run up the score."
The posting from the House GOP quotes liberally from an April 28th story in the Denver Post, though they notably failed to quote the sillier parts of the story about a "marathon legislative session":
Rep. Frank McNulty of Highlands Ranch raced to the microphone and, in a thundering voice, accused Democrats of "doing a touchdown dance at the expense of the minority." [Pols emphasis]…
…Republicans have accused Democrats of "overreaching," waging war on rural Colorado and introducing bills to reward unions and trial lawyers while harming businesses.
Rep. Dan Pabon, D-Denver, disagrees.
"Overreaching? No," he said. "I think we've been listening to the people of Colorado and they've told us, 'We put you in charge and we want you to get something done.' "
Hey McNulty, ask Carly Simon if this is about you.
Pabon is absolutely right here, and we've made the same argument before in this space. But before we get to that, let's examine how Republicans are so upset at the Democrats for continually beating them in elections that they think the 2013 legislative session is actually about them. To quote Carly Simon (no, seriously):
You're so vain, you probably think this song is about you
You're so vain, I'll bet you think this song is about you
Don't you? Don't You? Don't You?
There are many, many reasons why Republicans have never come close to regaining control of the state legislature since their surprise ouster in 2004, and their reaction to being steamrolled in 2013 is just another number on the list. Democrats are pushing ahead with progressive issues because Republicans don't do anything but get in the way. They don't offer reasonable amendments or attempt to debate in good faith — they just try to gum up the works and play procedural games. Anyone who has heard Republican Rep. Bob Gardner's version of a filibuster can understand what we mean here; Gardner just talks comically slow for as long as he can, his only goal to try to bore people into submission. Yet Republicans are annoyed when Democrats try to move things along and actually, you know, do their job?
Republicans call this "overreaching," and take it as a personal affront. But it's not about them, and it never was. It's about Democrats understanding that Colorado voters want them to lead; voters gave McNulty and the GOP a narrow majority in the House in 2010, and they promptly yanked it back from them two years later when it became clear that Republicans still have no intention of actually legislating.
Voters are tired of Republicans who can't figure out if they should still hate gay people. They're sick of Republicans who compare abortion to the Holocaust while everyone else is worried about schools and the economy. They're fed up with Republicans who persist with their ridiculous "Personhood" policy ideas that keep…getting…rejected…again…and again. "Personhood" isn't even about the issue anymore — it's a symbol of Republicans refusing to listen to even the most loudly shouted opinions of voters.
The simple truth of the 2013 session is this: Democrats were given a significant mandate from voters in 2012, and they are putting it to use. Some would say it is long overdue, and perhaps they learned their lesson from Congressional Democrats who did next to nothing with their 2008 mandate and then lost the House of Representatives in 2010. In fact, a closer look at the election results from the past decade tells a story that makes you wonder why Democrats waited so long to push harder on their agenda in the first place…
(Promoted by Colorado Pols)
Last month I reported that Larry Pratt, Director of Gun Owners of America, praised Weld Country Sheriff John Cooke for his opposition to gun safety legislation.
On KFKA's Scooter McGee show, Pratt said some 400 sheriffs in the U.S. are promising not to enforce gun-safety laws, like Colorado's new statute expanding background checks.
Pratt also said some sheriffs have vowed to arrest federal agents whom sheriffs believe are violating the U.S. Constitution.
Pratt said on the radio that some "sheriffs are saying, 'Not only will I not cooperate, but if the Feds are doing something unconstitutional in my county, particularly a gun grab, I’ll put them in jail.'"
It wasn't clear whether Cooke was among the sheriffs who are ready to arrest the feds, so I called to find out.
"The state gun laws are unenforceable, and I won’t enforce them," he said. "I’d rather go after drug dealers, burglars, and rapists."
But Cook said he wouldn't actually arrest federal agents in Weld County, even if he thinks they're enforcing unconstitutional laws, like federal gun safety statutes.
"I’m not going to arrest a federal agent," he said. "No, I’m not going to go that far."
Full story: Weld County Sheriff Cooke won’t arrest federal agents
The local Colorado Springs media appears to have finally become aware that something is not quite right in the "grassroots" signature drive to place a recall of Colorado Senate President John Morse on the Senate District 11 ballot this fall. A scathing new report last night from NBC affiliate News 5's Jacqui Heinrich puts key questions about the "grassroots" nature of this paid petition effort to rest–and corroborates Kennedy Enterprises' shady history as laid out to voters in radio ads and robocalls this weekend.
The recall effort is targeting those leaders who showed the strongest support for gun control bills, with Senate President John Morse seemingly at the top of the list. His camp is fighting back with a counter-campaign opposing the recall effort, and while it's clear what both sides are trying to do, it's not clear who is behind the recall campaign.
"This is what we do for a living. We travel around the country, we go from city to city, state to state, we put issues and candidates on the ballot for basically anybody who has money," a man who identifies himself as Tracy Taylor can be heard saying on an undercover video El Paso County Democrats say was taken at a training session for signature gatherers at Kennedy Enterprises. They're group that was hired to gather signatures to support recalling Senate President John Morse. In the past few weeks their workers have been seen gathering signatures outside grocery stores and in neighborhoods around Colorado Springs.
"It's absolutely legal, it's just unethical," Kathleen Ricker, Party Chair for the El Paso County Democrats told News 5…
Though Kennedy Enterprises didn't answer News 5's inquiries as to whether they did background checks on current employees, we did confirm the company faced allegations that they did hire criminals including at least one sex offender that was going door to door on a petition issue back in 2008.
As for the organization at least nominally running the show here? Meet Nick Andrasik, gentle viewers!
As it turns out, Kennedy Enterprises was hired by the Basic Freedom Defense Fund, run by Nick Andrasik. Andrasik has been in the news recently for using unsavory language on his blog to describe some pro-gun control politicians– something recall supporters think could distract from the overall message of the campaign. But since B.F.D.F. is a 501C4 organization, Andrasik doesn't have to disclose who is donating money to the cause, although some out-of-staters have announced online that they're funding it.
It's a big relief to see this story, as the facts of this paid recall effort against Sen. Morse and possibly others in retaliation for the passage of gun safety legislation this year have been pretty seriously misrepresented up to now. This story from News 5 captures everything we've been talking about for weeks: from the distasteful and marginal nature of the original organizers complete with Andrasik's overworking the "c-word" describing female legislators, to the mercenary frankness of "consultant" Tracy Taylor at Kennedy Enterprises.
Will it make a difference? That can't be determined yet of course, and Heinrich's report certainly notes that there are plenty of locals willing to complain about Sen. Morse, on and off camera. But opponents of this recall attempt needed to show that their claims about shady, potentially criminal unscreened petition gatherers are not baseless. Furthermore, the above photo of the hirsute Mr. Andrasik entranced by his giant phallic pistol, as shown to thousands of Colorado Springs viewers last night along with his offensive choice of words, isn't going to help the average well-adjusted adult voter find common ground with this recall effort.
Full story: Kennedy/Andrasik Exposé Shakes Up Morse Recall Attempt
9NEWS' Blair Shiff reports:
Citing racial bias, geographic concentration, and disproportionate usage in Colorado's application of capital punishment, various influential local leaders called on Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper to commute Nathan Dunlap's death sentence to life in prison without the possibility of parole.
A clemency petition was filed Monday by Dunlap's attorneys.
"We … urge you to grant clemency because the death penalty in Colorado is deeply flawed," states a letter to Governor Hickenlooper, signed by former judges. "These facts depict a system that acts in an arbitrary fashion, based on factors such as race and geography … Assuming that the death penalty may sometimes be appropriate, there is no principled reason for it to be applied in the circumstances of this case."
…Many of the supporters for clemency express concern in their letters that the death penalty in Colorado is not used proportionally, and it is concentrated geographically and by the profile of the prisoner, with racial bias and a bias towards younger offenders.
If we were in the position of betting today, we would lean toward thinking that convicted "Chuck E. Cheese Killer" Nathan Dunlap will be executed, if not in the time frame of the date currently set for his execution than at some inevitable point. Colorado's death penalty is in practice very sparingly applied, with only one execution actually carried out in the past 45 years. Politically, capital punishment became an issue this year after a bill to abolish it was killed with help from both Gov. John Hickenlooper and Rep. Rhonda Fields–the latter having a personal perspective on the issue, since two convicts on death row in Colorado are there for killing Field's child. After so much else accomplished, in particular gun safety, repeal of the death penalty just wasn't in the cards this year.
That experience makes one think that Hickenlooper will not stand in the way of Dunlap's execution, for a mass murder considered one of the worst in Colorado history (certainly at the time). If he does, it would mean the arguments about the death penalty's racial and geographic inequities were persuasive in this actual case where they were not in the hypothetical during the legislative debate. Politically, that would still be a very big deal.
Full story: Hickenlooper Weighs Clemency For “Chuck E. Cheese Killer”
This year at Colorado Pols, we've faced a real challenge keeping track of the drastically higher volume of unsourced, un-factchecked, and uncritically reported nonsense filling the space between rational debate over the issues affecting Colorado politics during the current legislative session. Particularly with regard to the gun safety debate, but with examples ranging the gamut of legislative agenda items and political issues this year, It has been tougher than ever to even note for the record so many absurdly false statements and claims, let alone give them the critical attention they deserve.
What we're trying to say is, there is more BS clouding Colorado politics today then perhaps ever before.
Meanwhile, as we've discussed repeatedly, the local press seems intent on minutely fact-checking one side of the debate, while allowing irredeemable cockamamie nonsense from the other side to go either unreported or worse, reported without any kind of fact-checking. There are lots of theories for why this is happening, but it may be as simple as a desire to keep the fight "fair"–and as a result, newsworthy to journalists driven to enforce a dogmatic "equivalency" between the two sides. For our part, we have been careful to report gaffes from both Republicans and Democrats this year, and that has emerged as a difference between our coverage and that of most local media. We'll have much more to say about the omissions and systematic misreporting from local media this legislative session in the coming days.
In the meantime, we're starting a new irregular feature called "Today In BS." In an effort to more quickly and comprehensively note for the record brazenly false statements made in Colorado politics, we hope to frequently and briefly post such items with their debunking–and move on. That way, when a local mainstream journalist reprints the name nonsensical allegation a few days/weeks later with no context, you'll already know the truth.
Today's example is a quote being widely attributed by conservatives to Senate President John Morse.
AP reports via the Durango Herald from our caddy-corner neighbors to the southwest:
Just days after Gov. Jan Brewer signed a law designed to hinder police participation in gun-buyback events, the city of Phoenix on Saturday held the first of three buybacks that organizers are calling the largest effort of its kind in the state’s history.
The law Brewer signed April 29 takes effect this summer and requires cities and counties to sell surrendered weapons instead of destroying them.
That basically bars police and supporters of the events from accomplishing their key goal, cutting the number of guns on the streets, and police likely would not participate…
This is, safe to say, one of the stranger conservative "backlashes" against the push for gun safety laws around the country. The new Arizona law in question, House Bill 2455, still allows police agencies to conduct firearms buyback programs, but they wouldn't be allowed to destroy the guns afterward as has always been the objective. Under this law, the weapons have to be sold back into the market. Given that the "buyback" system is entirely voluntary for all parties, the requirement that the guns not be destroyed seems based solely on an emotional attachment to guns–like vegetarians trying to shut down a meatpacking plant.
Opponents claim the law, in addition to being a stupendously bad idea, is shot full of loopholes too.
“I could do one through law enforcement, through (Tucson police), tomorrow and put a price tag of $100,000 on them, and no one would bid on them so they’d sit in storage,” [Tucson city councilman Steve] Kozachik said Friday. “Or, in the alternative, I could put a price on them of a penny and sell them to an artist who would melt them down and make them into art.
“They’ve really achieved nothing but made fools of themselves,” he said of the law’s backers.
Obviously, Arizona's new law is a 180-degree opposite from the gun safety bills we have passed in Colorado this year. In a state dominated by Republicans at all levels, "gun safety" apparently means, literally, safety for guns–at the direct expense of public safety, not to mention the wholesale disregard of the opinion of law enforcement. Arizona's nutty new law couldn't stand out in starker contrast to the path our state has chosen on gun safety, and we expect most well-adjusted adults will be fine with that.
Full story: Arizona Passes “Gun Safety Legislation”–Literally
(Promoted by Colorado Pols)
On Saturday, May 4th, A Whole Lot of People for John Morse, an issue committee organized by a group of Colorado Springs citizens to support John Morse, will launch a public alert campaign. The campaign will warn residents about the checkered past of a company hired to collect personal information and petition signatures in a paid recall attack.
In an effort to stop the misguided recall attack launched by a vocal minority, radio ads will inform the public of this company’s history of allegations including fraud, deception, and hiring criminals. A Whole Lot of People for John Morse is an independent group that is not coordinating with any candidate committee.
“We think it’s really important that Colorado Springs and Manitou Springs residents know that a signature gathering company with a highly questionable track record is going door-to-door in our community,” said Christy LeLait, Campaign Manager for A Whole Lot of People for John Morse.
“Kennedy Enterprises has a shady history of fraud and deception,” LeLait continued. “To our knowledge, they don’t perform background checks on their signature gatherers. And these are people who have access to our personal information.”
This public alert campaign will include radio ads, online ads, and a website where citizens can report fraudulent activity of this company. A link to the ad is available at Colorado Recall Watch, and included below.
As The Hill's Jonathan Easley reports:
The Republican National Committee (RNC) and Democratic National Committee (DNC) clashed Wednesday over a new RNC ad that the DNC says cruelly exploits the Newtown shootings.
The ad, called "The First 100 Days," criticizes Obama on the failure of his legislative agenda, including gun control, so far in Congress. It features a voiceover saying that Obama’s agenda has “already suffered a string of defeats,” and a black and white photo of the president reaching to embrace Nicole Hockley, the distraught mother of a victim in the shooting massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.
Democratic National Committee spokesman Brad Woodhouse called the ad “disgraceful” in a tweet and “disgusting” in another. ​​
