President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%↑

30%

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
June 21, 2013 02:01 PM UTC

Radio host identifies conservative lawyer, with deep connections to Morse-recall campaign, only as an "election attorney"

  • 25 Comments
  • by: Jason Salzman

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

UPDATED June 22 with a response from Jimmy Sengenberger and a correction that the organization I am Created Equal donated over $55,000 to Colorado-Springs consulting company Kennedy Enterprises, as opposed to at least $14,000 as previously reported, to gather signatures and perform other functions for the Morse recall campaign.
—————

On KNUS yesterday morning, guest host Jimmy Sengenberger convened a panel so that listeners could, as Sengenberger put it, "learn exactly what's going on" regarding the campaign to recall State Senate President John Morse.

How you learn "exactly what's going on" from a one-sided panel is beyond me, but that's standard fare for conservative talk radio.

But Sengenberger's discussion went beyond misleading into grossly-manipulating territory due to the way he introduced one of the three panelists.

The panelists were Jennifer Kerns, identified as a "Spokeswoman for Recall Morse;" Jeff Hays, identified as "Chairman of El Paso Republican Party;" and Mario Nicolais, identified as an "election attorney" on the panel to give "legal insights." Sengenberger later referred to Nicolais as an "election attorney" or an "election lawyer."

What Sengenberger didn't say was that Nicolais is a staff attorney for Scott Gessler’s former firm, the Hackstaff Law Group (formerly called Hackstaff Gessler), which is obviously a conservative outfit. Gessler's office will be presiding at a hearing to determine the validity of a protest, filed by Morse backers, of the language used on the Morse-recall petitions. 

What's more, and you wouldn't expect Sengenberger to know this, Nicolais' name, along with the Hackstaff Law Group, appears on the Articles of Incorporation for IAmCreatedEqual.com, Inc., which donated over $55,000 to the Morse recall effort in in-kind contributions to Kennedy Enterprises to support a paid signature-gathering campaign and other activities. The fact that the signature gatherers were paid is often omitted on talk radio.

Sengenberger should inform KNUS listeners about Nicolais' conservative affiliations, as well as the fact that Nicolais' law firm (which is also Gessler's former law firm) represents a major funder of the recall, and now Gessler's office is presiding over the petition-protest hearing.

Sengenberger was very precise, and fair, in identifying the other guests on the show but, for some reason, he was incredibly vague about Nicolais.

I asked Sengenberger via email why he didn't identify Nicolais more precisely.

"Regrettably, I was unaware that Hackstaff is the former law firm of Secretary of State Scott Gessler, so that particular point of emphasis wouldn't have come to mind," wrote Sengenberger. "As for not mentioning the law firm where Mario Nicolais is an attorney, this was simply an unintentional oversight on my part that is inconsistent with what I usually do when I have attorneys on. However, I don't see how anyone listening wouldn't be able to determine his political leanings based on the tone and tenor of the conversation, including his comments."

Tweet
Share

Comments

25 thoughts on “Radio host identifies conservative lawyer, with deep connections to Morse-recall campaign, only as an “election attorney””

    1. Mario is a shill?  Oh really?  You might want to read up on this:  

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BRO1iAQGe8

      http://www.one-colorado.org/news/mario-nicolais-and-coloradans-for-freedom-testify-in-support-of-civil-unions/

      http://coloradoindependent.com/113708/colorado-civil-unions-battle-a-heated-all-republican-affair
       

      The last one has the following distinctly "non-shill" clip:

      Looking up at Lundberg, who was seated in the elevated “bench” of the Old Supreme Court Chamber where the hearing was held, Nicolais pressed a point saturated with culture-war references, casting images of gay family life into the air through a Republican lens and, in doing so, bending sterotypical Colorado conservative views to the shaking point.

      “Civil unions are good conservative public policy. They promote monogamous relationships. They promote families. They promote caring for children,” Nicolais said. “You can’t go to a Republican caucus or stump speech without hearing those values espoused over and over and over again. It is Republican red meat and I [repeat it] all the time myself.”

       

      2. Mario Nicolais may have a better position on civil unions than evangelical Christian Republicans. After all, gays, particularly gay men, often hold extremely conservative political views. Gay men also tend to have more disposable income for political donations, as they rarely have families to support.  I don't have access to any scholarly studies about this, and I haven't found that research if it exists. However, from my personal experience as an LBGT woman, gay men tend to be at least as conservative as straight men of comparable demographics, on many "wallet" conservative issues..  Therefore, Nicolais is on the right track in trying to move Colorado's Republican party to a more accepting and gay-friendly stance.

        However,Nicolais'  relatively tolerant positions on gay civil unions do not, for me, negate his unethical behavior in using his personal and professional connections with Secretary of State Gessler to promote the recall efforts against state Senators Giron and Morse. Nicolais has contributed his professional name to the articles of incorporation of the recall group, has presumably consulted on the petition language, although obviously he screwed up in vetting it for constitutionality, and the law firm contributed $55,000 to the recall effort. I hold Nicolais and Gessler equally responsible. I think that Gessler, at least, has a huge conflict of interest, for which he should be held accountable.  Nicolais is apparently still trying to shop himself around as a neutral, rather than a deeply involved party, so that, too, is unethical.

        Being just a little bit cooler on civil unions doesn't negate that

        1. What evidence do you have that Mario is using his purported connections with Gessler to have anything to do with fighting Grueskin's complaint?.  Is he even legal counsel on the efforts for defending the recall? 😉 

          1. At this time, I have no direct legal evidence that Gessler and Nicolais consulted improperly. However, there is a plethora of evidence that Gessler was unprofessional and partisan in carrying out the duties of the office of Secretary of State. These lead to at least an appearance of impropriety.

            Gessler's own words and actions are the strongest witnesses against him:

            1. He was interested in maintaining professional contacts and paid work as a consultant for his old law firm: http://bit.ly/eDzzWk http://gocl.me/fSmL5J. The Hackstaff law firm, formerly Hackstaff Gessler law firm, bought out Gessler's interest after Gessler bowed to public outrage at his plans to continue consulting with the firm. However, the firm included a clause that it could continue to retain Gessler at its discretion to do contract work. http://bit.ly/eRzYAT Did that happen? A legal investigation could discover it.
            2. He tried (successfully) to get taxpayers to pay for his legal defense against ethics charges:http://bit.ly/11uCtsX This shows that Gessler is unethical, cheap, and arrogant.
            3. Gessler stated that a good election outcome is one in which a Republican wins. What citizens of Colorado want is a Secretary of State, who, when asked this question, says something about how elections should allow every eligible voter to vote, be efficient, transparent and accurate. Those were not Gessler's goals, and I won't enumerate all of the partisan obstacles his office put in the way of voters – I named those in my last post on this thread.
            4. The Hackstaff firm put out a mailer to county clerks, disparaging their professionalism, and promoting fears about illegal aliens. http://bit.ly/11UJXUC Extremely unprofessional and partisan.
            5. Mario Nicolais is both on the roster of attorneys at Hackstaff law, and listed as the legal counsel (with John Cutler) on the Articles of Incorporation for Iamcreatedequal, which donated $55K to the Morse recall effort.http://bit.ly/16XLmMD. It strains credulity that Nicolais did not consult with Gessler. The law firm allowed it, by keeping that clause in place. Some entity other than myself would have to actually do the legal discovery to find the links.

            So there is evidence of unprofessionalism and partisanship in Mr. Gessler's behavior, the law firm definitely shows Republican partisanship, and Mr. Nicolais shows that he was deeply involved in the recall effort, and interested in concealing that fact by not fully disclosing on Sengenberger's show.

            I want to congratulate Mr. Salzman on a fine piece of investigative journalism. I would also like to thank Mr. Fladen for the inspiration to follow up on this matter…as I said, I don't have the clout to discover what's hidden, but there are entities that have both the interests and the clout to do so.

              1. I've dealt with the mailer previously.  And as for your "strains credulity" – do you have a single piece of evidence that Mario consulted with Gessler regarding the recall?  If you do, put it up. 

                For reasons I'm not going to get into right now, I'm not going to touch the other points at this time. 

                1. So, the Counselor's repsonse is to not respond. "For reasons I'm not going to get into now"….I'm sure that kind of argument is devastatingly effective in a courtroom. 

                2. As I wrote, I have no direct evidence of wrongdoing, but there is enough appearance of impropriety to warrant an investigation by those with more expert knowledge than I have, and I have done what I can to instigate such an investigation.

                  I have nothing in particular against Mario Nicolais, other than that he works for a political agenda with which I disagree strongly. Gessler, on the other hand, has interfered with voters and voting across the state, repeatedly, even though this conflicts with his job description and the mission statement of his organization. He's also shown disregard, if not contempt, for the rules constraining his behavior, with his most recent ethics violations.  I'm not the only one on this board, or in the State, to see and write about this. Gessler has earned whatever consequences come to him.

                  At this time, I have no direct legal evidence that Gessler and Nicolais consulted improperly. However, there is a plethora of evidence that Gessler was unprofessional and partisan in carrying out the duties of the office of Secretary of State. These lead to at least an appearance of impropriety – See more at: http://coloradopols.com/diary/44794/radio-host-identifies-conservative-lawyer-with-connections-to-morse-recall-campaign-only-as-an-election-attorney#sthash.1e8fpVlM.dpuf

                  At this time, I have no direct legal evidence that Gessler and Nicolais consulted improperly. However, there is a plethora of evidence that Gessler was unprofessional and partisan in carrying out the duties of the office of Secretary of State. These lead to at least an appearance of impropriety – See more at: http://coloradopols.com/diary/44794/radio-host-identifies-conservative-lawyer-with-connections-to-morse-recall-campaign-only-as-an-election-attorney#sthash.1e8fpVlM.dpuf

                  At this time, I have no direct legal evidence that Gessler and Nicolais consulted improperly. However, there is a plethora of evidence that Gessler was unprofessional and partisan in carrying out the duties of the office of Secretary of State. These lead to at least an appearance of impropriety – See more at: http://coloradopols.com/diary/44794/radio-host-identifies-conservative-lawyer-with-connections-to-morse-recall-campaign-only-as-an-election-attorney#sthash.1e8fpVlM.dpuf

                  At this time, I have no direct legal evidence that Gessler and Nicolais consulted improperly. However, there is a plethora of evidence that Gessler was unprofessional and partisan in carrying out the duties of the office of Secretary of State. These lead to at least an appearance of impropriety. – See more at: http://coloradopols.com/diary/44794/radio-host-identifies-conservative-lawyer-with-connections-to-morse-recall-campaign-only-as-an-election-attorney#sthash.1e8fpVlM.dpuf

                  1. AAck. This board is so slow that I multiple pasted a quote in my last response. Someone please delete the whole thing, it's not necessary. Edit functionality, anyone?

  2. This is just another piece of evidence showing that Scott Gessler is the most ethically challenged Secretary of State in Colorado history. He is going to decide whether recall petition language is constitutional and valid  on petitions to trigger a recall election for State Senator Morse. Yet,  a staff lawyer at his old law firm is on conservative radio promoting the recall effort, and  also contributed $55,000 to the recall effort.

    Other questionable items on Gessler's Sec o St' resume:

    • He wanted to continue working for his old law firm after the election, stating that he couldn't possibly live on the $60,00 a year salary for his position.
    • He tried to stop overseas soldiers from being able to vote in the 2012 election, if they didn't vote in 2010.
    • He purged perhaps as many as 5,000 voters from the electoral rolls, again using the excuse that they were "inactive" because they didn't vote in 2010. Coincidentally, (?) most of these were ethnic minority voters, poor people, elderly, students… read "Democratic leaning voters".
    • His office spent $8,000 (not including staff time)  to send letters to 4,000 Colorado citizens questioning their right to vote, based basically on racial profiling – they searched DMV records for motor voter registrants with Hispanic last names, or who had temporary licenses. Of those 4,000, exactly one non citizen voter was found.  As someone who registered voters in 2012, it seems that every time we turned around, Gessler was putting another roadblock in the way of voters.
    • He unprofessionally said that a good election outcome would be one in which "Republicans win".
    • Weeks before the election, 800 Coloradans who registered online were unregistered because of a "software glitch".
    • And, Gessler is now also in the limelight because of ethically questionable spending on training for staff.

    We must vote this guy out in 2014. We need a real, unbiased Secretary of State. If Gessler decides that the recall petition language is valid, it will only add to the ethics questions surrounding his tenure in the office.

        1. but, he is an attorney at Gessler's old firm. Seems pertinent to a well rounded discussion such as Sengenberger was pretending to host

  4. O.K., with all the bahind-the-scenes action going on–does anyone know the schedule/dates for the petition to be set or to be tossed?  I keep hearing different dates on things–but I'm not a close follower of the timing.

  6. Hello everyone, let me reiterate my quote that Jason added after I responded to him: "Regrettably, I was unaware that Hackstaff is the former law firm of Secretary of State Scott Gessler, so that particular point of emphasis wouldn't have come to mind," wrote Sengenberger. "As for not mentioning the law firm where Mario Nicolais is an attorney, this was simply an unintentional oversight on my part that is inconsistent with what I usually do when I have attorneys on. However, I don't see how anyone listening wouldn't be able to determine his political leanings based on the tone and tenor of the conversation, including his comments."

    Gessler connection or not, as a general practice, Jason's overriding critique here is a valid one.  I should have said the name of his firm regardless of the circumstances just as I usually do.

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

88 readers online now

Newsletter

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