U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) George Stern
(D) A. Gonzalez
(R) Sheri Davis
40%
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
January 23, 2018 06:16 AM UTC
30 Comments
DO NOT TRUST MITCH MCCONNELL.
(PJ is a right- wing hack. Funny, but a hack nonetheless.)
Question everything. Trust no one.
Indeed, but this is one of the funniest things he's ever written:
👍
WOTD from Mahablog: "Sympathy for the Devil"
By my book, the Democratic Party doesn't have the power to force a DACA solution, and neither does the Republican Party (the Senate might vote for it, but the House wouldn't even bring it to a vote). Trump actually does have the power (a signature) to reinstate the program. On the other hand, the Courts have put the DACA recission on hold.
Given those realities, the best and probably only thing the Democrats can do is send a message and look towards winning the House back in November.
Yep, it's all about messaging for the elections at this point. We really need to capture the House majority and start isolating the Freedumb Club. Leading by example, we might even apply a little bit of WD-40 on the bipartisan legislative gears that have rusted under GOP "leadership".
Even if somehow we get a Senate majority, that really won't help as much since minority Republicans would still be able to stymie legislation (we wouldn't go the nuclear route either). Trump would veto most Democratic bills in any case, so without a veto-proof majority, we just need to continue the pressure on him so that voters understand exactly who is undermining our democracy.
V'ger — what the heck is up with Beth McCann?
I'm no expert on the moses el case, davey. But there is an enormous difference between being acquitted– i.e., Not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt — and being proven actually innocent. O.J. was acuitted.
Susan Greene is a die hard liberal and undoubtless rejects the notion. But if both Coffman and McCann feel moses's case falls short of proving actual innocence, maybe it does.
The law, faced with such ambivalence, says an accused goes free unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. But to go to the next step and pay $1.9 million , would require at least a preponderance of evidence that he is actually innocent. That is a fairly high standard.
–But there is an enormous difference between being acquitted- i.e., Not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt- and being proven actually innocent…
Susan Greene is a die hard liberal and undoubtless rejects the notion.–
It’s almost like you didn’t read the linked article and just jumped straight to character assassination and logical fallacy.
Maybe there was a YouTube video?
I don't think the O.J. case is even close to the Moses-El trial. A more apt comparison is the Timothy Masters case, where as a 15 year old, he was convicted in a completely circumstantial case based on a bogus psych profile, painting him as a monster, leading the jury to convict on the "better safe than sorry" principle.
He not only was released, but got compensation ($4.1 million for 10 years lost). Of course, he is white. Moses-El is only due $1.9 million for his 28 years behind bars.
The evidence against Moses-El is even weaker (after identifying the guy that actually later confessed, the victim "saw Moses-El in a dream" along with two other men — come on…!).
Seems both cases exhibit prosecutorial overreach, and the threshold for the preponderance of evidence pointing to innocence more than met. Given the extenuating circumstance that the DPD destroyed the evidence Moses-El *paid* to have preserved and tested, a reasonable person would in fact say the standard has been met.
Davey, I have a great deal of respect for your opinion. But not only did Morrisey's staff review the evidence and found grounds to renew the prosecution, it appears that the attorney general will also agree with McGann that the standard of proof of innocence was not met.
I agree with you about the master's case. In that case, we had actual fraud and manufacturing phony evidence.
In Moses el's case, we have gross carelessness that might have shown him innocent or might have proven him guilty. Because it was thrown out, it did neither. Such negligence justifies throwing out the conviction, because the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt cannot be met. But failure to prove him guilty isn't even close to proving him innocent.
I do think the attorney general is a reasonable person and I'm willing to defer to her judgement on whether Moses el proved his innocence. We have only Susan Greene's word that she won't, but forgive me if I wait out the process before judging.
Fair enough, but I'm rooting for Moses-El because it really doesn't seem to me he got a fair trial 30-some years ago. Maybe it's southern white guilt on my part, but I don't think so.
And yes, I understand we must have a very high standard to reopen cases, much less authorize compensation.
The moses el case, like many others, casts doubt on the reliability of eye witness testimony, which is especially unreliable across racial lines. As I understand it, he will be able to sue and a separate trial will establish whether he is entitled to compensation.
I'm okay with that. I'm not okay with Susan Greene attacking the integrity of five denver das or adas, plus an attorney general, solely because they disagreed with — Susan Greene.
As for white guilt, my friend, there is plenty of it to go around.
I read the article. It seems like you are just too dumb to understand the difference between not being proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and having proof of actual innocence. Or do you believe O.J. was actually innocent?
Acquittal is not, repeat, not, proof of innocence.
Regardless of your opinion of my intelligence, which I will weigh with the respect it deserves, your mistake is ignoring the corroborating evidence of innocence which Greene points out that McCann is choosing to ignore.
Nothing you have written supports you assertion that Greene believes acquittal equals innocence, or that her liberal values have led her to such a conclusion.
Read the article, sloppy one. She several times cites the aquittal as proof of innocence.
Several times?
Perhaps you could point all of them out.
The only time she mentions the acquittal regarding innocence claims is at the end of three paragraphs starting with "Clarity of Moses-EL’s innocence…" which at no time uses the word "proof." She cites supporting evidence, including the acquittal, but never makes the logical leap you impute to her (and me, which neither of us has ever stated) that a jury acquittal alone is proof of innocence.
She does mention McCann's need to protect her people from the upcoming civil suit, which belies your claim to her having no horse in the race of defending her predecessor's work.
Actually, you fail reading comprehension again, daft one. I said the attorney general, a republican, had no stake in defending the work of the Denver DA, run by Democrats. You pretend I said McGann had no motive. Did you just do your usual sloppy don't bother to read my comments, or was it a deliberate attempt to mislead? I'll be charitable and assume that,once again, you didn't read the post carefully.
So, other than the acquittal, where is the proof that Moses el is innocent? If there was "proof" , why did the judge klet it go to the jury in the second trial? A prosecution must meet a certain standard for probable cause or the case will be tossed out. Seems like the courts felt the DA had a case that a jury could decide.
So, "proof"? With an eyewitness still identifying him? And with an independent review from the attorney general failing to see this "proof."
You're fighting way above your weight class as usual, Daffy.
there are three references by green to the acquittal as arguing for his innocence.
You're right, I'll never be in your weight class.
🔥🔥🔥Burn! Dr. D.😅
Try Pop Warner
I'm stealing this, Daft. It's great.
All Americans should be required to take a class in logic, IMHO.
So, you're saying you are too dumb to understand the difference between not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and being proven innocent?
Well, at least you're honest.
I'm glad you approve of my integrity if not my intellect, which is certainly more than one can say about you based on your level of discourse.
On the other hand, my intellect allows me to understand the difference between not being proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and being proven actually innocent.
By the way Susan glossed over the fact that the attorney general also apears ready to rule against moses el. Why would she do that if he has been proven innocent? She has no stake in defending the record of the democrats who run the denver da.
Ohh, obviously, like three denver das, the attorney general is a satan worshipper who persecutes the sainted moses el out of pure meanness?
Interesting planet you and susan live on, daft one. Let me know when you want to visit Earth and I’ll get you a passport.
CO Dems have one job: get your voters to the polls and DON’T IGNORE EPC!
Unless, that is, you like living in a purple haze and being bipartisan with monos.