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%ā†“

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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
March 21, 2018 11:30 AM UTC

Tate's Harassment Victim Sick of Senate GOP Stonewall

  • 33 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Sen. Jack Tate (R-Handsy).

KUNC’s Bente Birkeland once again breaks news that casts Senate Republicans in an unfavorable light as the foot-dragging reluctance by Senate President Kevin Grantham to take action against Senators found by independent investigations to have committed harassment becomes the story–despite desperate attempts to muddy the waters:

It has been nearly two months since an independent investigator with the Employerā€™s Council concluded and found the accuser to be credible in allegations of sexual harassment against Sen. Jack Tate. Weeks later, there have been no consequences as a result and the accuser said she wants to know why. So she says she now wants to make the investigatorā€™s report public, which is allowed under the General Assemblyā€™s workplace harassment policy, in hopes it will spur action.

Senate President Kevin Grantham is charged with determining consequences for Tate, R-Centennial. When asked about it in early March Grantham, also a Republican, said he didnā€™t feel obligated to rush to a conclusion when dealing with something this serious.

ā€œIf weā€™re going to take action on these we have to make sure weā€™re crossing the tā€™s and dotting the iā€™s,ā€ Grantham said. ā€œIf I cross tā€™s and dot iā€™s to a fault, Iā€™ll take that. But I want to make sure that we do things right.ā€

Two months since the investigation into Sen. Jack Tate’s conduct was completed with a finding that the alleged harassment occurred based on the preponderance of the evidence. Two months that Grantham has known the allegations were credible, and the victim has known that her voice has been heard–yet nothing has been done.

So the victim authorized the release of the investigative report in its redacted entirety:

The investigator said she found the accuser credible generally because of the specific details she gave that made the allegations seem plausible, and because she didnā€™t appear to have a reason to make up the allegations. The report said the accuser gave Tate the benefit of the doubt, ā€œthat his actions were based on not understanding personal space. This leniency… bolsters her credibility.ā€

The investigator questioned Tateā€™s credibility because she said he attempted to sway the investigation with outside information, because his answers appeared rehearsed with his attorney by his side and because of Tateā€™s general demeanor. [Pols emphasis]

It’s very easy to see from the full contents of the investigative report documenting the allegations against Sen. Tate why Senate Republicans attempted to distract the press and public with their ill-conceived attack on Sen. Daniel Kagan. It didn’t work, and appears to be backfiring–but that doesn’t mean we can’t understand why they tried.

It’s because this is a PR disaster of the highest order. It indicts the entire GOP Senate leadership, which has been sitting on the results of this investigation for almost two months while women have no choice but come to work at the Capitol with Tate and other lawmakers credibly accused of harassment. And after the House took bipartisan action to expel Rep. Steve Lebsock, the Senate’s failure to take any meaningful action to deal with their own sexual harassment problem has created an unacceptable double standard.

If the Republican leadership of the Colorado Senate won’t fix this, it falls to the voters in every single Colorado Senate district to ensure Republicans no longer hold the majority in that chamber in 2019. All we can say is this: Republican Senate leadership is giving Democrats everything they need to accomplish that goal and then some.

Tweet
Share

Comments

33 thoughts on “Tate’s Harassment Victim Sick of Senate GOP Stonewall”

      1. But what Crowder is reported to have done pales in comparison to what the two big pervs. And IIRC, Crowder expressed regret for what he did.

          2. The victim, a young intern at the time, has released the redacted report. Basically, Tate, a 50 year old married man, was flirting, making comments about her clothing, arranged to be alone in an elevator where he touched her shoulder (somewhere I read waist, as well, but maybe that was someone else). She was uncomfortable, probably communicated that discomfort, but Tate didn't back down. This kind of thing went on for a while.

            The problem is that he was in a position of power and took advantage of a young and insecure intern. He clearly knew what he was doing. Major pervs? More like medium icky pervs. Still not OK.

             

            1. Hmm…. Im not so sure that there is anything here. I did read the report and from what I can tell this could all just be something she though was going on and really it was nothing. Im not really sure you can arrange to be alone in an elevator with someone that seems far fetched, also if you read the report she says there could have been other people in the elevator. She just doesn't remember. I also read that she was only at the capital once a week and she quit mid session witch puts her there only around 7 total days. The article also said that she worked in a different building and rarely went over to the capital. I just don't see a lot of time for him to be in contact with her and I have yet to see anything that strikes me as sexual harassment. I have been following this case from the beginning and her story has changed over time and been embellished. Examples of this is when the story first came out she said that he told her that he liked her skirt. Now she says in the report that he said "I like that skirt on you" also the initial story said that there were defiantly additional people in the elevator but now she doesn't remember. Being a woman and a victim this case seems to be normal human interactions and a wast of government time and money. He is my senator and I want to know if he is misbehaving but I just don't see it.

          3. Point well taken.  “Perversion” implies abnormal, and sexual harassment has now proven to be hardly out of the norm for our GOPer legislators, . . .

            . . . it’s now more of a mainstream expectation, I suppose?

            Feel better?

    1. When did Steve Lebsock go from victim of a witch hunt nutlid?

       

      Did you read about the California teacher firing his gun in the classroom and injurimg students?

    2. Are you referring to the Republican former representative that your GOP welcomed with open arms to join his fellow predators and their supporters?

      That Steve Lebsock?

    3. Here you go Moldy.  Since you are dedicated to defending these same views, you should be happy to see this:

      As for gay marriage, Conditt wrote, “Homosexuality is not natural. Just look at the male and female bodies … It would be like trying to fit two screws together and to nuts together and then say, ‘see, it’s natural for them to go together.'”

      In addition to attacking homosexuality, he railed on the government providing women with free abortions, saying, “If you can’t provide for a child, then don’t have sex.”

      Conditt also supported the death penalty and thought sex offender registries were too punitive.

      He was a conservative.

    4. How did Lebsock's victims feel?

      A quick reminder from the Denver Post's account:

      “I decided not to go public and file a formal complaint for a whole host of reasons,” Winter recalled. “I was worried about retribution. I was worried about making Steve angrier. I was worried about not being believed. I was worried about my reputation, my ability to do my job and serve my constituents. And so at that time, through this process, he apologized and said he was going to stop drinking and get therapy. And I told him that I was not filing a charge or going public right now. But if I ever heard of it happening again, I would be the first one.”

      So, after the Sine Die party, Rep. Winters decided not to proceed. Knowing that, the (new) House leadership decided to name Lebsock as a committee chairman.

      When additional women made charges, the original victim changed her mind, made a formal complaint, and soon afterwards, Lebsock was removed from his chairmanship. He was urged to resign, didn't, changed his registration to Republican, and then was forced out by an overwhelming vote with only 9 Republicans voting against the resolution.

      From what I've read, the victims felt some satisfaction they were heard and that the House agreed that Rep. Lebsock should be unseated.

      Does that help you understand how Steve Lebsock's victims felt?

        1. Queasy?  Baffled? . . . 

          . . . which, coincidentally, is the pretty much the way that anyone feels after reading any of Fluffy’s comments, and trying to follow their ever-shifting illogic and blargle . . . 

          . . . Fluffy is the perpetually-needful of a dope slap.

      1. Tate's victims, you say? According to Joey Bunch, he didn't have any.

        https://coloradopolitics.com/sen-jack-tates-accuser/?tr_soc_t

        “I do not know everything about Sen. Tate’s interactions with (the accuser), but based on her actions and her personal indiscretions during the 2017 legislative session, I do not believe that the accusation of harassment is true,” Knarr told Colorado Politics. “As I told the investigator, the accuser’s version of events circulated in the media are not consistent with the facts. I also addressed the accuser’s personal integrity and it should be considered when assessing her alleged victimhood.”

        Textbook slut shaming. I don't know what you call this but it's not fucking journalism.

        This makes me agree with the Guvs about Anschutz buying the Post. Please God no.

        2. 1. Find your picture on the intertubes. 2. right click on it until "copy image location" comes up. 3. copy image location url. 4. go back to your pols comment box. 5. click on the little image icon above. 6. in the menu that appears, paste your copied "image location" into the url box. 6. click OK. 7. Voila! picture in your comment.

          There used to be a help menu on here, but Pols got rid of it – probably when you were in your 60s.

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

69 readers online now

Newsletter

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