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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
February 14, 2011 11:54 PM UTC

A Recall Based on a Fabrication and Threats of Outing

  • 142 Comments
  • by: Middle of the Road

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

POLS UPDATE #2: Call this ‘Exhibit A’ of the kind of lowlife behavior being brought to our attention. Below is audio of a message left for another Colorado Pols reader, not the author of this diary. Personally identifying information has been removed. We believe the threat is related:



Can’t see the audio player? Click here.

Folks, we can only say again that the strength of this community lies in the ability of our users to interact freely, and without any kind of threats or retaliation for participating on our blog. We will never assist anyone in obtaining information about our users, and we will protect all of our readers and commenters to our full legal ability.

And yes, the person who recorded the above message has issues. We don’t know if the person who left the message is Guerin Green, but from what we understand about the timeline of these events, it’s more than possible.

—–

POLS UPDATE: We take efforts to “out” another Polster very seriously here at Colorado Pols. “Middle of the Road” writes below that Guerin Lee Green, publisher of the North Denver News and the Cherry Creek News, has been on a quest of sorts to uncover her real name (we use “her” only because she uses this pronoun in her writing), and we are hearing more about this story seemingly every hour.

Many Polsters are friendly with other Polsters outside of this website, and it is through those shared friendships/acquaintances that we believe “Middle of the Road” has been partially identified. Any Polster who is found to have any connection whatsoever to attempts to uncover the real name of “Middle of the Road” or any other Polster will be immediately banned from Colorado Pols. For more information, check out our Posting Policies in the right-hand sidebar (or click here).

We appreciate the positive contributions of all of the thousands of people who have contributed to Colorado Pols over the years. For what it’s worth, we’ve got your back — all of you — and we’ll do everything we can to help.

—–

(Original Post Follows)

The recall of DPS Board President Nate Easley is underway and according to the petition for signatures being circulated, he is specifically being recalled because of his conflict of interest as an employee of Denver Scholarship Fund while also serving as a board director of Denver Public Schools.

According to the petition (full PDF file can be read here):

General Statement: We the qualified voters of Denver Public School District 4 demand the recall of current elected Denver Public Schools Board of Education member Dr. Nate Easley and the election of a successor to his office. Our demand is based on Mr. Easley’s activities related to conflicts of interest and allowing these to affect his representation of his District 4 constituency. Specifically, Dr. Easley’s roles as DPS Board of Education President and his job as Deputy Director of the Denver Scholarship Foundation make him subject to undue influence related to his votes as our representative. As a board member, Dr. Easley supervises the DPS Superintendent who is also a member of the Foundation’s leadership team, thereby having direct influence over Dr. Easley’s employment status. As Deputy Director of DSF, Dr. Easley receives a substantial salary, the threat to which compromises his ability to independently represent District 4.

There is one major problem with that claim–it isn’t true.  

Nate Easley requested a meeting with John Kechriotis, the legal counsel for Denver Public Schools, on March 31, 2009, prior to making a decision to run for the school board and 7 months prior to the election to discuss any potential conflict of interest between serving as Deputy Director of the Denver Scholarship Fund and potentially serving on the school board.

According to an affidavit from John Kechriotis, he met with Nate and advised Easley that there was no conflict of interest that should stand in his way of running for the DPS School Board and if elected, serving.

AFFIDAVIT OF JOHN KECHRIOTIS

State of Colorado )

City and County of Denver )

BEFORE ME, the undersigned Notary, Tiffany Lambalot, on this 9 th day of February, 2011, personally appeared John Kechriotis, who being by me first duly sworn, deposes and says:

My name is John Kechriotis. I am General Counsel for the Denver Public Schools and have held the position since November 2006.

On or about March 31, 2009, I met with Nate Easley, Ph.D., Deputy Director of the Denver Scholarship Foundation, at the Offices of the General Counsel, Denver Public Schools, 900 Grant Street, Denver Colorado. Attached as Exhibit A to the Affidavit is the email string documenting the scheduling and purpose of the meeting with Dr .Easley.

Dr. Easley requested the meeting to discuss any potential conflict of interest between seeking and obtaining the position of School District Director for the Denver Public Schools (“Board of Education) in the November 2009 General Election with his employment and position as Deputy Director of the Denver Scholarship Foundation (“DSF”) …

My counsel to Dr. Easley at my meeting with him in March 2009 was that there was no inherent conflict that would preclude Dr. Easley from serving as a member of the Board of Education while continuing to be employed by the Denver Scholarship Foundation.

A full read of the affidavit is here.

To claim this recall is based on a conflict of interest is a complete fabrication. DCTA supported Nate Easley’s candidacy with their time and dime. They knew he worked for DSF before he ran for office. They saw no conflict of interest. The legal counsel for DPS saw no conflict of interest. The public and voters being asked for their signatures are signing a petition that is based on a complete falsehood. Whatever this recall is based on, it isn’t based on a conflict of interest. It’s time the public became aware of the facts and base their decision to sign a petition recall on facts, not fiction.

And now to address the intimidation tactics being used by Guerin Lee Green, a self described “journalist” and publisher of Cherry Creek News and North Denver News, who has resorted to overt attempts to out posters here who have asked questions about DeFENSE.

My advice to Guerin Lee Green: spend more time on fact based research and less time calling Larimer County Democratic Headquarters like you did last Wednesday evening, lying to the office manager that you’re my friend, in order to get my personal information.

Guerin’s conversation to the volunteer manning the phones: “Hi, this Guerin Lee Green. Do you know who [redacted first name] is? She’s a Democratic activist for Larimer County and a friend of mine. I forgot her last name and can’t seem to find her phone number? Could I get that from you? If you think of her name, here’s my number. Can you call me back?”

I guess my multiple, written replies where I did not give him my name and phone number via email on February 1st, 2011 weren’t enough of a hint that I have no desire to share who I am with Guerin or be interviewed by him.

Why does Guerin want to interview me in regards to DeFENSE? Good question. I never did get a good answer. I did ask if I could interview him regarding DeFENSE. He didn’t seem open to that idea. He wanted to know what my “agenda” was, who I supported in the Bennet/Romanoff primary and who I had worked for in the past, where my work had been published and what my name was. I’ve saved his emails–they make for some interesting, albeit bizarre, reading.

I know outing Middle of the Road will make for a must read article over at Cherry Creek News. Don’t get me wrong–I’m sure it’ll be a page turner for all ten of his readers.

Unfortunately for Guerin, outing MotR won’t hurt me. I am my own employer so his impotent efforts at attempting to out me in order to shut me up won’t work because I answer to no one but myself. I have volunteered for multiple candidates and issue campaigns, never been paid, so no astroturfing since I’ve always been up front with what or whom I support.

His efforts harm him far more than any of us that have disagreed publicly with this recall. His campaign to intimidate anyone that requests information about the organization known as DeFENSE provides adequate proof of his ethics or lack thereof. Guerin Lee Green describes himself as a journalist. Journalists don’t engage in the kind of tactics he uses to stifle anyone who disagrees with him. Nope, he’s just a guy with ulterior motives who has a serious problem with anyone that asks questions about DeFENSE.

For those of you who thought we were all barking up the wrong tree about DeFENSE, think again. There is a hidden agenda going on behind the scenes for this organization and it sure as hell doesn’t have to do with concern for the students of DPS and their education. If DeFENSE does not approve of Guerin’s machinations, I fully expect to read their complete denouncement of his activities on this thread.

If you believe bullying, intimidation, threats of outing to a poster’s employer and scare tactics have any place in this conversation, then by all means, send an email to DeFENSE and get on their contact list. Just be sure you never, ever publicly disagree with them because chances are good they’ll be coming after you next.

There are a lot of good folks on this blog that support this recall that I know, without a doubt in my heart, would NEVER support these tactics. If tactics like this make your skin crawl, speak out and speak up. Get involved because the kids are watching and I don’t think this is what most of us Democrats were hoping they would learn when we preach about “democracy in action” in Civics class.

Tweet
Share

Comments

142 thoughts on “A Recall Based on a Fabrication and Threats of Outing”

    1. It turns my stomach and makes my skin crawl, the tactics being used to shut down anyone expressing doubt about this recall. It isn’t about Nate Easley anymore than it’s about the children of DPS.

      And I think it’s disgusting that legitimate questions about what is happening in our school system, questions being asked by parents who have genuine concerns about the future of their kids, are being used as a means to an end by people who clearly have a different agenda and have no qualms about using these folks to get what they want.  

      1. I could write a book about the stuff like this during the Senate primary (who knows, maybe someday I will). It was insane. If people really want to create positive outcomes for their candidate/issue/campaign, why make things so personal? I will never understand it.

        Some friends and I were talking about this at lunch, in fact. Where is the intense underlying anger and distrust coming from? Is it because of the bad economy that people are looking for scapegoats for their frustrations? Did this generation become cynical because they all lived through Watergate and watching politicians lie on television while under oath? Is it the 24 hour news cycle and the preponderance of cable entertainment “news” that has made people lose their minds?

        Banter on Pols is one thing. I could go to lunch with BJ or just about anyone else here, probably, and we would all be civil to each other. We’d probably share a laugh or two. Calling people at home, outing people on the internet, stalking people in their private lives, calling their homes, etc., ….. those things are INSANE.

        Anyone who can answer this question in a mature, nonpersonal, nonattacking way will definitely have my attention. Thoughts?

        1. It’s like loving a sports team in reverse; some people really need something to hate or feel superior about.

          I was teasing a seemingly sane Bennet supporter in early August after she said she’d move if Romanoff won. She sent a threat with words I’ve never said out loud. Seemed completely normal until she catapulted off the handle. And I didn’t even say anything mean (yes, I know the difference).

          My point isn’t anything to do with the primary, just an example. There’s some other weirdo stalking anyone on Ken Salazar’s page who apparently starts calling and emailing your job if you say something nice about the man. She’s doing it to save the mustangs. Go Red Sox!

          I wish there was a larger conversation here, but I don’t even think it has to do with political frustration. It’s just more generally angry little people. Do some yoga, find Jesus or something. Crazy.

        2. It’s a lack of breathing space. A lack of spiritual grace. A lack of character, and depth, and understanding and empathy.

          It’s a short fuse, lacking proper goals and perspective.

          Imagine a diplomat acting this way. Why can’t we? Diplomats have a vast vision, a historical perspective and great patience.

          The person who left this message…I just listened to it, is vermin. This person is bereft of a developed soul.

        3. THIS PERSON did not hassle me during the primary. I am speaking in generalities, only. MOTR — I am sorry for you. When I was getting outed regularly and threatened/harrasssed (by someone on another CO blog), I was pretty freaked out. It sucks.  

        5. or minimized.  Sometimes it’s more than just anger — there can be a dangerous instability.  Stalkers can and do become dangerous toward their targets.  This kind of threatening behavior should be pursued fully through law enforcement.

          1. I have a lot of teachers in my life. I get it. They are grossly underpaid. They have arguably the most important jobs in the world (I believe this with every fiber of my being.) They are often screwed over in government budgets that appease the rich, opportunistic and powerful. They advocate for the rights of another class of people who are also minimized, abused and discounted — children. I get all that. I do. It’s real.

            I spent many years teaching preschool, religious school and adults. I never taught public school, but I did volunteer there thousands of hours there while raising my kids. My sisters are teachers. So is my sister-in-law, one of my nephews and two of my nieces. Teachers have a lot to be pissed off about, and people aren’t getting it. But as teachers, whether employed in a public school or not, we never stop being role models for our kids. Calling bloggers at home and threatening them is about as anti-education as someone can get. Writing anonymous angry blog posts with no concrete suggestions isn’t effective, either.

            If I am reading between the lines correctly, DeFENSE Denver may be angry about anti-teachers union votes at all levels.

            What DeFENSE Denver doesn’t seem to get is that his/her/their message is not being delivered in the way he/she/they are intending. To people who don’t know this person/these people personally, it all looks like political bitterness toward people they simply don’t like, coupled with bully tactics. Hating Barack Obama/Arne Duncan/MichaelBennet/Tom Boasberg/Nate Easley and whoever they associate with “the other camp” proves nothing.

            DD: Want to really deliver your message?

            Explain yourself in a well-written blog. Pretend the reader knows nothing about any of your points. Read it, reread it, and reread it again, removing all personal attacks, sarcasm, and threats. Suggest realistic changes, and how to get from where things are now to where you want them to be. Then post it all over the internet. Use your real name so people can call you and have an intelligent conversation with you. Be ready to debate honestly and diplomatically.

            Even better — sit down with Nate Easley and others you see in his camp, and discuss your concerns rationally.

            When you do, people will get it. You will win allies. But most importantly, you will honor TEACHERS — the very same teachers you and I believe in with all of our hearts.

            Please. For the kids.

    2. Can someone help me out? I haven’t followed this issue that closely.

      I thought the issue was that Easley accepted union contributions before the election and then, after winning his seat, voted (wisely, in my opinion) against the union on several school reform issues, especially the northeast Denver school dismantlings.

      Does this really have anything to do with conflict of interest or is it just about not voting with a big campaign contributor?

      1. the issue is Easley’s alleged conflict of interest by being an employee of DSF (a job he held prior to being elected) while simultaneously serving on DPS school board.

        As the affidavit linked in this diary proves, there is no conflict. I can’t speak to the ulterior motives of others. I can only speak to the facts that are available and to what John McBride listed as the reason for his recall.

        My personal view is that this has absolutely nothing to do with a “conflict of interest.” That was just the language they figured they could use as an excuse to prompt a recall. This is about a power grab to take over the board. The minority three desperately want to become the majority and recalling Easley is the quickest way to achieve the power grab and the take over.

        And clearly, they have no problem using less than ethical tactics to achieve that goal.  

        1. from Denver School Board member Theresa Pena, who says the anti-reform people (including the minority of the school board) is trying to recall Easley as a way to regain a pro-union school board majority, fire the district superintendent, and overturn changes for charters and other reforms.

          Link here:

          http://blog.ednewscolorado.org…

          1. at the bottom. That’s a fun read and so believable.

            And if you believe that, I have some awesome swamp land in Florida that I’m looking to unload…super cheap.

        2. When you strip away the excuses, it gets down to crossing the line for power.

          Sorry to hear about this hassle.  Hopefully people of goodwill will recognize what a tawdry affair this is and provide some opposition to this recall.

  3. It seems ridiculous just writing “journalistic intimidation”, yet I watched some of “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” this weekend and it got me thinking.  The 1939 movie depicted how a powerful media mogul (William Randolph Hearst, I guess) used bullying tactics to shut down the new idealistic Senator Smith.  Perhaps Mr. Green envisions himself as a modern day Hearst.  And, I imagine, he and his ilk can be effective particularly against someone whose job could be threatened.  There are a few of us, like Motr and me who are self-employed and can’t be intimidated.  For others, the anonymity of this blog is critical and needs to be protected at all costs.

    1. The fact that he has tried to out me and other posters or the fact that John McBride filed a petition to recall that is based on a complete and utter lie. And these folks are so sure that no one is ever going to bother to question the basic issue–the recall itself–that I suppose it never occurred to them that someone else just might.

      When I saw that affidavit and string of emails from John Kechriotis, I about fell over.  

      1. the fact that they have actively tried to harass you (and others) much more appalling.

        I am truly sorry that you have had to put up with this charade while trying to report the facts about this recall.

        Please, pretty please, continue to ignore this ridiculousness and continue to provide insightful commentary about this group and who supports this unfounded attempt to oust Easley.

        2. stop with the pretty please.

          You made a great point about the coming K12 budget cuts having more impact in the classroom than recalling Easley ever could and the corollary “this should be the focus.”  Hell you even drew DD out of hiding to reply.

          But your alliterative aliterate alliteration is positively painful.

  5. I don’t have any dog in the dispute about what’s going on at the recall – truth be told I don’t know much about it. But tactics like this are reprehensible and I absolutely abhor anyone spreading falsehoods and using intimidation tactics to try to get their point across.

    Fact is, someone who resorts to these tactics can’t promote or defend their position on its own merits, so that speaks for itself.

    I’m currently a plaintiff in a defamation suit I filed in Boulder County District Court.  That should tell you how strongly I feel about those who lie and make false statements.  

  6. MotR if there is anything I can do to help, please let me know.

    And to the slime-sucking scuzz-balls at DeFense Denver – your actions show exactly what kind of people you are and I don’t want to see you anywhere near school kids.

    1. I so appreciate that. I hope you know that.

      I find the audio to another fellow poster here to be far worse, far more threatening and vile. I think it’s time the spotlight got turned on the cockroaches and that’s what this diary is all about.

      I debated since Feb. 1st about whether to write this and risk being outed.

      When it became apparent that Green was using every tactic available to find out who I was, I spent most of the weekend really thinking about whether or not it was worth getting involved in a dogfight that I really don’t care about, other than the sheer unfairness of recalling someone without cause.

      And then, and I know this is going to sound overly simplistic, I thought of how others have stood up over the history of time to far worse intimidation. Then I heard the other poster’s audio this morning and that clinched it for me. If every single person that expresses doubts with this recall, with DeFENSE, with Andrea Merida, Jeanne Kaplan and Arturo Jimenez’s motives, with John McBride and NCCE or with Friends and Education and is then subjected to this level of intimidation just for asking questions, then they will continue to use these methods every single time they attempt a power grab.

      These are DEMOCRATS doing this to fellow Democrats. If I can speak out when Republicans do it, you better believe I’ll be speaking out when it’s members of my own party doing this crap to anyone that dares question their motives.  

        1. I’m not linking to it but I also don’t care who knows who I am. I should thank him for the free advertising for my business, since he mentions that, too.

          And for the record, Guerin, no one with a lick of sense would ever agree to talk to you, not after seeing firsthand just what kind of an unethical pseudo-journalist you are.

          Thanks for looking into every aspect of my life. Sorry your “scoop” falls flat but innuendo is always fun to write, isn’t it? Particularly when you just can’t accept that some of us don’t appreciate the kind of tactics you and DeFENSE engage in and that’s what motivates us and will continue to motivate us to call out scum like you.

          And for two weeks of your efforts, what does your big story about me accomplish or prove? That I was a Bennet supporter? Wow, you really are the next Bob Woodward because that was such a super huge secret that only everyone that read this blog knew about it.

          And thanks for admitting you were the one who left the voicemail on LB’s machine. Nice of you to put that in writing in case he decides to do something about it. That should save him some time.

          Nice backpedal about how you have decided not to out LB. Suck it up. He beat you to punch, you fool.

          Oh, and fellow posters, he claims he knows who four more of you are and knows your identities. That’s the caliber of who is behind this recall, folks.  

            1. That’s the saddest, lamest little piece of non-journalism I have read in ages. He got scooped by the two people he wrote his big expose about. That’s just downright embarrassing and for that, I sort of pity him.

              It turns out his expose is nothing more than boring obsessiveness about two bloggers that have been vocal about a recall that is nothing more than a smear campaign and a power grab. Where’s the scoop? That a Republican and a Democrat agree with each other? Wow. Stop the presses.  

              I do love being called a “political operative.” That actually cracked me up.

              I just hope I see an uptick in business from all ten of his readers.

          2. I’m guessing your reaction means you don’t have a lot to lose from this, but I can already see the sheep bleating “SHE’S NOT A JOURNALIST!!!” as a way to discredit your work.

            I hope that at least some of the people supporting the recall will realize that this crackpot isn’t to be trusted or taken seriously. (You know, some of the people who linked to this asshat’s “answers” about Defense Denver. I trust a couple of them have good enough hearts, despite how strongly they feel about Easley, Boasberg, et al, to realize this is one person not to associate with.) Time will tell…

            2. what a joke the article is. This is the big expose designed to discredit me for questioning DeFENSE?

              Gee, try harder, Guerin.

              And thanks, Ari. Appreciate your reasoned responses to a lot of this crap.  

  7. it’s just plain stupid.  The only real outcome for the guy is ego gratification and a power trip.  Nothing good for DPS, for Easley or the people who oppose him.  

    Just plain dumb.  If he’s reading these and has any guts or smarts, I challenge him to simply prove wrong the evidence that has been posted here.  Going after the messenger is nothing but Rovian bullshit.

    1. that I have almost no connections whatever with full-fledged political people, other than the ones I met here and a few politically active friends who aren’t close enough to me to even bring up Colorado Pols when we do discuss politics. I also make sure not to reveal even tangential information about myself, because you never know who can put two and two together.

      If your name isn’t actually “Craig,” may I ask why you chose that handle?

    5. At least that’s the name associated with the e-mail address I used to set up my account at Pols (and also at squarestate).

      Good fucking luck using that against me Guerin!

  11. Green was IIRC an outspoken anti-Bennet partisan during the campaign, and continued after the primary was over.

    This is the kind of thing that turns me against a campaign.  In fact, IMNSHO it’s kind of like payday lenders spamming this site – it deserves prominent and long-term attention of the most negative sort.

    1. I’m still mystified by all the bad blood in the Senate primary – it really seems as though Romanoff had a bit of a personality cult going on, and that this is payback for their leader’s loss. (Granted, the party leaders definitely seemed to have been interfering with the process to a degree, first with Ritter’s surprise appointment, then with Obama’s endorsement – maybe I’d be pissed if I were a Dem, too. But everything from the Romanoff camp seemed so blown out of proportion – I don’t get it.)

      1. Romanoff had many supporters like myself who are sane, motivated, hard-working Democrats who supported him because we believed he was the better candidate.

        My question:  Why can’t there be a discussion of THIS thread’s topic without dragging the Romanoff campaign and supporters into it?  

        1. Because Guerin Lee Green specifically asked me in an email what my “agenda” was and followed up with an email asking me to “confirm” if I had supported Bennet in the primary.

          Believe me, I think Romanoff and many of his supporters like you are horrified at what is being continued on here but the fact of the matter is that some of this is left over bitterness from a primary.

          1. that this is an issue of logic.  Just because some Romanoff supporters are @$$holes doesn’t mean all of them are.  The disaster that is happening related to the Denver schools, the outing of Polsters, etc, can be discussed without dragging in the prior Senate Primary.  I don’t want all Romanoff supporters painted with the same brush.  Left over bitterness from a primary has caused some idiots to do idiotic things — but not all Romanoff supporters are or were idiots.  

        2. my local county party.  It was a net positive for my group to see them get involved and stay active.  The Romanoff campaign did tend to attract a hard left fringe and they are still having issues with not taking things personal.

          This is an issue where every Pols contributor agrees that tempers and passions are part of this writing game but like “Fatal Attraction” you don’t want to get chummy with a nut.  I don’t even like to share personal information at my doctors office.

        3. … I know not every Romanoff supporter was nuts. In fact, I had actually come around and was pulling for Romanoff to win. (That would have meant registering as a Dem, and the party still makes me mad enough at times that I just can’t bring myself to do it.)

          But, building on MOTR’s answer, we’re seeing the exact same cast of characters – the nutty Romanoffskis – come out of the woodwork in support of this recall. And the DPS mess was a huge part of the arguments that were aired out here and elsewhere. I’m just connecting the dots.

          I’m sorry if the nuts made such a lasting and profound impression that the campaign as a whole was smeared by their actions. That’s unfair, but when I look back on it that’s what I immediately think of first.

        4. But if you dare go to the Cherry Creek News website, you’ll see that one of the front page articles is a blatant bashing of Michael Bennet.

          The vast majority of rational dems who supported Andrew Romanoff in the primary accepted the primary results, licked their wounds, dealt with the facts at hand and voted for Michael Bennet in the general.

          In the weeks before the general election, I was shocked to find that some active Dems still intended to write in Andrew for the senate seat, at the very real risk of sending Ken Buck to the US Senate. They wanted to make a point to the possible detriment of everyone involved.

          Rational or not, there is still a small but very vocal group of anti-Bennet-venom-spewing Democrats. They are no more representative of Romanoff supporters in general than the Birthers are representative of the Republican party. In either case, most of us wish they’d get over it and STFU so that we can focus on the real issues at hand.

          We’ve found a label for the lunatic fringe birthers that separates them from the rest of the policy minded GOP. Maybe we need to find a new label for the CO Dems who are still seething about the primary to the point that they have lost any capacity for rational forward thinking.

  12. That was left on my work voicemail about the same time that Green reached out to a friend we have in common via Twitter and told him that a damaging story was going to drop about me.

    I guess we’ll confirm if that was Green’s voice on my phone depending on if the CCNews writes something outing me.

    1. So I’ll say the same thing in reply to you that I said below: I sincerely hope you’ve contacted your local PD about this voicemail, not just COPols. Unhinged bullies can turn violent fast.

      I have to say, much as I feel for you, I’m glad it’s your voicemail, not that of someone less able to defend himself if need be. The incident that I recounted in my comment below yours is just one of many that come to mind when I think about harassment that starts online and spreads into real life. Humans are scary sometimes.

      Happy Valentine’s Day to ya, eh?

        1. I know you can take care of yourself, but as a professor of mine used to say, “No matter how tough you are, if you’re sane, a really determined sociopath will get you any day.”  I don’t know exactly how unhinged this person is, but I’m a little rattled, and I’m hardly new to the Internet or to what people are capable of when they take said Internet too seriously.

          If you need a nice li’l cowgirl to vouch that you’re not always a (BLEEEEEEP) online, I’m here for ya.

      2. I know Qwest can get call detail records. If the CPn is blocked then they can still get the carrier it came from. I think that the cops  could identify the caller if they wanted.

    2. What kind of stupid jagoff leaves that kind of message on a telephone messaging system in this day and age?

      My guess is that these assclowns won’t be anywhere so forthcoming as to actually write anything with attribution — that’s not these gutless pricks style.

      1. I don’t want to detract from the subject of this thread, but I do have the deets on GITG this weekend now. But with the atmosphere on Pols right now, I don’t want to post it when it’s not on the official website yet. If you can think of a way to verify that you’re you and not someone with a color for a last name, I registered progressive.cowgirl at gmail and you can email me for the info — if not, I’ll just say the location is in central Jeffco and will be posted on the house.gov site later in the week. Still totally down for an unofficial Pols meetup there, but I don’t want the stalker creepazoid or any of his ilk showing up to try to collect real names to then go match with usernames, so it may be best to just ignore each other and focus on the Congressman.

        1. I saw your post this past weekend.  I’ll send you an e-mail a little bit later tonight from the the account listed on my Pols profile or you can just send the details there if you want.

    3. WTF? That’s what you get for coming off as so smokin’ hot online. Green’s boy crush shouldn’t touch your work though. Rock hard abs maybe, but not work. #Whatafreak

      If you need anything…

    5. ..if you need me to camo up and be in overwatch at either your place of work or at home, call me.

      It’s about time I used some of those other skills the Army taught me at Fort Benning, and this seems to be a case where they could be put to good use.

    6. don’t let it be a secret.  I mean, I’ve never dealt with it and it has to be hard, but make sure we know one way or another.  

      I don’t really know what else to say.  

    8. This kind of crap is not to be tolerated.  And it’s not about left or right, NOBODY here will put up with threats against a poster for their activities here.

  13. As Dan Savage has said (I’m paraphrasing as I can’t find the exact quote) I look forward to the day when online socialization is so ubiquitous that we all have too many skeletons of our own in our online closets to care when someone else’s Web postings are connected to their real name and turn out to be perhaps less laudable than, in retrospect, the person being “outed” would like. Or, for that matter, to dare to out someone else–glass houses and all.

    I hope this message was sent not only to Colorado Pols, but to the local police department. Even if this doesn’t turn out to be criminal behavior–IANAL–a paper trail is a DAMN good thing to have in case these threats escalate. A friend of mine received online threats over a period of months and then came home one day to find a threat taped to her door. The person had tracked her down and flown cross-country to confront her. Thank the deity of your choice she wasn’t home when the stalker knocked.

      1. Someone is trying to intimidate a friend of mine and scare her in to not continuing her calling BS on Defense Denver, as she should, and she’s a liberal Dem.  

        What’s going on here has nothing to do with political orientation, but bullying, and mental illness.

        1. My point was merely that conservatives have been putting up with these tactics from the MSM for a long time. Thankfully, the worst offenders (like Olbermann) are losing viewers and getting fired.

          1. Guerin Green wasn’t stalking MOTR for the MSM.

            Green wasn’t leaving threatening, stalker-like voice mail on behalf of the MSM.

            Green is not caomparable to Olberman. Or anyone on MSNBC or Fox.

          3. You just gotta be part of this, so you insert yourself into the discussion even though it’s nothing to do with you. And as MADCO points out, this guy is way fringier than Fox News or even WND.

            You motherfucking wannabe victim. Typical.

        3. You eloquently expressed a shared sentiment.

          This kind of trash behavior is another attempt to suppress individual free expression in the name of ideological extremism.  Freedom isn’t free and bullies are ultimately exposed as weak.  We had to secure the west from cattle rustlers and bush whackers so some nutty paddy whacker peddling an obvious lie isn’t going to have much credibility just like Breitbart.

        4. LB and MOTR, I’m just catching up with all this. I just tuned in to see what was new before heading to bed and was going to razz you a little, LB, about the whole Avs/Forsberg situation. Not in the mood for any razzing now, that’s for sure. I can’t believe what I’m hearing and reading! This is so creepy. You and MOTR are handling this with so much courage and class but please take all the sound advice your friends here are offering.

    2. I’m a Republican.  A proud one.  I’ve gone toe-to-toe with many of the people above that are now offering support and good feelings toward me.

      Whoever this clown is, this is not partisan, and it’s not “journalism”, either.

    3. Don’t let the harassment directed at LB and MoTR distract you. Read between the lines. This post was clearly made so that we could all pay more attention to BJ. OK, BJ. Tell me your tale of woe while I fix you some hot cocoa. After all you’ve been through, you poor dear.

      1. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of all those on the left who are so outraged at this incident but wouldn’t think twice before doing the same to a Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, etc. If you were the only one that knew about his oxycontin addiction, would you have told the world, hoping to destroy his career? Heck yes you would.

        As far as the madrassa comment, you need to get out of the basement and figure out the difference between Islam and Christianity.

        1. This is why you are universally panned for your comments.  False equivalencies are your specialty but this one is even stupider than usual.  We tolerate stupid as you are so aware.  Intimidation is a repugnant Republican tactic that seems to have spread.

    1. Based on the information so far, I’d say he’s just a creepy stalker.  I suspect you are correct about that last, but unless you consider it synonymous with creepy stalker, it’s a reach.

      Oh wait, it is synonymous – never mind.

    2. 1. He’s the real victim.

      2. “Hiding behind” anonymity = deserving anything you get.

      3. We’re just jealous he’s smart enough to figure out our identities.

      4. ProgressNow boohoo astroturf boohoo.

      5. “I’m being persecuted for my belief in transparency!”

    3. it is kind of refreshing to have a little bit of transparency around here (and everybody knows who I am anyway). People post on facebook under their real names all the time and nobody cares.

      2. squealing and cheering in favor of “transparency” whenever someone here would repeat any of the minor personal information that you yourself had already posted?  Hypocrite.

          1. is the domicile of children and the emotionally immature — so, I understand why you have so many of those feelings so often.

            And, the last thing I will say in reply to your latest inanity — No, you’re welcome to repeat anything I have posted, in its context, anytime or anyplace to your little heart’s content.

  17. green thinks his opinion matters.

    The fish wrap that the Cherry Creek News is rates somewhere below my 4 year old’s scribblings and Kaziniski’s manifesto in terms of politico power.

    I’ll leave it to you which is more important on that scale, my daughter or Kazinski.

  18. I didn’t even know you had donors or a board of directors.

    You seem to be a strong enough person to be taking this in stride.  You have my sympathy.

    What a twerp!

  22. that hasn’t been said last night and this morning.  I applaud you for posting this diary MoTR and to LB for allowing the audio tape.  Stay true to your beliefs. It’s amazing how many good people will circle the wagons in support (even if they often disagree) as they have here on Pols for the two of you.

    To the person of interest identified here: you really are pathetic.

    1. On all counts.

      This is despicable.  Has anyone called this cretin or the relevant outlets for comment?  He appears to be rather shy on this thread.  

      1. asking to interview me (which still makes no sense), I asked if I could interview him in regards to DeFENSE since he appeared to be speaking on their behalf. He was absolutely not interested in being interviewed on the record about anything.

        And please note that DeFENSE Denver was logged on after this diary posted, as was Green, and I don’t see DeFENSE Denver calling him out for is tactics.

        One would assume if they had a problem with the way he behaves, they would say so, no?

  23. Where’s Wade Norris? Defense? etc. I want to hear what they have to say about this. I wonder why they have been so quiet.

    This is just reasonable “guerrilla tactics,” right Wade?

    …

    1. every single time one of them comments at this blog, from here on out, I will be linking to this diary and asking if they denounce this type of tactics. I think that’s a fair question.

      Hell, it doesn’t even require them to reveal their donors so it should a question they can actually answer instead of pulling the usual dodge and weave bullshit.  

    2. ….enough people read it for Green to do some serious harm to our community.  I’ve lived in north Denver for years – where politics have always been contentious – but he’s taken it to a new low.  I’ve seen a few very good people (including some who I disagree with) smeared by this guy because they disagree with his particular stance.  He basically utilizes his newspaper and website as a forum for his personal rants.  I hate to generate traffic for the site, but it’s interesting to read the articles on the front page –   http://northdenvernews.com/con…

      You can’t say he isn’t consistent – it’s pretty much an all-out assault on people who don’t share his opinions.  Fortunately, we’re too small of a town and he’s been burning nearly every bridge in it.  It’ll come back to bite him.  

  25. Thinking about it then and now I guess one can only hope that Guerin Green has sobered up, taken a look through a mature lens at his career hopes, realized that there won’t be any Pulitzer’s, or even very much interest, in identifying someone who wishes to remain anonymous in lawful activity and pulls back.

    But, some would rather stay in flames than be successful.

  26. That is some impressive journalism. I hope that your readers and employers were as proud of you as I was to out a couple of anonymous commenters to a local political blog and write a 1,000 word piece on it. I’m certain it is very worthwhile information to your readers.

    While you’re at it, there’s this other video game blog, well, it’s more of a forum, that I like to frequent, and it’s been killing me to know who is behind the “WizardJenkins89” handle. Could you use your incredible powers of influence and apparent dedication to the unnecessary to find out who he/she really is? I’d like to get their number so I can ask them how they beat level 7 of Super Mario Brothers.

    Again, congratulations on outstanding work. Journalism at its finest.

  27. I’m not going to investigate any further, because I really don’t care to know who Motr really is. I’d love to meet this person someday at a POLS get together, as I have a great deal of respect for this person.

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

59 readers online now

Newsletter

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