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
August 02, 2023 11:02 AM UTC

Meet Rep. Lauren Boebert, Co-Conspirator 1776

  • 29 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

UPDATE: An unrepentant Rep. Lauren Boebert defends the 2020 coup attempt in a new interview yesterday, reciting the same barely-coherent set of disproven talking points she used in the 2022 GOP primary (below)–and hopes the indictment leads to eventual Trumpian triumph:

Does this mean Boebert’s erstwhile friend Tina Peters was right too? Maybe what Peters claims about Boebert encouraging Peters to hack her own voting machines is true? Each foray into the subject by Boebert leaves more questions than answers.

And there will be many more forays. We’re just getting started.

—–

Rep. Lauren Boebert at the January 6th “Stop the Steal” rally.

Following yesterday’s indictment of ex-President Donald Trump on federal criminal charges related to the January 6th, 2021 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol and the attempt by Trump to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential elections, the majority of Republicans including several of Trump’s nominal primary opponents in the 2024 presidential race have once again come out in defense of the former President with the same vigor they denounced the charges filed against Trump over hush money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels.

But the charges Trump faces for plotting to overturn the 2020 election are immeasurably more serious than any of his previous criminal indictments, addressing what among all of Trump’s many misdeeds arguably inflicted the most lasting damage to the country. After the initial shock caused by the violence on January 6th more or less unified the political establishment in outrage against Trump, Republicans quickly realized that their base remained loyal to Trump even after what had happened–necessitating the slow but inexorable backsliding of the majority of Republicans into backing Trump once again and (worse) seeking to rewrite the history of January 6th and the 2020 elections.

But there are some Republicans who never wavered in their support for Trump, even as the rioters were smashing their way into the U.S. Capitol on January 6th. At the top of that list is Colorado’s Rep. Lauren Boebert, who invoked the rioters in her floor speech that day just before the Capitol was evacuated.

The oath that I took this past Sunday to defend and support the Constitution makes it necessary for me to object to this travesty. Otherwise the laws passed by the legislative branch merely become suggestions to be accepted, rejected or manipulated by those who did not pass them.

Madam speaker, I have constituents outside this building right now. I promised my voters to be their voice.

As our readers know well, January 6th, 2021 started as a big day for newly sworn-in Rep. Lauren Boebert. It began with a Tweet to her hundreds of thousands of followers that “Today is 1776,” after which Boebert headed to the Ellipse next to the White House for the speeches by Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, and Donald Trump that incited the crowd to march on the Capitol. From there, Boebert made her way to Congress in time to give her floor speech taking ownership of the oncoming rioters. Once the rioters were inside, Boebert Tweeted that Speaker Nancy Pelosi had been removed from the House chambers, which has been hotly debated ever since as a possible instance of Boebert trying to assist the insurrectionists who were at that moment threatening to hang Speaker Pelosi.

Reviewing Rep. Boebert’s actions on January 6th is important as we digest her response to yesterday’s indictment of Donald Trump:

Unlike other Republicans who had at least a fleeting moment of clarity immediately following January 6th only to backslide under pressure from their MAGA base later, Boebert remained faithful to Trump, and continued to recite the “Big Lie” that Trump should still be President–including on the campaign trail last year. Here’s Boebert at a May 2022 debate against her Republican primary opponent Don Coram:

Thank you very much for that question. Election integrity is something that Americans have been absolutely focused on. And I am proud that the first major action that I took in the House of Representatives was to vote to not certify some of the Electoral College results from the 2020 election. We clearly saw that at least six states violated their state and federal constitution. The Constitution states that it is the state legislature that makes election laws, not unelected bureaucrats, not secretaries of state, not attorney generals.

And then Boebert got, well, fired up:

We saw hundreds of thousands of ballots go out illegally. Hundreds of thousands. We saw illegally–illegal drop boxes being placed. The state legislatures did not change election law. So this is something that the states absolutely need to take care of. Our state legislatures need to secure elections and make sure that nothing like this ever happens again. We’ll probably have more health problems in the future, but we should never allow something like a Fauci-funded Chinese virus to interfere with our elections.

Though perhaps not outrageously referring to COVID-19 as the “Fauci-funded Chinese virus,” these are essentially the same arguments made by Giuliani, Eastman, and local Trump attorney Jenna Ellis in their campaign to persuade Republican legislatures to embrace the “fake electors” scheme in the runup to the certification vote on January 6th. Every single one of these allegations has been debunked in court both before and since January 6th. These are allegations so demonstrably baseless that the attorneys who repeated them face professional sanction and possible criminal indictments of their own.

No one to date has accused Boebert of being much more than a cheerleader for the “Big Lie,” and a regurgitative source of the misinformation that underpins it. The threat to Boebert lies less with the judicial system, but rather with the voters in her district who came within 546 votes of sending Boebert to early retirement last November. Accountability for what happened on January 6th, 2021 is crucial for the judgment of history regarding Donald Trump, but also for voters in CD-3 who will decide Boebert’s fate in November of 2024.

At urgent issue in both decisions is whether the next January 6th can be prevented.

Tweet
Share

Comments

29 thoughts on “Meet Rep. Lauren Boebert, Co-Conspirator 1776”

  1. She isn't smart enough to have been a co-conspirator. Jack Smith should have included references to U.I.s in the indictment. 

  2. I bet Boebert would proudly where clothing with "Co-conspirator 1776" on it. Hell, you might've just come up with her campaign tag line!

    I am so, so, so tired of Republican false equivalencies:

    * Being investigated by House Republicans IS NOT THE SAME THING as being investigated by the FBI and DOJ.

    * Having Lauren Boebert accuse someone of a crime IS NOT THE SAME THING as an indictment from a prosecutor!

    * Extremist rhetoric from random Leftists with no clout IS NOT THE SAME THING as extremist rhetoric from leaders of the Republican Party!

    Republicans desperately want this things to be equivalent but they're just not and it's exhausting.

  3. Here's hoping that Adam Frisch will be using Boebert's X-ing on Trump's indictment and Bidens "crimes" to provide a clear contrast.  Her sense of what is going on is contradicted by the work of the Department of Justice professionals, citizen grand juries, and a variety of federal judges and magistrates. Frisch can suggest Boebert is WAY out her lane of competence and focused on a partisan defense of Trump.

    I wouldn't mind her yammering about Hunter Biden and Joe Biden in business IF she would use the same standards on Donald Jr., Eric, & Ivanka and their connections to Donald J. Trump, one-time *resident.  The Trump Foundation, the Trump Organization, and Allen Weisselberg [director of the Foundation and CFO of the Organization] have already been found in violation of civil law and guilty of some crimes. Other indictments are pending trial.  Still more indictments are expected soon from Georgia. "New York Attorney General Letitia James' office says it is ready to proceed with a trial stemming from its $250 million lawsuit claiming former President Donald Trump, two of his children and his company engaged in widespread fraud." Trial is expected to begin in early October.

    Frisch can easily point out HE doesn't want to get involved in commenting on criminal and civil cases — he wants to focus on the district and the constituents.

    1. "yammering about Hunter Biden and Joe Biden in business……" According to Freedom Caucus member Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), there was nothing there yesterday in the Devon Archer hearing. Chair Comer didn't even bother to show up.

      Anna Stout of Grand Junction is now the 5th Dem to announce against Boebert. I'm still backing Frisch. Hopefully everyone will unite behind the winner after the Dem primary.

  5. She's a really 'special' brand of stupid, isn't she?

    I don't know which is more profoundly imbecilic — her, or the gullible, crap-swallowing, easy-mark knot-heads and oafs who support her and vote for her.

    We're talking about a depressingly dangerous level of stupid here.

  7. Yes ultra-rich self-funded politicians have always been known for their humility. Nothing ego driven about Frisch at all. He almost won against the least popular politician in the country and people act like he’s some kind of heroic man of the people. Guess what? The reason people say that those who live in Aspen are out of touch is because they are in fact out of touch. 

            1. Joe,

              Frisch has some $2.6 million in money raised. The other wannabes have personal savings. He has a campaign apparatus. The others, apparently, don't even have any friends writing them $25 checks.

              Boobert has to go. The only Dem with a shot is Frisch. The others should take their ego trips home and run for their local school boards, which on the Western Slope are under attack by Moms for Liberty and other rightwing groups.

              Let's get rid of Boobert. Isn't that the priority?

              1. Certainly. I don't object to any of what you have said other than the idea that the others are driven by ego trips while Frisch is driven by some sense of civic duty. I think that's pretty insulting to the others who want to run. I don't know what is more of an ego trip than waking up one morning in 2021 and deciding, "hey I'm rich. Maybe I should go be in Congress." Obviously things have changed now since he came so close and people are more behind him, but were you encouraging him to run for school board back then or is that only reserved for people that can't bend the course of our politics with their private funds?

                At any rate, I'm sure all, including Frisch, have a mix of motives. I'm personally not a Frisch fan, especially since he has earned plaudits from the No Labels right-wing front group and has committed to the Problem Solvers caucus. But you can count on me to vote for him on election day to get rid of Boebert, just as I did last time. 

              2. They're entitled to take their vanity trip in the Democratic Primary much as Sol Sandoval and Alex "Poop Boy" Walker did two years ago.

                I'd rather they run against Frisch in a primary than in the general election as a spoiler third-party candidate. (A variation on Johnson's famous statement about preferring the camel inside the tent pissing out that vice versa.)

                Fisch had no problem winning the nod last time and I expect him to win again. There will be some teeth-gnashing about him "buying the election" or the Dem Party power brokers having their thumbs on the scale. (Other than Ken Salazar, who is still in Mexico City, I cannot conceive of who in CD 3 fits that term.)

                It was the same whining when Hickenlooper was encouraged to run.

                  1. Ken is ambassador to Mexico. Wasn't John Director of the (state) Agriculture Dept.?

                    I guess they would be what passes as the power brokers in the CD-3 Democratic Party.

                  1. But that was still more votes than the other two received. Unless you are raising questions about the integrity of the vote count.  wink

                3. Camels piss through their nose???  Gawd, I really love this place; I learn something new everyday here!

                  (Or, maybe J. Edgar just liked dressing up as a dromedary as much he did dressing up like a woman?)

    2. So, by your logic, given the choice between upper middle-class Hiedi Heidi Ganahl and uber rich Jared Polis, are you saying that my vote for uber rich Polis was a mistake?

            1. I guess I'm just a democracy fan. Why do you prefer a political system that gives people power over others based on how much money they have, no matter how they got it?

              1. Our system provides access to elected office for the rich and powerful (think Jared Polis, John Hickenlooper, and Michael Bennet) as well as those of more modest backgrounds (think Lauren Boebert who was raised in trailer park and never finished high school).

                Personally, I'd prefer the guy who was educated at Princeton and made a fortune putting his family's greeting card and candy delivery business onto the Internet than the proprietor of "Shooter's Grill" even if the Princeton grad is, in your opinion, out of touch.

          2. "Polis is out of touch…." With who, with what? How?

            Sounds like you're just throwing wet toilet paper on a wall to see what sticks and what doesn't.

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

195 readers online now

Newsletter

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