U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(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) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
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%
June 26, 2007 10:21 PM UTC
20 Comments
Maybe the Homebuilders could do some more Robo Calls into each of those legislative districts saying:
“Did you know your legislator is having their campaign finance records subpoened? What do you suppose they are trying to hide in those records?”
That could get them even more positive press.
As Ed Norton used to say: Sheeeesh.
this is a clear harrasment suit. I hope the D’s make a rule 11 claim. scott gessler should be carefull about shooting his mouth off. “What’s good for the goose is good for the gander,” sounds like frivolity to me.
Does the “innocent until proven guilty” canard only apply to government officials who just happen to be Democrats? Unlike the “Recently Deceased Public Official Who Shall Not Be Named” mess (wherein arguably dispositive evidence, admissible as an admission against interest, was caught on tape), I know next to nothing about this suit or its bona fides and daresay that, unless any of you work in those Reps’ offices (in which case, you probably shouldn’t be talking), you don’t, either.
That our government is not applying the laws in a fair and even-handed manner would be about as shocking, as, say, the Rockies not winning the World Series every year. Campaign finance laws are so abstruse that it’s hard to get it right, even when you’re trying. And that the complainants could make out a SLAPP suit with sufficient merit to survive a motion to dismiss would surprise me, like, not at all.
And really! That you would accuse a professional colleague of unethical behavior, without any personal knowledge whatsoever? What is good for the goose is good for the gooser; those who have been harassed by public officials should have the right to a little payback.
What is even more egregious on the part of Gessler is the fact he forgot to tell the newspaper reporter that he had already agreed to dismiss the case. In other words, he is trying to smear members of the General Assembly and the state Treasuer after he has agreed to dismiss the case. This kind of intentional misrepresentation by silence is reprehensible. No wonder Republicans are loosing in Colorado with this kind of behavior.
Oh how little we learn from history… as recent as 9 months ago!
Attorney Mark Grueskin, who traditionally supports Democratic causes, couldn’t resist a jab at Gessler, who represents Beauprez, the Republican candidate for governor who has been given the unflattering nickname “Both Ways Bob.”
http://www.rockymoun…
A Colorado attorney, behaving unethically? Heaven forfend!!!
Unless you know what Gessler got for his clients by agreeing to dismiss, and whether the other side lived up to the deal and whether his clients could renege if they didn’t, it is a bit presumptuous to say he is behaving unethically, is it not?
It’s perfectly acceptable for government officials to smear ordinary citizens, but not vice versa?
KnowYourCOURTS.com has been getting hits from the Denver Home Builders’ Ass’n. Probably doesn’t mean much of anything but they appear to be especially interested in Colorado court news & comment.
which is, I’ll say, easier to read then that green font you were using.
. . .
As Patton said in the film by the same name, “L’audace, l’audace, toujours l’audace!”, paraphrased “The audacity!” Gessler is under the bizarre impression that public sympathy may somehow go his way with this stunt. Conversely, people are going to see it for what it is, an angry attempt by an industry to push around and punish the legislature. What audacity!
All you do is rant about how bad our government is. Every single place that you might insert this opinion, you have. We get it. You think anyone and everyone that receives a taxpayer funded paycheck is corrupt, stupid, or worse.
I still support some of your observations, but this subject has provided a glimpse into some mental churnings of yours and it’s not pretty.
We, the taxpayers, I presume.
As long as they can do it legally (and I’m assuming Gessler did his due diligence), the CAHB has every right to make life as miserable as possible for the folks who went after them. They should send the message that they aren’t going to be f’d with — sort of like a brush-back pitch in baseball.
Many Polsters are so pro-our-fascist-government-abusing-us-subjects that it makes me sick.
…is a fascist, part of the fascist government? You paint with a pretty broad brush, buster. She is in the leg looking out for your rights, make no bones about it. Virtually all her bills are about increasing rights and transparency for you, a Coloradan. And she isn’t alone.
I’ve seen her in action on the Judiciary Committee. When it comes to doing something about our out-of-control courts, she is definitely MIA. Same goes for Terrance Carroll, Claire Levy, and pretty much everyone in the Dem camp. Queen Mary is one of theirs, and Dems circle the wagons.
I don’t need any more rights; all I need is some effective way of forcing the government to respect the ones I (purportedly) already “have.”
As for my belief that we have descended deep into the well of fascism, I have stated my views on this without references to my personal situation. And while there are some who are not beholden to our corporate masters (e.g., Ron Paul), the tragic reality is that ours is a fascist government, with almost no accountability on the part of our public
servantsmasters.In effect, what you are saying is that “Concentration camps aren’t so bad, as long as they contain only [Jews/homosexuals/gypsies/Muslim terrorists/the other guy].” Those of us who have been arbitrarily and capriciously persecuted by our fascist government, and have sought aid from Carroll and her ilk to no avail, have earned the right to express valid cynicism. Learn the lesson of Pastor Niemoller….
That having been said, you don’t need to know the first thing about my experience to appreciate the merit in my claims. The only rights we have are the ones we can enforce at need, and the inescapable fact is that we can’t reliably enforce the ones we supposedly already have.
I’m assuming that the subpoenas came after some actual legal process already occurred, but I don’t see any evidence of that in the article. Or is this some kind of subpoena to appear in court to formally hear a complaint? I’m confused.
Normally, the plaintiff files a suit. The defendants are formally served notice of the suit. A hearing is scheduled to work out proceedings. After a bit, when you get to discovery, then you get subpoenas… Am I right? I Am Not A Lawyer, but I think that’s the traditional order of things.
Or have we skipped the charges and gone straight into discovery… Sentence first, verdict afterwards anyone?
Everything Gessler says in the article quotes screams out for a SLAPP counter-suit.