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
November 22, 2013 03:48 PM UTC

Peter Boyles Critiques Local Coverage of the Hudak Recall Effort, as Only Peter Boyles Can

  • 31 Comments
  • by: Michael Lund

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

In the heated battle and drama surrounding the efforts to recall Colorado State Senator Evie Hudak, accusations of malfeasance and misrepesentation have been thrown back and forth, a gubernatorial candidate has proffered obscene gestures, and local news outlets have entered the fray to parse out the truth and report on the contentious issues raised by the two sides.

Never the wallflower, KNUS 710AM radio talk show host, Peter Boyles, has become the media point man for the Recall organization, hosting the organizers Mike McAlpine and Laura Waters in daily appearances for updates and rallying cries. As you might guess, the tone of the show these days is combative and loud.

When KDVR Fox 31's reporter Eli Stokols and KCNC CBS4 Denver's Shaun Boyd ventured into Arvada and Westminster to report on the Recall and efforts to thwart it, they were not spared from Mr. Boyles cutting criticism and confrontation.

We've provided some audio clips from The Peter Boyles Show for you to hear exactly what Peter Boyles thinks of their journalistic efforts:

1. Peter and Joe Neville, lobbyist for Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, respond to Eli Stokol's report identifying paid signature gatherers for the Hudak recall effort as having criminal records, which supports claims purported in door hangers and robo-calls by Hudak supporters. The root of Mr. Boyles' complaints seem to lie mostly with the organizations defending Hudak against the recall, whose methods to investigate recall works Boyles refers to as "underhanded", "Brownshirt technique" "gestapo-esque" and "very, very KGB". Misters Boyles and Neville accuse the Democracy Defense Fund as 'gift-handing' information to Stokol's for his report. Further criticism from Neville and Boyles refers to Stokols' reporting that DDF "fundraised" $30,000 to fund their efforts when it appears the money was donated in large amounts by few donors. Finally, Boyles charges Stokols for not forwarding information concerning the potential crime of threatening phone calls from someone associated with the Hudak recall.

2. Boyles calls Stokols' piece "bad journalism", claiming that DDF gave Stokols information critically important to the report, while refusing to return Boyles' phone calls requesting answers to his questions. Further criticism from Boyles falls to Shaun Boyd's report on the recall in which she interviews Hudak. Boyles mocks Hudak's appearance in the piece a, saying that "Evie is now part of 'Shaun's people'".

3. Boyles facetiously adopts the song "Eli's Coming" to mock Stokol's supposed failures in his report. Also in this segment, Boyles lays out his case against Shaun Boyd's report, which reported that Hudak claimed that she had nothing to do with the organized opposition to the recall. Peter calls "BS" on that claim, but doesn't back up his assertion.

4. This clip includes audio from Shaun Boyd's interview with Evie Hudak, complete with Peters peanut gallery commentary and editorializing.

Tweet
Share

Comments

31 thoughts on “Peter Boyles Critiques Local Coverage of the Hudak Recall Effort, as Only Peter Boyles Can”

  2. It isn't surprising that Democracy Defense wouldn't return Peter's phone calls – he's been urging his listeners to harass DD by calling their number non-stop. Also, Boyles is not exactly someone one can have a reasonable conversation with; he jumps in on the attack, yells questions, yells over the other person's reply, starts insulting and demeaning them while holding down the "mute" button so that their answers aren't heard by his listening audience.

    I've heard him do that on the air with the spokesperson from Democracy Defense, with Tom Mauser, with Jason Salzman. It's beyond bad journalism and interview technique, and well into verbal bullying.

    It's why I don't bother to call in. My own written communications have never gotten any response from Boyles or the station, so it seems that he only responds to criticism when he feels he's in a position of overwhelming strength.

    Nice to see someone else covering our local conservative "entertainer", Mr. Lund.

    1. I'm with you. I don't listen to boyles, haven't for years, and am aware that when you call in, bad things happen in the form of you validating his program from a ratings standpoint.

      But………….I still figure that the way to stop this phony gasbag in his tracks, to literally stun him, is to as a journalist ask him straight out if he did indeed serve in the US Army as a paratrooper………IE the 101st or 82nd Airborne.

      boyles knows he used to claim that on his program, he was doing it as far back as the late 80's, early 90's, during the time he was reviewing Mark Lanes' great work "Plausible Denial". Somewhere there are archived tapes or something. I can't be the only person that heard it. Back then I had no reason to think he was pulling a fast one. 

      Anyway, falsely representing yourself as military isn't ok any more. People don't look the other way any more. This is his achilles heel. A journalist just needs to get him on the record.

      1. If you want to call in and ask him, Rocco, go ahead. I'd recommend the "broken record" approach – just keep asking him your question over and over, until he either answers or hangs up on you. Be aware that he will try to piss you off by making fun of your name, various other sidetracks and red herrings.

        But you'll probably get through his screeners if you say you're from Pols.

          1. Examiner has never been a reliable source.

            You need to come up with a better one, though. It looks like you have our usual complaints with these bullshit links. It could all be a plant, could be misinterpreted as to what the context said – as in "statisitics" ARE NOT IN HER FAVOR EVEN IF SHE CARRIED A GUN AND A PERMIT. She is correct with that analysis. Think about it…

             

              1. I have absolutely no problem believing that there are morons on both sides. So what? My only interest is in what various factors say about the likelihood of a successful Hudak recall. We all know, whatever it is, somewhere, sometime, some how there is a Johnny doing it, too. 

          2. OK…some guy on a bike threatened the recall picketers, then rode off. Police were called, but never found him.

            Anti-recall picketers have no idea who he was. He had never registered or trained as a volunteer. That's all I know. And the link is from the recallhudaktoo  FB site.

          1. Exactly. Nobody knows who the guy was. He was never caught,has never showed up again.

            My guess is, either a plant, since the videotape was conveniently rolling, or one of the  armed mentally ill roaming around randomly.

            1. What we do know is this:

              He is clearly active, as he committed felony menacing.

              He is not supporting the recall effort. 

              Now its been a long time since I took a logic and critical thinking class, but from these premises one can but lament the inference, whether he is "on the list" or not. 

            2. Well mama then your guess is as baseless as the recent guess by righties that the guy threatening Hudak supporters was not only not connected with the recall campaign but must have been a Dem plant. This all sounds exactly like the stuff we were making fun of in that thread but with the shoe on the other foot. Let's leave knee jerk defense and baseless accusations to the righties, shall we. 

              1. It's why it's called a "guess". At least I'm not attributing it to "some people say", or "word on the street", or "rumor has it", to make it sound more legitimate.

                1. Your welcome. I wish I could say I did it for you but   my concern is with credibility, something not well served by knee jerk accusations or knee jerk excuses.wink

          2. And if he is a Hudak supporter?  I don't feel the need to deny the possibility. Every group, social, political, ethnic, racial, religious, you name it, includes some morons. If this is an authentic Hudak supporting moron, that would hardly rise to the level of shocking.

            Truth told, the only people who are at all aware of this kind of stuff , much less getting worked up over it, are the tiny percentage of people like us, on both sides, who are on blogs looking for this kind of thing or listening 

            It's not as if, for instance, anyone listening to Boyles if he chooses to make a big deal out of this, is going to become any more anti-Hudak than they were before. It's not as if anyone who frequents either flavor of political sites doesn't already know where they stand. Is Negev going to be swayed by this? Am I? Are you? Seems to me concern over actual fraud should be enough to worry about.

        1. Fuck you, Negev.

          Here's why:

          The Blaze is run by Glenn Beck, a idiot of the third magnitude, always comes up with lies without backing up. That's why Fox News got rid of him after a massive amount of advertising losses because nobody could not stand Beck. You are obviously a Beck fan, and you gave us two very dubious links – one from the Examiner which is mostly run by bullshit and innuendo and no facts to verify anything, and the other being Beck's stupid website.

          I think I know exactly who you are, Watkins. You're a dumbshit that couldn't even hold a steady job, mooching off from the Schriebers when you couldn't manage your Eruv scam. Even the Twerskis had a soft heart for you before they fled Denver.

           

          1. and then the name calling when there is no logical answer…

            I tell you what – Google it. Pick from the 41,400 results and you choose any source you like…

             

            1. No.

              HawkeyeX lost patience with you because you're citing 2 sources that are known even in conservative circles to be over the top extreme right wing agitation centers.

              Beck is what he is……a bomb thrower with a niche (I guess you're in it) that is angry, scared, and highly volatile. His schtick plays well with end of times radicals and separatists, not exactly even mainstream conservatives. He does deal in paranoia and religious old testament predictions. The blaze isn't considered legit by any republicans in the actual mainstream.

              It's irritating that you bring up the examiner as well, because it's a "gawker" based site owned by Anschutz, and deals strictly in attempting to proliferate wild right wing anti progressive "theories" based on dubious sources of information. The "writers", "contributors", and "sources" are paid by the piece, and the crazier the better. Vetting isn't prioritized.

              So yeah, HawkeyeX went FU on your ass, but you definitely had it coming.

              Next time you want to demonize the opponent, bring something that doesn't get you embarrassed.

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

79 readers online now

Newsletter

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