Do Not Share This Lauren Boebert Town Hall Announcement

MONDAY UPDATE: The Montrose Press reports that Lauren Boebert’s town hall is still on despite the unfortunate fact of the public having heard about it:

Although the initial announcement, which was shared with the Montrose Daily Press by third parties, asked people not to share or post the event to social media, citing security reasons, word spread all the same.

Local GOP Chairman Spencer Hamner said he does not have security concerns, as long as the Montrose County Sheriff’s Office or Montrose Police Department is available. A previous event featuring Boebert that had been set for Montrose was canceled after unspecified threats to the venue and host.

Rural Colorado United, a Pueblo-based political action committee opposed to Boebert, will be holding a town hall Tuesday, March 16, at 12:15 p.m. in Riverbottom Park. Organizers have dubbed it the “Thanks for Nothing, Boebert” town hall and in the announcement criticized Boebert’s no vote on the recent coronavirus relief bill.

We’ll update as events unfold.


As seen (wait for it) on Facebook today:

That’s right, folks. What we have here is a shareable graphic announcing a town hall meeting in Montrose starring Rep. Lauren Boebert on Monday. But the graphic says “for security purposes, please do not share or post this event to social media. Thank you.”

In the future, we recommend:

  1. Don’t make a social media graphic to publicize an event you don’t want to publicize.
  2. If you do make the mistake of #1, don’t say on the social media graphic not to share it on social media, because that’s of course what everyone is going to do.

Also, don’t blame us for “exposing” Boebert’s super-secret town hall, like we said it’s all over Facebook. Snow on the Front Range ought to keep those pesky Antifa types away, and Boebert has…extreme security on call.

So don’t accept any excuses, Montrose! Get down there and respectfully ask the hard questions.

25 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. MartinMark says:

    Nah, this is just a scam to rack up some more reimbursable miles.  It must be quarterly payroll tax deposit time again.

    My guess is someone on her staff said to put in the disclaimer to maintain that sense of being under siege among her followers.  Pretty much SOP straight out of the Cult Brainwashing 101 manual.

  2. MattC says:


    People in CD3 should attend and ask her what she plans to fix Social Security and stabilize Medicare.

    My most Republican eligible friends and family see SS and Medicare as different because they paid in and earned it.

  3. kwtree says:

    This is her chance to show that she wants to represent the ~ 49% of her district who did not vote for her.

    I am not optimistic about it.

  4. gertie97 says:

    My guess is this will get called off due to “security concerns'' if the audience can't be limited to true believers.


  5. skeptical citizen says:

    Wear those hip waders, cause the BS is gonna be deep.

  6. kwtree says:

    The obvious solution for her is to convert to a "phone-in" or virtual town hall format. Cory Gardner did this a few times.

    The advantage is that the rep gets to display in a casual, yet professional, manner, and their staff filters all of the uncomfortable audience questions. Only a select few ever get onto the live recorded town hall.

    But maybe doing an online zoom event would be seen as catering to the vaccine hoaxers, or something.

    • unnamed says:

      The obvious solution for her is to convert to a "phone-in" or virtual town hall format.


      Well, she is at best phoning it in with respect to her job.  So, why not.

  7. kwtree says:

    Boebert sponsors bill on water law. The “Western Water Security Act” supposedly is intended to prevent the Federal Government from trying to “seize  control of private property and private water rights.”  Her cosponsors are all Trumplicans, with statements in this odd press release

    So I don’t understand water law. But I remember, when I lived in Pueblo, that Tipton kept getting re-elected on the theory that he was “ good on water rights”.

    Someone who does understand water law please interpret this. I’m sure it will feature prominently in her town hall, as it did in her constituent newsletter. 

    Do the Feds bargain about water rights every time they deny a grazing or use permit? Is this related to Bundy and his wishto graze his cattle for free on Fed land? Does it have something to do with drillers on public lands? Someone who knows, please share.

    The other proposed bills in her newsletter are nonsensical and will never happen: moving the Capitol fence to the southern border, making N Korea return the USS Pueblo, some garble about the 2nd amendment, etc. But this one signals that she wants to be taken seriously and to get re-elected in CD3.

  8. gertie97 says:

    It was, in fact, a bill Tipton worked on for quite a while. It's a legitimate issue although I doubt Calamity Jane has even a glimmer of the problem, let alone a solution.

    The feds have in the past attempted to get water rights for themselves in return for granting a permit. I don't remember the details but there was a fuss when the Black Canyon of the Gunnison graduated to national park status about federal reserved water rights. There have been a number of cases where a rancher, or ditch company, sought a Forest Service permit to slightly enlarge a small reservoir's capacity, only to be told that to do so a portion of the water right would go to federal ownership in return for the permit. Things hit the fan eight or so years ago when the Forest Service tried it with the Powderhorn Ski Area.

    It should be noted that federal reserved water rights are indeed a real and proper thing under the Winters Doctrine for Indian reservations. That long-ago Supreme Court ruling held that when Congress set aside land for reservations, it implied that sufficient water went with. It was partially due to the Winters Doctrine that the Ute Mountain Utes and Southern Utes finally got some wet water just a few years ago.

    It's horribly complicated but the kind of thing that warms the hearts and fattens the wallets of Colorado water lawyers.

    It definitely does not belong in the hands of a rank amateur like Qbert.


  9. Diogenesdemar says:

    So it looks like if you’re really interested in hearing a high-school dropout waitress yell at people for a hour or so this evening, you have a choice, . . .

    you can still head on out to Montrose by 6:00 . . .

    . . . or over to your nearest Waffle House after the bars close.

    • MichaelBowman says:

      THAT'S what's missing!  We need to set up vaccination clinics at every Waffle House (full transparency: no trip to the south is complete without this detour) and we catch these guys in a moment of weakness while they're in a sugar coma from their bottomless maple syrup orgy. 

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.