Hancock Denies Link to Prostitution Ring Five Days Before Election Day

From Westword, via Complete Colorado:

The Denver mayor’s race has grown unexpectedly nasty, with frontrunner Michael Hancock being targeted with false claims that Tom Tancredo endorsed him and more. The latest? A Complete Colorado report that attempts to link Hancock to the Denver Players prostitution ring that spelled doom for Judge Edward Nottingham. Hancock’s campaign manager sees the report as utterly false and reprehensible.

Complete Colorado builds its story on a document on view below and accessible by clicking here. It’s basically a log sheet that lists a “John” referred to as “Mike Handcock,” a payment amount of $275 and the notation “Wrks4City.” Prior to launching his mayoral bid, Hancock was a city councilman.

Campaign manager Evan Dreyer confirms that the number listed on the document is the same as Hancock’s personal cell — a topic of conversation this morning on Peter Boyles’s KHOW talk show. Nonetheless, he stresses that the report is “categorically untrue,” adding, “Michael and the campaign have endured negative, false, deceptive attack after attack for months, so nobody should really be surprised at this. The thing that’s different about this one is just the personal nature of it, and how shameful it is.”

When we first saw this story yesterday on the hideously-designed conservative site Complete Colorado, we waited to weigh in while we considered the story and the source. Embedding a PDF of a mostly-blacked out document isn’t exactly a smoking gun, after all.

But the one thing that we kept coming back to as we considered the story is this: If these allegations are really just “a political hit job,” then why are they coming out now?

If you were anti-Hancock, or just preferred his opponent, Chris Romer, and you wanted to use this as a way to damage Hancock’s campaign for Mayor, why would you sit on this until less than a week to go before Election Day — particularly when the voting is all being done by mail? Today is the last day that you can still mail your ballot and feel assured that it will arrive at the Denver Clerk’s office in time to be counted — there’s simply not enough time for this story to have a significant impact on the outcome of the Mayor’s race. If you wanted to use this story to impact the race for Mayor, you needed to put it out last week at the latest. We still need to see more proof to believe this story, but the too-late timing of its release actually makes it slightly more plausible.

All of this got us thinking about this story not in terms of the race for Mayor but about what comes next. If this story is true — and that’s a big “if” — and Hancock ends up winning the election on Tuesday…then what? Hancock has talked frequently about his plan, for example, to hire a new Police Chief and Manager of Safety, but he’d have a tough time legitimately overhauling the Denver Police Department if he himself was involved with a notorious prostitution ring. If this story is true, Hancock would step into office with one hand tied behind his back — and that’s assuming he would even make it to the inauguration. The calls for Hancock to step down would begin immediately if more came out about this story.

With just a few days to go until the votes are tallied for Mayor, this story is unlikely to have much of an impact on the outcome of the race. But that doesn’t mean it is necessarily any less significant.

0 Shares

145 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. BlueCat says:

    pretty much immediately after being elected, then what?  Would a special election have to be scheduled?

  2. Automaticftp says:

    So why is what sounds like an attempted hatchet job worthy of the front page?  Or of being commented on at all?  

  3. c rork says:

    Please end this race. Now.

  4. (just a Chris Romer despiser) . . .

    but, it takes a little bit of time to disprove a negative doesn’t it?  So why release something that could be disproven except at the very last minute when there isn’t sufficent time to do so?

    You’re “the timing on this must reinforce it’s validity” argument isn’t even a logic worthy of the Beej.

    • Colorado PolsColorado Pols says:

      But not now. Hancock doesn’t have to “disprove” this (strategically speaking) because there isn’t enough time left for it to matter. Talking about it at all just makes it more of a story if you’re Hancock.

      • droll says:

        you have start wondering both ways. What if Han(d)cock started this himself to further play the victim?

        Is this retribution for constantly saying that Romer is breaking campaign laws?

        Did Romer, or mysterious strangers, do it as a stereotype? You don’t want a thug for Mayor!! Sometimes ideas come late.

        Is it a weird coincidence?

        Or, and I know I said this yesterday, is this all the final nail in Evan’s douche coffin. It’s not really, or at all, about him, but he’s a douche. And his douchery is what made me think the whole story is a plant. I don’t really think it is, but it seems plausible by his douche response.

        Also from yesterday, anyone have any ideas on why any part of law enforcement or the media would just overlook this for years? It’s evidence in a criminal case, yes? And law enforcement was all like, “Yeah, we’ll just let this guy slide because he’s nice and has had a rough life.”

        Not that I’m not enjoying that the denial of doing wrong comes with the insinuation that Captain Negative is continuing to be negative here. Christ! We have us some classy candidates!

        • Middle of the Road says:

          One that I’ve been thinking about since I saw Westword’s story. Why would law enforcement, media or anybody in the know ignore Hancock if this was really him? For God’s sake, this little fiasco brought down a judge so bringing down a city councilman would have been icing on the cake.

          This story smacks of a last minute desperate, “Hail Mary, I’m about to lose my race for Mayor and don’t have a State Senate seat to fall back on” sort of maneuver.  

      • “So Mr. Hancock, you’ve not been very vociferous in your denials.”

        Things I’m sure no one is saying:

        “Mr. Hancock refused to discuss this situation on our show.”

        “What’s Mr. Hancock hiding?”

        (And, yes, like C rork — please, please, please make this race stop!  Shenanigans on both these fuckers — the judges rule that third-place, Mejia, gets Mayor by default.

        Having said that, if I was a Denver voter holding a ballot in this race, I’d still vote Hancock and stick a stamp on it today.)

      • nancycronknancycronk says:

        When I was volunteering heavily on another campaign, people used to send me unsolicited “scoops” hoping I would be foolish enough to share the “breaking news”. I didn’t fall for it; as soon as I’d ask what their sources were, it would fall apart. I suspect stories like these are shopped all over the place until someone falls for them. Don’t you get stuff like this all the time, and choose to ignore it? Seriously, I’m wondering.  

  5. You know the one, tried to hire Sarah Palin and Octomom?

    Can we count on him to make a “Mike Handcock” spoof?  

    • droll says:

      Or who is he “nailin'”? I mean, that’s Hustler, not some dicey guy. cough cough You know what I mean.

      • (Not actually being a hypocrite in this thread, but this story is silly and too late to affect the election, and it hasn’t caused a media frenzy, so I feel like it’s okay to laugh at it instead of being indignant about another fucking sex scandal, because so far there’s no scandal and no proof there was sex.)

        Or what about “Mike Handcock Does Denver?”

    • to a porno offer than a guy who is in hock $673,000 for his campaign.

      WTF Mr. Brilliant Financial Genius Businessman?  How is this even possible in a Mayoral race?

      It’s not like Chris wasn’t craven enough already, but now any pimp with a roll of hundreds looks like the kind of guy he could become beholden to.

      Now more than ever, for the sake of Denver and Colorado, Romer should never again be allowed anywhere near a public office in this State.  (Let him go out and sell his own fat, frosting covered ass on East Colfax in the private sector.)

  6. RavenDawg says:

    At least leave him covered in mud so it will take some time to clean up and get on track.

    Alternatively, why did John Wilkes Booth wait till the war was lost before he acted?

  7. dwyer says:

    Also, Hancock and Romer were supposed to be on the Rosen show, this am.  Does anyone know if they were and if this issue came up….so to speak.

    Where the hell is Jason when we really need him?

  8. reubenesp says:

    but I agree with Diogenesdemar,” I’d still vote Hancock and stick a stamp on it today.”

    As to post-election issues, I’d turn that around on Romer and ask him now: “Mr. Romer, if you should win – which is even more unlikely now (sorry Pols) – will you recuse yourself from the selection process for city bond contracts since you are a former senior vice-president of JP Morgan?

  9. botw says:

    I am very surprised that ColoradoPols made this a front page story.

    It strikes me as irresponsible and unfortunate to turn a rumor from this source into a story of what-ifs if Hancock is elected and to speculate that he might not “make it to the inauguration.”

    I was under the impression that rank rumors — especially from questionable sources — were not appropriate for this site.

  10. TobiasFunke says:

    Yes, it’s too late to really influence the election… except that a TON of ballots had not been sent back yet, and if people were waiting on a sign or something to make their decision for them, this could certainly be that, ridiculous as it is.

    I don’t think Romer’s camp really had something to do with it, but someone working WITH his campaign might have.

    A “hail mary” is what they call that, I think.

  11. RedGreenRedGreen says:

    You really have to ask that? It’s because this story has been shopped around to every legitimate news outlet in town for weeks, and they finally found one that would run with it. All the other speculation about timing is hogwash.

  12. caroman says:

    Wow.  I’m not involved in this race, but I am surprised that CoPols would front page this ridiculous story.

    “Handcock?”  I thought we had our fun yesterday about Weiner.

    Really, Pols.  I am disappointed in you today.

  13. TobiasFunke says:

    The former City Council president is calling a prostitution ring more than once, each time from a different, public, pay phone, to make reservations for himself, changes his name only by adding a “d” to make “Handcock” out of “Hancock,” and actually puts “Wrks4city” as his information?

    Really?

    You have to be fucking stupid to think that this story is legitimate. No joke.

    And then to put that story on the front page? Laughable.

    And then to go down the road and start asking questions about what happens if he happens to win the election?

    With THIS preposterous story as the basis?

    Nah, ColoradoPols is COMPLETELY impartial. Totally buy that.

    This is hilarious. Really.

    • Ralphie says:

      1. It’s not Pols’ story

      2. True or not it’s of interest to political junkies like us

      a) if true, it’s a bombshell

      b) if false, it’s despicable

      I’m still wrestling with whether this should have been front-paged, but given that the audience here is political junkies, I can sort of see the reasoning.

      • TobiasFunke says:

        However, I will point out that CoPols thought it enough of a story to do its own write-up, specifically wondering what happens IF ANY of this becomes true, which is pretty funny in and of itself. And then CoPols thought it enough of a story to post it on the front page.

        Where’s the coverage of Romer loaning his campaign $540k since April? Non story? Or just not a front-page story?

        Now, if Hancock (or Handcock) had loaned himself any cash, we’d see a new land-speed record for how quickly that info was posted on the front page.

      • As RedGreen noted, this story had already made the rounds to the reputable media.

        I have to admit, it has prompted quite a few hits here on CoPols, so it’s performed as hoped for a front pager. Gotta sell those ads.

        • Hell . . . there goes the-timing-makes-this-story-so-much-more-plausible argument — shot all to hell . . .

          Unleeeeeessssssssss, . . . the timing of the prior shopping around makes the recent release so much more plausible.  Yeaaaah, that’s the ticket . . . whatdaya say now Beej/Pols? — that logic is so much firmer now, huh?

      • nancycronknancycronk says:

        Or completely made up? Why aren’t there other notes besides where this person works (what a coincidence(!) like “arrives late”, “smells bad”, “likes feathers”, etc?) You’d think if they were taking notes, there’d be more to read.

        There is nothing believable about this “story”. Come on Pols — passing on a story from extreme right-wing nut jobs with absolutely no evidence is pretty low.

        • ohwilleke says:

          a madam’s address book, at least not unless somebody has got a rather odd fetish.

          Total fabrication: possible.

          Actual evidence from a police deparmtent evidence locker that happens to be released the same day that the Fraternal Order of Police endorses Romer and just a few days after Romer promises a video camera for every beat cop: possible.

          Golf lesson records in a prostitutes list of customers contact information and payment history: not possible.

          • nancycronknancycronk says:

            Anyone could have fabricated it.

            Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Substantiated evidence? Reputable witnesses? Doesn’t anyone believe in these things anymore?

            • cdsmith says:

              That, then, would be covered under


              Total fabrication: possible.

              In fact, from my outsider perspective, it looks like a total fabrication is the vastly most likely possibility; not from any real political player, but just from some random prostitute or pretend-prostitute who wants to be the center of attention for a while.

              As the original article pointed out, it’s very poorly timed to influence a mail-in ballot election.  But random attention-starved citizens don’t necessarily know that.

          • ellbee says:

            Promising a camera for every beat cop is not something that’s going to make them like Romer.

            “Sir – drop the knife – you’re out of focus!”

            The FOP endorsement is squat, too.  I would be totally shocked if this “leak” came from the DPD.  Most of the guys I talk to are terrified of Romer winning the election.

  14. ohwilleke says:

    and having managed to escape prosecution for doing so, as almost all Johns do (quite possibly to a point where the statute of limitations has passed), necessarily has all that much political relevance and certainly doesn’t amount to “involvement” with a prostitution ring in the sense of being someone who managed it or used political power to protect it.  Indeed, in Denver’s strong Mayor form of government, the City Council has virtually no say over how the police force exercises its discretion and the DA is elected independently of city officials.

    If it is true, and the evidence is hardly unequivocal, Hancock (who has been married for seventeen years) certainly wouldn’t be the first official to have been caught in an instance of consentual sexual impropriety like having an affair or patronizing a prostitute, and those instances aren’t political death sentences.  McCain won the Presidential nomination as a Republican despite an admitted string of egregious affairs, and Gingrich, notorious for similar conduct, is in the running to be President this year.  Bill Clinton didn’t resign over his notorious affair.  John Edwards and Arnold Schwarzenegger of course, are also big time pols who had affairs revealed, with Edwards facing indictment for covering it up illegally and Arnold apparently having broken no laws in his cover up.  Indeed, in the case of a prostitute, one knows that there wasn’t sexually harassment of a subordinate (a la Clinton) and given the alleged timing it didn’t happen at a time when his wife was suffering from a severe illness and needs his support a la Edwards and McCain.  This is a far cry from the rape accusasions lodged against the IMF chief.  There are lots of places where patronizing a prostitute wouldn’t even be illegal (although Denver is not one of them).

    For my druthers, the likely souce would be someone who felt sympathies with the Fraternal Order of Police, which has endorsed Romer fairly late in the game and may have been motivated by poll numbers showing that Romer is behind.  

  15. Say Hey Kid says:

    If he was on the “DO NOT BOOK” list I’d be worried

    What will the Denver Post do or not do on this?

    As of now there is nothing but a front page headline tomorrow could be a game changer

  16. And I suck at photoshop.

    This proves nothing unless the police confirm it’s the original report.

    Also, I giggled in an unseemly manner at the “don’t watch clock for big tip.” OH I BET IT IS.  

  17. Old Time Dem says:

    because a councilman apparently doesn’t even merit a VIP designation.

  18. redstateblues says:

    Not just the “story” with “evidence” courtesy of the best damn Drudge ripoff site in town, but the “analysis”.

    Had to pass this along courtesy of another shadowy, dark, disreputable anonymous blogger:

    I heard Hancock denied he was a werewolf when a second grader asked him if that’s why he shaved his head. The timing is suspicious — the fact he’s denying this when it ISN”T a full moon actually argues for the accuracy of the charge. Let’s ask Dan Willis what will happen if he changes into an actual predatory wolf DURING the inauguration — Dan will know. If the deputy mayor has to step forward with a silver stake, how will that affect plans to replace Chief Whitman?

  19. reubenesp says:

    The CEA, DCTA and Republican voucher guy Alex Carnberg are among those behind despicable anti-Hancock mailers:

    http://www.kdvr.com/news/polit

      • raymond1 says:

        … funny, if Merida & Co. were on the other side, they’d declare that racist in a heartbeat.

        Less unsupportably snarkily: it’s striking that there’s a new generation of progressive black leaders that’s supporting center-right education reform, and drawing major fire from teachers’ unions for it.

        It’s the left’s version of the right’s tea-party-versus-bankers crackup, where the TeaPeople want the U.S. to default on its  debt, leaving the BankPeople thinking, “crap, it seemed like a good idea to fool blue-collar whites into starting a ‘tea party’ fighting to cut spending that benefits themselves — but now this monster has escaped the lab…”

        • Middle of the Road says:

          The alliances are downright weird on some of these issues. What is even stranger is how many teachers are starting to publicly advocate for a different approach from their unions. Thank God, because unions will never reform themselves until their own members start to demand it.

          There’s an all or nothing approach among the teacher’s unions like the CEA and the DCTA that no longer works for me. I find it harder and harder to defend their actions, particularly when I see the results in graduation rates, drop outs, et al. More and more people are standing up and speaking out which only seems to be driving the education unions to further entrench themselves in what hasn’t really been working in a very long time.

          If they don’t get their heads out of their asses and start doing some internal house cleaning, forces beyond their control are going to do it for them. And that would be a shame, in my opinion. But not wholly undeserved.  

          • nancycronknancycronk says:

            then the rest of the citizenry, including parents and other adults, don’t have to do anything at all. Should we blame crime on Epidemics on health care professionals? Auto accidents on those who make the cars? Gee, what an easy world to understand when one settles for the easiest (read laziest)answers around.  

        • Middle of the Road says:

          to my comment. Something I read a while back–speaking of strange alliances.  

          • raymond1 says:

            … with what you’re implying about historical views of teachers’ unions: when the political debate about schools was just a univariate “more money or less” debate, I was 100% on board w/ teachers’ unions. But progressives aren’t all in line w/ the unions now that the debate is multivariate — not just “how much in gov budget for schools but tenure, school choice, vouchers, school shutdowns etc. Apologies for the math lingo about variables but it seemed to make sense, and sxp and BJ can hold hands & use their identical math perspectives to explain it to everyone if necessary.

  20. Gray in Mountains says:

    I’ve read this incorrect spelling in some posts on this blog. Were they from shills for one camp or another?

    I agree that this is likely a sham story, that Hancock is far too smart to go to a hooker and only add one digit to his name.

  21. Ridiculous play, Pols. This “reasoning” is absurd and smacks of desperation on your part:

    But the one thing that we kept coming back to as we considered the story is this: If these allegations are really just “a political hit job,” then why are they coming out now?

    And just think, that’s the most “logical” spin you and your Koch-funded allies could come up with. Wow.

    So, Pols, what’s it like to be in bed with Josh Penry? Does he hog the covers?

    (btw, My preference is for both candidates to lose somehow, because they are both heinous, but Pols’ reality-bending Romer shillfest is nonetheless appalling. Then again, this kind of thing is really nothing new for Pols.)

  22. nancycronknancycronk says:

    I think they’ve been pretty even-handed before this, but this story is unethical since it lacks any evidence, IMHO. I hope they retract it. I do think the owners/editors mean well, and usually do a good job.  

    • ohwilleke says:

      but clearly there is evidence in the form of a pdf of a four page document alleged to be from a police investigation in Denver that really did happen in which a ledger of that nature really was seized and is included for everyone to judge without an interpretive filter in its entirety.  And, the alleged document does contain an entry with a phone number that genuinely is the phone number of the individual of the candidate according to his own campaign manager.

      It could be fabricated, but if it were not fabricated it could very well look exactly as it does, and the fact that Hancock says it is a lie giving his powerful interest in saying so (personally and politically) doesn’t mean much.  This is a subject about which more people lie than tell the truth.

      I also agree that it is relevant since it is out there, whether or not it is true, and should be evaluated more widely.  There is nothing at all unethical about reporting a rumor whose veracity can’t be determined with certainty.

      Now, it certainly qualifies as a “dirty trick” whether or not it is true.  But, it isn’t accurate to say that the story “lacks any evidence.”  Indeed, it has far more evidence than many rumors.

      • nancycronknancycronk says:

        If I created a document on my computer and posted it here saying ohwilleke kidnaps young boys and makes them work as slaves in his backyard circus, it is ethical and proper? Awesome. Colorado Pols, once a somewhat respected source of inside political baseball in Colorado, just became another tabloid.  

        • raymond1 says:

          … usually in the title. “Hancock Denies Link to Prostitution Ring” is a title you give to a pol’s denial of some solid allegagtion. Contrast the funny-but-point-taken alternative title that Nancy suggested above, and that is similar to Pols typically posts when, for example, it’s Ken Buck smearing Bennet:

          The Headline, if printed at all, should have been, “Desperate Anti-Hancock Forces Reach Depths Lower Than Fox News Tied To An Anchor”.

  23. Say Hey Kid says:

    Hancock wins unless the Denver Post headlines this story over the weekend.  Bet he won’t be getting much sleep

  24. marindenver says:

    The Denver Post is not, thank god, Westword.  They are, however, highlighting the story about Romer loaning his campaign big bucks and Hancock actually raising even more.

    I don’t know, CoPols, I keep trying to give you guys a chance but this crap belongs in the tabloids.  HANDcock???  Give me a break.

    Still waiting for that admission that the “ZOMG – Hancock is a CREATIONIST!!11!1” flier was rated “leaning deceptive” (and “leaning” is being kind) after your treatment of it as a big game changer also, too.

    It’s gonna be Mayor Handcock to you guys, get used to it.

  25. bjwilson83 says:

    As I said before, Pols got scooped. The other thing that points to the veracity of the story is that Todd Shepherd is an award winning reporter. There is no reason why he would jeopardize his career over a contest between two Democrats.  

  26. we waited to weigh in while we considered the story and the source.

    Once you considered both the story and the source, you should have just backed off. I thought we weren’t supposed to post rumors here. This is just about as unsubstantiated as it gets. But, just on the off-chance it gets just a few late voters over to the Romer side, I guess it was worth it.

    • in asserting its purported aversion to publishing rumors:


      http://coloradopols.com/diary/

      How cronyism and incompetence are destroying the Democrats in Colorado (+)

      by: MikeD1970

      Fri Nov 05, 2010 at 14:51:56 PM MDT

      *Colorado Pols Note: This diary has been deleted. The content was largely complaints and accusations about a company allegedly not paying wages. As per our posting policies, Colorado Pols does not permit unsourced, potentially defamatory accusations.  

      The kicker there of course is that Alan, er, “Pols” that is, (wink-wink), was lying though his teeth in claiming that the deleted diary was “largely complaints and accusations about a company allegedly not paying wages.”  It was actually a fairly comprehensive peek at the malfeasance and incompetence of Pols’ political hack-cronies.

      Conclusion: How to get an unsourced smear of a candidate published at ColoradoPols:

      Step 1 — Make sure it’s about the opponent of whichever candidate Pols is shilling for.

      Step 2 — Post the smear on a wacko right-wing blog without any hint of credible evidence or means of verification. Then Pols will be sure to re-post it here.

  27. harrydobyharrydoby says:

    Mailed my ballot for Han(d)cock already.  At first glance this juicy tidbit of a story wouldn’t change my vote on such a slender thread of evidence.

    But I think ColPols has not overstepped their own rules by running with it because there is at least one document to support the story(however tenuous).  Rumors are merely unsupported gossip.  This is at least one step above, given the admission that the documented phone number does match Hancock’s.

    If it does turn out to be true, then let the chips fall where they may.  But, what do I know? I didn’t realize getting a blow job was an impeachable offense, but Newt  prove me wrong.

    Personally, I believe if true, Hancock should man up and admit it.  Then his wife should administer the punishment.  If true, and the DPD released this evidence illegally, then as with the ICE leak during the 2006 guv’s race, somebody in law enforcement needs to go to jail.

  28. nancycronknancycronk says:

    Notice you never hear of women legislators or candidates involved in these scandals and accusations? Proof men are not well-suited for political work, perhaps? Perhaps we should just make all male legislators in this country — at every level– and all candidates, wear one of these devices, to put an end to accusations of sexual deviance? Imagine the real work that could be done on actual policy? Clinton, Edwards, Gingrich, Craig — they’d all still have their reputations in tact, and Wiener’s photo wouldn’t be much to look at. Imagine the possibilities! http://www.medicaltranscriptio

    • Whiskey Lima JulietWhiskey Lima Juliet says:

      If it is not real, it will go away.  However, my guess is a bunch of reporters and bloggers are looking into it.  If Hancock wins and it is true, he will be forced to step down.

      Too many men have been brought down by sex scandals.  Moreover, this is not the first about Michael; there is another rumor that a few reporters are looking into.  Men and especially men of “Jesus” are pros at making stupid mistakes with women.

      If this were is, he would have to know that it will not be long before the prostitute is on TV, look at Elliot, Spitzer, Ted Haggard and Jim Bakker.

      I say we sit back and wait.  Innocent until proven guilty.

      • ellbee says:

        Moreover, this is not the first about Michael; there is another rumor that a few reporters are looking into.

        I really think that’s an inappropriate comment, WLJ.  Hate the guy or not.

        • Whiskey Lima JulietWhiskey Lima Juliet says:

          This is what happens when you run for office.  I hope for Michael this is not true.  Less about Mayor, I don’t like to see accomplished Black men brought down with sex scandals.  However, like all politicians ego is the center of what drives them.  They believe that no one will bring up stuff and act shocked when it happens.

          The unfortunate piece here is that so many scandals happen so often, who the hell knows whats true and whats not.  I would not have guessed that the Gov of California had his mistress and son interacting with his family for the entire time he was Gov.  That would seem like a made up story as well.

          Ellbee, is it unfair if it does turn out to be true?

          • And this is a fallacious rejoinder, WLJ:

            Ellbee, is it unfair if it does turn out to be true?

            That’s like saying it’s OK to execute suspects without trials because, hey, you never know, what if they were really guilty?  

            • Whiskey Lima JulietWhiskey Lima Juliet says:

              Why don’t we know where this came from?  Who broke the story?  If this is the same paper work that had Nottingham’s name on it shouldn’t someone be able to say true of false?

          • ellbee says:

            Is you throwing out the inference that there’s some big rumor related to Hancock and something having to do with a sex scandal, and not even the one that came out yesterday, but an additional, mysterious rumor that ‘people’ are looking into.

            If “what” turns out to be true?  I think you need to be specific, and take responsibility for it, or keep it to yourself.  You’re throwing nasty rumors around, and it’s totally different than what I’m used to reading from you.  Even when I disagree with you, you’re always really well-sourced and reasoned.

            • Whiskey Lima JulietWhiskey Lima Juliet says:

              With both Romer and Hancock the rumor mill is running wild.  What I should have said was, i would be shocked if this is the last of the rumors we hear about, especially with this tone of the campaign.

              And for all of us on this blog, we are allowed to talk about the candidates. I am a concerned voter, not a paid consultant for either team.  My opinions are just that.  Getting upset and  chastising any non consultant posting a comment, seems counter productive to a blog.

    • Nikki Haley, South Carolina  

  29. WinstonSmith says:

    Sad to see that CoPols has resorted to full on yellow journalism. Of course, Pols has always been just a few folks with their own agenda acting like what they write has any journalistic integrity. Front paging this kind of garbage just helps to send Pols further down the tubes.

    Oh look, someone involved with a drug ring signed the name Barry NObama. And next to it wrote PrezUS. What if Obama is really involved in a drug ring? Maybe it is legitimate because it was released by some unknown party 5 days before the election. Your attempts to justify front paging this story are about as lame as they get.

  30. Selena says:

    I have been a dedicated and avid reader since ColoradoPols started.  I have learned so much from your site and felt the comments were so stimulating that I didn’t feel the need to create an account and post.  Your incredibly irresponsible posting of this vicious rumor about Michael Hancock motivated me to post for the first time.  ColoradoPols has become a widely read and important resource and I can’t tell you how much it distresses me that you would post something where the actual sources were tenuous at best. Pols, we all make mistakes.  I would humbly suggest that you own up to it and apologize for posting something like this without any hard evidence.  Your suggestion that this might somehow be true, or at least worthy of reporting, because why would someone release it at so late a time is, in my opinion, quite weak.  How about the reason is that this was one last Hail Mary pass in what has been an incredibly negative campaign against Mr. Hancock?  Please return ColoradoPols to the high standard that has made it so great.

  31. johnnswift says:

    ….seems to be the dominant theme in these comments. Probably an attempt to make us forget the original issue; Hancock stands accused of using the services of a prostitution ring. (And if the accusation is true, Hancock is now a liar, too.)

    I know a thing or two about Photoshop and (after examining it) I see nothing in the image that would indicate that it has been “photoshopped.” If you want us to believe that, give us the evidence.

    A simple explanation for why this document appeared at the last minute: maybe because the whistleblower tried to get the Denver Post and other mainstream media to publish it, and they refused.  Not because the document is not real, or not credible, but because they don’t want to embarrass or piss off the future mayor. Or his cronies.  So the whistleblower simply ran out of time to get the word out, and posted it wherever he (or she) could.  That scenario happened to me, with the Denver Post, a few years ago; believe me, editors in the mainstream media have less courage than a rabbit.

    No, the whistleblower doesn’t have to be a Romer supporter; maybe (like me) he wouldn’t give a nickel for either of the bums. Maybe he’s an honest cop (they do still exist) who gags at the thought that a politician who cheats on his wife and uses prostitutes is concealing his dishonesty and running for Mayor.  If I had that document in my hands, I’d feel exactly the same way. Wouldn’t you?

    So stop killing the messenger (ColoradoPols) or the (maybe) whistleblower (the brave person who posted the document) because you don’t like what the story (if true) implies about Hancock. Instead, focus on the real issue: is the document real? Because if it is, very probably that really is Hancock listed there – how else could the writer have obtained his cellphone number?

    So let’s hear from the Police Department (or whoever has custody of the evidence from the police investigation) to settle the real issue; is the document real?

    • JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

      I can’t speak to the Denver Post’s decisionmaking, but agree on the rest. If it’s a false document, someone already knows that. Let’s get the truth instead of trying to outrage our way around it.

      Agree on killing the messenger too. It’s dumb and transparent. http://coloradopols.com/diary/

    • If its fake, then it comes from someone that has his cell#.

      He may have some friends that he’s fallen out with.

    • Selena says:

      We are not “killing the messenger” but rather being critical of Pols for being irresponsible in their reporting. The reason that ColoradoPols was wrong on their reporting of this exists on two fronts.  First, (and I agree this is open to argument and hear your point), unsubstantiated rumors have no business finding their way on to a respected publication like ColoradoPols.  Second, even if we concede that ColoradoPols was right to post the story, they certainly went over the line by entering into “what if” speculation on what they admit to be a tenuous accusation.  For example, the comment about how Mr. Hancock would have to resign later or the question about why is this coming out at the last minute and that could make it more credible.  By engaging in this type of reporting, Pols has enabled mudslinging that has no business in Colorado politics.

      Pols, we love your blog but you simply made a mistake on this one.  Please own up to it.  We all make mistakes.

  32. sloanslake says:

    these prostitution allegations appear to be credible enough to warrant a police investigation. That’s what we pay our cops to do right? Uphold the law and investigate credible allegations of crimes committed? Well, I for one would like to know one way or the other.

    And yes, if elected and these allegations prove true, I would absolutely expect Hancock (or any other mayor) to step down. Cheating on your spouse is one thing, repeatedly hiring a hooker is quite another.  

  33. ohwilleke says:

    possession of the former boss of the raided clubs and was allegedly stolen on Monday.  The blog post was from the previous Friday, although it could have been based on a copy rather than an original of the book.

    Why the original book was stolen (if indeed it was rather than being a staged fake theft) is the mystery of month here in Denver, but it is certainly fair to guess that the alleged theft and the leak of the Hancock story are related.

    One can imagine any number of scenarios:

    1.  A Hancock supporter steals it to keep the evidence deniable.

    2.  A Hancock opponent (maybe a rogue cop, maybe not) steals it as confirmation of the rumor.

    3.  A third party realizes that leakable dirt about him is out there and wants it buried before it leaks too.

    4.  Hancock or some other person in the book was blackmailed with the information before it was leaked and this was self-help to stop the blackmail (perhaps knowledge of the blackmail in progress from Hancock when asked for comment was a factor in the big ticket press not covering the story until after the election).

    5.  A random burglar robbed the guy’s house, realized he’d found something more valuable and took it.

    6.  Someone faked the Hancock pages and stole the original to keep from being caught in a grand act of deception.

    7.  The burglary was fakes to provide deniability to later black mail efforts by the homeowner.

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.