President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%↑
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd
(D) Adam Frisch
52%↑
48%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
60%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
April 26, 2007 04:21 PM UTC
18 Comments
to remove Wadhams from under your skin.
It’ll soon become a pus filled boil of slimy Republican hypocrisy and further disgusting anti-American shenanigans. Then we can lance it.
for the affirmation:)
Could we, at this point, with headlines like this one..
please drop the ruse that Coloradopols is somehow not a left-leaning blog? No biggie, let’s just be honest about it.
It seems that no one takes issue with your perspective. No one. So what if it’s left leaning? No one is forced to post hear, to my knowledge every one gets to say what they wish. I don’t see any words at the top that say, “Fair and Balanced.” If I post at Little Green Footballs, I know that I’d be in the minority.
What’s the issue?
my homonymanel (sp?) shields were down….
No issue at all, and I would enjoy it just the same. But I think the umbrage on the part of Coloradopols at being referred to as ‘left-leaning’ is a bit disingenuous.
Then again, I log in and debate with folks with the name “Laughing Boy”.
I’m not going to lose any sleep over it, I just think this particular headline might be revealing.
appreciate your honesty, and I wholeheartedly agree with you.
I love healing moments….sniff….
Next time a Democrat eye-poppingly contradicts himself from one sentence to the next, we’ll make sure to use the term “slobbering all over themselves” on them, too.
http://coloradopols….
Imagine what Republicans would be doing all over themselves in a left leaning blog!
Cheers, Lauren.
We’re not going to go there.
Lauren and Laughing Boy obviously didn’t listen to the webcast of the Executive Committee meeting yesterday before the committee went into executive session to hear the specifics of the complaint.
I did. The headline was accurate. Actually, it was kind.
Did you hear actual “slobbering”? Are you sure? Maybe it’s a colorful exaggeration. By a left-leaning blog…
He’ll read this post at some point, too.
I haven’t seen him call Wadhams “dickwad” yet.
I complained to the Colorado Attorney regulation counsel that David Brougham, who was representing the State of Colorado and Lloyds of London in a federal lawsuit I brought, 02-1950, sent me bills for multiple instances of ex parte conferences with federal judicial officials and they said it was OK to have ex parte conferences and bill for it. Brougham filed in federal court that it was OK for him to bill for ex parte conferences because the Col Attorney Regulation Counsel said so. They said these were OK:
On 2/12/03,:”Review new letter from Sieverding to Tremaine regarding Jane Bennett and may city defendants. Telephone call to Dave Brougham-discussed pleadings from Wisconsin court and Sieverding letter. Conference call to Magistrate Schlatter. Further discussion with Brougham on notice letter to Sieverding.”(e86, Lettunich to City)
“6/23/03 confer with Van Pelt regarding reply issues. Telephone call to Court regarding need for same”. 05-01283 complaint p. 49 (see also e71)
2/12/03 “Confer with court clerk regarding new pleadings from plaintiffs”. (e60 David Brougham bill to CIRSA)
2/28/03 “Telephone call from David Brougham regarding new pleading from Sieverding and review pleading with Brougham as to most significant allegations. Telephone call with….and Clerk’s office” (e73 Lettunich)
3/21/03 “Confer with court clerk regarding possible re-filed amended complaint” (e10 David Brougham to Colorado Intergovernmental risk Sharing)
3/24/03 “Confer with city attorney regarding status of amended complaint and service issue, telephone call to federal court clerk regarding same” (e61-62 Brougham to Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing)
3/31/03 “telephone calls to and from Lettunich regarding new filing, telephone call to federal court regarding same”(e62 Brougham to CIRSA)
4/23/03 Telephone call to court regarding status of recent orders” (e64
5/6/03 “Confer with court clerk regarding status of defendant responses”(e67)
6/11/03 “Telephone call to court regarding response to motion to compel” (e67 Brougham to Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing)
6/16/03 “Telephone call to court regarding 6/15 filing” (e68 David Brougham to Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing)
6/16/03 “Telephone call to court regarding status of plaintiffs’ response regarding motion to dismiss” (e68 Brougham to CIRSA)
7/2/03 “Telephone call from clerk regarding certain motions” (e72)
7/30/03 “Telephone call to Court regarding latest filings” (e75)
8/4/03 “Telephone call to court regarding filings by plaintiffs since (7/31) order”. (e75 David Brougham to Colorado Intergovernmental)
8/11/03″Telephone call to court clerk regarding post 7/31 filings”e46
8/14/03″Confer with court clerk regarding status of ruling on motions” e76 (Brougham to CIRSA)
8/15/03 “Confer with court regarding status of pending motions and timing of ruling”. (e58 Brougham to Underwriters at Lloyd’s London)
9/8/03 “Telephone call to court regarding status of pending motions” (e76 Brougham to CIRSA)
9/09/03 “Confer with court regarding status of motions” (e77)
9/24/03 “Confer with Lettunich and court clerk regarding status of pending motions” (e78 Brougham to CIRSA)
10/07/03 `Confer with court clerk regarding rule status’ (e78)
10/10/03 “Telephone calls to court clerk regarding new filings”(e78)
10/14/03 “Confer with court clerk regarding filing of recommendation regarding pending motions” (e78, Brougham to CIRSA).
10/24/03 “review 13 additional `motions’ filed by plaintiffs. Telephone call to court regarding status and acceptance or rejection of same.” (e79-80, Mr. Brougham, Hall & Evans to CIRSA)
10/27/03 “Confer court clerk regarding filing dates and plaintiffs’ latest filings” (e 80 Brougham to CIRSA
10/31/03 “Review actual court file regarding most recent pleadings, `striking’ majority of same, confer with court clerk regarding same” (e80, Brougham to CIRSA)
11/21/03 “confer with court clerk regarding status of pleadings” (e81)
12/11/03 “Review actual court file” “confer with clerks regarding case status, pending motions” “Further conference with court staff regarding motion status” (e82, Brougham to CIRSA)
So if you don’t have the “connections” to call the court for private conferences to manage your lawsuit you won’t win. Since the court is corrupt, there is no rule of law in Colorado. I would never invest in Colorado real estate knowing this. This developed out of a dispute about zoning in Steamboat Springs. There they said that even as an adjoining property owner I did not have a right to even discuss whether my neighbor the city council president was building in violations of the development code. The lawyer for the city council president said in court that he didn’t care about my civil liberites. He claimed that I “molested” the wife of the city council president even though we never had sex and she said under oath there was no offensive touching, I hadn’t been following her, hadn’t called her in years and she couldn’t remember interacting with me. Her lawyer, in order to cover up them building in violation of the zoning, said that the evidence of molestation was unrefuted but I wasn’t allowed to cross examine him.
If you want proof of this, just look in the assessor’s data base for routt county for Kevin Michael Bennett at 701 Princeton Ave Steamboat Springs. You will see only one old house listed on the assessor’s database, but anyone can see from the street that there are 4 buildings on the property. There is a lot of detail on them at the Rouut County Building department but the county attorney Merrill said that he would refuse to sell me copies of the building department records as required by the CO Open Records Act.