President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

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

70%

30%

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
September 05, 2007 01:48 AM UTC

House Ethics Committee has been officially asked by CREW to investigate Doug Lamborn

  • 9 Comments
  • by: CD-5 Line

http://www.citizensf…

Here’s the Denver Post’s report on this today: http://www.denverpos…

This wasn’t the primary of 2006, when a lot of things Lamborn and his supporters such as Chuck Gosnell and the Christian Coalition of Colorado said and did and which were ignored, including the fraudulent alteration by the Christian Coalition of Colorado of a CSIndy article headline falsely stating that Jeff Crank had endorsed Richard Skorman and by falsely accusing Jeff Crank as being a part of the “radical homosexual agenda”.  Nor is this a situation such as the Ratterree letter in a state race in the 1990s where Doug Lamborn’s opponent was falsely accused of taking his dying wife off life support, the same letter that Doug Lamborn denied to Erin Emery as ever having existed, but the same letter the Gazette reported in the 1990s as having been circulating at the El Paso County Republican Assembly to attack Tom Ratterree, which letter contributed to Ratterree’s withdrawing from the field, assuing Lamborn’s election.  http://www.coloradop…

Lamborn has made a serious error in forgetting that once he took office, he was and is subject to House Ethics rules, which are independent of Chuck Gosnell, the Christian Coalition, Pat Toomey and the Club for Growth, behind whose lies and character assassinations he can no longer hide.  He’s on his own now.  Naked and running scared.  It may be time for him to “lawyer up” if the Committee decides to investigate him, which it is not obligated to do.


I personally believe that if the House does an investigation of Doug Lamborn, the House will find Doug Lamborn has violated House Rules and the truth that Doug Lamborn doesn’t want revealed, that he tried to suppress by attacking the Barthas, will see the light of day.  Lamborn is in very serious trouble, politically and perhaps legally, in my humble opinion.  We shall see what, if anything, the House Ethics Committee does in response to Lamborn’s self-made problem.  The best of all circumstances would be to see him forced to resign from the 5th CD position and have his seat filled by the 5th CD vacancy committee.

Comments

9 thoughts on “House Ethics Committee has been officially asked by CREW to investigate Doug Lamborn

  1. Here’s the report on Lamborn’s apology:

    http://thehill.com/l

    Notice that the date of the article is Wednesday, September 5, reporting that Lamborn has apologized by a letter sent Tuesday, September 4–the same date a request for a House Ethics investigation has been made.

    And, notice that the Hill article doesn’t discuss at all the circumstances surrounding the donation from Marc Murphy, the manager of Bronco Billy’s casino, to Lamborn in the 2006 primary.  That’s the one Lamborn should most want to avoid discussing because the public record proves he accepted the money, cashed the check, and God only knows when he returned that money, but, it doesn’t show up in the FEC filings for the quarter ending June 30.  In other words, it looks like Lamborn, if he has refunded Marc Murphy’s donation, used the money to get elected and, if he has returned it, took more than one year to do so.  Caught.  And he called the Barthas liars? 

  2. Chuck Brooke, senior vice president for government affairs of IGT reports facts that materially conflict with Lamborn’s. [What was that which Lamborn said about there are serious consequences to liars?]

    Quoting from the following: http://spencerspeaks
    “But Brooke’s account conflicts with Lamborn’s. Brooke said he did not include the returned check on his twice yearly report to the Federal Election Commission, which means it came in some time after June 30.

    “The secretary who handles the mail thinks it was probably in the past three to four weeks,” Brooke said.

    That would put it ahead of publication of the letter to the editor written by the Barthas, BUT right around the time the couple have told others they wrote their letter.”

    Lamborn’s “apology” to the Barthas is window dressing.  I’d like to know when and how the Barthas actually first learned of Lamborn’s “apology” as it’s clear Lamborn, in trying to kill the calls for a House Ethics Committee investigation, released the letter to the press, not the Barthas first. 

    1. Here is my take.  This seat will probably be held by a Republican (and likely the same Republican) for about two more decades.  The 5th needs good representation in Congress during this time to ensure the military bases are supported, water issues are dealt with, and whatever else comes up.  Lamborn was ineffective as a State Senator and would have been ineffective as a Congressman.  I dont think he has the respect of the local military community, he is divisive in the party with little to no chance of unification, and he is the laughingstock of the US House right now. 

      The 5th had a number of good candidates during the last election, but unfortunately we elected the worst one.  Now it is time to undo that mistake and get a real representative elected.  I think it is better to go through the growing pains of electing a new congressman than be stuck with Doug Lamborn for 20-30 years. 

      On a final thought, if Lamborn keeps this up, does anyone think he might fail to make the ballot next year? 

      1. He’s still the incumbent, and will earn a certain amount of votes for that.  He won’t resign over this, I don’t think that he thinks that it’s that bad.

        1. People seem to forget how hard it is to beat an incumbent when they start talking about Lammy.  There were all of 2 reps that were defeated in primaries in 06 and one was Cynthia McKinney…need I say more.  If only 50 or 60K show up for a primary anyway, Lamborn still will likely be renominated despite his obvious, uh, lameness.

          1. But he’s going to have to work pretty hard for it.  And with the accelerated schedule this year, Crank has got to be going full throttle from here on out to win…

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

47 readers online now

Newsletter

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