corruption in politics
More details emerge on group formed to oppose accountability for Colorado Supreme Court incumbents
Initial reports in mid-May (story broken by Law Week Online) about a well-funded group formed specifically to counter the growing momentum and success of the grassroots judicial accountability organization Clear The Bench Colorado in raising public awareness about the issue of judicial accountability in Colorado were substantiated Tuesday (June 1st) with additional details on the key members and name of the organization.
Again, Law Week Online breaks the story (“Group Aiming To Defend Colo. Judiciary Comes To Light“):
Well-known figures in Colorado legal circles have quietly filed paperwork creating an organization to defend the state’s judiciary amid a campaign to force four state justices into retirement.
Former Colorado Public Defender David Kaplan and Berenbaum Weinshienk attorney James Kurtz-Phelan incorporated the Colorado Judiciary Project, briefly known as the Colorado Judicial Project, with the Colorado Secretary of State’s office in early April.
Trey Rogers, who only a month before the filing served as chief legal counsel to Gov. Bill Ritter, filed the group’s paperwork.
The effort comes as Clear the Bench Colorado, a local group, continues a campaign encouraging voters to vote against retaining Supreme Court Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey and justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez and Nancy Rice.
Strangely enough, all of the “well-known figures” mentioned in the article are prominent advocates for the Democrat Party – according to OpenSecrets.org, Kaplan has contributed a couple thousand to Democrat candidates, Kurtz-Phelan shelled out almost $15,000 to Democrat candidates in recent years, Trey Rogers was Gov. Ritter’s chief legal counsel, former Colorado Supreme Court justice (and current full-time activist) Jean Dubfsky contributed over $16,000 to Democrats, and of course Democrat Party attorney Mark Grueskin contributed over $12,000 cash and countless hours of “pro bono” and paid legal work to the Democrat Party, candidates, and causes.
Yet we are supposed to believe that this group’s efforts are oriented towards nonpartisan “public education” about the courts and the “judicial retention process”?
The Judiciary Project won’t directly advocate for voters to retain the four justices. Instead, it will educate voters about Colorado’s judicial-retention process, which includes lengthy judge performance evaluations, Kaplan said. Local performance commissions only rarely recommend a judge not be retained.
Puh-LEEZ! What a bunch of mullarkey! Surely they don’t think that Colorado voters are THAT stupid?
As noted by the judicial watchdog and accountability group KnowYourCourts:
If we are to take them at their word, the mission seems rather redundant. It is one also claimed by the Colorado Judicial Institute and the “Our Courts” indoctrination program.
The judicial retention “process” is quite simple: those incumbent justices wishing to remain declare their intention to do so; the question of whether or not they keep their jobs appears on the ballot in the form of a question: “Should Justice [name] be retained in office?” ( Yes/NO ) Colorado voters, based on available information and their best judgement as citizens, decide and vote accordingly, exercising their rights as citizens to do so. What part of the “process” is unclear?
What HAS been lacking, in all previous retention elections, is a source of substantive information (including commentary, evaluations, and even analysis and the full text of significant cases) on which to base an informed decision – a deficit now filled to a large extent by Clear The Bench Colorado.
Grueskin’s claim that his group was not formed in response to the growing momentum and awareness generated by the judicial accountability organization Clear The Bench Colorado (Grueskin characterized the assertion as “self-aggrandizing” and “ego-driven” – sure, attack the messenger, not the message) was also exposed as a rather less than honest statement (“baldfaced lie” is perhaps a bit harsh) by a message he sent out (leaked to our sources) back in February when “brainstorming” on what to do:
You may have read about the so-called “Clear the Bench” effort, a campaign for the non-retention of Justices Mary Mullarkey, Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, and Nancy Rice at the 2010 election. The Denver Post wrote about it recently. See www.tinyurl.com/ClearTheBench.
(Grueskin’s attempt to spin the facts after being caught red-handed, along with the entire text of the message – and our response, calling him on it – is ably chronicled in a mid-May Westword article, “Mark Grueskin, Matt Arnold tangle over judge retention: Should they stay or should they go?“)
Unfortunately – and in marked contrast to the highly transparent and publicly accountable grassroots organization Clear The Bench Colorado, which operates under the disclosure requirements of Colorado campaign finance law, providing transparency of funding and expenditures – the 501(c)4 organization formed by this cabal of activist Democrat lawyers does NOT have to disclose sources of funding to the public. They are completely unaccountable to Colorado citizens:
The Colorado Judiciary Project is organized as a 501c4, which covers civic leagues, social welfare organizations and local employee associations.
“Civic leagues” and “social welfare organizations?” Well, perhaps “local employee associations” is appropriate, since this group will be looking out for their buddies on the bench (before whom many, including Grueskin, frequently argue cases). Perhaps – perhaps – there is no formal quid pro quo, but there would certainly appear to be, at the very least, a perception of possible corruption. A strong case could be made that each of the attorneys involved in the group should be excused from arguing any case before the Colorado Supreme Court justices they are seeking to defend, in order to dispel any such perception of undue influence.
What IS abundantly clear is that this new group will collect and spend exorbitant amounts of money in an attempt to “educate” the public that “all is well” with the Colorado Judiciary, when the evidence to the contrary is abundantly clear:
Be an informed citizen - exercise your right to vote “NO” this November on the four ‘unjust justices’ of the Colorado Supreme Court’s “Mullarkey Majority”- (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your constitutional rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your home or business against seizure via eminent domain abuse, your right to be fairly represented in the legislature and Congress, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, instead of suffering under rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.” Support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off! ) and your contributions - and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!
CEW and Colorado “not-so” Independent continue tag-team “disingenuous” spin on campaign finance reporting, continuing baseless (and erroneous) attacks on Clear The Bench Colorado
“First they ignore you; Then they ridicule you; Then they attack you; Then you win.” Mohandas K. (Mahatma) Gandhi
Clear The Bench Colorado is firmly within the 3rd phase of Gandhi’s aphorism; following the filing earlier this month of an unfounded “campaign finance complaint” by notorious leftist attack group “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” – it’s what they do) “picked up” as “news” primarily by the left-wing propaganda outlet Colorado “not-so” Independent, the CEW/CnsI tag team continues to spin any related news developments into yet another attack on Clear The Bench Colorado.
The most recent example turned up in an article published earlier today by the Colorado “not-so” Independent previewing the scheduled signing by Governor Ritter of “three influential bills into law Tuesday” (“influential bills?” where did the CnsI reporter learn to write?) in which the reporter really had to stretch to create a connection with which to attack Clear The Bench Colorado:
Another bill will require campaign issue committees to disclose the same donor information as candidate committees. Colorado Ethics Watch recently highlighted the topic in pointing out possible problems of mis-categorization, arguing that issue committee Clear the Bench Colorado, which is asking Coloradans to vote supreme court justices off the bench, is about candidates not any one issue, and that it should be confined to candidate finance restrictions. Ethics Watch says the practice of non-disclosure of large donations to judicial campaigns could allow criminals to purchase safe judicial havens. The new bill would require disclosure.
One problem: the bill in question (HB10-1370) does not mean what the reporter thinks it means. (Inconceivable!) ”Donor information” is NOT a subject of the bill at all; the “Disclosure Requirements” included in the bill simply refer to formalization of a mandate to include the name of the sponsoring Issue Committee on any communications in order to avoid “perception of purposefully anonymous interests attempting to influence the outcome of the election”:
1-45-108.3. Issue committees – disclaimer. (1) AN ISSUE COMMITTEE MAKING AN EXPENDITURE IN EXCESS OF ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS ON A COMMUNICATION THAT SUPPORTS OR OPPOSES A STATEWIDE BALLOT ISSUE OR BALLOT QUESTION AND THAT IS BROADCAST BY TELEVISION OR RADIO, PRINTED IN A NEWSPAPER OR ON A BILLBOARD, DIRECTLY MAILED OR DELIVERED BY HAND TO PERSONAL RESIDENCES, OR OTHERWISE DISTRIBUTED SHALL DISCLOSE, IN THE COMMUNICATION PRODUCED BY THE EXPENDITURE, THE NAME OF THE ISSUE COMMITTEE MAKING THE EXPENDITURE.
Clear The Bench Colorado has ALWAYS – even in the absence of any formal requirement to do so – included the name of the organization (along with contact information, including our website) on all of our communications, because we believe in and practice transparency and integrity (full disclosure). Clear The Bench Colorado has never felt the need to hide behind “anonymous interests attempting to influence the outcome of elections… through the expenditure of large sums of money.”
Ironically, the integrity and transparency of the Clear The Bench Colorado movement to restore accountability to our judiciary contrasts markedly with “the practice of non-disclosure of large donations to judicial campaigns [which] could allow criminals to purchase safe judicial havens” exemplified by the recent formation of the 501(c)4 organization formed by former justice Dubofsky and Democrat lawyer Grueskin to defend incumbent Colorado Supreme Court justices in response to the growing momentum and resonance of Clear The Bench Colorado, as that organization does NOT have to disclose sources of funding to the public. They are completely unaccountable.
Strangely, “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” – it’s what they do) seems to have no issue with the “expenditure of large sums of money” to influence judicial elections by such anonymous, unaccountable organizations.
It is time for “We The People” to restore accountability to our judiciary - exercise your right to vote “NO” this November on the four ‘unjust justices’ of the Colorado Supreme Court’s “Mullarkey Majority”- (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your constitutional rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your home or business against seizure via eminent domain abuse, your right to be fairly represented in the legislature and Congress, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, instead of suffering under rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.” Help to support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and your contributions – and vote “NO” on giving these unjust justices another 10-year term!
Former Colorado Supreme Court justice (and current full-time activist) Jean Dubofsky & Democrat Party lawyer Mark Grueskin roll out the big bucks to counter Clear The Bench Colorado
Coming close on the heels of a spurious “campaign finance complaint” by notorious leftist attack yap dogs “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” – it’s what they do) against the grassroots judicial accountability organization Clear The Bench Colorado, the announcement this weekend (at the Colorado Bar Association board of governors meeting) of a well-funded group formed specifically to counter the growing momentum and success of Clear The Bench Colorado in raising public awareness of the issue of judicial accountability in Colorado provides a nice ironic twist.
(The COBAR even claimed – with a straight face – to be “neutral” on the Clear The Bench Colorado campaign, despite placing “Item No. 13, [Executive Director] Chuck Turner’s report on the status of the “Clear the Bench” campaign on the agenda.”) Neutral? Rrriiiiiiggghhhttt…
The story was broken in an article posted by Law Week Colorado earlier today (“Dubofsky said to plan response to Colo. Judge Non-Retention Campaign“):
Former Colorado Supreme Court Justice Jean Dubofsky and Democratic Party lawyer Mark Grueskin are forming a nonprofit group to educate voters about the judicial performance evaluation process in light of an anti-retention campaigned led by Clear The Bench.
Dubofsky’s and Grueskin’s move to form a 501(c)4 organization was disclosed Saturday at the semi-annual meeting of the Colorado Bar Association board of governors. The name of the group wasn’t revealed.
The formation of this organization is certainly an interesting development in light of the baseless complaint filed by “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” – it’s what they do) bemoaning the “potentially unlimited funds” that could flow to Clear The Bench Colorado due to the Secretary of State’s office having designated Clear The Bench Colorado as an Issue Committee.
Unlike Issue Committees – which must operate under the disclosure requirements of Colorado campaign finance law, providing transparency of funding and expenditures – the 501(c)4 organization formed by Dubofsky and Democrat lawyer Grueskin does NOT have to disclose sources of funding to the public. They are completely unaccountable.
Will “Colorado Ethics Watch” file a complaint against this shadowy organization for the “corrupting influence” of the huge sums of money it will expend in support of the retention of incumbent Colorado Supreme Court justices?
Don’t hold your breath.
“Colorado Ethics Watch”, the “Colorado Independent” (which is an anything but “independent” left-wing propaganda mouthpiece, tasked with providing a veneer of “news” coverage respectability to political spin and mudslinging attacks), and now the latest (as yet un-named) addition of the shadowy Dubofsky/Grueskin Colorado Supreme Court incumbent protection group, are all part of the network of left-wing (“progressive”) organizations known as the “Colorado Democracy Alliance” (CoDA), formed to dominate all aspects of Colorado government. Operating at the edges of public awareness (skirting transparency, public accountability, and the ragged edges of campaign finance and other laws), these groups coordinate their actions towards advancing the “progressive” agenda statewide (with significant success so far; read The Colorado Model (by Fred Barnes) and, more recently, The Blueprint (by former Rep. Rob Witwer & Reporter Adam Schrager) for an analysis of the success of these groups in Colorado – and beyond).
In a way, I suppose it’s flattering – all of these groups and resources (and massive amounts of money) arrayed against little ol’ me: Underdog (er, Clear The Bench Colorado).
Not bird nor plane nor even frog…
Now more than ever - stand with Clear The Bench Colorado in defense of your constitutional rights. Exercise your right to vote “NO” on the 4 ‘unjust justices’ of the Colorado Supreme Court’s “Mullarkey Majority” (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your constitutional rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your home or business from against eminent domain abuse, your right to fair representation in government, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, instead of suffering under rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.” Support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!) and your contributions - and exercise your right to vote “NO” on retaining these unjust justices on the bench for another 10-year term!