Wednesday, November 06, 2013

Utah Political Capitol: Lawmakers Angered by Attorney General’s Deleted Emails and Data

Shades of the Richard Nixon presidential era?

Eye-opening morning story from Utah Political Capitol, who prefaces the latest John Swallow Scandal development thusly: "You know it is bad when the national expert says the data loss is like nothing he has ever seen":
“We have encountered a series of troubling circumstances...," says Steven Reich, lead investigator for the Utah House investigative committee which is currently looking into impeachment charges against Utah Attorney General John Swallow.

Ask yourself how it's possible that every single byte of communication from every single electronic device covering every single time period in question has "mysteriously" disappeared into the ether.

Shades of the Richard Nixon presidential era?

It's certainly beginning to smell like that, innit?

So what say our Gentle Readers about all this?

So... Is anyone really surprised about this latest disturbing revelation?

43 comments:

blackrulon said...

I am looking forward to hearing the Gayle Ruzicka/Eagle Forum, Paul Mero/Sutherland Institute, Connor Boyack,Libertas Institute, explanation of the missing emails.

Bob Becker said...

The evolution of The Swallow Defense:


1. I didn't do it.
2. If I did do it, it wasn't illegal.
3. If I did it and it was illegal, I didn't know it was at the time.
4. If I did it and it was illegal and I knew it, you can't prove it.


Stay tuned for further evolutions....

Bob Becker said...

God called all those messages home.....

blackrulon said...

I am grateful that the caucus selection of John Swallow to run for Attorney General of Utah, the states top law enforncement offical was able to weed out the lesser qualified and criminaly inclinded applicants for the position.

cboyack said...

Not sure why I'm included in this list, as I've not been at all defensive of Swallow. In fact, just yesterday I tweeted that we citizens are watching to see if Swallow will be held to a different standard than the average Joe would. Barring some reasonable explanation (which I can't imagine exists), the deletion of this data is reprehensible.

blackrulon said...

Thanks for your answer. However there are individuals and groups in the state that seem able to use their own form of logic to explain away any questionable actions by certain elected officials.

AWM said...

I don't care what side of the isle you're on, THAT's funny!

thorn_1 said...

This investigation has had some amazing screwy things happen and some of the most innovatative excuses. Could make a TV Serial

Bob Becker said...

Mitt who? Doesn't hebuild vacation villas or starter castles around the country? Or something?

utah_1 said...

Perhaps Mitt Romney should be blasting Count My Vote for having no run off.

"I’m concerned that that kind of approach (some caucus/convention
systems) could end up with a minority deciding who the nominee ought to
be. And that I think would be a mistake," he told The Globe. "I think we should have the majority of the party’s voters decide who they want as their nominee."



Utah's Count My Vote / Buy My Vote (CMV) doesn't get a majority of the parties voters to decide who
they want. We do that now. CMV has no run off and almost eliminates the
possibility of the party picking between 2 candidates, so virtually no majority candidate.

Ray said...

Too bad he wasn't willing to denounce the fringe during is presidential bid. Just another 1%er Mitt-flip. Bob- I guess after selling many of his homes so they wouldn't be an issue in the 2012 election he needs to restock his inventory.

blackrulon said...

i really like reading your profilic trpotious multiple spam rants against the Count My Vote proposal. However you might be asking yourself why both Mike Lee and John Swallow, who survived the caucus system are doing so much harm to themselves, the Republican Party and Utah.I am curious as to why you allow municipal elections to proceed with candidates who qualify for the primary election and general election without going through a neighborhood caucus?

rudizink said...

Bottom line, Utah_1, you believe Utah voters are too stupid to nominate their own candidates, right? That's the essential core of your argument, isn't it? Enjoy your stranglehold on the Utah nomination "system" while you can. A year or so from now, your corrupt, archaic and decidedly un-democratic Utah Caucus/convention nomination system will be "toast." :-)

Danny said...

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I prefer the current caucus and convention system. The problem with a primary with lots of names is the most famous/weathly one will win every time.


The current system lets the party boil it down to two candidates from which the voters can choose.


The impetus for Count My Vote is the fact that the party tossed out party crony Bob Bennett, a useless Senator, and offered two conservatives to the voters instead.


The Count My Vote voices here on this blog are all democrats who prefer that if Republicans are going to win, a RINO like Bennett is preferred. But for conservatives, we are happier with Lee.


As far as Romney: he lost to the worst candidate in recent memory, and is a reprehensible thief. It is comical the leftist media goes to him for advice. They wish all Republicans were un-electable pariahs like him!

rudizink said...

You are "old-fashioned, Danny, which I say ain't half-bad, normally at least.

James Humphreys said...

That is simple, the municipal elections are non partisan and everyone of voting age in the boundaries may vote so long as they register.



This poorly written law doesn't allow everyone to vote. It lies to all unaffiliated voters. They may now pay for a direct primary, but they may not vote in it!

James Humphreys said...

The only thing undemocratic is this proposal which limits our choices for participation and doesn't require a majority vote to win.


It's a poorly written bad law, that virtually no one who signs it has read. Gee, I remember us getting other failures like the Patriot Act and Obamacare from primary elected morons who failed to read those too, in the same fashion.

James Humphreys said...

Danny, that whole thing with the Globe was a setup orchestrated by our own Kirk Jowers to help him fund raise, since they are way behind in their goals of signature gathering already.

blackrulon said...

So i am considered intelligent enough to pick candidates in municipal elections but must receive guidance to vote in other elections? if I am a reegisted voter why can't i vote in all elections? I am paying for all electioins now, When are where was the neighborhood caucus that allowed Ms. White to be placed on the primary ballot? Was the caucus advertised?

James Humphreys said...

When is that stupid intelligent argument going to simply die. It is lie and no one suggests anything about intelligence in this discussion but those who argue for gutting our current great system..



You DO NOT pay for the caucus or conventions of the various parties now, unless you regularly contributed to the parties themselves.



The various political parties have a right to decide how they will nominate their candidates.



Municipal election have no official party endorsements, so they do not go through the party process. It's very simple. Utah is one of the few states where all municipal elections are non partisan. If you lived in many other large cities you would have to deal with partisanship even at that level.


If you are not registered with a party, you already don't get to vote in all elections. In fact, if this abomination passes and you are not registered with a party, you will still not be able to vote in all elections. Read the proposal and see for yourself.

blackrulon said...

Wrong again. Accorfing to a paul Rolly column published in the Friday November 8 2013 edition of the Salr Lake Tribune the following occured. Salt lake County GOP chairman Chad Bennion listed on the party's website all the candidates who were registered Republicans. Perhaps you could contact Mr. Bennion and explain to him the non- partisan nature of municipal elections. Keeping the current caucus system is just an elitist attitude exhibited by many who have an attitude of entitlement and arrogance towards the Utah voter. i am looking forward to reading news of your application for a initiative to remove the inititiave process from the Utah consitituion

James Humphreys said...

Did you see a R or D or another letter after any of our municipal candidates? NO. Enough said



Chad was wrong to openly support anyone in a municipal election. Of course so were the Dems with Turner Bitton, here in Weber County. I have never seen such bad behavior on the parties until year. I do hope we correct them of their bad behavior.


You won't see me make such a petition sir. That would be hypocritical. I prefer to actually work through our elected legislature where all issues belong on the state level.

blackrulon said...

Have you contacted Chad Bennion asking him why he tried to interject partisan politics in a non-partisan election? Just a small suggestion. If the Utah brand of caucus selectioin is so great why haven't any of our bordering states instituted a similoar system. Ask why Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico. Nevada or Arizona still foolishy let the voters fully select their prefered candidates in a primary election.

blackrulon said...

The Patriot Act, which was created by the Bush administration received yes votes from both Orrin Hatch and Bob Bennet. They both advanced to election using the caucus system..

Danny said...

James,


That doesn't surprise me. Kirk Jowers, penultimate insider, doesn't like the caucus system, because people who go to caucuses couldn't care less what self-appointed rulers like him think. Used to having influence way beyond his talent, based on his media connections, Jowers resents the public.


He is the poster child for why Count My Vote is a sham.


That's another positive for the caucus system - it's all about policies there, not personalities. It's why people without values, like Jowers and Bob Bennett, do poorly under the current system, and why they resent it so much.

James Humphreys said...

I have personally talked with Chad about this already. Many in Party leadership have over the last month as well.


As for other states, Idaho and Wyoming are looking at it. With their lower cost of living, primary only has become to expensive for their State House and State Senate seats. Hispanics are pushing in Arizona and New Mexico to do something different since they are excluded in the primary process. Not sure what they wil come up with. Certainly we will try to encourage them to look at our state as a example of a great hybrid primary system where a majority wins in a primary but minorities are represented at all levels of the process.


That was a very fair question sir.

James Humphreys said...

My point was it is bad for anyone to support anything, let alone vote for it, when they haven't even taken the time to read it.


Especially when it fundamentally alters our freedoms in any way. None of us should sign this petition without reading it and discussing if it is written well enough to be good policy.

James Humphreys said...

Finally, someone speaking up that isn't opposed to this. The majority of people here are well intentioned and believe what they do. I agree with many of the posters most of the time.



In this however, I am baffled. This proposal is not only bad policy, but it is terribly written and is a real mess. Of course the super rich that back this proposal don't care one bit about us everyday citizens. They would rather have to deal with us common folk and have to accountable to anyone but their also super rich friends.

blackrulon said...

Supposedly, according to you, other states are looking a the caucus system.t. The other states seem happy with their current system and will not changee. But they can look at it. iI look at Ferrarias often but it does not meanI I am considering buying one. Doing something different does not mean a caucus system. No other states are seriously considering changing to a caucus system and soon enough Utah will shed its caucus system.

James Humphreys said...

You are right, the super rich that buy elections there will certainly not want to change. Heaven forbid a US Senator or Governor would have sit down with a school teacher or a an accountant and have a real conversation for an hour. I hope we are smarter than to sell out to the big money that buys elections everywhere else and keeps our country at war with others and with ourselves just so they can keep all of the money and power out of our hands. Don't sign away your voice!


And again, please read before you sign or you are no better than the dumb asses that vote in Washington for bills they haven't read either!

blackrulon said...

When in the process am i allowed to use my own judgement as to the best candidate? I prefer to make my own deecisions not let someone decide for me. Why can't i make my own decision?

blackrulon said...

Most utah citizens trust MiKe Leavitt, three times elected Governor of Utah and Norm Bangereter, twice elected governor of Utah. Better them than a bunch of people behind the scences who have never won an election for office.

James Humphreys said...

So trust them and still not read. Pathetic!!! Oh and how did they win...that's right, through this system.

rudizink said...

Why? Because to the anointed few who still control the nomination process, you are among the unwashed masses, and democracy is a dirty word in Utah.

blackrulon said...

When will Senator Mike Lee let the voters in Salt Lake County, the most populous county in the state, have a town hall meeting?

blackrulon said...

If Mile Leavitt and Norm Banheret and others who have used the caucus system want a change they might just have some knowledge about how skewed the caucus system has become.

James Humphreys said...

Totally off topic of course, but I'll play. When will Jim Matheson hold any town hall meetings? Why is he so afraid of his constituents?

James Humphreys said...

Oh they don't. I worked with Governor Leavitt. Very nice man, but he swims in other "higher" circles now. Why would he or anyone else in his station want to mingle with us common folk. How dare we question him or his motives?


They do know that the money they invest in candidates will yield a higher rate of return if they can control all of the information you and I have as average voters. That is much harder to do now. Why risk all of the power and money if you can't buy the outcome?

blackrulon said...

"control all of the information you and I have as average voters.' Really, they control all media, message boards and the internet? The far right also fears losing their power hold and control of the outcome.

James Humphreys said...

wow, I can't believe that in this conversation, unlike most here, I am the pessimistic one. Let's see....let's look at the local municipal elections that just happened. Marcia White...I really like her as you know. How many mailers did you get? Did they contain all of the information you wanted to make your decision? Can you tell me right now where she stands on a mountain gondola, or where she thinks the best new development prospects are? Can you tell me what she thinks about the Ogden Golf course, or even where she really stands on chickens? Probably not. That was a little city council race and you only received the information intended to paint to picture in broad strokes. So yes, the campaign controlled what information you really had access to. You were free to call or email her and she would talk with anyone, but oh so few people did. She had to reach out to as many as she could and even in a race with only 3,000 votes she couldn't reach them all in a 4 month period.



Imagine how much easier to manage a message in a Congressional seat or how few people they actually talk to down with us common folk. We are primarily used as props for them to make a point. You know all of this, don't pretend you're that naive....you are far more informed than that.

rudizink said...

Please 'splain sumpthin to me, James, O My Good Friend. Remind me again why a politically-astute guy like me, who spends mebbee 30-40 hours per week or more digesting and posting about politics, needs a claque if Faux News-programmed dumbasses, who show up En Masse to get elected as "Neighborhood Election" (sic) caucus meeting, to "represent" me as convention "delegates?"
Let me fine-tune the question, assuming that despite your troubling GOP connections, that you at least have a "rudimentary belief" in the "value" of "Democracy in America."


So what say you son? exactly why do you not trust the people of Utah to make their own informed choices in the nomination arena?


This thread is heavy with your continuing failure to answer this simple question, methinks. And something tells me you know I'm right about this. :-p

blackrulon said...

While a new town hall meeting for Jim Matheson is overdue he has held a telephone town hall meeting in 2011/ Telephone town hall meetings are the current faavorite of Orrin Hatch. When will Mike Lee hold any type of town hall meeting. Jim Matheso0n is the congressional representative for the fourth district. Senator Mile Lee is a Senator for all the people of Utah. it is not offtopic since the claim is often made that the caucus system better gives the average citizenb to quiz their elected representative.

blackrulon said...

I am informed enough to know that the political beliefs of former Governor Mik Leavitt and former Governor Nornm Bangereter has stayed fairly consistent and true. What has changed is the Utah GOP has been hijacked by a radical groups intent on keeping their power. . .

Post a Comment

© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved