"Lockhart did not return calls Friday."

This from the man who has just budgeted $250,000? to reinvent the image of the Utah Republican Party.

Stan the Man Incorrigible

I am very troubled to hear Lockart was "doing his job to keep the party unity" or that "if you drop out of the primary, you'll be taken care of." What a great example of party power corrupting the primary selection process.

What a convenient lapse in memory by Mr Hansen! The supposed quest for "unity" or "cost savings" that circumvents the election process. What is so bad about having choices in a primary?

I think Mr Walker should focus his energies on a job search. He should easily be able to call on some of his favorite causes, and their benefactors, like the school voucher zealots, or maybe David Checketts , owner of the publicly subsidized Real Salt Lake stadium. They both owe him a huge debt of gratitude for his rubber stamp of prior support. We’ll be wasting money on that stadium for decades to come!

Not much heat in this story. On the other hand, the article I read late Friday night (after 10:30 pm) was generating a lot of comment, well over 100 comments by the time I added mine.

Now, I cannot find the article or the comments. Too bad, because the responses showed how disgruntled Utah's voters were becoming over the mess of strongarm politics.

All this aside, I still wonder why Mr. Walker was deemed to be the heir apparent to the Treasurer's throne. He had limited qualifications, was a very poor legislator (in representating his constituents) and came out of nowhere to receive the blessings of legislative incumbency four years ago.

Lt. Gov. Herbert showed malfeasance by letting a current legislator run for an office for which he participated in setting the salary. (Why is no one addressing this? Is the reconcilation something I've missed?)

We are all created equally and some "are created more equally than others."

Bernick wrote, "But Ellis said he was told by Hansen, "If you drop out of the primary, you'll be taken care of" and that he assumed it was a reference to the offer Walker had made to raise his salary by $56,000 annually."

He ASSUMED -- ASSUMED??!!

Is this what this story is about, his assumptions?

Ellis thinks he was offered 56k raise because of an email from a supporter and all of sudden anytime anybody says anything to him they are involved in the alleged bribe.

Warning to any restaurant server - If Ellis walks in and orders a glass of water, do not say, "Sure, I'll be happy to take care of that for you."

You just might end up in his next court filing.

Sounds to me like some career government worker is obsessed with what he believes was an offer constituting more than a 50% raise.

Is anyone that surprised? The corruption of the Republican party in Utah is a cancer on our wonderful state. Maybe it's time to cut the cancer out.

This is about political inbreeding. And it's too bad, because it distracts from real issues Republicans try to talk about. From guzzlegate to treasuregate, elected Republicans forget they still are accountable to the people.

This is my second entry about the missing article with its hundred or so comments appearing late on Friday night.

My earlier comment was supposedly added, but somehow it has turned up missing.

I probably still don't know how to use the system!!!

I was hoping other persons making comments could lead me to where to find the article.

Is Ellis being investigated for soliciting a bribe?

I read his petition to the supreme court.

According to his own petition he...

1. On Mar. 10 Ellis received the bribe from Walker through a campaign supporter.

2. "A few days later" he was informed by legal counsel that the offer violated Utah Code and was a bribe.

3. On Mar 17. Ellis met with Walker at the Market Street Grill over breakfast "to discuss the matter in greater detail."

A. At that meeting Ellis expressed concern that the offer was illegal.

B. Yet still Ellis questioned Walker about how he could guarantee the pay raise and conceal it through incremental increases.

C. At the end of the breakfast meeting Ellis told Walker that he would have "to consider [the offer] further."

4. On Mar. 21 Ellis called Walker to decline the bribe.

Sounds like Ellis knew it was a bribe. Yet still Ellis meet with Walker to discuss it. At the meeting he did not turn the bribe down. That sounds like something similar to solicitation of a bribe to me. It's at least the entertainment of one, not what I want from a Treasurer.

My prediction: The prosecutors looking into this case will conclude that the law against offering an incentive to a candidate to withdraw from an election violates one's right to free speech, and is therefore unenforceable.

Like a lot of legislation out there, the law was intended to discourage only those of us who don't have friends in high places.

Was this the same guy that had his 17 year old daughter be a delegate?

It sounds like the Republican party is corrupt. Lets replace all of them.

Yes. Mr. Lockhart runs the state GOP, Mrs. Lockhart is a state rep. and their 17-year old daughter was selected as a delegate for the convention and there was some hoopla around that matter the DesNews reported on.

New Utah GOP motto: What happens in the state GOP, stays in the state GOP. We know better than the people. We're the government and we're here to help!

Solve all the corruption and vote the GOP incumbents out. Corroon, a democrat, seems to be more conservative than all the GOP candidates.

I seem to have forgotten my early training.

How did the statement go: "The family that PREYS together stays together."

Obviously, some families adhere to that -- perhaps they need to change their ways.

Try going to the "Utah" tab on the top of the page and about 4 articles down will be a tab that says "previous" or try the right side applet box that says "most commented". I found 2 separate stories listed that may be the one your looking for.

"Is anyone that surprised? The corruption of the Republican party in Utah is a cancer on our wonderful state. Maybe it's time to cut the cancer out."

"It sounds like the Republican party is corrupt. Lets replace all of them."

And whom do you suggest replacing them with? Surely anyone who doesn't have his head buried in the sand knows that the Democrats aren't any different when they become entrenched (Goggle "Chicago-style politics").

Who, then?

"The more you read and observe about this Politics thing, you got to admit that each party is worse than the other. The one that's out always looks the best."
-Will Rogers, Illiterate Digest (1924), "Breaking into the Writing Game"

Having know Mr. Lockhart for many years I have never seen him do anything unethical. Yes, he is actively involved in the political process. That involvement does not make him unethical. Enough with the witch hunt.

There are problems on both sides of the aisle. Both Democrats and Republicans in Congress are destroying the American dream. Closer to home, Ralph Becker (D-SLC) was the stereotypical politician. It was common knowledge that you didn't get an appointment with him unless you brought a campaign contribution along. Of course, we have many reports of the Utah Democratic party silencing division within the party. Where's the outrage there?

Yes, I am a disgruntled Republican, but I see no relief in the Democratic party, who I view as even worse. We need less government. Then there is less possibility for corrupt government (or less government to be corrupt with).

JJ,

to take care of you.

"Warning to any restaurant server - If Ellis walks in and orders a glass of water, do not say, "Sure, I'll be happy to take care of that for you."

If a server said "I'll be happy to take care of that for you" then it is safe that he is offering to take care of it. Hansen saying "you will be taken care of" means exactly that. In exchange for dropping out of the race Ellis would be "taken care of." Of course maybe he was only offering to get him some water if he dropped out but even that would be breaking the law.

Hansen: IF YOU DROP OUT WE WILL TAKE CARE OF GETTING YOU SOME WATER.

Ellis: Why thank you. I will drop out in exchange for you taking care of getting me some water.

The moment someone says they will take care of a candidate if they drop out it is a CRIME. Only ignorant people don't understand that it's a safe assumption to believe as Ellis did but I suspect for you the only way a crime is committed is if they said: WE WILL BRIBE YOU.

"Having know Mr. Lockhart for many years I have never seen him do anything unethical. Yes, he is actively involved in the political process. That involvement does not make him unethical. Enough with the witch hunt."

You knowing Stan Lockhart doesn't shock me since your post indicates that you lack integrity and character so it makes sense for someone ethically challenged to say that this is a witch hunt.

Sending someone to ask a candidate to drop out of the race in exchange for being "taken care of" is a crime and unethical. As a voter I don't care about party unity. I don't want candidates I agree with or disagree with dropping out because of a BACK ROOM DEAL. Of course you don't see anything wrong with what Lockhart did but those of us with morals and ethics do see something wrong with it and we also see something wrong with your unethical defense of such unethical conduct.

This should have been resolved before convention.

Walker got almost 60% of the vote there. Of course Stan would want to check to see if Ellis was still wanting to run.

Walker almost won there because Ellis was being stupid. (The flier at convention). I didn't want Walker, because he didn't know what he was doing. Of course he wanted Ellis to stay on the job.

Now, we have a mess and that might cause Dick Clark to win, when the GOP had the only one running with the most experience to do the job.

I am more interested in investigating Ellis, than Walker. Walker is toast.

Amy is correct to assert that Ellis, by his own admission, is guilty of soliciting a bribe. Further, the only "offer" we have written proof of is the e-mail from Empey (the Zions lackey that is an Ellis campaign supporter). Thus, Empey is also complicit in the collusion. According to the affidavit, Walker bought the breakfast with "his credit card." Oh no. Sounds like a bribe. Shouldn't a govt employee buy his own food, lest he be susceptible to undue influence?

JJ is correct that maybe Ellis ASSUMED that Walker's purchase of the breakfast was his way of showing that he "could make it happen." I wonder who tipped the valet at Market Street Grill - probably Stan Lockhart. Now the GOP chair is really in the cross hairs because it was only $1 - cheap tipper.

If the GOP could do their job, we'd have better parking downtown and wouldn't have valet at MSG.

Oh, let's just blame the church for that too. . .

To Response to unethical poster: You show your arrogance and ignorance. My statement is accurate as stated.

Let's see. There was only one state-wide race on June 24th. For some time prior to the Primary, long before Mr. Walker had discussions with Mr. Ellis, it was widely rumored that Ellis was considering dropping out of the race. Given that the cost of a state wide race is significant, and the rampant rumors regarding the lack of committment by Ellis, it appears that Stan Lockhart was doing his job by inquiring of Ellis' intent. This is a "witch hunt" if ever there was one.

In the month-long dialogue since this issue hit the press, you're the first person to say it was "widely known" that Ellis was considering dropping out of the race.

I know Ellis pretty well, and I didn't know that. If it was "widely known" in your circles, that's only because Walker was so free in telling others of the fact he'd offered Ellis a job and he might get him out of the race.
Other than the bribe, the thought would've never even crossed Ellis's mind to drop out. I guess what you're admitting is that you knew, as did lockhart, about the offer. Because outside of the bribe, no one would've had any reason to think Ellis was thinking about dropping out.

Gotcha!

I think he said "widely rumored"?

And that is true because Carl Empey told people at Zions (inter alia, Walker) that Ellis was considering dropping out. That is how Empey and Ellis colluded in the inducement of Walker. Clearly those two worked together and admitted such in their bone-headed affidavit. Wait until the prosecutors convict Ellis and Empey with help from a Walker plea.

arc is right; the Ellis investigation will be interesting because he has something to lose. Walker already lost; he'll roll over on the other two.

Dick Clark is running for treasurer? The New Years Eve gig not keeping him busy enough?

For those of you who want to discredit Ellis, get a life. He is one of the most respected and liked men on capitol hill. Ask any of his current or past employees, they will vouch for his integrity. The bottom line is this, Ellis is qualified, educated and well liked, down to earth and a people person. Walker had the backing of the big boys, was unqualifed, and overstated his credentials. No wonder Ellis won in a landslide. By the way Mark, get your crew out and get your yard signs down, I'm sick of looking at them.

Let's see, the party of smaller government wanted to save money on a costly primary by shifting the burden to taxpayers in the form of a pay raise for a high-level bureaucrat? Sounds like government of the piggies, by the piggies, and for the piggies.

You said Walker would "roll over" on Empey and Ellis to take them down with him? That's like saying the dude who is already behind bars for crimes he committed alone is "willing" to rat out others in exchange for leniency. Walker is toast. He can't take Ellis and Empey down. If the culpability is to expand, it will more likely expand up into legislative leadership, although they will just deny everything and are too smart (unlike Walker) to leave a trail.

If Ellis and Empey talked over the offer and let others know it was on the table, I don't see that making them guilty of anything. When they found out it was illegal, it was dropped. Apparantly, when Ellis first told Walker it was illegal, Walker told him he could get around that! Hubris. I appreciate you wanting to turn the focus to Ellis, but if there was any proof Ellis did anything illegal, it would already be front page news.

Glad you don't know much about spelling, grammar or criminal law. Maybe Walker is working with the prosecutors and not the press. Maybe he should take a clue from Ellis and "leak" it? Maybe you should review the affidavit and complaint for your proof about Ellis. I guarantee the prosecutors will see the fire behind the smoke of that self-incriminating affidavit.