Where are the Hughes haters now?

Day by day it is becoming clear to a blind person that this is nothing more than an election year witch hunt. Since Greg Hughes chairs the conservative caucus he is the obvious target.

Let me see if I get this straight:

1. Susan Lawrence said there was no bribe. Throw that 'charge' out.
2. Bramble comes forward and says he did it PUBLICLY, from the floor of the Senate. Throw that 'charge' out.
3. Not a single lobbyist has stepped forward to say they were shook down for money. Then it is admitted the basis for this charge comes from a gossip column written in the Salt Lake Tribune by Paul Rolly. Gossip as fact in a smear attack? Throw that 'charge' out.

So we have heard three of the seven charges. Did I miss something? What should we look forward to on the other 4 'charges'?

People, this is nothing short of a massive smear campaign by the liberal left. It has finally brought Utah in the same gutter as Chicago, Miami and New York.

Thank you Sheryl Allen and Phil Riesen!

Sorry for this interepuption. Now back to the smear campaign.

If there is one thing I have learned in all my experience at the legislature it's that almost all ethics violations point back to Senator Bramble. It's time he start answering for some of the serious ethical questions he has been involved in...oh that's right, he's chairman of the "ethics" committee so that will never happen.

As a "Hughes Hater," we are still here. Whether he did any of these things or not makes no difference to me. Unresponsive to your constituents is unresponsive to your constituents. He needs to go for matters completely unrelated to this complaint.

Hughes will get the last laugh even if he loses to Lisa Johnson.

He should have no problem successfully suing Riesen, Lawrence, Allen, Irvine and others for defamation.

I crack up at the paid bloggers like the first comment on here.

Or maybe that it the job they give the interns.

None of these guys will be clean in the end.

Riesen is a hero. We need more like him that aren't afraid to stand up to the R's.

I always figured they had their moms writing in their defense.

I have to defend JMT on here - he's absolutely correct! He's posted on here consistently about many different topics so I think that might speak to the accusation that he's somehow paid by one of the campaigns.

Let's stick to the issue here though folks - Hughes isn't guilty.

re:he who laughs last

any doof can sue however one would be required to actually possess charactor to have it defamed.

To think that this is all about Hughes is an adventure into the absurd. The big fish are still in the pond.

Ethics allegations aside, Hughes has not represented District 51 well. He consistently sides with his buddies in the conservative caucus and listens only to their views and how they think the direction of our state should go. He does not and has not listened to his constituents. It sounds like his supporters have already resigned themselves to a November loss based on the comment above that Hughes will eventually get the last laugh--whatever. I am one of those Hughes Haters who hated him before the ethics allegations and still hate him now. Draper deserves better representation.

Not being that familiar with the Utah Legislature and it's members, and having lived outside Utah during the whole voucher thing, it sure looks to me as though Hughes is getting hit by a major smear campaign. Could this all be retribution against Hughes for his tenacious stand in favor of vouchers?

I would hope people in Utah are intelligent enough to realize that he was simply representing his district, as the majority of his constituents were supporters of the voucher. But, perhaps that is not the case?

Susan Lawerence did not retract her accusation of ethic violations. She stated under oath that she stands by her letter on the charge against Greg Hughes. Huges offered her money if she were to change her vote or to leave the room and not vote. (She may not have called it a bribe in her letter, but she did in other conversations and emails) Huges actions are a clear violation and an attempt to influence the vote. Appears very similar to what Walker did. Hughes must be held accountable.

Greg Curtis was quoted today in the Tribune saying that he had said he would sign the ethics complaint against Hughes if the complaint was not brought out until after the election. It appears leadership is trying to hold from the public pertinent and important ethic violations from coming out timely inorder to influence the elections. It is time for a change in the legislature.

I wonder if Bramble treats the staff for the fiscal analysts office and office of legislative research and general counsel like he treated the pizza delivery girl?

I guess it probably depends on whether or not he thinks anyone is watching or it might come out in the news...

When in doubt, attack the messenger. I suppose me being the messenger would imply that I'm paid staff or an intern. Sounds good, not true.

I'm a messenger for what I perceive to be the truth. Read this very paper and you will see that what I have posted is factually correct.

I strongly believe we need ethics reform though this case is not it. We need a more open government, not a more restricted one. When most people talk about ethics reform what they talk about is more regulations, which will always lead to less observable government. Meaning people take their actions underground.

Make legislators report all gifts above $5. It may be a slight hassle but the people should see that, while the Utah National Guard gives out a really neat Swiss Army knife and pen for $8 the University of Utah hands out a couple hundred dollars worth of freebies.

Make the system easier to find. In fact, on the legislative website next to the legislator I think they should list not just the bills they sponsor or committees they sit on but their conflicts of interests and gifts.

Let the people know, then decide.

Every district in Salt Lake County voted against vouchers. Hughes blatantly ignores his constituents if they do not agree with him. He is arrogant and needs to go.

to constituents is not an ethics violation and does not in any way add credence to an ethics investigation. Get a life or go back to Iran.

It is becoming more clear each day that any ethics violations were on the part of Phil Riesen.

to constituents is a reason to be voted out of office.

The margin of defeat for vouchers in district 51 was smaller than any other in the legislature. You could say that Hughes was being responsive to the 45-49% of constituents that supported vouchers, not to mention the many other things he has done for his district.

I'm encouraged by any politicial who will show vision and leadership, especially on controversial issues.

People are free to vote against anyone with whom they disagree but to attempt to smear them in the media is just plain dirty!!

Check your numbers the margin of defeat of vouchers in District 51 was actually 44% for 56% against. Hughes did not listen then what makes anyone think he will listen on other important issues.

"IF" he loses????????????

We deserve better than Bramble!

I'm ashamed that he is in ANY leadership position.

In complete agreement. Stated well and makes a lot of sense.

I hate utah politics.

I am voting the imcumbents out. I don't care who they are or what they have done. Incumbents are all getting the boot when I vote.

Hughes as well as Bramble have a history of brow-beating anyone who does not agree with their right wing anti-public school, Southerland Institue positions. All you have to do is sit in on one of their committee meetings. Their behavior and discounting attitude to the citizens of Utah would put a knot in your stomach. Anyone that doesn't believe Hughes didn't try to intimidate Lawrence or shake down the business community for $20,000 per "contribution" to his pro-voucher public relations effort has never been around Greg, Bramble,Curtis, etc. They are all modern day Gadianton robbers. They have no shame!!