Lisa Johnson and Rep. Hughes’s October Surprise
Rep. Greg Hughes soundly defeated Lisa Johnson two years ago for a House race in Draper. It would take something like weeks of bad press to close that gap. And that’s just what Rep. Hughes got, when an ethics complaint was filed against him a month before the election. Rep. Hughes was cleared of all charges (most failing 8-0 in the 4 Republican / 4 Democrat ethics committee). But, to understate the matter, it’s a tough task to make up for all the bad press.
Today, Johnson’s attorney revealed that she knew about the potential charges against Rep. Hughes in April. That sheds new light on a little on-line conversation I had in June with “CraigJ”. I pointed out that the 3 complainants against Rep. Mark Walker had all promised vengeance on House Rules Committee members. CraigJ was very animated in the commentary. I knew that Lisa Johnson’s husband was Craig, so I asked:
craigj,
Are you Craig Johnson, married to Lisa Johnson, democratic candidate running against Rep. Greg Hughes?
If so, that just might be the most precious thing I've ever heard!
If so, please tell: is Rep. Hughes the "legislator to be named later?" And when might that be revealed -- late September, October? Not that you've given any thought to whether that might help your wife's campaign against Greg.
I know that the motives of people trying to ruin other people shouldn't be questioned, and I'm sure you and Hansen, Mascaro and Allen wouldn't engage in a smear campaign to leverage an election, but it just might be fun to know if your wife stands to gain from all this.
You said, "It's a fabricated smear plain and simple." Apparently, it might not be quite so plain and simple.
Man, do I love politics!
Well, well, well. It turns out that CraigJ could have answered my questions at that point.
“Is Rep. Hughes the ‘legislator to be named later?’” Yes.
“And when might that be revealed – late September, October?” Yes.
“Not that you’ve given any thought to whether that might help your wife’s campaign against Greg.” Well . . ..
“It just might be fun to know if your wife stands to gain from all this.” Well . . ..
CraigJ responded,
And how dare you try to drag my wife into your sick charade! Neither she nor I are involved in any way with this ethics complaint. I'm sorry to say but I don't have any idea what the anonymous poster is talking about.
It's no surprise, though, that I see your friend Rep. Hughes as part of the problem with Utah politics and we are working hard to defeat him.
It is a sick charade. And, CraigJ, your lawyer just revealed that you knew exactly what the anonymous poster was talking about, when he wrote:
“Legislator to be named later”: I'll put $10 on Greg Hughes. The Democrats and Allen/Mascaro think they can take him out. (Not that I think Hughes is guilty of anything, just that I think he will be the legislator to be conveniently named later.
Who will take me up on this and what odds will you give me?
LisaJ is making ethics the center point of her campaign? Please.
Today, Johnson’s attorney revealed that she knew about the potential charges against Rep. Hughes in April. That sheds new light on a little on-line conversation I had in June with “CraigJ”. I pointed out that the 3 complainants against Rep. Mark Walker had all promised vengeance on House Rules Committee members. CraigJ was very animated in the commentary. I knew that Lisa Johnson’s husband was Craig, so I asked:
craigj,
Are you Craig Johnson, married to Lisa Johnson, democratic candidate running against Rep. Greg Hughes?
If so, that just might be the most precious thing I've ever heard!
If so, please tell: is Rep. Hughes the "legislator to be named later?" And when might that be revealed -- late September, October? Not that you've given any thought to whether that might help your wife's campaign against Greg.
I know that the motives of people trying to ruin other people shouldn't be questioned, and I'm sure you and Hansen, Mascaro and Allen wouldn't engage in a smear campaign to leverage an election, but it just might be fun to know if your wife stands to gain from all this.
You said, "It's a fabricated smear plain and simple." Apparently, it might not be quite so plain and simple.
Man, do I love politics!
Well, well, well. It turns out that CraigJ could have answered my questions at that point.
“Is Rep. Hughes the ‘legislator to be named later?’” Yes.
“And when might that be revealed – late September, October?” Yes.
“Not that you’ve given any thought to whether that might help your wife’s campaign against Greg.” Well . . ..
“It just might be fun to know if your wife stands to gain from all this.” Well . . ..
CraigJ responded,
And how dare you try to drag my wife into your sick charade! Neither she nor I are involved in any way with this ethics complaint. I'm sorry to say but I don't have any idea what the anonymous poster is talking about.
It's no surprise, though, that I see your friend Rep. Hughes as part of the problem with Utah politics and we are working hard to defeat him.
It is a sick charade. And, CraigJ, your lawyer just revealed that you knew exactly what the anonymous poster was talking about, when he wrote:
“Legislator to be named later”: I'll put $10 on Greg Hughes. The Democrats and Allen/Mascaro think they can take him out. (Not that I think Hughes is guilty of anything, just that I think he will be the legislator to be conveniently named later.
Who will take me up on this and what odds will you give me?
LisaJ is making ethics the center point of her campaign? Please.
posted by steve u. at 10/22/2008
Subscribe
24 Comments:
If Lisa Johnson pulls this off, we can expect more of this in future elections. The Democrats have finally figured out a way of leveling the playing field through dirty politics.
First - I don't think Lisa Johnson had anything to do with this silly, awkward, clumsy and mismanaged October surprise. If she'd had something to do with it, it would have been handled a lot better.
Second - Did you just quote a blog comments conversation as your proof that Lisa had something to do with this? Really? Get your head checked, Rep Steve.
Third - October (or pre-primary) surprises happen. If they're handled right, they work. In a gerrymandered state like Utah, where dirty tricks and heavy handed tactics are the tools of the GOP trade; where the snide and arrogant rise in power and dominance, it seems to me that a well timed info drop in an election year is good strategy.
It's an election, not an ice cream social. If you don't like getting the finger pointed at you, don't behave in a way that makes it possible.
How many Republicans DIDN'T get ethics charges files against them this year?
This turd, however, was so poorly planned and put together that I completely understand why you Republicans are mad about it. You would have done it much more effectively.
:)
Steve, I remember that series of posts. I also remember questioning some sort of comment from Craig about "October surprise"...wondering what he was talking about in the context of the comments I was making. And, if I remember correctly, Rob Miller posted a comment explaining that Craig just thought that there would be many Republicans who unexpectedly would be defeated. And I didn't give it another thought. Huh.
I hope the Johnsons didn't have anything to do with this Hughes thing. But nothing really surprises me any more...how can smart human beings forget the #1 rule of politics: what goes around comes around.
That said, this whole thing stinks. It is sad that the Dems and RINOs tried it...and, now, that Greg might seek some retribution. I hope he doesn't.
But I believe your memory is correct.
JM is correct that this wasn't executed as well as it could have been, but it's not bad for a first try. This is the first time someone has tried an October Surprise in Utah in a very long time. I've been here more than 15 years, and I don't remember either party trying this.
This is a very good first shot. Next time, the Left will be even better and the Right will still be on the low end of the learning curve.
The RINOs and the Democrats should have waited two more weeks to spring the surprise. By jumping the gun, they've given Hughes two weeks to redeem himself before the election.
I don't think Hughes' opposition anticipated that he would react so quickly and wrap this thing up as fast as he did.
I agree with anon 12:36 that we'll see more of these if Johnson defeats Hughes. While I appreciate the entertainment value of such spectacles, it does degrade the political process.
Hey, October Surprise rhymes with "BRAMBLEIZED"
I talked with Rob and he still states that Johnson was in no way involved with the ethics complaint.
He has never lied to me in the twenty years I have known him, and he is the only guy I know who admits if he has been wrong, and when he has been BRAMBOOZELLED.
J-Man,
But how do we know that you aren't lying?
If you only know one person who admits if he has been wrong, then you're hanging out with the wrong crowd.
Besides, how would Rob know that Johnson wasn't involved, unless he was involved in the complaint? Hmmmm....
JM Bell said
"If you don't like getting the finger pointed at you, don't behave in a way that makes it possible."
Um...this comment made me sad. We're not talking about valid October surprises here. This is good old fashioned made up stuff. How exactly can one behave in a way that avoids being falsely accused?
Ya Right, now it Miller who is behind this.
Me thinks Marlor was only stating that he trusts Miller. Nothing more, but Maybe Miller was behind it all. He has proven that he is smarter than the average GOP bear, that for sure.
Rob Miller is an honorable guy. I'd be surprised if he was involved in any of this mess.
Lisa Johnson stated to the Salt Lake Tribune that the first she heard about the Greg Hughes ethics complaint was when the media reported it.
That was Sept. 30th.
On the other hand, her attorney stated two days ago to the Salt Lake Tribune that he told her about it in April, and followed up again with Craig Johnson in June.
These two statements do not mesh. A less kind way of putting it is that Lisa Johnson has been caught in a lie.
By bringing up Rob Miller I in no way meant to suggest that he knew anything about this. Fact is, I don't know who knew what when about this.
Rob is indeed an honorable guy in my experiences with him. And he's a friend...even better!
Salem - That the "ethics" committee cleared Hughes of all charges means NOTHING. In my opinion, an elected Republican could forcibly sodomize a goat at a Chuck E Cheese and be cleared of all charges.
Do I THINK that Hughes did what he was charged with? You bet I do, but, he was "cleared" of those charges.
The simple existence of the "Hey, Greg, quit being such a dick," section of this whole debacle sheds more light on his unethical escapades than does the wash job he got in committee.
IF Greg weren't the Mark Towner kind of tin-foil clad anger reactor, prone to lawsuit wolf calls, I would have said:
"If you don't like getting the finger pointed at you, don't try to bribe your way through the legislative session."
But I didn't.
Bell's comment raises an interesting point of citizenship and civility: what do we do as a people when citizens simply have zero confidence (or 100% cynicism) in our elected officials and our democratic processes?
In this case, what Bell is really saying is that only a verdict of guilty would do in the Hughes case...that the process is corrupt and the people running the process are corrupt.
I see this attitude more and more...not so much because cases of corruption don't exist, they do...but the attitude that EVERYTHING is corrupt. When we get to this point, I wonder how to even communicate civilly with someone bearing this attitude. Honestly, is there anything that would appease the logic or conscience of Bell, or someone like him, on this issue...except to find Hughes guilty, punish him, and have him lose his District seat?
Paul,
You misdiagnose Bell's comments. He's not saying "EVERYTHING is corrupt". He's saying "REPUBLICANS are corrupt." Read his blog. It's not much different than OneUtah.
He openly admits that he thinks Hughes is guilty even though no one has provided a SINGLE shred of evidence. Just because a dim-witted former legislator (and she is dim-witted even if she is a nice person) says "Hughes tried to bribe me" doesn't mean Hughes is guilty, unless you're Bell in which Hughes is guilty of being a Republican.
JM Bell,
Look, I'm not saying you are wrong, your opinion is as valid as the next guy, but I am curious as to why you feel this way. What exactly do you see as the problem?
In your initial comment(Third point) you validate the October surprise strategy but then go on to degrade those same or similar tactics when used against your interests. So which is it?
If the system really is broken, lets fix it. Do you have any suggestions or are you just mad your team lost?
I wasn't trying to diagnose Bell's comments. He can certainly speak for himself. I was attempting to transcend the moment and get us to look forward to where we are headed if this cynicism and incivility continues.
But thanks for bringing us so quickly back to reality. :)
salem - It's all voters. What can I do? Keep making noise, keep waving my arms, etc.
As for Anon - little better than One UTah? C'mon, it's WAY better and a lot funnier.
For folks that listen to my radio show, you know that when a Democrat offends me, I am just as loud and angry as I am with Republicans. Matheson voting for the Torture bill; Obama voting for the retroactive immunity bill: all get my attention and my angry keyboard. Republicans just seem to get into more trouble more often.
One of the weird twists about Utah's super-majority is the target rich GOP environment. It's your system, it's your rules (or lack of rules) and yet Repugs still blame Democrats for everything. It's insane. You've been running the show for decades and yet you refuse to take responsibility for anything that doesn't work. Like Ethics on the Hill.
What is so funny and I'm laughing is the Republicans call this an October SURPRISE. How about all the late February and early March surprises that they pull off in the legislature. Can you tell us all about that Steve. Oh I forget you get to have double standard when your at the capitol. Where is the ethics in that. What a bunch of Hippocrates's you republicans are. I can see why you are going to lose in Nov.
Then we see the smear campaign that you have done with Jay in Sandy,how many more will you do? How do you account to the lord on all this? And to your bishop. I guess that it is ok if you don't get caught. Well your caught. We can see it and where it all comes from. Your not fooling anyone.
Yes. . . What a bunch of ancient Greek physicians you Republicans are.
I don't get it. Doesn't it seem like a lot of people knew about this alleged bribery, but it became public after it was put in writing. Hughes and all of his defenders just ignore the fact that this accusation of attempted bribery came from a fellow Republican House colleague. It was publicized by democrats, to be sure, but that's their job. If a republican legislator had a letter from a democrat accusing his democratic opponent of bribery, would he sit on it until after the election because of some bogus sense of ethical loyalty. I'll wait for a pledge from republican legislators never to use documentary evidence of corruption against an opponent. Anyone?
You make a good point that some people look like they had some advance knowledge of Rep. Hughes' ethical problems.
However, you might want to go back and read your original post where you assert that accusations against Rep. Walker were politically motivated. We now know the accusations did in fact have substance because Rep. Walker's attorney says he is willing to plead guilty to a crime.
So your record of defending the integrity of your suspect colleagues by attacking the motives of others is not good.
Why does it not surprise me that Steve Urquhart is supporting Hughes over an ethics complaint revolving around vouchers?
I seem to remember Mr. Urquhart also playing hard ball with vouchers by selectively allowing bills to be heard in the Rules Committee. Basically it was a "You vote for vouchers, I'll let you bill out of Rules" deal. We all know it. It was plain to see.
Now, Mr. Urquhart is defending Greg Hughes. What a shocker!
What a shocker... :
GOP says Dem House candidate violated lobbyist law
By Robert Gehrke
The Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated: 10/28/2008 06:25:26 AM MDT
The Salt Lake County Republican Party filed a complaint Monday with the Lieutenant Governor's Office, alleging that Democratic House candidate Lisa Johnson violated state lobbyist law.
Johnson is the executive director of Utahns for Public Schools, a group created last spring to trying to stop a private school voucher bill that was passed by the Legislature. The complaint accuses her of failing to file a required lobbyist registration.
"I'm not registered as a lobbyist because I'm not a lobbyist," said Johnson. She said the group's partners, like the Utah Education Association and PTA, have their own legislative agendas they lobby for, but Utahns For Public Schools does not.
But Salt Lake County Republican Party Chairman James Evans complained to the lieutenant governor, who oversees lobbyist registration and reporting, that Johnson did indeed lobby the Legislature and failed to register and report her activity.
Johnson is locked in a tough battle with Rep. Greg Hughes, R-Draper, who was cleared earlier this month of ethical misconduct, although the ethics committee scolded him for conduct "unbecoming a member of the Utah House."
Hughes has suffered politically as a result of the adverse publicity, say his supporters.
Anon.,
Can you give any names of Reps I leveraged over vouchers or identify any bills I held because of vouchers?
I didn't think so.
<< Home