THOUGHTS ON #FLOTUS and Bette Midler.

In case anyone is confused about my leanings... I lean slightly to the right of middle.

HERE ARE MY ELECTION SUGGESTIONS

Governor:  WALKER STAPLETON

Congressional District 5: DOUG LAMBORN

Attorney General: GEORGE BRAUCHLER

Secretary of State: WAYNE WILLIAMS

State Treasurer: BRIAN WATSON

State Senate District 2: DENNIS HISEY

State Senate District 9: PAUL LUNDEEN

State Senate District 11: PATRICK McINTIRE

State Senate District 14: SHANE SANDRIDGE

State Senate District 15: DAVE WILLIAMS

State Senate District 16: LARRY LISTON

State Senate District 17: KIT ROUPE

State Senate District 18: MARY ELIZABETH FABIAN

State Senate District 19: TIM GEITNER

State Senate District 20: TERRI CARVER

State Senate District 21: LOIS LANDGRAF

El Paso County Commissioner District 1: HOLLY WILLIAMS

El Paso County Commissioner District 5: CAMI BREMER

El Paso County Sheriff: BILL ELDER

El Paso Co. Clerk & Recorder: CHUCK BROERMAN

El Paso County Coroner:  LEON KELLY

CU Regent at Large:  KEN MONTERA

CU Regent, 5^th Congressional:  CHANCE HILL

Amendment A:  YES

Amendment V: NO

Amendment W: YES

Amendment X: YES

Amendment Y: YES

Amendment Z: YES

Amendment 73: NO

Amendment 74: NO

Amendment 75: YES

Proposition 109:  YES

Proposition 110:  NO

Proposition 111:  YES

Proposition 112:  NO

El Paso County 1A:  YES

Colorado Supreme Court

Justice Richard L. Gabriel:  NO

Colorado Court Of Appeals

Judge John Daniel Dailey:  YES

Judge Rebecca Rankin Freyre:  NO

Judge Elizabeth L. Harris:  NO

Judge David J. Richman:  YES

Prosecutor who questioned Christine Blasey Ford dismantles Ford’s case in scathing detail

l, the prosecutor who questioned Christine Blasey Ford on behalf of Republican senators last week during an emotional hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, released a memo late Sunday detailing why no “reasonable prosecutor” would bring a case against Brett Kavanaugh given the “evidence” that exists against him.

“A ‘he said, she said’ case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that,” Mitchell said, explaining the case’s “bottom line.”

1. Ford has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened

Mitchell explained that initially Ford said the assault occurred in the “mid-1980s,” but later changed the date to the “early 80s.” But when she met with the polygraph administrator, Ford crossed out the word “early” for unknown reasons.

Ford has also described the incident occurring in the “summer of 1982” and her “late teens” — despite claiming it happened when she was 15.

“While it is common for victims to be uncertain about dates, Dr. Ford failed to explain how she was suddenly able to narrow the time frame to a particular season and particular year,” Mitchell said.

2. Ford has struggled to identify Judge Kavanaugh as the assailant by name

Mitchell explained Ford neither identified Kavanaugh by name during marriage counseling in 2012 or individual counseling in 2013. Ford’s husband claims she identified Kavanaugh in 2012, but Mitchell noted that Kavanaugh’s name was widely circulated as a potential Supreme Court pick should then-Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney have won the presidency.

“In any event, it took Dr. Ford over thirty years to name her assailant,” Mitchell wrote. “Delayed disclosure of abuse is common so this is not dispositive.”

3. When speaking with her husband, Ford changed her description of the incident to become less specific
According to Mitchell, Ford told her husband before they married that she had been the victim of a “sexual assault,” but told the Washington Post that she told her husband she was a victim of “physical abuse.”

“She testified that, both times, she was referring to the same incident,” Mitchell said.

4. Ford has no memory of key details of the night in question — details that could help corroborate her account

Mitchell explained:

Ford does not remember who invited her to the “party, how she heard about it, or how she got there”

Ford does not remember whose house the assault occurred or where the house is located with any specificity

Ford remembers very specific details about that night that are unrelated to the assault, such as how many beers she consumed and whether or not she was on medication

Perhaps the most significant hole in Ford’s memory, Mitchell said, is the fact that Ford does not remember how she returned home from the party.

Factually speaking, the location of the party that Ford identified to the Washington Post is a 20-minute drive from her childhood home. And it was only during her testimony last week that she agreed for the first time that someone had driven her somewhere that night. Ford remembers locking herself in a bathroom after the alleged assault, but cannot identify who drove her home.

Significantly, no one has come forward to identify themselves as the driver.

“Given that this all took place before cellphones, arranging a ride home would not have been easy. Indeed, she stated that she ran out of the house after coming downstairs and did not state that she made a phone call from the house before she did, or that she called anyone else thereafter,” Mitchell said.

5. Ford’s account of the alleged assault has not been corroborated by anyone she identified as having attended — including her lifelong friend

As widely reported, Mitchell explained that each individual Ford identified as having been at the party has submitted sworn statements — under penalty of felony — that they do not remember the party and cannot recall or corroborate any detail that Ford alleges.

6. Ford has not offered a consistent account of the alleged assault

Ford claimed in her letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) that she heard Kavanaugh and Mark Judge talking downstairs while hiding in a bathroom after the assault. But she testified that she could not hear anyone, and only “assumed” people were talking.

Meanwhile, Ford’s therapist’s notes show that she said there were four boys in the bedroom when she was assaulted. However, she told the Washington Post it was only two, and blamed the error on her therapist. Also, in Ford’s letter to Feinstein she said there were “me and 4 others” at the party. However, in her testimony, she said there were “four boys” at the party in addition to herself and Leland Keyser, her female friend.

Additionally, “Dr. Ford listed Patrick ‘PJ’ Smyth as a ‘bystander’ in her statement to the polygrapher and in her July 6 text to the Washington Post, although she testified that it was inaccurate to call him a bystander. She did not list Leland Keyser even though they are good friends. Leland Keyser’s presence should have been more memorable than PJ Smyth’s,” Mitchell said.

7. Ford has struggled to recall important recent events relating to her allegations, and her testimony regarding recent events raises further questions about her memory
Mitchell explained that Ford is unable to accurately remember her interactions with the Washington Post, such as what she told reporters or whether or not she provided them with a copy of her therapist’s notes.

Also of significance is Ford’s claim that she wished to remain confidential since she submitted her assault allegations to a person operating the Washington Post’s tip line. She testified that she did this due to a “sense of urgency,” claiming she did not know how to contact the Senate Judiciary Committee. However, she was unable to explain how she knew to contact the offices of Feinstein and Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.).

Also, Ford cannot recall if she was recorded, via audio or video, during the administration of her polygraph, nor can she remember if the polygraph was administered on the same day as her grandmother’s funeral or the day after.

“It would also have been inappropriate to administer a polygraph to someone who was grieving,” Mitchell said.

8. Ford’s description of the psychological impact of the event raises questions

Ford testified that she suffers from anxiety, PTSD, and claustrophobia, which explains her fear of flying. However, she testified that she has flown many times in the last year, and flies on a regular basis for her hobbies and work.

Meanwhile, Ford testified that the assault affected her academically in college. However, she never claimed it affected her in high school after the assault allegedly occurred.

“It is significant that she used the word ‘contributed’ when she described the psychological impact of the incident to the Washington Post. Use of the word ‘contributed’ rather than ’caused’ suggests that other life events may have contributed to her symptoms. And when questioned on that point, said that she could think of ‘nothing as striking as’ the alleged assault,” Mitchell explained.

Finally, Mitchell said the “activities of congressional Democrats and Dr. Ford’s attorneys likely affected Dr. Ford’s account.”

credit: summary courtesy of Chris Enloe & The Blaze.

The son of a Colorado Springs woman will receive the Medal of Honor next month, becoming the first airman to receive the nation’s highest award for valor since the Vietnam War, the White House announced Friday.

The medal will be awarded posthumously to his widow, Valerie Nessel, on Aug. 22 by President Donald Trump at the White House.

“I was beginning to think it was not ever going to happen,” Terry Chapman said Friday after learning from special operations officials that the White House had announced the award to her son, Tech Sgt. John A. Chapman. “I’m glad that the story’s finally out.”

Chapman, 36, died March 4, 2002, during a firefight with al-Qaida fighters on Takur Ghar Mountain, Afghanistan.

(for more details go to GAZETTE.COM)

Tonight on THE RANDALL REWIND... would you support the President if he shut down the government in order to get real, meaningful, border security? I would. (9:00-10:00 pm... right on KVOR.com or download podcast in ITunes. Leave your reply here or call 719-540-0740 during the show.

Trump on Monday doubled down on his call to drastically ramp up border security and overhaul the immigration system a day after he threatened to shut down the government over the issue.

Trump's tweet came a day after he said on Twitter that he would be willing to "shut down" the government if Democratic lawmakers did not agree to his demands on immigration and border security, including the construction of his long-promised wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Trump has repeatedly called for an end to family-based immigration, which he refers to as "chain migration," as well as the diversity visa lottery program.

Lawmakers face a spending deadline in September. If Trump were to allow the government to shut down, it would mark the second lapse in funding this year. The first happened in January amid a dispute over protections for beneficiaries of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which Trump rescinded last year.

HERE ARE THE MOST INTERESTING TEXTS FROM THIS MORNING'S SHOW:

CALLER 1:

Carol here. Shut it down. People don't get cheated out of any money. Juan is a a-hole. I quit watching the Five when he became a permanent fixture. Got tired of the continuous puzzled look on his face. 9:26 AM

Carol again. My husband "a carpenter " was asked by a government employee if he could hire an illegal alien so he could charge a cheaper price. My husband didn't get the job and that was fine. 9:47 AM

100% support President Trump to shut the government because I'm sure he would not close down the Veterans Memorial 9:45 AM

 CALLER 2:

Richard, there are so many people living in border states who desperately wants the wall. Many of the illegals are doing jobs that could be performed by citizens. Ask the painting and construction guys. Thanks Jim  9:41 AM

CALLER 3:

So, it's okay to punish the American people by shutting down the government because you don't get your way? Just like a child having a fit, trump is a vengeful little bastard. The only standing I will do for him is someday standing and urinating on his grave. 8:55 AM

I still cannot believe that a grown man of your years uses a term like "snarky", grow up Richard! 9:26 AM

CALLER 4:

As soon as anyone is allowed to cross the border, they should be taken to a holding village where they will learn employment skills, english, and how to grow their own food. While in these villages they will decide if they want to become legal american citizen, or take their new skills back home to improve their own country. 9:12 AM

           

CALLER 5:

Fund the border wall aka secure the country or shut it down! 8:52 AM

Securing this country is a federal obligation! 8:55 AM

A LAW BANNING SALES OF CELLPHONES TO KIDS

What do you think of a proposed ballot measure that bans the sale of smartphones to minors???

Backers of this measure that would change state law to prohibit the sale of smartphones for kids under 13 call it “preservation of natural childhood” and blame governments and megacorporations for failing to “rescue” generations of children from the “careless and experimental introduction” of technological devices and their “addictive” and “dangerous” impacts.

Drafted in part by a Colorado anesthesiologist named Tim Farnum who says he saw negative effects of smartphone use in his own children, the measure earned national ink. His kids, he told The Washington Post, became moody and quiet and didn’t leave their bedrooms. And when he tried to tell them to ease up on the screen time? “All of a sudden the fangs come out,” he said.