From the Associated Press:
The Secret Service has opened a criminal investigation into the removal of three people from President Bush's town hall event on Social Security last month after they were singled out because of a "No More Blood for Oil" bumper sticker on their car, their lawyer said Thursday.
The second investigation by the Secret Service seeks to determine whether a man dressed in a dark suit and wearing an earpiece criminally impersonated a Secret Service agent when he escorted the three Denver residents out of the March 21 event, attorney Dan Recht said.
An agent from Washington, D.C., contacted Recht and asked if his clients Alex Young, Karen Bauer, and Leslie Weise could be interviewed this week as part of the second investigation into the incident, Recht said. The Secret Service has said the first investigation determined the man was not one of its agents but a staff member with the host committee.
This is not an issue that is going to sink Beauprez by any means, but the level to which it could hurt him could change with the outcome of this investigation. If the Secret Service found that the person who tossed the "Denver Three" out of the meeting was actually connected with Beauprez's office, then the potential for a damaging mail or television piece a year from now grows exponentially. But if they conclude that it was a White House staffer or just an overzealous volunteer (and it is likely a volunteer who will get tossed under the bus on this one) then it shouldn't harm Beauprez. Bobby B has been consistent in speaking out against the removal of the "Denver Three," so he can reasonably slide on this one as long as there is no connection made to his office.
Excellent analysis. Perhaps Lori McGinnis can cut a check for $3100. to pay for the volunteer's bus injuries.
Posted by: Keith | April 21, 2005 at 10:56 PM
Um, the "bus injuries" are likely to consist of Federal pound-me-in-the-*** prison time if the charge of impersonating a Federal Officer go through. This person (whoever it is) has led a trite and meaningless life; he is a Very Bad Man...
Call me silly, but unless a single volunteer has been doing this at every Presidential stop on his tour, I don't see this as a one-person scandal. This tour has brought home the pervasiveness of these kinds of actions in the President's appearances, and it's finally enough that the Democrats will keep digging. There are other lawsuits on this kind of action in Arizona, South Dakota, and New Jersey that I'm aware of...
Posted by: Phoenix Rising | April 22, 2005 at 07:20 AM
Drama's fun, but anyone who thinks BB will be tarnished by this story is smoking something, unless the bouncer came out of his organization, which seems highly unlikely, imho.
Don
Posted by: Donald E. L. Johnson | April 22, 2005 at 08:09 AM
Drama's fun, but anyone who thinks BB will be tarnished by this story is smoking something, unless the bouncer came out of his organization, which seems highly unlikely, imho.
Don
Posted by: Donald E. L. Johnson | April 22, 2005 at 08:23 AM
Why has not local law enforcement launched an investigation?
Not sure whether the event occured in Denver, or Aurora, but whichever DA has jurisdiction, there should be an investigation. Impersonating a peace officer is a class 6 felony with up to 18 months in prison and a one year mandatory parole. Would love to see a subpoena for Karl Rove and other white house types to testify to what they know about the ejection.
We'd then see just how much these guys believe in law and order.
18-8-112 CRS
Impersonating a peace officer.
(1) A person who falsely pretends to be a peace officer and performs an act in that pretended capacity commits impersonating a peace officer.
(2) Impersonating a peace officer is a class 6 felony
Posted by: Roger D | April 22, 2005 at 08:57 AM
It is a federal issue, the Secret Service has jurisdiction over the matter, so the locals will stay out of this one.
Posted by: Little Boy Blue | April 22, 2005 at 09:17 AM
Just because you are smoking something does not mean you are wrong. ;-)
"Um, the "bus injuries" are likely to consist of Federal pound-me-in-the-*** prison time if the charge of impersonating a Federal Officer go through"
This is right on. They will not be able to just offer up some poor volunteer as a sacrificial lamb on this one. It is HIGHLY unlikely that a volunteer did this. If so they are a VERY zealous volunteer. Even then the mystery "volunteer" would have had to have been directed by someone.
THAT is when it will get interesting. Who dressed the person? Who assinged them to do the job? Someone with a leadership position has to be behind this.
There is blood in the water here.
Posted by: Strider | April 22, 2005 at 09:21 AM
Conspiracy, or one idiot acting alone?
Denvergate: to be continued.
Posted by: tommix | April 22, 2005 at 09:43 AM
I hope these whiners do sue and win. It would set a nice precendent going into the 2006 election year. Imagine college or other rowdy Republicans crashing the Dems' town hall meetings. As soon as we're in, you can either look anti-free speech by kicking us out or suffer the consequences of embarrassing your candidate or elected official. Remember to thank the Whining 3 for their lawsuit.
Posted by: Dan | April 22, 2005 at 09:53 AM
Dan, your theory has two flaws:
1) The Dems generally don't bar people from their town halls, unlike some Republican events I can think of... When you're not winning a majority of votes, you don't turn down new listeners.
2) A campaign event is technically a private event, unlike a Presidential visit. Not that this helps in the PR department, but the legal distinction is there...
The Dem strategy on disruptive people is either to (1) show that supportive people outnumber the disrupter, or in more extreme cases (2) have the disruptive person removed after they've proven themselves disruptive. No major help for the GOP there, sorry.
Posted by: Phoenix Rising | April 22, 2005 at 09:59 AM
Little Boy Blue:
the locals may indeed stay out of it, but that doesn't mean they don't have jurisdiction if they choose to exercise it. Impersonating a peace officer is a violation of state law. The act did not occur on Federal property. State law applies and local law enforcement has the right to investigate/prosecute if they so choose.
The real federal issue here, is not so much the impersonation of a secret service agent but the violation of the civil rights of the individuals ejected.
If the SS investigation shows that other's abetted the impersonator, or if there had been instructions given by others to ensure that no non-believers were to be allowed in, then you also have conspiracy to deprive civil rights.
Posted by: Roger D | April 22, 2005 at 10:58 AM
Phx-
I never said the D's bar people from their town halls, but to say the D's don't participate in the same kind of profiling is not true. If the lawsuit is successful, the R's will be motivated to attend these events with their own agenda.
From your logic, the D's would prefer to wait until the person is disruptive after the PR damage is done, until they're thrown out. I support the R's position of throwing out an operative with an agenda and having a chance to control the PR.
Either way, this lawsuit will open a can of worms.
Posted by: Dan | April 22, 2005 at 11:08 AM
State law may not cover the impersonation of a Federal officer, but it's a federal felony anyway. If they're opening up a second "investigation" as they are, that means they're probably building a case. If they're flying agents hither and yon to conduct interviews, that means it's become serious business. Most likely, whoever first handled this internally got bumped off the case and it was given to someone new.
Posted by: Stygius | April 22, 2005 at 12:07 PM
Dems - tolerant towards protesters? Did you already forgot about the DNC convention last summer where protesters were surrounded by BARBED WIRE???
Posted by: Don't you wish | April 22, 2005 at 12:45 PM
Every Dem I know thought the Boston idea of a "Free Speech Zone" was a sick joke. It was also mostly empty; protesters were routinely seen outside of the area and closer to the convention.
Posted by: Phoenix Rising | April 22, 2005 at 01:29 PM
Sorry Stygius, the only thing this "investigation" is, is a stunt to try and appease the 3's media hungry lawyer and the Dem. Congressmen who are doing their best to milk this story for all the media coverage they can. I doubt you will see anything come of this "investigation." Its just a rouse to make you crazy liberals think someone is actually doing something about it. Mark my words.
Posted by: Blue Eraser | April 22, 2005 at 01:53 PM
"Free Speech Zone". Gee thats funny I thought the entire country was a free speech zone!
Posted by: Strider | April 22, 2005 at 02:08 PM
The reason Bush's keepers keep non-believers out of his events is that they are afraid he might be asked a real question. It has nothing to do with 'disrupting' an event.
Anyway, people who do attempt to disrupt events generally end up making themselves look like wacko idiots.
The people being barred from these events have been assumed guilty - at least give them the chance to prove that they are idiots.
Posted by: sparky | April 22, 2005 at 02:41 PM
Is it not true that Bill Clinton's keepers did the same thing for him during his Presidency?
Posted by: a | April 22, 2005 at 02:55 PM
BE - the only real reason for this investigation is that the Secret Service admitted to knowing who the perpetrator was. Since they admitted that, they have a hard time dancing away from FOIA requests without conducting an investigation.
Posted by: Phoenix Rising | April 22, 2005 at 03:03 PM
Hard to dance through barbed wire too...
Posted by: Don't you wish | April 22, 2005 at 03:33 PM
Bob Ewegwn takes on this topic this morning. He ties it into the case of Matt Dempsey, arrested at a Ted Strickland rally two and a half years ago.
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E146%257E2831361,00.html
Posted by: ewegen reader | April 23, 2005 at 10:55 AM
The whole Matt Dempsey thing gets me all tied up in knots. Anyone who knows or has had the opportunity to interact with Matt probably feels the same way.
On one hand you have Matt Dempsey - a kid who makes Dobson look like Jerry Garcia. He's not the smartest kid around, but he is passionate. After his arrest I wanted to get a t-shirt made with his mug shot on the front. As a Dem I thought that if ever there was a person who deserved to be locked up it was Matt Dempsey...
On the other hand, Matt was just doing what the Strickland supporters were doing to Allard around the state. Taunting the other side and making sure the Post/News/local paper has a picture with protesters surrounding the opposing candidate. Turnabout is fair play.
I wasn't there - so I don't know if Matt really endangered the lives of the gymnasts or streetperformers or pandhandlers or whatever down on Pearl street mall.
Yet, my stomach is in knots because I believe Matt had the right to do what he was doing - even if he is creepy. Okay, really creepy.
Posted by: Dempsey's mug shot | April 23, 2005 at 05:24 PM