Deseret News | Lawrence testifies in Hughes ethics case

Reader comments
Lawrence testifies in Hughes ethics case

Wow | 6:57 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Looks like Rep. Hughes and his attorney are both cut from the same cloth. Those quotes could have just as easily come from either.

Maverick | 7:50 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Hughes is a Maverick-- like Sarah Palin. Perhaps he should move to Alaska where they don't care if people play by the rules or follow the law.

1Observer | 7:57 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Wake up Utah. This is a smear campaign by the UEA, the Dems and the anti-voucher group. Riesen himself admits that he has no proof, only one person's word. That person now says that she doesn't think Hughes did anything wrong. Then you have Neil Hansen, another Democrat saying that the idea of $50,000 was floating around and that he was offered the money by some nebulous group. Whatever! Hansen is consistently ranked as one of the least effective legislators by Des News. Why would any group come to him. Then to say that, while he doesn't know for sure, he thinks leadership must have known because they know everything that goes on. Really Neil, omniscient leadership? Hm-m-m-m. This is basically a ploy by the UEA and the Democrats, each who has no philospophical connection to the average Utah voter, to try to win races by smearing the other side beause they themselves do not have a message that resonates with anyone. This whole thing is a sham and people should see it for what it is.

Comments continue below

Cats | 8:51 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Having had interaction with Phil Riesen's attorney, Dave Irvine, I can tell you that he is a nasty, petty person who does his best to damage others. He is known for attacking anyone who disagrees with him and has TRIED, on numerous occasions, to get people fired from their jobs when he has had disagreements with him.

Fortunately, most people in the state are on to Irvine and he is usually unsuccessful. I don't know anyone who has any respect for him. That's the kind of person Phil Riesen has chosen for his attorney.

That should make you stop and think!

Sick of it all | 8:56 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

The majority leadership call this a media show and are going on the attack against those who exposed the whole thing because it's their backside that got exposed. They don't like anybody trying to tell them they can't do something; they don't think the law applies to them (and if they find out that it does, they change it so it doesn't); and they sure as heck don't think we, the people, need to or (they tell themselves) want to know how they do what they do. Well, let's just all admit that we have the best legislature money can buy - it's just too bad that when it came time to buy them, we didn't have enough money to outbid Dave Checketts, Energy Solutions, the Utah Petroleum Marketers Association, the Utah Petroleum Association, and other lobbying groups. The only way we'll ever get ethics in our legislature is to get rid of the super-majority the Republicans have - so I don't care what the dem in my district stands for - I'm voting for them. I'm just so sick of the shananigans these arrogant legislators are pulling - and sick of them protecting each other from the law.

Anonymous | 9:04 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

This ethic complaint is part of a national Democratic Party strategy to win elections this year. Democrats are looking at key races and filing ethics complaints. The Democrats tried this last election in Colorado and the strategy worked, even though the ethics complaints went nowhere it is guilt by proclamation.

Additionally we have many people running for office this cycle that switched the Republican party because of their radical social and financial stands on issues. They distance themselves from the Democratic party by omitting any connection they have with the Democratic Party.

Anonymous | 9:08 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

This reminds me of abused women and how they protect the abuser. It is really sad. Reisen had an obligation to bring forward the complaint. If he had not Curtis would have made sure it was hidden.

Wow | 9:40 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Karrenberg and Hughes really are two peas of the same pod. The only think shocking about Karrenberg's profanity-laced comments is that they didn't come directly from Hughes.

Jail Time Please! | 9:54 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Thanks Mr. Hughes for reminding the people of Utah to vote and remove dishonest, self-serving people like yourself from public office. You are corrupt and should be living at Point of the Mountain. At least it is close to Draper, your family can visit you.

The corruption HAS TO STOP!!! Make Hughes an example of what happens to dirty public officials.

Vote them all out in November.

1Observer | 10:22 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

I commented on this story earlier - is the News becoming so shallow that it can't publish a contrarian position? Are you afraid that the public won't swallow this story hook, line and sinker? It seems like you only publish comments when they agree with your stories. Is it any wonder people are losing faith with the media and subscriptions are declining. I thought with Joe Cannon at the helm you might become a little more balanced but it has become worse. Some actual investigative and reasoned reporting would expose this whole ethics charge against Hughes as a farce. But that story will never get printed by the New since it doesn't mesh with your current agenda.

I Know Susan | 10:49 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

and she is a woman of great integrity. If she said it happened, it happened.

Comments by Hughes' attorney give a false impression about Susan's beliefs. If she had thought nothing was wrong with the request, she would not have raised the issue. Her refusal to call the lie a lie speaks to her class and unwillingness to wrestle in the mud. Until she is quoted saying she thought the offer was above board, don't believe it.

As for Reisen, the worm. He knew exactly what he was doing and gave no thought to how it would impact Susan. His only thought was about how to do the most harm right before an election. Maybe someone whould ask him how ethical it is to still be appearing in John Parras ads right before an election. Sounds like unreported free media.

Instereo | 11:26 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

If Mr. Hughes and the republicans didn't have anything to hide, they'd be saying "bring it on" but they must have something to hide because they are name calling, shifting blame, swearing, and saying how unfair everything is. The sooner they are out of office, the better off we'll be. Utah needs to be balanced to keep both sides honest.

Choose your own (expletive) | 11:43 a.m. Oct. 11, 2008

It's kind of fun to fill in the blank with whichever cuss word works best.

That said, the person using those words in a hearing display mental and verbal weakness.

Laura | 12:32 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Karrenberg's a decent lawyer but he's always been a hothead with a penchant for profanity. The problem here is, I don't see how he's helping his client by cursing and bringing up the Viet Nam war. You know what they say, though: If the facts are on your side, pound home the facts. If the law is on your side, pound home the law. But if you ain't got the law OR the facts, pound on the table.

Swearing (and not on the Bible) | 12:34 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Are there any in legisltive leadership that don't swear like sailors behind closed doors? I'd love to know it if there are any who are card-carrying members who also don't swear like obnoxious teens, especially in meeting with those who disagree with them?

Hughes? Nope.
Curtis? Not a chance.

Anyone know of any?

Throw the bums out!

Shoot the messenger again! | 2:43 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Shoot the messenger again!

Never mind that there is a huge problem with ethics.

Legislative leaders are too comfortable with the system as it is and they are in the middle of this one.

Time for a change.

Is anyone surprised | 3:51 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

I am shocked that people are suprised by this. Everyone know Utah Politics are for sale. Look at all the issues, Bank vs Credit Unions, Vouchers, Energy Solutions, Real Salt Lake. They were all done by deal making. What is the difference betweeen a pro voucher getting financial support, and the PTA and UEA using school time and resources to promote their cause and canadates??????

It is all to the benefit of a few-Look at the Bank vs Credit Union debate, the banks said that Credit Unions do deserve the tax breaks because the do not distribute their earning and keep them in reserves. We just gave the banks 750 billion. I hope everyone remembers this when the banks go after the Credit Unions again.

Re:1Observer | 4:48 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

If you know Hughes, at all, you would easily be able to believe the allegations. It is that simple. Unfortunately, we will never rid ourselves of this because of people who make excuses for this behavior and point their fingers elsewhere. Let's concentrate on this one and determine what really happened.

Stefani Walker | 7:10 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Vote for Greg Hughes!

Stefani Walker | 7:28 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

Greg Hughes is willing to put himself out there. He does not shift blame. He is not part of a conspiracy. He does not do things that are underhanded. Greg is HONEST, he is real, he is good-hearted.

It is easier to be an armchair politician than to put one's self out there on the chopping block as a true patriot.

By the way, Hughes did say, "Bring it On!"

RE: I know Susan | 9:05 p.m. Oct. 11, 2008

I know Susan Lawrence, too ... and am in complete agreement with your above statement. She is a woman of great integrity and courage. I only wish that she were still in office.

Seen it all! | 11:09 a.m. Oct. 15, 2008

Maybe before anyone defends Mr. Hughes they should talk to the people who have actually seen all of the dishonesty! His dishonesty extends beyond this one issue. Note to Mr. Hughes; Time to call (in the words of Texas Hold-em) a "spade a spade"!

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.