At the filing deadline back in June, King County Councilmember Jane Hague probably chuckled with relief to learn that her only opponent was ten-time perennial loser Richard Pope. But it’s beginning to look like Pope is the candidate in the race who lucked out by drawing an unstable, self-destructive opponent.
King County Councilmember Jane Hague’s re-election campaign took another strange turn this week, when the campaign reported a potentially record-setting contribution by Hague and her husband — and then said the report was a mistake.
[…] The Bellevue Republican’s campaign reported to the Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) that Hague and her husband, Ed Springman, contributed $50,000 to the campaign Monday — an amount believed to be more than a County Council candidate has ever given to her own campaign. […] The reported contribution quickly prompted Hague’s opponent, Republican-turned-Democrat Richard Pope, to file complaints with state and county authorities, saying that Springman’s share violated the state’s $700 limit on how much anyone other than the candidate can give.
Jesus… what, was she drunk or something? Probably…
The latest misstep follows disclosures that Hague was arrested June 2 on suspicion of drunken driving and that she signed a biographical sketch during her 1993 campaign claiming a college degree that she didn’t have. She has pleaded not guilty to a charge of driving under the influence.
Democratic Political uber-consultant John Wyble, who is not involved in the race, has his own take on Hague’s recent misstep:
“It sounds like she’s nervous…”
Or… drunk…
… given all the things that have happened in the last few weeks. She may be in trouble … I don’t think I’ve ever seen a County Council candidate throw in their own money, especially $50,000.”
But of course, there are two sides to every story. (At least, in traditional journalism.)
But on Tuesday afternoon, Hague’s campaign spokesman, Brett Bader, said no contribution had been made. He said the campaign’s report to the PDC was “inadvertently filed,” and he didn’t know how the mistake had been made.
“There was no contribution made nor deposited,” Bader said.
Hague has no idea how the mistake was made. Hmm. I’m guessing we should just blame it on some staffer. That said…
Bader said Tuesday it is possible that Hague will make a significant contribution — on her own.
Say… $50,000?
When a candidate puts his or her own money into a campaign, he said, that’s “a demonstration that the candidate is committed to winning and doing what needs to be done.”
Or, that she’s discovered even her traditional Republican donors don’t want to give money to a blame-shifting, drunken liar, who can’t seem to manage the enormous sums of money they’ve already given her.
Hague at the time reported total contributions of $268,142, but her campaign said Tuesday $47,400 of that was intended for a separate surplus account and was accidentally deposited in the 2007 campaign account. The money has been returned to the correct account, according to the campaign.
So… um… if Pope has raised only $3,792 thus far, compared to Hague’s $268,142 (or maybe $220,742… I’m confused)… why would Hague feel the need to inject a record $50,000 of her husband’s own money into her campaign? Hmm. I wonder if she’s done any polling recently?
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....htmlE-mail
ewsvine
Rossi gives up nonprofit’s top post
By Ralph Thomas
Seattle Times Olympia bureau
OLYMPIA — Republican Dino Rossi announced Tuesday he has stepped down as president of the Forward Washington Foundation, a controversial nonprofit that his Democratic foes claimed he was using as a front for a 2008 bid for governor.
It would be nice if Richard Pope could get off his ass and raise some real money to compete with Hague.
Dagnabit Pope! You’re going to drive that lady to drink!
GO RICHARD!
POPE! POPE! POPE! POPE! POPE! POPE! POPE! POPE! POPE! POPE! POPE! POPE! POPE! POPE! POPE! POPE! POPE! POPE!
Fellow libs! Richard has fallen off (at least a little) from the “Dark Side”. Spare him a few bucks!
Pope can’t raise any money because he’s a whack-a-doo. The fact that Jane is throwing money in only confirms what is printed in this post- that she is committed to winning.
So…where do we contribute?
I’ve not given money to a Pope before, but why not?
But, Richard, I want a Quid pro Quo the next time an issue concerning Lesser Spanaway comes before you…
I suppose we’re going to get a bunch of multiple personality commenters in here again God, Richard, You attract dingbats when your name is mentioned :>
Doesn’t this sound like Sen. Cantwell and her boyfriend loan contribution?
Um let me see, Richard attacks women in courtrooms, now Keith Ervin attacks women in the press. Keith and Richard must e-mail each other like schoolgirls with a crush. Goldy, Richard lost the D endorsement, has a horrible record on every aspect of his life and has a number of his own PDC violations being investigated. Your continued work on the Dick’s behalf only demeans your credibility and proves Dems love the crazies. Thank god Sheary’s in charge of the party and not you bufoons. Now, can we get some more OJ footage? That stuff is Golden.
Richard Pope’s campaign fundraising strategy is to play the Lotto and hope for the best.
@5…Chadt…
Why don’t you just buy some tickets, then mail them to him? Cut out the middleman?
The Piper
I don’t care for liberals much. I tend to vote democrat mostly.
@7
Uhhh yeah…we’re the dingbats…I guess if you consider anyone who believes ol’ Richard is a sorry excuse for a human being and TOTALLY unqualified for any public office (as his record suggests) then I am proud to be in the dingbat MAJORITY.
@4
Really? What astute political analysis. Jane is making Richard look good…read that again. Unbelievable.
@13
Interesting… Apparently Richard can’t look good on his own.
D’ya feel lucky, Pope? Well, do ya?
Ben Franklin and all of your multiple personalities @ 14,
“Apparently Richard can’t look good on his own.”
[*Snicker*]
That is rich irony from someone who feels the need to post under multiple names in the same thread.
@14
Apparently not. That says more about Jane than Dickie.
Darryl- before you start throwing accusations around, consider that there might be a few people who share an office who think in a similar fashion about this topic. I assume you are looking at the IP address… it IS possible to have more than one person with a computer out of an office. You seem to be more concerned about the messenger than the facts. Fool.
“Richard Pope’s campaign fundraising strategy is to play the Lotto and hope for the best.”
Piper, wouldn’t this expense show up on his PDC reports?
Hey Richard: Too bad about no endorsement from King County Dems–but kudos for having the chutzpah to ask. First time I ever saw a Dem with that deer in the headlights look.
Good luck.
Sockpuppet @9,
I never expected Richard to get the D’s endorsement, and in fact, I would have never advised the D’s to endorse him. Here’s what I previously wrote on that subject:
Personally, I pledged to endorse the winner of the Democratic primary, and that’s what I’ve done. But my endorsements are meaningless.
Ben Franklin@18: Darryl believes in blowing (sic) in the multiple names of we whom think right but NEVER does it to them who puke here leftist.
Darryl = Fool!
Ben Franklin, You made the correct call.
Goldy
Good point I regress. You, like Sheary, have good sense. I am worried about Daryl though or should I say his brother Daryl, or other brother Daryl for that matter. Richard asking for the Dem endorsement is a tragic example of his own incompetence. The man has been a dangerous nuisance to democrats for many years and his record needs to be pronounced. Pope is a hateful and vindictive man who has no shread of decency. Your joyous participation in his current episode is questionable as using evil for your cause or evil for any cause is still evil and you are ridin the horns!
ASSIE Voice@20; I can’t believe it. Your “endorsements are meaningless”? The truth finally comes from the Head of HorsesASS (ASSHead) 09/26/2007 at 1:29 pm and you started this Blog in May 2004?
But… but… but… your NorthWest Division of Lunatic Donk Moonbat!s react to your “brilliant” soliloquies every day!
Richard Pope, where do I contribute to your campaign?
@22
Just curious, Have you denounced that evil creature now occupying the White House?
@22
Richard is a dangerous nuisance? He’s lost like 372 different elections running as a Republican. Most Democrats would be thrilled to have nuisances like that.
If the Popemeister is an embarrassment to the D’s, big fat hairy deal. They’re at fault for deciding that Hague’s seat was ‘safe’ and otherwise not worth pursuing zealously. Everyone (even you trolls) say this with me:
There is no such thing as a ‘safe’ seat!
We’ve all felt our brains turn to mush when the Popemeister hits us upside the head with some pretty decent research on whatever topic he posits upon. A wonk like him is someone I think either party could use, and I doubt he’d be much of an ’embarrassment’ to the D’s if he managed to somehow defeat Hague, although a maverick like him might not toe the line as closely as some would want. Let’s face it, independent thought isn’t being encouraged all that strongly these days, by either party.
Ben Franklin and all of your multiple personalities @ 18,
“Darryl- before you start throwing accusations around, consider that there might be a few people who share an office who think in a similar fashion about this topic.”
Sure…I mean, your potential explanation doesn’t defy the laws of physics or anything. On the other hand…in a previous comment thread we find…
That’s a lot of people typing all those words just minutes apart.
If you really ARE separate individuals, for Christ’s sake, I hope you’re using condoms!
Ekim @ 24
“Richard Pope, where do I contribute to your campaign?”
That information is available on Pope’s web site.
Sophistcure (and Partners),
“The man has been a dangerous nuisance to democrats for many years and his record needs to be pronounced.”
He has certainly been a nuisance to Democrats AND Republicans who violate PDC rules! But the only people who would find him “dangerous” are those who don’t actually FOLLOW the rules.
Compare that to Jane Hague, who was arrested for drunk driving. Is there any real comparison here? Driving drunk REALLY IS Dangerous…as in killing and injuring people:
So…um…how many people die from complaints to PDC and state ethics boards each year?
“Pope is a hateful and vindictive man who has no shread of decency.”
You mean, as opposed to Jane Hague who lies about her academic credentials and blames other people for her own errors? That seems corrupt and just plain mean to me.
Talk about “hateful and vindictive,” how about acting rude and abusive to the police? (Said Hague, “I was angry at myself, I was angry at the situation and I took it out on them.”)
Sorry, Sophistcure, but nothing that Pope has done comes close to being as reckless, dishonest, mean-spirited, and untrustworthy as what we now know Jane Hague has done.
I may not be a Pope fan, but anyone not calling themselves a Republicon these days is probably a better legislator than anyone calling themselves a Republicon.
Republicons are a disease.
Democracy disease.
Go Richard.
@22: Your christian charity toward Pope is touching. However, consider David Brock–he turned it around. For a counterexample see David Horowitz. He is freely accepted in wingnuttiae circles these days, but maybe that says more about the wingnuttiae than the sincerety of Horowitz’s traitorous about face.
Dickie deserves a chance to show his newly acquired Democratic bona fides. It’s all up to him, now.
You go to Pope’s website and there’s nary an endorsement by anyone living or dead!
And among his cited letters to the editor there isn’t a single one that mentions his name, let alone endorses or even mentions him positively.
His campaign makes less sense than one by Lynden LaRouche…
The Piper
@22: “…….and his record needs to be pronounced.”
OK: rec’ORD
Did I pronnounce it correctly?
David, you’ve been negative about Hague. It’s time to get positive about Pope.
While you’ve endorsed Pope in the comments threads of some posts, you haven’t given him a big, splashy endorsement. When the time is right, you ought to do it. While I personally don’t take endorsements too seriously either, your endorsement may be influential with some fellow Dems and bloggers. As you identified, the downside risk is small.
What embarrassing antics are people worried about? Pope was reasonable on your radio show. Get behind him in a more positive way.
Piper @ 33:
“You go to Pope’s website and there’s nary an endorsement by anyone living or dead!”
After all the toes he has trod on, you expected to find something different?
“His campaign makes less sense than one by Lynden LaRouche…”
Perhaps. But Hague has disgraced her office, and Pope’s quixotic campaign makes more sense every time she opens her mouth. By the way it’s LyndOn, but we all make mistakes.
Darryl @ 28.
Well it might be hard to believe, but some of us work hard for our money and don’t have all day to sit on our ass and blog. When I read of this outpouring of support for Dickie P, I felt I had to comment. God forbid when my co-workers and I have a slow period in the day, I encourage them to comment as I know we are like minded. Still, the fact that you feel the need to attack my office as one individual and not the substance of our comments is telling. I can only conclude that you are as misguided as he, and therefore a pain in the ass as well.
@36…PTBAA…
I stand corrected…Lyndon…
Don Quixote was goofy too. Good choice of adjectives to describe Richard Pope…Dictionary definitions of Quixotic include, “impulsive and often rashly unpredictable,” “fanciful, fantastic, imaginary,” “Capricious; impulsive,” and “not sensible about practical matters.”
Hell…He can’t even get Sancho Panza to endorse him!
Just because you don’t like what Jane Hague has done or how she campaigns or find recent revelations about her to be disturbing is no reason to support an absolute empty suit like Richard Pope!
If you’re pissed because the Demo’s boffed it by not running some one, then take it up with them. Don’t uncritically support someone who’s track record suggests he’s a serious problem waiting to happen.
What? You want bigger problems than what you’re seeing now?
What this whole sorry episode cries out for is more discipline in political parties and more control by them over who is allowed to claim affiliation with them. On this issue, my old pal, Grumpy Dwight Pelz, and I are of one mind and accord.
Sometimes it’s best to just sit on your hands…
The Piper
@ 36,
If “we all make mistakes” then why all the vitriol aboout Hague? If you profess an arguement, then try to make it apply to all instances… I say ‘right on’ Piper – at least you have consistency and cogent arguements on your side. The fact that you compare Pope to LaRouche doesn’t exactly give you a whole lot of credibility either…
Ben Franklin (and Partners) @ 37
Substance? I provided some of that in comment #30, but let me recap:
This isn’t about Jane Hague “just making a mistake.” It is about a pattern of misleading, reckless, or contemptuous actions.
There is no question about it…she simply does not deserve to be reelected.
Piper Scott,
“Just because you don’t like what Jane Hague has done or how she campaigns or find recent revelations about her to be disturbing is no reason to support an absolute empty suit like Richard Pope!”
That just plain naive of you, Piper. It is going to be Jane Hague or Richard Pope in that office come January.
Jane Hague is highly damaged goods. She has run her course on the Council.
Pope is certainly a pain in the ass to PDC violators, but is that really a bad thing????
Richard has a BA in Economics and Political Science (SUNY-Albany) and a JD with with Highest Honors from UW, and elected to the Order of the Coif (c.f. Hague, who dropped out of college and lied about it.).
Richard also served in the Army Reserve for seven years, did active duty during the Persian Gulf War, and was awarded the Army Achievement Medal.
So…careful who you call an “empty suit” there, Squirt.
Richard Pope is mentally ill. He said so himself in court filings barely two years ago. In that same case he was removed by the judge for his gross imcompetence. His only contribution to politics is digging up nasty shit on other people and hurling at them. He is a weird obsessive man; so weird the King County Democrats overwhelmingly decided last night to NOT endorse him despite the steady srip, drip against Hague.
Every election is a choice bewtween two people — were Hague running against anyone other than Pope there would be a choice. Fortunately for her she isn’t.
“If you’re pissed because the Demo’s boffed it by not running some one, then take it up with them.”
Red herring, fishmonger. I am. I have.
“Don’t uncritically support someone who’s track record suggests he’s a serious problem waiting to happen.”
I don’t. He didn’t get my vote last night on his endorsement petition to the KCDC. Hague is a problem happening right now.
Horsesasshole @ 42,
“Richard Pope is mentally ill.”
No he’s not.
“He said so himself in court filings barely two years ago.”
No…he did not say he was mentally ill. (Here is the document.)
“In that same case he was removed by the judge for his gross imcompetence.”
No…he wasn’t. Neither has he ever been arrested for drunk driving.
“His only contribution to politics is digging up nasty shit on other people and hurling at them.”
Yeah…nasty shit like PDC violations and lying about college degrees!
“He is a weird obsessive man”
…but not a drunk driver!
“so weird the King County Democrats overwhelmingly decided last night to NOT endorse him despite the steady srip, drip against Hague.”
It’s hard to blame them…he has gone after Democratic PDC violators with the same relish he has gone after Republican PDC violators.
Darryl @ 40
How about we compare the two candidates where it matters most then – public office. I see one with a long career of service and delivering to her community, and another with a track record of not only losing – but being rated ‘unqualified’ for public office EVERYTIME. Causes one to wonder, doesn’t it???
Darryl (aka Richard), if you are so obsessed with the man, why don’t you ask him out for drinks??? Who knows, you may even get lucky with this kind of obsession for the man…
Yeay, Darryl’s back! I always love winning arguments, and no one makes it easier than you Darryl. “R” “I” “c” “H” “a” “R” “d” “p” “O” “p” “E” “s” “U” “c” “k” “s”. See how easy it is to quote someone else and pick apart their argument? Based on your statements, Darryl, I have to admit that I agree with you. I find your sense of philosophical discourse adventageous to my point, but after all this- what I really, really need to know is if you agree with my conclusion that all people with toothbrushes agree Richard Pope is crazy, or are you still unable to find your toothbrush?
Ben Franklin,
“Darryl if you are so obsessed with the man, why don’t you ask him out for drinks???”
Obsession? Because I’ve voted for him in a number of past elections? Hey dipshit…this is America…we’re allowed to support and vote for whoever we want!
And, in this case, I believe Richard is (demonstrably) the better person for the office (see comment 40).
But to answer the second part of your question: I seem to recall that Richard doesn’t drink. But, I’ve chatted with him at the Montlake Alehouse several times. What of it?
By the way…one of the things that REALLY PISSES ME OFF about Jane Hague is that she was arrested for drunk driving in MY CITY on a heavily used highway (yeah…even at 11 pm):
Clearly, her thoughtless drunk driving put my friends, neighbors, and me at risk.
Ben Franklin @ 45,
“How about we compare the two candidates where it matters most then – public office.”
Sure…why not.
Jane Hague: dropped out of college, and likely lied about having a BS in order to start her career in County Government as the Director of Elections in 1986.
From there, she worked for the Bellevue City Council, likely lying about her academic credentials in the process. In 1994, she ran for County Council, again lying about her academic credentials to secure the position.
Her most recent “credentials” arose after she generously attended a child’s charity, got drunk, pulled over, became abusive to the officers, lied about how much she had to drink, concealed the arrest from her constituents for six weeks, and then pled not guilty to the charges.
Richard Pope: Earned an BA degree in Economics and Political Science from SUNY-Albany, and a JD with with Highest Honors from UW, and was elected to the Order of the Coif.
Richard also served in the Army Reserve for seven years, did active duty during the Persian Gulf War, and was awarded the Army Achievement Medal.
He passed the Washington State bar exam in 1991 and has been a practicing attorney since then. Interestingly, Pope has a little bit of government experience—as a prosecutor in drunk driving cases.
He’s run for public office a bunch of times, but (so far) has only managed to serve as a Republican PCO. He now has a well deserved reputation as a political gadfly, in part because of his obsession with keeping elected officials—Democratic and Republican—honest.
Me? I’ll take the one who doesn’t lie and drive drunk…thanks.
Darryl,
“Richard Pope is mentally ill.”
No he’s not.
“He said so himself in court filings barely two years ago.”
No…he did not say he was mentally ill. (Here is the document.)
That document in fact says “My own mental health situation is terrible”. My health is terrible but I’m not ill? Please.
“In that same case he was removed by the judge for his gross imcompetence.”
No…he wasn’t.
Yes he was you fucking idiot, read the case you link to just a few months later. The judge kicked him off AND took the extraordinary step of referring him to the state bar for discipline where he is currently under investigation.
Yeah…nasty shit like PDC violations and lying about college degrees!
Actually nasty shit about Darcy Burner like posting the police report from a fender bender she was in and implying she endangered children…a foreshadowing of his current campaign.
And
“He is a weird obsessive man”
…but not a drunk driver!
“so weird the King County Democrats overwhelmingly decided last night to NOT endorse him despite the steady srip, drip against Hague.”
It’s hard to blame them…he has gone after Democratic PDC violators with the same relish he has gone after Republican PDC violators.
Actually he hasn’t, he just goes after people he runs against. He is a deranged loser and has nothing to offer the voters in any of his races except the vain hope that he can so smear his opponents people ignore what a complete, pathetic, lunatic failure he is.
I sense a lot of desperation in the critics of Richard Pope now. Pope’s critics are getting more serious and nasty.
Also, let’s use some rational criteria to evaluate the candidates. When Buffett evalutates potential CEOs, he looks for a lot of qualites. However, the three absolute, essential, necessary, must-have qualities are as follows: intelligence, integrity, and energy. These criteria can be applied to evaluating potential politicians.
On these three necessary qualities, Richard Pope wins without debate, doubt, or question.
@51
I wouldn’t call speaking the truth about Richard desperation… When it comes to intelligence, sure he seems to be decently intelligent, but as other commenters about Richard have stated- so was Ted Bundy. Let’s then take energy, when was the last time anyone saw Pope at ANY community event when he wasn’t stumping for his own losing campaign? And finally, there is integrity. I’ll take someone who has apologized for making a mistake and moving on versus someone who switches parties and has attacked a woman in the course of his professional duties. Seems to me the choice is rather clear.
horsesasshole,
“That document in fact says “My own mental health situation is terrible”. My health is terrible but I’m not ill? Please.”
No…mental illness is diagnosed by mental health practitioners, not lawyers, you moron. The document points that this took place shortly after he had provided terminal care to his father and his father had died. Ever lose a parent, asshole? It’s difficult.
“Yes he was you fucking idiot, read the case you link to just a few months later. The judge kicked him off AND took the extraordinary step of referring him to the state bar for discipline where he is currently under investigation.”
If you can provide an authoritative link, I’d be happy to re-evaluate and correct my contradiction of your claim. Until then, kindly go fuck yourself.
“Actually nasty shit about Darcy Burner like posting the police report from a fender bender she was in and implying she endangered children…a foreshadowing of his current campaign.”
That hardly rises to the level of being abusive to police, drunk driving and faking a college degree for decades.
“Actually he hasn’t, he just goes after people he runs against.”
You contradict yourself.
As you clearly (and correctly) point out yourself, he revealed some unpleasant (if public) information about Darcy Burner. Yet he has not run against her. Last year, he filed a complaint against Gregoire—he wasn’t running or planning to run against her (he did run against her many years ago, but that is entirely unrelated to his actions last year). I seem to recall he filed a complaint against Peltz once, and I am pretty sure he wasn’t running against him. He has filed complaints against the KC Republicans over their financial malfeasance even while he was still a Republican. Of course, he has also filed complaints against his opponents, as is his right, when they have violated PDC rules. Remind me again, why is it bad to file a complaint against anyone who has violated campaign finance laws???
Horsesasshole, you focus on relatively trifling issues with Pope. No question he is not perfect, and I’ve criticized him on this blog (front page and comment threads) plenty of time. But, Hague has committed a string of extremely serious breaches of the public trust. She no longer deserves the office she now occupies.
No doubt this comment will be dropped, as was the one I attempted to post earlier. Nonetheless I’m going to vent my feeling that this has to be the suckiest thread in the history of this or perhaps any other political blog.
ArtFart,
I’ve emptied the spam filter just now, and didn’t see any comment from you, and I certainly wouldn’t delete it any comment that was germane to the thread—even calling this thread sucky.
In fact, I’ve been having fun provoking these wingnuts into apoplexy.
Darryl,
I have to say, for someone with as impressive a resume as yourself, I am dumbfounded why you think so highly of Mr Pope. Although, maybe with your extensive knowledge regarding female menopause, you are just accustomed to fluctuating political views, temperamental stances on issues and Mr Pope’s irritable behavior towards women.
AZN INVAZION,
“I am dumbfounded why you think so highly of Mr Pope.”
My comments are less about “thinking so highly of Mr. Pope” and more about being fed up with Jane Hague.
Richard has certainly pissed me off on occasion, but more often I find he is bright and capable of being objective when evaluating real evidence.
The fundamental issue here is Hague. As an academic, I am completely disgusted by a person who has faked a college degree and used that to get ahead in life.
Furthermore, I recognize that, objectively, drunk drivers are a MUCH GREATER mortality and morbidity risk to Americans than terrorists. Drunk drivers cause the equivalent loss of life of a 9-11 every four months. Hague engaged in a reckless behavior, hid it from her constituents, and has not taken responsibility for her actions.
The PDC “issues” and other problems are less important to me, except in the pattern they establish for Hague. Finally, some of her political positions simply piss me off.
In sum…I’d rather have Pope in that seat than Hague. It’s very simple, really.