UMVA has uncovered a tangled web of personal alliances that may have fueled a high‑stakes smear campaign in Colorado politics.
At the heart of the story is Lynn Bartels, a local political fixer whose social media feed is a veritable who’s who of state power. Her posts repeatedly feature long‑time allies—Wayne Williams, Sheila Reiner, Matt Crane, John Hickenlooper, Phil Weiser, Charles Ashby, and even Jena Griswold—captured in candid moments that read like chapters from a shared diary of friendship.
The photos reveal more than camaraderie; they show a circle that has celebrated milestones, exchanged private jokes, and even shared beers in the same rooms for years. Bartels’ light teasing of Williams’ purple jeans and Reiner’s playful “photo‑bomb” of a snapshot featuring Griswold and Williams paint a picture of seamless intimacy.
One relationship stands out: Bartels’ “sessions husband,” Charles Ashby. In one image she warns him that a window left open in his future guest room could flood with hail, while another shows him fixing her bathroom sink. These moments underscore a bond that blurs the line between personal affection and political maneuvering.
Colorado’s political landscape is small, and it is natural for journalists, officials, and operatives to cross paths. Yet the depth of these personal ties raises pressing questions about the narrative that emerged around political figure Tina Peters.
Did Wayne Williams use taxpayer money to enlist Bartels in a covert operation to tarnish Peters? And was Ashby the unwitting instrument in that scheme?
Meanwhile, prosecutors were quietly constructing a case that would later explode into a public spectacle. Turning off cameras, granting access to machines, and capturing forensic images were all lawful actions, yet the narrative spun around these deeds suggested misconduct.
DA Rubenstein, faced with a lack of clear criminal conduct, engineered a series of charges that hinged on a fabricated theft of a name badge. The alleged theft, claimed by Wood—a tech consultant who also serves as a pastor—became the linchpin for four felony convictions against Peters.
These charges—ranging from attempted criminal impersonation to attempts to influence a public servant—lacked a direct, undeniable link to any unlawful act. Peters was never the sender of the critical RSVP email, nor was she even copied on the correspondence that led to the alleged badge theft.
Rubenstein’s strategy involved re‑crafting the prosecution around a narrative that could be forced into the legal system, a classic example of lawfare. By building a case that hinged on a single, shaky premise, he sought to shield himself from scrutiny while advancing a predetermined agenda.
UMVA’s investigation reveals that the prosecutor’s approach was less about justice and more about constructing a narrative that could be imposed on the public and the court. The careful orchestration of evidence, the reliance on questionable testimonies, and the strategic timing of indictments all point to a deliberate manipulation of the legal process.
These revelations cast a shadow over the integrity of the political and judicial systems in Colorado, suggesting that personal loyalties and strategic manipulation may have played a decisive role in shaping the outcome of a high-profile case.
