If Only ProtectMarriage.com Enlisted the Help of George Alan Rekers
By
I would have enjoyed cross-examining him. Let me put it that way. I don’t think we’re going to see him again.
—David Boies, one half of the Olson-Boies team in Perry, on the prospect of john George Alan Rekers being a defense witness [via]
Don't forget to share:
Help make sure LGBTQ+ stories are being told...
We can't rely on mainstream media to tell our stories. That's why we don't lock Queerty articles behind a paywall. Will you support our mission with a contribution today?
Excellent bitchslap on Florida AG Bill McCollum……….
Boies is pointing out what should McCollum should have learned his first day of law school, you must thouroughly vet any witnesses you are going to put on the stand. Not pander to biased groups attempting to push their agenda in a court of law……
Well, I don’t think anybody doubted that Protect Marriage were out-lawyered – how could they not be with that dream team against them? Whether this will make any difference when it gets to scotus remains to be seen…
No. 1 · PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS wrote, “Excellent bitchslap on Florida AG Bill McCollum………. Boies is pointing out what should McCollum should have learned his first day of law school, you must thouroughly vet any witnesses you are going to put on the stand. Not pander to biased groups attempting to push their agenda in a court of law……”
You are forgetting that McCollum probably knew he was going to run for governor. One advantage of filing his lawsuit (even using Rekers) is that it’s a cheap way of getting support from the religious right wing. The usual Republican strategy is to “run to the right” during primaries and then “run to the left” afterwards. Filing that case means he didn’t have to run to the right as hard as he can quietly point to that case and indicate that he has to focus on other issues to get elected. Losing the lawsuit doesn’t matter – he can simply blame the proverbial “activist judge” and point out that he’ll make more conservative appointments to the courts than his opponent will.
@B: To gain favor with the lunatics? Filing the lawsuit: Yes Hiring Reekers: Absolutly No…………Reekers was paid between $60,000
00 and $120,000.00 for his “testimony”. Going to be an issue he is going to have to deal with, it definatley backfired on him….
No. 4 · PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS wrote, “@B: To gain favor with the lunatics? Filing the lawsuit: Yes Hiring Reekers: Absolutly No…………Reekers was paid between $60,000 and $120,000.00 for his ‘testimony’.”
Check out http://wthrockmorton.com/2010/06/05/mccollum-overruled-assistant-to-hire-rekers-as-expert/ (the author is not particularly gay-friendly but still is pretty negative towards McCollum). McCollen apparently suggested Rekers, but they had about 30 other people they wanted to use as expert witnesses and all declined (including the author of the URL I cited above) so Rekers was their only choice.
It occurred before Rekers’ rentboy scandal (i.e., before most voters had ever heard of Rekers). Probably what actually happened is that McCollen figured they needed a witness and was willing to pay for it, even if the price was high, so he made a snap decision to go with what they could get. He probably figured the average person wouldn’t notice and the lunatics would think he was doing a good job, which would plausibly have been true if Rekers hadn’t become fodder for people like Stephen Colbert (whose wisecracks about Rekers were hilarious). It is also possible that McCollum just thought he had to support a state agency in a lawsuit (that seems to be his spin on it, for whatever that is worth).
My guess is that the Rekers scandal will be “old news” well before the election. BTW, if you look at the “issues” part of McCullen’s campaign web site ( http://www.billmccollum.com/issues/ ) it says nothing about opposing gay rights. He did try to distance himself from Rekers and said he wouldn’t hire Rekers if he knew then what he knows about Rekers today ( http://www.towleroad.com/2010/05/florida-ag-bill-mccollum-distances-himself-from-rekers-wreck.html ) which will probably take the wind out of the sails for any attempt by his opponent to tie McCollum to Rekers (McCollum also emphasized that a different state agency actually paid Rekers).
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS
Excellent bitchslap on Florida AG Bill McCollum……….
Boies is pointing out what should McCollum should have learned his first day of law school, you must thouroughly vet any witnesses you are going to put on the stand. Not pander to biased groups attempting to push their agenda in a court of law……
slobone
Well, I don’t think anybody doubted that Protect Marriage were out-lawyered – how could they not be with that dream team against them? Whether this will make any difference when it gets to scotus remains to be seen…
B
No. 1 · PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS wrote, “Excellent bitchslap on Florida AG Bill McCollum………. Boies is pointing out what should McCollum should have learned his first day of law school, you must thouroughly vet any witnesses you are going to put on the stand. Not pander to biased groups attempting to push their agenda in a court of law……”
You are forgetting that McCollum probably knew he was going to run for governor. One advantage of filing his lawsuit (even using Rekers) is that it’s a cheap way of getting support from the religious right wing. The usual Republican strategy is to “run to the right” during primaries and then “run to the left” afterwards. Filing that case means he didn’t have to run to the right as hard as he can quietly point to that case and indicate that he has to focus on other issues to get elected. Losing the lawsuit doesn’t matter – he can simply blame the proverbial “activist judge” and point out that he’ll make more conservative appointments to the courts than his opponent will.
PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS
@B: To gain favor with the lunatics? Filing the lawsuit: Yes Hiring Reekers: Absolutly No…………Reekers was paid between $60,000
00 and $120,000.00 for his “testimony”. Going to be an issue he is going to have to deal with, it definatley backfired on him….
B
No. 4 · PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS wrote, “@B: To gain favor with the lunatics? Filing the lawsuit: Yes Hiring Reekers: Absolutly No…………Reekers was paid between $60,000 and $120,000.00 for his ‘testimony’.”
Check out http://wthrockmorton.com/2010/06/05/mccollum-overruled-assistant-to-hire-rekers-as-expert/ (the author is not particularly gay-friendly but still is pretty negative towards McCollum). McCollen apparently suggested Rekers, but they had about 30 other people they wanted to use as expert witnesses and all declined (including the author of the URL I cited above) so Rekers was their only choice.
It occurred before Rekers’ rentboy scandal (i.e., before most voters had ever heard of Rekers). Probably what actually happened is that McCollen figured they needed a witness and was willing to pay for it, even if the price was high, so he made a snap decision to go with what they could get. He probably figured the average person wouldn’t notice and the lunatics would think he was doing a good job, which would plausibly have been true if Rekers hadn’t become fodder for people like Stephen Colbert (whose wisecracks about Rekers were hilarious). It is also possible that McCollum just thought he had to support a state agency in a lawsuit (that seems to be his spin on it, for whatever that is worth).
My guess is that the Rekers scandal will be “old news” well before the election. BTW, if you look at the “issues” part of McCullen’s campaign web site ( http://www.billmccollum.com/issues/ ) it says nothing about opposing gay rights. He did try to distance himself from Rekers and said he wouldn’t hire Rekers if he knew then what he knows about Rekers today ( http://www.towleroad.com/2010/05/florida-ag-bill-mccollum-distances-himself-from-rekers-wreck.html ) which will probably take the wind out of the sails for any attempt by his opponent to tie McCollum to Rekers (McCollum also emphasized that a different state agency actually paid Rekers).