Legend has it that in 1787, the Russian leader Grigory Potemkin erected elaborate fake settlements populated by joyful peasants along Empress Catherine the Great’s route through newly conquered Crimea. 

His objective was to conceal reality behind an illusion of prosperity. Hence the term “Potemkin village.” 

This month, Colorado has a Potemkin primary, littered with candidates whose reality belies their carefully crafted personas. 

There’s no clearer example than CU Regent Wanda James, who’s cultivated a reputation for pioneering legalized pot while touting the “nation’s first Black-owned cannabis dispensary” she “built” with her husband, Scott Durrah. 

Now, she’s one of two Democrats challenging U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette in Colorado’s 1st Congressional District — running as CEO of a company she shut down as she campaigned. 

As I reported on Friday, Simply Pure Colorado LLC no longer exists. James dissolved the company on April 21. The storefront is “permanently closed,” as Google Maps attests. Yet its website appears operational, and her LinkedIn still says CEO. She told regulators she was closing, but she didn’t tell the public. 

Simply Pure Colorado drew one of the first $150,000 loans from the state’s Cannabis Business Loan Program, which James helped create. Not three years later, the company was gone — and state officials couldn’t tell me whether the loan was repaid. 

In 2016, outside investors contributed $436,000; the landlord invested $100,000 plus a year of free rent. James and Durrah’s controlling 56% stake rested on “Branding, Management, and Day to Day Operations.” Yet the company never owned the brand. James did, and she personally licensed it to a New Jersey operator. 

The Simply Pure brand and any licensing revenue belong to James. Branding was always her real business. 

Since 2005, James and Durrah have filed roughly 30 companies. Most became delinquent or dissolved; only one of their six restaurants remains. 

“It is entity after entity. It is delinquency after delinquency,” said Chris Chiari, an original Simply Pure investor who secured a $202,000 judgment against the company. “There is a hat. There ain’t no cowboy.” 

James isn’t the only candidate whose story doesn’t hold up. Secretary of State Jena Griswold, one of four Democrats vying for attorney general, sells herself as a “resistance” folk hero against Trump — even claiming she “argued at the Supreme Court.” 

She didn’t, and legal experts blasted her claim as a misrepresentation. 

The Gazette’s Eric Sondermann put it best: “Truth-in-advertising dictates that Griswold’s campaign slogan should be, ‘No experience needed.’” If elected, he wrote, she “would be the least experienced, least qualified person in the entire office.” Including a junior attorney. 

Griswold has never tried a case or submitted a brief. She represented just one client in court more than 14 years ago and isn’t registered in federal court. 

The job runs Colorado’s top legal shop — some 270 attorneys, major litigation and the state’s most consequential cases. But she can’t hold a team together. 

From 1999 to 2019, Colorado had only two deputy secretaries of state. Griswold has burned through four, including one who left after 13 months with a confidential settlement. She’s churned through at least five chiefs of staff, three legislative liaisons and three communications directors — and paid $120,000 to settle a Hispanic career employee’s discrimination claim. 

CBS Colorado found dozens of Democrats — attorneys, judges, people who’ve worked with Griswold — who agreed she isn’t equipped to be AG. “But none of them agreed to be interviewed out of fear of retaliation,” CBS reported. 

Pitching a dubious image is a bipartisan pastime, though. Look no further than Republican gubernatorial frontrunner Victor Marx. 

Marx echoes Dan Maes, whose inflated credentials won him the 2010 GOP nomination before his campaign collapsed in the general election with only 11% of the vote. A recent 9News interview raised serious questions about Marx’s past. His campaign finances raise more. 

Marx has raised $2.67 million, far more than his Republican rivals. It’s an impressive number, but he’s already spent 86 cents on every dollar raised — including over $725,000 on one direct-mail firm and about $173,000 on a digital fundraising firm. Overall, more than 40% of his spending has gone into raising more. 

Against the Democrats, Marx’s mirage vanishes. He had $377,971 in cash on hand on June 1 — far behind Phil Weiser’s $1.2 million. Michael Bennet’s comparable $388,373 comes with millions in “soft money” support. 

Marx’s fundraising itself doesn’t withstand inspection. In early May, I reported over 50 donations exceeded the legal limit. A campaign finance complaint recently found 96. I’ve identified 114 donors who exceeded state limits by nearly $75,000. One gave $1,000 five separate times. 

Spokesman Roger Hudson told me the campaign would refund every over-limit contribution, per state law. Two reports later, besides one refunded corporate donation, there’s no evidence of any being returned. 

That includes three donations from “Isaiah Foundation,” which I flagged to the campaign over six weeks ago. Those entries used the home address of the president of the Castle Rock-based Isaiah 58:12 Foundation, a 501(c)(3) organization barred from political giving. The campaign called it “likely a disclosure error.” No correction or refund has been issued. 

Victor Marx’s war chest, like Wanda James’ business empire and Jena Griswold’s résumé, collapses under scrutiny. Are these illusions manufactured to conceal inconvenient truths — self-portraits painted with nothing behind them? 

Perhaps. After all, the Potemkin primary is afoot. And it won’t serve Coloradans well, regardless of party. 

Jimmy Sengenberger is an investigative journalist, public speaker, and longtime local talk-radio host. Reach Jimmy online at Jimmysengenberger.com or on X (formerly Twitter) @SengCenter.