Comment by good_golly — February 21, 2008 @ 11:28 am

sigh… gg, if you had any knowledge of the jury system you’d know that it isn’t infallible. example:

http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/comments.php?id=16261_0_27_0_C

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=4311309&page=1

poor gg flunked h.s. civics. and it shows.

Why should it bother? It has the RNC talking points and the don’t pay it if it goes off message.

1. Prosecutors have great discretion in the cases that they bring. Now, contrary to GiGi’s assertion, the alleged bribe actually involved a contribution of money to an initiative campaign and not to Siegleman’s campaign. Thus there was no direct benefit to Siegleman. Second, the individual involved had already been appointed to consecutive terms on the board by several previous govenors. Even granting (and the evidence seems pretty tenous on this point) that there was an intent to curry favor with the then governor, it does not seem to be evidence of a real heavy duty crime. Certainly it pales in comparison to the kinds of campaign contributions that we have seen to Republicans in recent year whose companies then receive large contracts or personnel appointed to overseeing their industries. The fact that previous corruption charges were dismissed (coincidentally around another campaign time) and that 90% of the charges made in this case were dismissed prior to trial would show an abuse of prosecutorial discretion. The fact that the defendant was acquitted of the majority of counts making it to trial also tells a story. Hey, a prosecutor will bend heaven and earth to get a major organized crime figure or drug king pin. This really seems to be piling on.

2. The jury only does part of the job. The judge becomes a major figure both in determining the evidence admitted, the instructions given the jurors and the sentence imposed. Conflicts of interest are simply not countenance. These gentlemen had been bitter, political opponents. The very appearance of prejudice demanded recusal. There were other judges that could have presided over the case without the accompanying stench. The judge’s sentencing (another former govenor had been given probation in a case where the defendant had received a direct benefit) and failure to grant bail pending appeal or even time to put his affairs together prior to surrendering to custody belie a vindictiveness. The judge’s subsequent foot dragging in providing reasons for denying bail (despite two appellate court orders) or having the transcript prepared for appeal just stinks to high heaven.

3. The other political machinations, the statement of Rove’s involvement by a Republican political operative, the close relationhip of the US Attorney (spouse of a top Republican campaign operative in the election campaign against Sigleman), the timing of the charges all connote impropriety.

No good_golly, a jury is but a small part of the judicial process. I do not need indict the jury. They may well have done their duty. However, we can all indict the Republican party and their filthy form of politics. The record is replete with the bad faith, if not outright illegality, of actions taken by Republican US Attorneys in response to political pressure by the White House.

Obama is from Chicago- he will indeed be fighting the Republican mafia. Take some advice from the movie, the Untouchables:

You said you wanted to get Capone. Do you really wanna get him? You see what I’m saying is, what are you prepared to do?
Ness: Anything within the law.
Malone: And *then* what are you prepared to do? If you open the can on these worms you must be prepared to go all the way. Because they’re not gonna give up the fight, until one of you is dead.
Ness: I want to get Capone! I don’t know how to do it.
Malone: You wanna know how to get Capone? They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. *That’s* the *Chicago* way! And that’s how you get Capone. Now do you want to do that? Are you ready to do that? I’m offering you a deal. Do you want this deal?
Ness: I have sworn to capture this man with all legal powers at my disposal and I will do so.
Malone: Well, the Lord hates a coward.
[jabs Ness with his hand, and Ness shakes it]
Malone: Do you know what a blood oath is, Mr. Ness?
Ness: Yes.
Malone: Good, ’cause you just took one.

There really wasn’t much tv coverage of the Justice Department scandal, itself. This case was just one example of how Bush’s justus department was used for political purposes, against political enemies. Too little too late, to help reinstate “60 Minutes’” credentials for investigative reportage.

GOT DAM TARORISTS!!!

Comment by hellinabucket — February 21, 2008 @ 12:46 pm

It’s like a supernatural version of that deck of cards the Bushies released after the invasion of Iraq, with all the pictures of Tarorists.

Comment by RUCerious — February 21, 2008 @ 12:21 pm

he was hand picked and has been pushed up the political chain. these criminals are patient and he has been trying to make a statement in american politics for a long time. it is because of the lack of concern of the americans that allowed this to happen. this is so higher than karl rove. he does not have that much power…….it’s the zionist who own our political system and have the money which is power to appoint ‘one of their own’ to achieve their goal…NWO. that is why the slogan zionist owned, nazi ran, fascist america works so well.

Comment by Fred — February 21, 2008 @ 12:03 pm

that’s because, while the rest of us are playing straight poker, Gigi is trying to claim she has a full house with a fistful of Taror cards.

GG, please expound on how this doesn’t show what a complete partisan hack without any consistency you are.

Comment by good_golly — February 21, 2008 @ 11:41 am

and yet he’s not in prison where he belongs. Doesn’t say much for your party’s respect for the law, except that it doesn’t have any.

You mean the system that’s not good enough for the suspected terrorists we have incarcerated in GITMO? THAT jury system?