Court upholds most Siegelman charges.
Court upholds most Siegelman charges.
Today, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta upheld five of the seven charges against former Democratic Alabama governor Don Siegelman, who was the victim of political prosecution by Karl Rove. From Siegelman’s statement in reaction to the verdict:
The three judge panel of the 11th Circuit has ruled. I am disappointed. The fight will continue. My family and I are deeply appreciative of the outpouring of support and prayers. Your words and actions keep our spirits lifted and our resolve strong. We will get through this and we will win.
Siegelman went to prison after his sentencing in June 2007, but was freed last year on appeal bond. He currently faces a seven-year term, which may be reversed since the 11th Circuit ordered a new sentencing hearing.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
.
The Rule of Law and Justice be damned…
… Isn’t this how the Fascists Ride?
.
March 6th, 2009 at 3:07 pmI didn’t think there were any Democrats in Alabama. Seriously though, It seem his only crime is being a Democrat.
March 6th, 2009 at 3:17 pmWho are these judges, and what is their relationship with the instigators & prosecutors of Siegelman? Were they appointed or elected? Are they Republicans? Do they know Rove & his cadre of crooks? The whole thing looks contrived.
March 6th, 2009 at 3:20 pmIf there ever was a case this is it.
March 6th, 2009 at 3:22 pmWhen does it end?
Wonder how much Rove paid off these justices
March 6th, 2009 at 3:23 pmWhat’s worth noting is Siegelman’s “partner in conviction”, Richard Scrushy of HealthSouth, a for-profit health care company.
http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2008/12/former_governor_don_siegelman.html
TP reminded us of Richard Scott of Colombia/HCA. Scrushy was just as sleazy. HealthSouth also got fined by the feds for fraud.
http://www.mywire.com/a/USATODAY/HealthSouth-agrees-to-100M-fine/886675
Keep this in mind as private equity Nancy-Ann DeParle leads health care reform. She served on numerous for-profit healthcare boards since 2001.
March 6th, 2009 at 3:25 pmHe currently faces a seven-year term, which may be reversed since the 11th Circuit ordered a new sentencing hearing.
Sentencing- time already served.
Justice however NOT yet served, but Siegelman stays when he belongs, out.
March 6th, 2009 at 3:34 pm>Couldn’t have been all the evidence against him………….
What evidence is that exactly? That someone who had given money got apointed to something? right? or is there anything else we missed?
March 6th, 2009 at 3:48 pmThe Sigelman case never was going to be the thing to hang Rove. Just because there was massive interference on behalf of Rove in the judicial proceedings…doesn’t mean that Don Siegelman wasn’t crooked as hell.
Rove will burn…just not for this
March 6th, 2009 at 4:18 pm13 is what you get troll-wise on this site? Nada de nada.
March 6th, 2009 at 4:20 pm>A motorcycle and a half million dollars?
whate entity did that half million dollars go to troll?
yeah, money given to lottery fund, not the governor, by a guy who gets appointed to some state board, who had been on that same board under 3 previous adiministrations
you’ve got ONE guy alegeding an illegal quid pro quo..
once again, seigelman himself, nor his campaign, got a single dollar from the transaction. thats undisputed. like i said, anything else troll?
any idea why Rove refuses to discuss this case, genius?
March 6th, 2009 at 4:36 pm>So, he was convicted on hearsay?
From the court documents looks like his was convicted based on the testimony of one person.
> You went to which law school?
Texas WEsleyan, Summa Cum LAude ‘08 biatch
March 6th, 2009 at 4:42 pmWhich law school did you go to troll? And who was it again that got that half million dollars?
March 6th, 2009 at 4:43 pm“which was deposited into Siegelman’s bank
account that same day.”
so the state lottery fund didnt get the money, like it reads in the indictment troll? siegelman kept it?
March 6th, 2009 at 4:45 pmThis is most distressing..
March 6th, 2009 at 4:45 pmhttp://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200713163.pdf
Bailey testified that lobbyist Hanson “made it clear to him that if Mr.
March 6th, 2009 at 4:47 pmScrushy gave the $500,000 to the lottery campaign that we could not let him
down”
“The IHS “donation” was in the form of a check dated July 19, 1999, made
March 6th, 2009 at 4:48 pmpayable from itself to the Foundation.”
” At
March 6th, 2009 at 4:51 pmthat meeting, Scrushy gave Siegelman a check issued by HealthSouth for $250,000
payable to the Foundation. 8 On May 23, 2000, the $250,000 check was applied
directly against the Foundation’s loan balance.”
Chocolate Jesus, Ar Ar Binks does not speak or understand English very well. Try Gungan, if you know it.
March 6th, 2009 at 4:52 pmPLC – you are really on a roll! Love the Gungan!
March 6th, 2009 at 4:57 pmYes, Siegelman was convicted based on hearsay, second-hand hearsay at that. The prosecution’s star witness was Nick Bailey, a former Siegelman aide with a criminal record who testified against Siegelman in exchange for leniency from the feds.
The prosecution claims that there was an explicit quid pro quo: You give the lottery fund half a million dollars, and I’ll give you that coveted unpaid seat on the Certificate of Need Board that you already have and no longer want. Deal?
In order to convict a politician of bribery, you need that explicit quid pro quo–otherwise anyone who ever gave a campaign contribution would be cruising for a federal bribery conviction.
Trouble was, nobody else was at the key meeting between Scrushy and Siegelman. Nick Bailey claimed (in some versions of his story) that Siegelman emerged from the meeting and said something about how Scrushy wanted a seat on the CON board. Even if you believe the final version of Bailey’s story, there was no quid pro quo.
March 6th, 2009 at 5:50 pmThanks, Archie.
March 6th, 2009 at 10:40 pmWell golly, since have been in session all day, didn’t have the time to do the refutation of all you “good citizens.”
Wash you all out with the tide later, & really not that much later. TTFN.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:35 amYou all forget that this was the THIRD attempt to politically destroy Seigelman. Very similar to what was done to Clinton by Karl Starr…repeatedly attempts, relentless.
March 7th, 2009 at 9:29 amSeigelman did nothing unusual for politicians, and nothing immoral. BushCo. has profited immensely from his own actions in office but walska free and very rich man. Seigelman was however an extrememly popular Democrat in Alabama. As a Southern Democratic governor he was a threat to the GOP controlled presidency. As was Gray Davis.
#36- You said all that needs to be said in rebuttal, & wonderfully well. Blew all of Archie B. & Co’s blather away in one graph.
I won’t add a thing except kudos, kassandrasduplex.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:16 amThe $500,000 didn’t go into Siegelman’s pocket. The governor was the personal guarantor of a loan from the Alabama Democratic Party to the Alabama Education Lottery Foundation. In theory, he would have been responsible for paying the Alabama Democrats back if the foundation had been unable to repay the loan. No one has suggested that the foundation was in danger of defaulting, with or without the Scrushy money.
The AELF wasn’t just some front, it was the driving force behind a hard-fought, though ultimately unsuccessful, campaign for a state lottery to benefit the public schools.
Scrushy’s main objective in giving the donation was to make peace with Siegelman after backing his Republican opponent in the previous election. (Scrushy was a big time Republican donor.) Ironically, that’s perfectly legal. Siegelman’s people told Scrushy that the governor wanted so many hundred thousand dollars to “make things right” between him and Scrushy.
The donation was clearly a peace offering. The prosecution’s claim Scrushy gave all that money in order to buy a seat on the Certificate of Need Board is just bizarre.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:27 pmSorry, I misspoke. The loan in question was from a bank, not the Alabama Dems. The Lottery Foundation took out the loan to help repay the Alabama Democrats for GOTV expenses incurred during the lotto campaign. Siegelman was the guarantor.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:36 pmYou mean much in the same way that massive donations to Bill Clinton’s pet project also don’t land in his own pocket and therefor generate no influence.
March 7th, 2009 at 4:22 pmYeah, good one. Now tell us the one about the Priest and the Rabbi walking into the bar.
Peace!
March 7th, 2009 at 8:05 pmsikis
porno izle
porno videolar
porn videos
peace!
April 19th, 2009 at 12:38 pm