Posted on 04/07/2009 9:02:13 AM PDT by VRWCTexan
WASHINGTON – A judge has dismissed charges against former Sen. Ted Stevens because of prosecutorial misconduct and has ordered a criminal contempt investigation of the prosecutors.
"In nearly 25 years on the bench, I've never seen anything approaching the mishandling and misconduct that I've seen in this case," U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said in the opening moments of a hearing.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
When Ray Donovan, Secretary of Labor under President Reagan, was acquitted of highly publicized corruption charges in 1987 he asked, plaintively: “Where do I go to get my reputation back?”
Where Do I Go To Get My Reputation Back?”
That was the question asked by Ray Donovan, Reagan’s Labor Secretary, after he was found not guilty of corruption charges
Were they? Or were they clinton left-overs?
In many respects, the DOJ is very much like the DOS. It’s populated with career bureaucrats that frequently have a left-wing bent. Sure, there was a Bush political appointee (as US Attorney) that was in charge of the district office, but it was “career” prosecutors that managed the case and are now facing scrutiny.
Assuming for a minute that Bush’s appointed US Attorney for that district (USA) became of aware of the states problems, what were they to do - in a practical sense. Remember, this trial was held during a contentious and politically charged time. If Bush’s USA would have dropped the charges, the DEMS would have screamed bloody murder and the press would have had a field day.
Having said that, there isn’t any allegation the US attorney was aware of the misconduct of the assigned prosecutors and FBI agents handling the case.
So, to use a phrase like “this was a Bush Administration” prosecution, is terribly misleading - IMHO.
http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/facinfo/tab_faculty.cfm?Status=Faculty&ID=1997
Brenda Morris - Lead
B.S., University of Southern California; J.D., Howard University. Brenda Morris joined the Public Integrity Section, Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice in September 1991.
After working for twelve years as a Trial Attorney with the Public Integrity Section, she was promoted in March 2004 to Deputy Chief for Litigation. In August 2006, Professor Morris was promoted to the position of Principal Deputy Chief.
Promoted to or appointed to? They're still not political appointments, even if hand-selected by Gonzalez himself (if they were or were not, I have no idea). Anyone who's promoted in any agency of government is technically promoted by the Secretary for that agency.
Judge Sullivan’s initial appointment to the D.C. Superior Court by Reagan doesn’t mean anything politically. We’d like to think judicial appointments are apolitical but they usually aren’t. What is?
In the case of the DC Superior Court, the local bar proposes to the current Administration its nominees from which the POTUS selects. So, much of the politicking that goes on is within the local bar, then the Administration chooses which of the nominees gets the appointment. It is thru this process that the DC court ends up with either truly good judges or the incompetent partner a firm is trying to get rid of .. there is little in between.
I know several attorneys of different political persuasions who’ve appeared before Sullivan both in the DC Superior Court and at the US District Court for DC, and he really is well regarded.
Do I need the tag..?
Promoted to or appointed to? They’re still not political appointments, even if hand-selected by Gonzalez himself (if they were or were not, I have no idea). Anyone who’s promoted in any agency of government is technically promoted by the Secretary for that agency.
Stevens goes free, but he doesn’t deserve it. Of course, his dishonesty is no greater than the average senator...
Not necessarily, many Clinton holdovers in GW's Justice Department. Though I don’t know for a fact the affiliation of the nutballs involved in this.
You have nothing to fear from this man. McCain comment on Obama.
You probably don't indict a sitting US Senator with the approval of the AG, unless of course you're a special prosecutor. I'm not familiar with how PIS works, but let's stipulate it works just the way you describe.
There's a HUGE difference between the approval of pursuing an indictment and the prosecutors engaging in prosecutorial misconduct. Also, there's no allegation that Gonzales (or anyone else for that matter in the Bush Administration) knew of the misconduct before, during or after the trial. It seems to me that you (and most of the MSM) is trying to give these prosecutors the benefit of the doubt that this wasn't politically motivated because the prosecution occurred during Bush's and Gonzalez' tenure.
I believe nothing could be further from the truth. It is plausible, perhaps even likely, that these prosecutors acted unethically and even criminally precisely because if their political leanings, despite who their bosses may or may not have been.
And the really sad part is that more Military, and Border Guards, were prosecuted during the Bush years than Democrats.
Why is the concept of PROFESSIONAL CAREER PROSECUTORS so difficult to understand?
Thus far the following Alaska businessmen and politicians have been indicted and convicted or plead guilty in the corruption probe that Stevens was caught up in: Bill Allen, Rick Smith, Bill Bobrick (serving 5 months in prison), Tom Anderson (serving 60 months), Pete Kott (serving 72 months), Vic Kohring (serving 3 1/2 years), Jim Clark, Bruce Weyhrauch, John Cowdery (6 months house arrest), Bill Weimar (6 months), Beverly Maskek (plead guilty).
If you have ANY confidence, then you have a lot more than I do. I have seen this Rodeo too many times.
Not in this case. Nelson Cohen was appointed to the Alaska position in 2006.
It's like al-Qaeda: They don't need specific orders to do their dirty work, all they know is thay need to make war on Republicans and subvert the Constitution. Probably there is no trackback.
You'll notice that there are no Democrats disturbed about this. That's because there are no Democrats who actually care about the integrity of the electoral process.
I challenge you to back up either statement with specifics and links to such evidence (and don't give me a press release from Johnny Sutton -- he is worse than the prosecutors involved in Stevens case, IMO). The Border agents lied to no one and didn't falsify a single document.
The same goes for you (#99)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.