Posted on 07/29/2002 7:23:19 AM PDT by PJ-Comix
In his last gasp for freedom, James Traficant looked at jurors in his corruption case and promised that he could take what they doled out.
"If you find me guilty, you come out and just say it," Traficant roared. "I'll accept it like a man."
Federal prosecutors say Traficant has accepted nothing about the jury's verdict in April and has failed to show any remorse. Instead, they say in pleadings filed Friday, he has accused investigators, attorneys and a judge of corruptly conspiring to bring him down.
Because of those actions, and for tarnishing the image of Congress, Traficant now deserves the harshest sentence possible, they say.
Tomorrow, U.S. District Judge Lesley Wells will decide Traficant's prison term, one that attorneys have argued over for weeks. The former 18-year member of Congress faces 87 months in prison after being convicted of 10 felony charges, according to federal guidelines.
But Wells has the discretion to add to or subtract from that.
The judge is expected to listen to some character witnesses who will describe Traficant's 22 years of public service to the Mahoning Valley, including four years as sheriff before he was elected to the U.S. House. Sentencing hearings typically last less than an hour, but the testimony and legal arguments slated for this one could stretch it out over a full day or more, some court officials predict.
Prosecutors say Traficant deserves a much greater sentence than the 87 months because his crimes were so egregious: He shook down contractors who did hundreds of thousands of dollars of free work at his farm and boat in exchange for political favors. They also say his outlandish behavior after the verdict warrants a steep sentence.
Traficant's attorney says his client deserves a much lighter term in prison because of his "lifelong dedication and exceptional public service."
Traficant has denied wrongdoing. With bluster and profanity, he tried - and failed - to bully his House colleagues out of voting last week to toss him from office.
Traficant told them that he was railroaded during his federal jury trial in Cleveland. Legal experts say Traficant's ouster from the House, as well as two jurors expressing second thoughts about his conviction, are not likely to play into Wells' sentencing.
At the end of the 10-week trial, on April 11, a jury convicted him of 10 corruption charges, including tampering with witnesses, bribery and racketeering. Traficant said many witnesses whom prosecutors called at his trial were felons who testified against him to get light sentences.
Traficant wants Wells to allow him to remain free on bond until an appeals court decides his case. But prosecutors in Cleveland say Traficant must first show that he has a chance of winning an appeal, and they believe he has none. They want Traficant to go immediately to prison.
Federal authorities said the impact of his misdeeds go far beyond his district.
"The fact that a member of Congress, one of the highest positions in our government, has been convicted of these crimes of dishonesty will cause some loss of public confidence in these institutions at the very time citizens must depend on them to ensure our domestic security," prosecutors wrote in court documents.
They stopped short of saying how much more time in prison Traficant should spend, but they asked for a substantial increase to "fully reflect the nature of the crime and extent of its harm on the community."
Prosecutors also contend that Traficant is a risk to run. During his trial, he told Wells: "I do caution the court, that if you poison this jury one more time, you'll have to send a marshal for me because I am not coming back to your courtroom. You can put that on the record."
Traficant represented himself at trial, even though he is not an attorney. For his sentencing, he has an attorney, Richard Hackerd, who said the former congressman is no threat to vanish.
Hackerd also said Traficant deserves the minimum sentence because of his service to the Youngstown area. He cited Traficant's four-year term as sheriff, when Traficant refused to foreclose on the homes of laid-off steelworkers. Traficant was found in contempt of court, and he was sent to jail for failing to remove the families from their homes.
"This demonstrates his willingness to sacrifice his personal liberty for the community," Hackerd said in documents. He plans to call witnesses tomorrow and present affidavits from constituents whom the former congressman helped.
"His office was aggressive in constituent services, and Mr. Traficant pursued legislation action diligently," Hackerd wrote.
Prosecutors say Traficant did not serve his community, but stole from it. They said he took more than $200,000 in kickbacks from his employees, forced his staff to clean stalls at his horse farm and encouraged witnesses to lie for him. And if a constituent needed help, they said, Traficant wanted to know what the citizen could do for him first.
To reach this Plain Dealer reporter:
jcaniglia@plaind.com, 216-999-4128
Very well huh? On how many counts was he convicted?
Use of the National Guard for law enforcement is not illegal under Posse Commitatus, only use of federal troops except in time of emergency or war. Government legally used regular army troops to help put down the LA riots ten years ago.
Which collaborated with the Germans. Any one of those Vichy officials were more complicit collaborators than Demjanjuk who was just a low level shmoe trying to survive the War.
Yes, he kidnapped my pet squirrel while he was my houseguest.
Why do you consider your government too good to frame a man that fought against governmental abuses?I believe that my government is capable of framing a man that fought against governmental abuses. With Mr. Traficant, no framing was necessary.
- exodus
I say again, Mr. Bird, you did not watch the Ethics Committee hearings.
How do I know??
You still think Traficant is guilty. If you had seen Traficant’s documented physical evidence, and heard Richard Detore’s testimony, you would know that Traficant was innocent of all charges, and was in fact illegally targeted by the FBI, the IRS, and the Justice Department.
Here is the link to C-Span’s videos of the hearings.
You’ll need RealPlayer to watch them.
It's not paranoia when people are really out to getcha.
I'm sure I'm the dozenth poster to say that this morning.
To: exodus
You can copy text in Acrobat Reader.
Click the "T" on the toolbar to activate the "Text Select Tool".
Highlight the text and copy away.
This is with AR 5.0, older versions also have this capability.
Copy-paste away!
# 85 by Sledge
Thank you, Sledge!!!
It worked, just as you said.
I was even able to select ALL the text of the Acrobat Reader document, 219 pages, by using the hotkey Ctrl+A, then Ctrl+C to copy, and then paste the text into Word.
You’ve made me extremely happy, my friend.
Again, I thank you.
I submit that there is NO exonerating evidence. Zero. Screw the link to the video, that ain't the trial.
"Screw the facts! I'll believe the show trial."
The guy was tried and convicted. He didn't help his case by defending himself, and his prior shenanigans most certainly played a role in the minds of the jurors, whether that is proper or not. You'd think this would be a perfect opportunity for Larry Klayman to expose the entire Congress, but he seems to be steering clear. Same with every other watchdog.
Poor Traficant, all he needed to do was log onto Free Republic and have his sympathizers defend him in court. Clearly you guys are all better than the resources he had available to himself.
We shall see.... And Traficant WILL be BAAAAAACK---In Congress. So I hope they keep the squirrel food on hand in that Chamber. Traficant's hairpiece is a hungry critter!
To: Mr. BirdTo: exodus
I say again, Mr. Bird, you did not watch the Ethics Committee hearings.
How do I know??
You still think Traficant is guilty. If you had seen Traficant’s documented physical evidence, and heard Richard Detore’s testimony, you would know that Traficant was innocent…”
# 106 by exodus
What did I say??
You haven’t seen the evidence, so your opinion is based on nothing but hearsay and your belief that your government would never lie to you.
You’re wrong also, there is a consensus among those who actually watched the Ethics Committee hearings. We believe that Traficant is innocent, and that the government manufactured evidence, and that the prosecutors in the trial, and the judge, went out of their way to deny Traficant a chance to defend himself. We believe that the FBI, IRS, and the Justice Department really were out to get Traficant, and that they used tyrannical methods to do so.
On the C-Span forums, where everyone commenting had seen the hearings, the vast majority of posters believe Traficant innocent, and believe Traficant’s assertions of governmental corruption.
I say again, and you would know if you had watched the hearings, that there was no evidence of wrong-doing by Traficant, and overwhelming evidence that the government violated every protection he had the right to expect as a citizen. The government actually manufactured evidence against Traficant.
Please, watch the videos. I guarantee, even with you going in convinced that Traficant is guilty, you’ll come out believing in him, and believing in his innocence.
OK OK OK! I give up, I'll watch the videos. Remember though, the posters on the C-Span forums are self-selecting, and hardly a representative sample of the overall opinions on the hearings.
And please remember that I conceded the point that my government could and would lie to me. They have proven that over time.
To: Dave STo: bok
The government used Alabama National Guard and hardware during the siege at Waco. Is that legal? …
# 93 by bok
The governor of Texas calls out the Texas National Guard.
The Alabama National Guard operating in Texas is a Federal military force, and is illegal under Posse Comitatus without a federally declared State of Emergency.
“OK OK OK! I give up, I'll watch the videos…”
# 114 by Mr. Bird
Great!
I look forward to your comments.
I certainly would pay you for them.
OUR OWN GOVERNMENT USED, AGAINST OUR OWN CITIZENS, TOXIC GASSES THAT ARE NOT LEGAL TO USE IN WARFARE WITH ANOTHER NATION.
I will repeat that. We used, against our own citizens, toxic gasses that are illegal to use against other nations in warfare.
that is a fact, and you can do a minimal amount of research to back that up.
And they died from inhaling this gas, right? Wrong. You stand a much better chance of living a long life if you dont fire on federal agents.
To: Mr. BirdTo: exodus
“…I brought up Waco, yes. Our government committed premeditated murder there, murder planned and orchestrated at the highest levels of our government.
I could bring up Ruby Ridge, too. That was also a case of premeditated murder…”
# 49 by exodus
_Jim, I watched the footage live. I remember being told, “The Davidians are shooting at us!!” I remember seeing the federal troops hiding behind the motor vehicles, vehicles with glass windows. I remember wondering how the Davidians were able to lay down such a murderous barrage, while avoiding putting a hole in even one single piece of that glass.
Before the ”Rules of Engagement” documentary expounded on the evidence, the evidence was there. We knew that murder was being committed, even while we were watching it live on television.
Don’t blame our belief on McNulty’s documentary. The world premiere of his film took place in 1997. That was four years after the murders. McNulty made his documentary to publicize the available evidence; to tell those who had not been paying attention what our government was guilty of.
Of course the ”Rules of Engagement” documentary showed footage out of sequence. That’s called editing. It’s done to make a point. The footage still shows gunfire going into the Davidian’s home.
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.