Number Growing Who Say Siegelman Prosecution ‘Political’
Right before Thanksgiving I mentioned here a poll that showed that 56% of likely voters polled responded that it was “very likely” or “somewhat likely” that the prosecution of former governor Don Siegelman was politically motivated. A reader pointed out to me that this is a shift from a poll reported in July by the Birmingham News:
But a recent poll by the Capital Survey Research Center, the polling arm of the Alabama Education Association teachers lobby, showed that 30 percent of Alabama voters believe Siegelman’s conviction and imprisonment was politically motivated. A slim majority, 51 percent, believe his prosecution was fair and deserved. Others polled didn’t know, didn’t answer or weren’t aware of the Siegelman conviction. The margin of error for the question was plus or minus 3.3 percent.
In the span of a few months, we have gone from 30% of Alabama voters who believe his prosecution was politically motivated up to 56% who believe it was “very likely” or “somewhat likely” politically motivated.
A note: General Wesley Clark made mention of Siegelman at the state Democrats’ Jefferson-Jackson Dinner Friday night saying, “I believe he’s being unjustly confined.” The blog Left in Alabama makes the point that Clark is the “the highest profile Democrat to call for scrutiny of Don Siegelman’s investigation and prosecution.”
Related Articles:
Still guilty.
Comment by Anonymous — December 3, 2007 @ 2:21 pm
The only Siegelman is guilty of is being a Democrat.
Comment by bhmhomeboy — December 3, 2007 @ 2:50 pm
Really bhmhomeboy? Perhaps you could do us all a favor and, unlike your compatriots, provide some evidence to support your claims.
Comment by Will — December 3, 2007 @ 3:10 pm
If they say it enough times, I guess they think that will make it true.
Comment by Margaret — December 3, 2007 @ 4:22 pm
Evidence? It’s interesting you bring that up, Will, since the prosecution had zero evidence that there was any quid pro quo between Scrushy and Siegelman. The 11th Circuit will let Siegelman out. It might take another year before they hear the case, but he will eventually get out (despite the Court’s conservative leaning). For a campaign contribution to be a bribe, there has got to be evidence of some sort of quid pro quo arrangement (not just the fact that Scrushy was on the board, which he had served on under three other governors, and the fact that the board regulated HealthSouth, which votes Scrushy recused himself from). Sadly, Siegelman was unjustly prosectuted and the jury’s decision was based more on Scrushy and his past than anything about this specific contribution. The more Alabamians know, the more they recognize that this was a political prosecution.
Comment by ptclearer — December 3, 2007 @ 6:21 pm
Actually, ptclearer, the prosecution showed that Siegelman had a loan he had made to the lottery campaign committee repaid by Richard Scrushy to said committee in return for Scrushy’s appointment to the CON Board. Whether or not he was on the board previously really makes no difference as, for his to be on the board in the future, Siegelman would have to appoint him. This, repaying a loan made by Siegelman in return for Scrushy’s appointment to the CON Board, constitutes quid pro quo. If you have evidence to the contrary, I would be most interested to see it.
Further, perhaps you could explain to us why Nick Bailey and Lanny Young were willing to go to jail if Siegelman were innocent? Remember, if Siegelman’s claims of innocence were true, neither man was guilty of a crime. Thus, why would they confess to a crime they did not commit?
Comment by Will — December 3, 2007 @ 9:01 pm
With each passing day the number of people who DO NOT think it’s political shrinks even futher. It’s fast becoming a given that DS was railroaded.
Comment by BoutTime — December 4, 2007 @ 6:04 am
Out of curiosity, any one seen any polls about Scrushy and his conviction?
Comment by walt moffett — December 4, 2007 @ 7:18 am
Will,
Speaking of Lanny Young, kinda funny that the Feds weren’t interested in what he had to say about laundering money to the campaigns of Bill Pryor and Jeff Sessions isn’t it? But then again, Young is propped up as a star government witness in regards to his testimony relating to DS, a Democrat.
No political motivation there, obviously.
Since you appear to the bastion of knowledge on the prosecution of DS, how would you explain the prosecution disregarding Young’s claims in regard to the GOP candidates, but taking his claims against DS as the gospel?
Comment by Willie — December 4, 2007 @ 8:42 am
“TWO OIL MEN ARE MAKING MILLIONS FOR THEMSELVES AND THEIR AFFILITES”
Bush and Cheney have managed to get oil to close at above $97.00 a barrel (an all time high), gold is near an all time high and the U.S. dollar is at its all time low. There is more Federal money going to civilian mercenaries than to American solders. During the last seven years our borders have been left open, now we have over 14 million illegal immigrants. Every military power in the world has managed to slip spies up through Mexico and across our borders unchallenged.
Bush’s bad appointments have been in his own personal interests; he has disregarded his oath to protect and serve the U.S.A. Good job guys you have made millionaires of your GOP affiliates by awarding big government contracts to their sham organizations at the cost of bringing our country into a recession. You have redefined Democracy, the executive powers, our Judicial system and the role of our National Guards and the Military Reserves.
Alabama is right in the middle of Bush’s corruption. Bush has had to help Bob Riley win both his elections for governor. Slick Bob is being groomed as a potential vice president candidate for the 2008 election. But what about his connection to Jack Abramoff and Michael Scanlon during the 2002 election. Also, there is another cloud over Riley’s head that involves their conspiracy to eliminate his opponent Don Siegelman in the 2006 election which is starting to get national attention.
By showing no shame and declaring executive privileges the occupants in the white house have become fugitives that are untouchable. Charges can’t be brought against them, because the judicial system works for the executive branch in which the President is the man in charge. Congress has not been able to start an impeachment process because there are very few conservative (honest) Republican’s remaining in Congress who align themselves with the traditional Republican values. Bush’s new group of corrupt politicians are still using the name of the GOP and they still run on the Republican ticket; however, they are aligning themselves on Bush’s and Cheney’s corruption.
What’s the next move once a new president assumes office? What could possibly be Bush’s plan? How are they going to avoid prosecutions and possibly war crime charges? How are they going to prevent the Feds. from seizing their bank accounts and their assets. Will Bush perform midnight pardons? But, first they have to be charged with a crime to be pardoned. Who then would pardon Bush?
I believe that they have all their eggs in one basket. The new President will have to be a close ally. With so many facing possible prosecutions, I believe that what they did to get Bob Riley elected governor is just an example of what might happen to their presidential opponents.
I believe that Karl Rove has never been debriefed and that he is still using the NSA to do wiretapping to gather whatever information that he needs to eliminate top presidential candidates. I believe that Bush is using the Justice department to investigate all presidential candidates, and that Karl Rove is being given the results of their investigations to be used to blackmail and to generate smear campaign ads. This is the same thing that he and Donal Segretti done for Nixon. Segretti went to prison; however Karl was only twenty one and escaped prosecution. Maybe he won’t be as lucky the next time. If Karl’s tactics fail to get their candidate in the lead, I believe that Bush’s and Cheney’s crimes are so serious that the leading candidate will be assassinated regardless of whether he or she is a conservative Republican or a Democrat.
Comment by T. Andress — December 4, 2007 @ 8:55 am
Evidence to support my claim that Don Siegeleman is guilty of being a Democrat: Don Siegelman is in prison in Louisiana cleaning toliets and mopping floors.
Comment by Bhmhomeboy — December 4, 2007 @ 10:55 am
Where he deserves to be for committing the crimes he is guilty of.
Comment by Anonymous — December 4, 2007 @ 2:41 pm
It’s a crime to be a Democrat in Alabama.
Comment by bhmhomeboy — December 4, 2007 @ 3:50 pm
If it is a crime to be a Democrat in the state, then explain the state legislature.
Comment by Margaret — December 4, 2007 @ 5:39 pm
To Bush, Cheney and other political leaders in high places:
Most of you are senior citizens acting selfish and cruel to your fellow men like you are going to live forever.
For it is written by God: “IT IS APPOINTED UNTO MEN ONCE TO DIE, BUT AFTER THIS THE JUDGEMENT. FOR MAN THAT IS BORN OF A WOMAN IS OF FEW DAYS AND FULL OF TROUBLE. YOU COMETH FORTH LIKE A FLOWER, AND IS CUT DOWN; YOU FLEETH AS A SHADOW, AND CONTINUETH NOT.”
You need to live every day like it’s your last for it maybe!
CAUTION! What you do here on earth determines where and how you spend eternity.
Your days are numbered. You have an appointment with death that everyone must keep.
GOD
Comment by fromGod — December 7, 2007 @ 9:20 am
“BUSH HAS TURN THE WHITE HOUSE INTO A DEN OF THIEVES”
President Bush, Vice President Cheney and their executioner Lieutenant Rove have disregarded the values so cherished by the Republican Party. Their ideology have been to channel millions of dollars to those party members who have pledged total absolute loyalty to the Bush administration. This includes creating/channeling campaign funds for their elections, making appointments of the undeserving and/or unqualified boot lickers to high Federal offices and awarding large military/government contracts to thousands of companies that are owned directly or indirectly by his supporters. Many of these contracting companies are sham organizations and/or have no accountability.
We in the “South Eastern States” have surely suffered the most from the presidency of Bush. We are facing a very serious dilemma; we have a new strain of government corruption that is immune to the antibodies of the justice system as defined by the constitution which incudes: (a) Election fraud, (b) political favors for illegal campaign contributions (large oil companies, Tobacco Companies, Gambling Casinos, etc.), ( c) corrupt Bush appointed U.S Attorneys that spend millions of dollars profiling high ranking Democrats so that their offices can be freed up for a Bush operative and (d) Bush appointed U.S. Judges that removes the threat of a political comeback by giving maximum sentences with appeal denials and highly restricted/screened prison correspondence.
Comment by Taylor Hicks — January 6, 2008 @ 10:59 pm