The main papers do “lean Republican”, that is why papers like the Independent are important. I am glad my friends on the right admitt are willing to admitt to the fact.

(Cap Locks on for emphasis)

bhmhomeboy, the “F” in the FEC stands for federal. Were it a race for the US Senate or House of Representatives in question, your point would be well made. However, as this is a state election, the FEC does not regulate campaign finances in this matter.

As for my “Seinfeld” quip, I was merely suggesting that the penalty for that which Governor Riley is accused, which he has not been proven guilty of of course, may not prove that draconian. If, for example, the penalty were a monetary fine, this might amount to much ado about nothing.

in the FWIW category, the Alabama Democrat’s blog make no mention of this story focusing instead on Mike Hubbard, his sports network and free tickets.

Oh yes–Bob Gambacurta hates Riley. He was the hack that headed the anti-Amendment one campaign back in 03.

Your “argument” in #20 more accurately reflects your point and is well taken. Btw, the Seinfield quip is amusing and illustrative.

I have no time for a westlaw query on this topic on the afternoon of new year’s eve, but am interested to know what you discover/know etc about the ramifications [to the extent they exist] of campaign reporting violations.

Thanks.

Second, I was merely referring to walt’s comment that, quote, “Maybe we’ll see other candidates’ reports getting the same once over, next week’s papers should be interesting.” Like it or not, Nixon, there will be no such reports forthcoming from the Montgomery “Independent,” as that paper is owned by gambling magnate Milton McGregor. My argument, if you had taken the time to read through all the comments, was simply that walt’s hope of future investigations into similar situations was unlikely and certainly not forthcoming from the Montgomery “Independent.”

Here’s the important question that should be asked: Assuming all these claims are proven true, which of course they have not been proven yet, what would the maximum penalty be? All these attempts to liken this situation to that of former Governor Siegelman seem intellectually lazy to me, as his convictions involved bribery. Does anybody here actually (this does not include those whose legal studies amount to reading the newspaper) know what the penalty for this would be?

I can’t help but be reminded of that episode of “Seinfeld” in which Newman tries to catch Jerry in mail fraud for attempting to collect on mail insurance for a stereo that had been damaged before it was sent. Upon doing so, Newman exclaims “It’s called mail fraud! Oh, how I have waited for this day! This day in which your pitiful play world will come crashing down!”

Upon being calmed by his superior, Newman continues, “There will, uh, be a small fine.”