Secondly wasn’t the conviction of Dr Bobo overturned by the 11th Circuit?

Thirdly prosecutors and Judges must avoid the appearance of impropiety. Leura canary is a smart lawyer - too smart to belive she could prosecute the political opponent of someone her husband was aiding with out the appearance of impropiety

Fourth, excuse me if I do not accept Alberto Gonzales and the BUSH DOJ as the defenitive ariter of ethics

Fifth, those “career prosecutors” still worked for Canary. Who do you think filled out their job evaluations?

Also note dummy I said “if” Bailey wrote out several versions of the testimony there “may be” a Brady Violation

Finally all defendants (even capital murder ones) are entitled to a timely appeal (its in a little old document called the United States Constitution (that pesky due process of law thing)

Al, you should know the answer to your question regarding Karl Rove and congressional subpoenas. Only baseball players have to abide by them, they don’t apply to policos.

Can someone remind me how much prison time Guy Hunt served for putting campaign funds in is pocket?

Are Billy Canary and Karl Rove good friends or not?

If a “pioneer” raises over a $1M for a presidential candidate and obtains an ambassadorship why is he not in jail?

If Judge Fuller served on the Republican Executive Committee and sued the State of Alabama while Siegelman was Governor why did he not conflict himself out of the case? Same question for Billy Canary’s wife, Leura.

What are the official reasons the Justice Dept. and Karl Rove refuse to comply with Congressional Subpoenas?

Who thinks that if/when Obama is elected the Dems don’t fast-track this?

Does the Qoran have hymns in it?

As a Republican, I can tell you that I have no problem with a person having concerns about the Siegelman case if they do so after an objective review of the facts and circumstances. I just don’t think that very many objective people, who truly take the time to review everything in this case really, in their heart of hearts, believe that Siegelman is innocent. My own review convinces me that there’s just too much credible evidence against him, and there is just too little credible evidence supporting the idea that he was unfairly convicted.

With that said, the problem that both sides have is that, if you’re a Republican, you have a tendency to want to believe that Siegelman is guilty; Likewise, if you are a Democrat, you have a tendency to believe that this is a huge government conspiracy. Objectiveness gets checked at the door.

In this respect, I am reminded of the Clinton impeachment trial. Republicans tended to the view that Clinton’s lying under oath was an impeachable offense, while Democrats tended to the view that it was not an impeachable offense. Objectivity was in short supply as the battle was pitched, and everyone was expected to believe a certain way based on their party affiliation.

With all of this said, I think that your charge that the Republican Party does not allow free thought is completely unfair. My own experience with the Republican Party demonstrates a party full of free thinkers who seldom sing from the same hymnal. My guess is that Democrats and the Democrat Party are the same way.

Oh and ps–if you are registered in Alabama, you are not a registered Republican. We don’t register by party in this state. If you are not from Alabama, I think it is highly probable that you have only heard one side of this story and it’s not the truth–not by a longshot.

I have a question for you,

Is it okay to be a Republican and have grave concerns that the Siegelman prosecution was flawed and seriously tainted?

Serious question. It appears as though your answer would be no, which me leaves me utterly dumbfounded as to whether or not I belong to a party that discourages free thought and independent thinking.

The same goes for the GOP thought police who are on here trying to do damage control and spin this story.

make that two questions:

1. is it permissible as a registered republican voter for the last 6 presidential election cycles [last 24 years] to have grave concerns about the siegelman prosecution?

2. do i now belong to a party which is incapable of objective analysis and one that discourages free thought and independent thinking among its members?