Comments on: Siegelman Released on Appeal

By: anonyous

anonyous — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 03:09:25 +0000

is judge fullers’ middle name “Everett” ?

By: bhmhomeboy

bhmhomeboy — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 21:19:56 +0000

Margaret,
What difference does it make if Scooter Libby’s conviction was overturned or he recieved a pardon?

Was Scooter Libby hauled off to jail in leg irons and shackels immediately after being found guilty by a jury of his peers?

Did Scooter Libby serve 9 months in prison?

This is what Barack Obama means when he says it’s the end of “Scooter Libby justice” and the beginning of “justice for all”.

pole totem, you are right about the bottom line, Somebody ain’t telling the truth. Thats fer sure.

By: Kathy

Kathy — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 20:08:37 +0000

After Bush commuted Libby’s sentence, Libby chose not to appeal his conviction.

By: pole totem

pole totem — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 13:03:11 +0000

Bottom Line, we may get some answers. Somebody ain’t tellin the truth. If it is Siegelman, he goes back to prison for a long time. If it is Rove, Canary et al don’t you think it is a good idea to find out if DOJ has been taken over by political hacks? And please, somebody tell Canary to take his hand out of Mike Hubbard’s back and quit destroying our party just to defend some two bit lobbyist (Canary).

By: Margaret

Margaret — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 03:12:47 +0000

Was Libby’s conviction overturned or did he receive a pardon?

By: bhmhomboy

bhmhomboy — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:24:58 +0000

Convictions are overturned everyday. Ask Scooter Libby.

By: um...

um... — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:05:41 +0000

Nixon, that was more than “a couple of press releases” on the 60 minutes piece. It was a flood of e-mails.

But I understand the response to the 60 minutes case… there the implication is that the Governor’s supporters plotted to take out the ex-governor in a dirty prosecution.

Here a three judge panel made a non-controversial ruling on a procedural issue. Hubbard should have kept his mouth shut.

By: Gunney Highway

Gunney Highway — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:30:18 +0000

Apparently a WRONGFULLY CONVICTED bad apple.

I hadn’t really thought of it that way Nixon, that’s a nice point. Why would they be disappointed?

Was this a Republican conviction?

By: Kathy

Kathy — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:26:41 +0000

anonymous, Republicans were dealing with a convicted bad apple in Scooter Libby too. I don’t recall a great wailing and gnashing of teeth from the party when Bush commuted his sentence before he served a day in prison. Our legal system grants defendants the right to appeal their convictions. Does the Republican party want to take away that right? I certainly hope not.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:01:04 +0000

nixon – you are referring to PURPORTED bad apples, but yet we are dealing with a CONVICTED bad apple in Siegelman.

By: Nixon

Nixon — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 19:46:51 +0000

Here’s one I don’t understand. The state GOP is the first to claim that politics played no part in the prosecution, but the first to issue a press release on the topic when something doesn’t go its way. Rather confounding to me.

For instance the press release issued yesterday:
“The Alabama Republican Party is disappointed in today’s ruling by the 11th Circuit Court and their decision to release former Governor Don Siegelman pending his appeal of the 6 counts of bribery and the 1 count of obstruction for which he was convicted.”

Why is the party disappointed in the decision by the 11th circuit? Why does the party feel responsible to take up for the prosecution and rulings of Judge Fuller? Under the current federal rules, neither the prosecutors nor judge may maintain political affiliation, but the state GOP has no reservations about jumping out front and defending them. This is odd. Maybe nothing.

It would seem to me that any decent organization, political or otherwise, would not be disappointed if a judicial body found that there were SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AND FACT raised in the prosecution of an individual. Albeit, this merely warrants a review of the case, but is still significant. Any decent individual/organization should have no problem with a federal circuit court giving the Siegelman prosecution a thorough review if in fact people who frequent this site and the state GOP are so confident that the prosecution was carried out in the proper manner.

The same thing occurred when cbs ran the story on 60 minutes, the state GOP worked itself into a lather over it and issued a couple press releases defending the conduct and decisions of the prosecutors and judge. Why does Hubbard feel like he has to defend these people? The far wiser approach would be to distance yourself and your party from the PURPORTED bad apples involved.

Just an observation from an otherwise uninformed, armchair political observer.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:42:02 +0000

The 11th Circuit got the transcript Tuesday, two days later they release Siegelman. I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when that document hit Atlanta.

By: Gunney Highway

Gunney Highway — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:59:01 +0000

Montgomery,

Nice work. I guess fact does usually trump fiction…except for my war stories. So there I was…

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:26:31 +0000

Thanks Montgomery. Espcecially on the appointment stuff. Seems like JD is spinning this however he can . . . including fear mongering and lies. The same way they got this conviction in the first place.

By: Spell Check

Spell Check — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 16:15:41 +0000

CAN SOMEONE PLEASE GET JD A DICTIONARY?!