Former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman Held in Solitary For Calling Thom Hartmann Show

[red dog 1]

"Former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman Held In Solitary In Prison, Son Says" http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/12/former_alabama_gov_don_siegelm_2.html
(At this link, there is another link to listen to the Thom Hartmann radio interview with Gov. Siegelman that "may have landed Don Siegelman in solitary confinement.&quot

(The above thread was originally posted in "Latest Breaking News Forum" but has since been locked as off-topic by mcar, a host of the Latest Breaking News forum)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141286996#top



"Why Did Obama Administration Ask Judge To Increase Don Siegelman's Prison Sentence?"

According to author Andrew Kreig, Siegelman, who was facing a 7 year prison sentence, is now serving a 20 year sentence,
"one that Obama and (former) Attorney General Eric Holder pushed for.
In 2009, the Obama Justice Department requested that Judge Fuller sentence Siegelman to 20 more years in prison when his appeals are finished."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023955756/
(Note: In the above OP, reply # 76 is a response from author Andrew Kreig himself)



"Department of Justice Pulls a Whitewash on Siegelman Whistleblower"
http://legalschnauzer.blogspot.com/2009/10/department-of-justice-pulls-whitewash.html

"Message From Gov. Siegelman"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026741017#top

"Lawyers For Don Siegelman Again Seek His Release from Prison?"
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/14/us/lawyers-for-don-siegelman-ex-governor-of-alabama-again-seek-his-release-from-prison.html

"Dear President Obama, Please Pardon Don Siegelman NOW"
http://democraticunderground.com/10026033690/

"Why Obama Should Pardon Don Siegelman"
http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/obama-pardon-don-siegelman


For more information about the Don Siegelman case, go to:
http://free-don.org

[randys1]

1. I dont believe the Obama admin did that

When a credible source tells me so, then I will believe it.

I will also be very angry, if it is true.

Of course Obama isnt the DOJ, but Holder is or was and I would like to understand why.

[red dog 1]

9. So you think Andrew Kreig is a liar?

and Daily Kos is a bogus website?

http://www.andrewkreig.com

Kreig is the founder of the Justice Integrity Project
Is the Justice Integrity Project a "bogus" or "fake" organization?

At his website, Andrew Kreig lists his "Top Feeds"..which include:
-- The National Press Club
-- FireDogLake
-- Legal Schnauzer
Are these all "bogus" or "fake" news websites too?

Kreig also lists as one of his top feeds,
-- Glenn Greenwald

Is Glenn Greenwald a liar too?

I consider Daily Kos to be a "credible source"..and I don't think Andrew Kreig is a liar

Also, I consider Glenn Greenwald to be one of the best investigative reporters around.

BTW, I, too, was at first very skeptical about Andrew Kreog's Daily Kos article, which detailed how Attorney General Eric Holder dispatched U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan to ask Don Siegelman's Judge to INCREASE Gov. Siegelman's prison sentence.
However, I could find nothing in Kreig's Daily Kos article that turned out to be untrue.

As hard as it is to believe that President Barack Obama would do such a thing to Gov. Siegelman as to actually ask Siegelman's judge to increase his already long (7 years) sentence, the fact remains that it was, indeed, done...and it wasn't Holder's decision either!

[rjsquirrel]

12. Legal Schnauzer

is not credible.

[Octafish]

19. Legal Schnauzer is more credible than you.

Learn:

Legal Schnauzer -- journalist friend of Gov. Don Siegelman -- STILL IN JAIL!

Unbelievable, Roger Shuler -- the journalist who helped keep Don Siegelman in the public eye when Corporate McPravda wouldn't -- is still in jail on trumped up charges.

Let Roger Shuler Go Before Christmas -- The Only Journalist Held Indefinitely In The US

By Jill Simpson and Jim March
OpEdNews Op Eds 12/23/2013 at 07:59:56

The Committee to Protect Journalists who are defending journalists worldwide recently announced their 2013 list of reporters imprisoned illegally around the world. As to be expected Turkey, Iran and China were at the top of the list but shamefully this time the USofA made the list as well due to the jailing of an Internet blogger named Roger Shuler in the state of Alabama.

Roger has been a key documenter of corruption in the United States since he took on the Don Siegelman story in 2007 and he has never let up. Roger has recently vowed from his jail cell that he will not retract the statements he has made about Rob Riley, son of recent former Governor Bob Riley. So what we are left with in America is a journalist indefinitely incarcerated by a specially appointed retired judge not duly elected to decide this case who was appointed by Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore known famously as the "10 Commandments" judge who was removed from the bench due to his mixture of church and state but re-elected by popular vote.

SNIP...

What concerns me about Roger Shuler's case is how they are indefinitely holding him. Clearly, if they want to punish Roger they should give him a sentence but instead it appears that in America these days we can now hold people for any amount of time if they do not do as the court wishes. So Roger sits in a jail cell in Shelby County Alabama with no knowledge of when he is to get out. Journalists all over the world are beginning to pick up his story as it appears this is the first time we have seen a journalist in the United States be treated like a Guantanamo Bay alleged terrorist. It is very Kafka-esque because we have a specially appointed non-elected judge, a secret hearing and sealed records. This is a nightmare for Roger Shuler's wife Carol and I'm sure any assistance anyone can give her would be welcome during this holiday season while her husband is indefinitely incarcerated in these United States because he refuses to take down a story he swears is true.

If we as citizens allow this to stand then we cannot complain about getting subverted media in the US. It is my request that everyone who reads this asks 100 friends to write and call Chief Justice Roy Moore at 334-229-0700 (address listed below) and ask him to show the Christian mercy he professes all over Alabama towards the only imprisoned journalist in the US, Roger Shuler.

As for Rob Riley, his attempt to suppress Roger's stories whether true or not has made him worldwide infamous for being the first to succeed at jailing an opposition journalist in the United States. It is frightening to think about Riley running for congress given this situation and Riley's questionable actions on the rights of journalists.

CONTINUED...

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Let-Roger-Shuler-Go-Before-by-JillSimpson-JimMar-Journalists-Detained_Journalists-Embedded_Journalists-Journalism_Roger-Shuler-131223-26.html

Anybody remember Don Siegelman?

Anybody remember Justice?

Anybody remember rjsquirrel posting anything worth reading on Don Siegelman, other than to smear Legal Schnauzer?

[rjsquirrel]

20. There's more to that story

and you know it.

[Octafish]

21. Really. So, show it.

Otherwise, you're just talking crap about Legal Schnauzer.

And you know it.

[rjsquirrel]

22. You already did

You don't know who I am.

Your very description of Shuler's crazy behavior and now parallel martyrdom claim shows why he is not an unbiased source on anything.

But keep the insults flying. Proves you're in the club.

Conspiracy theory is conspiratorial.

[Octafish]

23. I know you smeared Legal Schnauzer.

That's why I asked you to back up what you said about Legal Schnauzer.

When you can't, you act like the victim.

Is your name Elena Kagan? She also backed Mark Fuller and Karl Rove over Don Siegelman and 120-plus state Attorneys General.

[rjsquirrel]

24. I called LS biased. You say that's a smear.

I say it's a reputational fact, not subject to proof by simple assertion.

My assertion is that the proprietor of Legal Schnauzer has a public reputation for using the site to pursue personal causes, including those in which he is involved as a litigant. That meets every standard of "bias" in modern journalism. The evidence can be found by googling "Legal Schnauzer" and the name of its proprietor.

[Octafish]

25. You wrote ''Legal Schnauzer is not credible.''

Look it up, in Reply 12 on this thread.

Something else you wrote, in Reply 22:

But keep the insults flying. Proves you're in the club.

Conspiracy theory is conspiratorial.

It's like calling me a conspiracy theorist without actually, you know, saying I'm a conspiracy theorist.

Here's why that appellation bothers me, a person interested in uncovering crimes of the national security state, including the assassination of President Kennedy:

The facts , including this CIA document, show the nation's mass media are manipulated by the CIA.

CIA Document #1035-960, marked "PSYCH" for presumably Psychological Warfare Operations, in the division "CS", the Clandestine Services, sometimes known as the "dirty tricks" department.

CIA Instructions to Media Assets

RE: Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report

1. Our Concern. From the day of President Kennedy's assassination on, there has been speculation about the responsibility for his murder. Although this was stemmed for a time by the Warren Commission report, (which appeared at the end of September 1964), various writers have now had time to scan the Commission's published report and documents for new pretexts for questioning, and there has been a new wave of books and articles criticizing the Commission's findings. In most cases the critics have speculated as to the existence of some kind of conspiracy, and often they have implied that the Commission itself was involved. Presumably as a result of the increasing challenge to the Warren Commission's report, a public opinion poll recently indicated that 46% of the American public did not think that Oswald acted alone, while more than half of those polled thought that the Commission had left some questions unresolved. Doubtless polls abroad would show similar, or possibly more adverse results.

2. This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government, including our organization. The members of the Warren Commission were naturally chosen for their integrity, experience and prominence. They represented both major parties, and they and their staff were deliberately drawn from all sections of the country. Just because of the standing of the Commissioners, efforts to impugn their rectitude and wisdom tend to cast doubt on the whole leadership of American society. Moreover, there seems to be an increasing tendency to hint that President Johnson himself, as the one person who might be said to have benefited, was in some way responsible for the assassination. Innuendo of such seriousness affects not only the individual concerned, but also the whole reputation of the American government. Our organization itself is directly involved: among other facts, we contributed information to the investigation. Conspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our organization, for example by falsely alleging that Lee Harvey Oswald worked for us. The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments.

3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the assassination question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active addresses are requested:

a. To discuss the publicity problem with (?)and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors), pointing out that the Warren Commission made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.

b. To employ propaganda assets to and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories. In the course of discussions of the whole phenomenon of criticism, a useful strategy may be to single out Epstein's theory for attack, using the attached Fletcher article and Spectator piece for background. (Although Mark Lane's book is much less convincing that Epstein's and comes off badly where confronted by knowledgeable critics, it is also much more difficult to answer as a whole, as one becomes lost in a morass of unrelated details.)

4. In private to media discussions not directed at any particular writer, or in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments should be useful:

a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not consider. The assassination is sometimes compared (e.g., by Joachim Joesten and Bertrand Russell) with the Dreyfus case; however, unlike that case, the attack on the Warren Commission have produced no new evidence, no new culprits have been convincingly identified, and there is no agreement among the critics. (A better parallel, though an imperfect one, might be with the Reichstag fire of 1933, which some competent historians (Fritz Tobias, AJ.P. Taylor, D.C. Watt) now believe was set by Vander Lubbe on his own initiative, without acting for either Nazis or Communists; the Nazis tried to pin the blame on the Communists, but the latter have been more successful in convincing the world that the Nazis were to blame.)

b. Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others. They tend to place more emphasis on the recollections of individual witnesses (which are less reliable and more divergent--and hence offer more hand-holds for criticism) and less on ballistics, autopsy, and photographic evidence. A close examination of the Commission's records will usually show that the conflicting eyewitness accounts are quoted out of context, or were discarded by the Commission for good and sufficient reason.

c. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to conceal in the United States, esp. since informants could expect to receive large royalties, etc. Note that Robert Kennedy, Attorney General at the time and John F. Kennedy's brother, would be the last man to overlook or conceal any conspiracy. And as one reviewer pointed out, Congressman Gerald R. Ford would hardly have held his tongue for the sake of the Democratic administration, and Senator Russell would have had every political interest in exposing any misdeeds on the part of Chief Justice Warren. A conspirator moreover would hardly choose a location for a shooting where so much depended on conditions beyond his control: the route, the speed of the cars, the moving target, the risk that the assassin would be discovered. A group of wealthy conspirators could have arranged much more secure conditions.

d. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light on some theory and fall in love with it; they also scoff at the Commission because it did not always answer every question with a flat decision one way or the other. Actually, the make-up of the Commission and its staff was an excellent safeguard against over-commitment to any one theory, or against the illicit transformation of probabilities into certainties.

e. Oswald would not have been any sensible person's choice for a co-conspirator. He was a "loner," mixed up, of questionable reliability and an unknown quantity to any professional intelligence service. (Archivist's note: This claim is demonstrably untrue with the latest file releases. The CIA had an operational interest in Oswald less than a month before the assassination. Source: Oswald and the CIA, John Newman and newly released files from the National Archives.)

f. As to charges that the Commission's report was a rush job, it emerged three months after the deadline originally set. But to the degree that the Commission tried to speed up its reporting, this was largely due to the pressure of irresponsible speculation already appearing, in some cases coming from the same critics who, refusing to admit their errors, are now putting out new criticisms.

g. Such vague accusations as that "more than ten people have died mysteriously" can always be explained in some natural way e.g.: the individuals concerned have for the most part died of natural causes; the Commission staff questioned 418 witnesses (the FBI interviewed far more people, conduction 25,000 interviews and re interviews), and in such a large group, a certain number of deaths are to be expected. (When Penn Jones, one of the originators of the "ten mysterious deaths" line, appeared on television, it emerged that two of the deaths on his list were from heart attacks, one from cancer, one was from a head-on collision on a bridge, and one occurred when a driver drifted into a bridge abutment.)

5. Where possible, counter speculation by encouraging reference to the Commission's Report itself. Open-minded foreign readers should still be impressed by the care, thoroughness, objectivity and speed with which the Commission worked. Reviewers of other books might be encouraged to add to their account the idea that, checking back with the report itself, they found it far superior to the work of its critics.

SOURCE: http://www.boston.com/community/forums/news/national/general/cia-instructions-to-media-assets-doc-1035-960/80/6210620

From 2003, first OP on DU I could find on it: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x765619

To be honest, I don't care what you think of me. I'm interested in the truth.

More than me, though: Justice depends on truth. So, it bothers me when you smear Legal Schnauzer as "not credible."

You see, Legal Schnauzer doesn't side with Rove and Fuller and the people who smear others as "conspiracy theorists." He's a Democrat.

[rjsquirrel]

26. OMG

Last edited Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:13 AM - Edit history (2)

You're one of those.

(Backs away slowly from conspiracy theory spouting talk radio nut.)

Damn right I called LS not credible. I stand by the statement. The fact that someone who believes in the silliness you spout would defend Shuler tells anyone intelligent all they need to know. About both Legal Schnauzer and you.

Figures it's a Thom Hartmann thread too. Better buy more gold cuz the economy is collapsing!

[rjsquirrel]

28. Hi Roger

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2015/04/35_million.html

[Octafish]

38. Steve? Is that you?

Prosecutor Steve Feaga reportedly once pushed for false testimony in the Siegelman case, and now he tries to convince public that convictions were legitimate.

http://legalschnauzer.blogspot.com/2015/12/prosecutor-steve-feaga-reportedly-once.html?m=1

Sounds familiar.

[rjsquirrel]

40. Nope, not me

But I see you are citing the discredited blogger Shuler to make your conspiratorial allegation against the prosecutor (and presumably the judge and jury?). As we both know, Shuler is currently facing a 3.5 million dollar libel judgment for egregiously and repeatedly lying about someone. So I don't see why I should trust his account over that of a prosecutor.

[Octafish]

41. Prosecutor approved by Karl Rove.

Doesn't make him a crook, but he at least worked for one.

[rjsquirrel]

29. Read about Shuler the clown

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2015/04/35_million.html

[rjsquirrel]

27. Belatedly here you go

This is the clown you claim is credible:

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2015/04/35_million.html

Alabama blogger ordered to pay $3.5 million in defamation lawsuit


A Shelby County blogger, who spent five months in jail before agreeing to remove stories from his website about the son of a former governor, has now been ordered to pay $3.5 million in a defamation lawsuit filed by a former campaign manager for Alabama Attorney General ...

Shuler failed or refused to sit for a scheduled deposition. He was sanctioned by Judge Blankenship, who then set a March hearing for sanctions and default judgment.

[Octafish]

30. Thank you for the news.

I think Legal Schnauzer will win on appeal. Freedom of speech trumps any perceived hurt the poor Republicans have endured. Precedent might be found in that Jerry Falwell vs Larry Flynt suit. Public figures can be the object of satire and all manner of speech. I'd say: "You know, that's a liberal idea" but I doubt you do.

[rjsquirrel]

31. You think?

Fact if the matter: convicted of libel, which means a proven liar in a court of law.

You asked for evidence he was less than a reputable source. What part of "$3.5 million libel judgment" fails that standard?

He's not a martyr. He's got a screw loose.

Your willingness to see conspiracy instead of craziness indicates you have a concealed personal stake in this. No serious journalist considers Shuler or his crazy Schnauzer credible. Because he isn't. He uses his site to pursue personal vendettas against personal enemies. There is no higher purpose or consistent theme to his work except "conspiracy against me." He's a leftish analog of a type found across the political spectrum.

If he was credible he would have influence.

[Octafish]

32. ''If he was credible he would have influence.'' Like Gov. Donald Siegelman?

Guy's rotting in prison for doing what previous Alabama administrations were free to do. The GOP prosecutors who led his multiple prosecutions shopped for the judge, since dismissed from the federal bench for beating his wife, have been exposed for partisan hacks in ser vice of John Ashocroft and Karl ROve. That is why Legal Schnauzer is prosecuted for "libel."

Glad to see where you stand on it, rjsquirrel. The "wrong side of history," as they say.

[rjsquirrel]

33. Lol

You have a rationalization for everything.

Looks to me like Siegelman is on the wrong side of history, and a prison wall.

But how the existence of Siegelman proves Shuler is credible, now that's a rich question.

My point is made. Wake me up when "history" proves you were right. Shuler is a convicted liar. I have substantiated my point.

You moved the goalposts. I expect no less from a conspiracy theorist.

[Octafish]

34. No, the one looking for rationalization is you.

Otherwise you wouldn't work so hard to find an excuse for siding with Karl Rove and George Bush.

The "conspiracy theorist" ad hominem is funny, too, considering how corrupt Fuller, Rove and Bush are.

[rjsquirrel]

35. Yeah whatever dude

I'm a proud progressive who canvassed for George McGovern in my first election.

I know a lying bulllshit conspiracy theory when I hear one.

Funny how no one else cares about this except a few family members of Siegelman. Shuler is a maniacal and likely (seems to me) paranoid fellow. He's a laughing stock among the few who know who he is.

You said he was credible. I said he wasn't. You asked for evidence. I provided a court conviction just this past year for libel. You changed the subject and start accusing me of supporting Karl Rove.

Where are the legions of Shuker's defenders? Not on DU, and definitely not on daily kos, either, which you cited as a "credible source" because they let Shuler post an occasional hilariously paranoid diary like everyone else. Those diaries are ignored and mocked there too. I oughta know as I've laughed at him with fellow kossaks too.


Lol whut?

i begin to suspect you are a schnauzer. You act just like one.

By the way one of many reasons sane people laugh at Shuler is that stupid website name. It reveals his intention to bark loudly at passing cars.

You lose. I'm done. I'll see you when Shuler gets Siegelman sprung, which is to say never.

You're deep in a paranoid conspiracy fantasy. It's bull.

[Octafish]

36. I stand with Don Siegelman and Legal Schnauzer. rjsquirrel stands with Karl Rove and John Ashcroft.

Got it. Dude.

[rjsquirrel]

39. In your little world

those are the only options.

I get it.

[Octafish]

16. Ask Elena Kagan, too.

As Solicitor General now Justice Kagan spearheaded the Obama administration's efforts to return Gov. Siegelman to prison and actually extended his sentence.

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2010/06/22/kaganaccomplice

Not your fault this isn't in the news, but who really loves Karl Rove?

[red dog 1]

17. Thanks for that

[d_r]

2. wait

he's been is solitary for *eight weeks?*

[red dog 1]

6. "All I know is it's been eight weeks and he's still locked in a box"

said Siegelman's son, who practices law in Birmingham, Alabama
(From the OP)

[d_r]

11. and the radio show

is from October. 2 months in solitary.

[red dog 1]

15. You got it!

Last edited Sat Dec 12, 2015, 01:37 PM - Edit history (1)

2 months in solitary for talking to a talk show (which is NOT against prison rules)

Joseph Siegelman, Don's son, said that his Dad has been in solitary since "mid-October."

[dhill926]

3. seriously....just what the hell is going on here...

[red dog 1]

5. "seriously....just what the hell is going on here.."??

If I haven't posted enough links for you to know "what the hell is going on here"
then, perhaps, you need to go to;
http://free-don.org

and ask them your question.

[dhill926]

7. uh...just kinda rhetorical, dude...

[red dog 1]

10. Sorry, I thought you were questioning my integrity.

or suggesting that what I was posting was not true.

[dhill926]

13. no....not at all....

all good.....best to you....

[red dog 1]

14. Thanks for that

[fasttense]

4. Obama and his Justice Dept had no problem vacating the theif Ted Stevens' conviction

But he couldn't even consider Don S.
Stevens was guilty and a RepubliCON. If Don S. had been a RepubliCON, he would have been a free man now.

[Judi Lynn]

8. It makes me sick, too. Unbelievable. No justification for ignoring the crime done against Don S. n/t

[Octafish]

18. Kick for Justice

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021318070

[midnight]

37. Kick.