Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Siegelman ruling and update . . . by Larisa Alexandrovna

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 10:28 PM
Original message
Siegelman ruling and update . . . by Larisa Alexandrovna
March 06, 2009
Siegelman ruling and update...

First, if you are new to the US Attorney scandal as it specifically relates to the alleged political prosecutions of American citizens seen as enemies of the WH (Rovegate), I urge you to read the links I provide at the end first and then come back to this entry.

##

Before you read the bad news - and it is bad news - remember that none of the evidence that was uncovered after the Siegelman trial was allowed to be part of this appeal. So what we know of Karl Rove's alleged involvement and his friendship with Billy Canary and Canary's wife - the US Attorney for the Middle District of Alabama, Leura Canary - was not allowed as part of this appeal. And the Rove-Canary angle is just one example in a case surrounded by serious problems and questions. On the Rove-Canary issue alone there is enough to overturn on appeal. If other issues -for example, such as the issue of the 60 Minutes find that the key witness in the case, Nick Bailey, had been coached by the prosecution and forced to write out his testimony 72 times- are added in, this case would have been entirely dismissed and Siegelman entirely set free.

So what the 11th Circuit ruled on is essentially what was in the indictment and Judge Fuller's instructions to the jury - but they did not consider any of the now well documented facts that have created such an uproar and which have implicated Karl Rove and his pals in this saga. They did not consider, for example, the jury tampering that we now know had taken place, nor the witness intimidation and coaching coaching we now know about, nor the fact that Leura Canary did not recuse herself, etc. In other words, they considered nothing of what we now know about as the reality of this case. Even still, they struck down 2 of the 7 charges against Siegelman. So that should tell you something.

-snip-

Okay, now let's also recall something very important to both this case and that of Paul Minor. In Alabama, the former Attorney General who sealed the ballots during the 2002 election, not allowing Siegelman to get his rightful recount, was William Pryor. Within several months of his sealing the ballots, he was appointed on a recess appointment to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals (the same court that just ruled on this case). Although Pryor was not part of the 3 judge panel reviewing this case, his recess appointment into a position of such authority raises questions about other judges. It should also be noted that Pryor was a former client of Karl Rove.

More @ http://www.atlargely.com/2009/03/siegelman-ruling-and-update.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. Your last paragraph screams legal problems. Wow...
Okay, now let's also recall something very important to both this case and that of Paul Minor. In Alabama, the former Attorney General who sealed the ballots during the 2002 election, not allowing Siegelman to get his rightful recount, was William Pryor. Within several months of his sealing the ballots, he was appointed on a recess appointment to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals (the same court that just ruled on this case). Although Pryor was not part of the 3 judge panel reviewing this case, his recess appointment into a position of such authority raises questions about other judges. It should also be noted that Pryor was a former client of Karl Rove.

Someone better take this away from this group of judges.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AZ Criminal JD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Who in the world could "take this away" from the 11th Circuit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Who? Answer: SCOTUS. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AZ Criminal JD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. That would not be "taking it away" as the poster implied.
And good luck with the SC overturning the 11th on this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. I agree. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. what the conservatives/neo-cons/ republicans were able to accomplish
with these prosecutions was control of the state judiciaries and political offices. They were also able to get "tort reform" legislation passed that favors the corporations and make it difficult for the plaintiffs to have their cases heard. They also stacked the deck with bushco appointees to the federal bench and appellate courts. It will be years before any balance is returned to the scales of justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 10:48 PM
Response to Original message
4. Betcha they sentence him to time served....
They don't want a martyr, but they also don't want him to run for office again.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. I don't think so
but I am sure they would be pleased if that were the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 11:34 PM
Response to Original message
6. This isn't over.
Edited on Fri Mar-06-09 11:41 PM by Gregorian
I wonder if other cases will reveal information that will spill over and or revive this case in the event that all appeals fail.

We're no longer under fascist rule. But appointees from previous foul administrations still linger. This is the real taint of bad presidencies.

I'm thinking of Rove, specifically. There may be some overlap in case evidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 01:33 AM
Response to Original message
8. Kick for tomorrow ---
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Justice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 04:55 AM
Response to Original message
9. Basic Info on 3 Judge Panel Hearing Appeal (one Reagan, two Ford)

the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Judicial Circuit has jurisdiction over federal cases originating in the states of Alabama, Florida and Georgia.

Judge J.L. Edmondson - Chief Judge (Reagan appointee 1986)
Born: Jasper, Georgia July 14, 1947
Emory University, B.A., 1968; University of Georgia School of Law, J.D., 1971; University of Virginia, LL.M. (Judicial Process), 1990.

Judge Gerald Bard Tjoflat (Ford Appointee 1975)
Born: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania December 6, 1929
Former Chief Judge of Circuit: October 1, 1989 - September 20, 1996
University of Virginia; University of Cincinnati; Duke University School of Law, LL.B., 1957

Judge James C. Hill (Ford Appointee 1976)
Born: Darlington, South Carolina January 8, 1924
University of South Carolina, B.S.C., 1948 (war interrupted); Lamar School of Law, Emory University, J.D., 1948.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Senator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 06:47 AM
Response to Original message
10. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeeDeeNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
11. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 04:17 PM
Response to Original message
12. Makes my heart sick..thanks for posting Merh!!
and we are supposed to applaud when Pelosi says she is so happy that congress made a "DEAL" with Rove to testify..shaking head here with a very heavy heart for Siegelman..this nightmare never ends..and when it does..the bad guys will all walk freely!

See story on Yoo Torture suit.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3772045

and the al-Haramain case.

Obama’s Response to the al-Haramain Smack-Down? Cheneyesque Reasoning

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/02/27/obamas-response-to-the-al-haramain-smack-down-cheneyesque-reasoning/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shireen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 10:08 PM
Response to Original message
15. sickened by that ruling.
This is certainly going to strengthen the resolve to go after Rove.

But Siegelman ... my heart goes out to him and his family.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Elwood P Dowd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
16. This thing is rigged. Obama needs to step in an commute his sentence to time served.
Appeals will not work with so many corrupt repukes in the justice system.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC