All Charges Dropped Against Former Sen Ted Stevens

[shally]

Disclaimer: i was never a fan of former Sen Ted Stevens but...

now that the election is safely behind them and the seat belongs to the Democrats... on orders from AG Eric Holder the government has decided to drop all charges against the former Senator because of prosecutorial misconduct

draw your own conclusions

[akhhorus]

This doesn't change the facts of the case: Stevens was taking bribes pretty obviously.

[shally]

This doesn't change the facts of the case: Stevens was taking bribes pretty obviously.

still, it doesnt change the perception that things are politically motivated

reminds me of what happened to former Gov Edwards.. the government was determined to get him, and eventually did.. you cannot thumb your nose at the feds for decades and expect to not go unpunished eventually.. but the fact that the fbi was able to bug his home during construction should be chilling to anyone who cares even remotely about civil liberties

[Sweepea436]

I have a question. From the standpoint of the every day person (that doesnt make sense when he talks politics :Peace:))that doesn't trust any politician as far as he can throw'em -- will we ever get to a day of....... I wont say honest politics, (because I dont know that it has ever existed) but to time when things like this wont be allowed to stand? From what I remember reading, thay basically had this clown dead to rights, correct? How is he walking from this? Is the corruption to deep set?

[shally]

I have a question. From the standpoint of the every day person (that doesnt make sense when he talks politics :Peace:))that doesn't trust any politician as far as he can throw'em -- will we ever get to a day of....... I wont say honest politics, (because I dont know that it has ever existed) but to time when things like this wont be allowed to stand? From what I remember reading, thay basically had this clown dead to rights, correct? How is he walking from this? Is the corruption to deep set?


i dont know the full circumstances, but apparently, the prosecutorial team was so bad, they had to be replaced.. and then the judge wouldnt even sentence stevens until the government dealt with this issue

so, as bad as stevens was, the behavior of the govenrment was worse inthe conduct of this trial.. so he walks.. as the old saw goes.."better 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man be convicted".... not saying that stevens was innocent, but i truly fear the power of the fed government a lot more than corruption of one politician

[Sweepea436]

i dont know the full circumstances, but apparently, the prosecutorial team was so bad, they had to be replaced.. and then the judge wouldnt even sentence stevens until the government dealt with this issue

so, as bad as stevens was, the behavior of the govenrment was worse inthe conduct of this trial.. so he walks.. as the old saw goes.."better 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man be convicted".... not saying that stevens was innocent, but i truly fear the power of the fed government a lot more than corruption of one politician

One politician a week it seems like. Alright thanks for the reply. I'm pretty sure I just pulled a "hijack" so I'll leave it alone! :)

[akhhorus]

still, it doesnt change the perception that things are politically motivated

reminds me of what happened to former Gov Edwards.. the government was determined to get him, and eventually did.. you cannot thumb your nose at the feds for decades and expect to not go unpunished eventually.. but the fact that the fbi was able to bug his home during construction should be chilling to anyone who cares even remotely about civil liberties

The only prob is that the Dems weren't in charge of the DOJ when Stevens was indicted and convicted.

[akhhorus]

i dont know the full circumstances, but apparently, the prosecutorial team was so bad, they had to be replaced.. and then the judge wouldnt even sentence stevens until the government dealt with this issue

so, as bad as stevens was, the behavior of the govenrment was worse inthe conduct of this trial.. so he walks.. as the old saw goes.."better 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man be convicted".... not saying that stevens was innocent, but i truly fear the power of the fed government a lot more than corruption of one politician

From what I understand, the prosecutors withheld evidence, including that an FBI agent was having an affair with one of the witnesses. I'm sure Ted will claim vindication, but it doesn't change that VECO was buying him luxury goods/doing free improvements on his house(and Stevens didn't report it, which is what he was convicted of) and getting government contracts at the same time.

[shally]

The only prob is that the Dems weren't in charge of the DOJ when Stevens was indicted and convicted.

i dont even begin to claim to know the politics of the prosecutorial team.
i think there were plenty in the GOP who were happy to see him swept off the stage

From what I understand, the prosecutors withheld evidence, including that an FBI agent was having an affair with one of the witnesses. I'm sure Ted will claim vindication, but it doesn't change that VECO was buying him luxury goods/doing free improvements on his house(and Stevens didn't report it, which is what he was convicted of) and getting government contracts at the same time.

problem being that if the prosecutors arent above reproach this is a certainty of happening.

again, not saying that Stevens wasnt corrupt, only saying that the greater risk is a prosecutorial system considering itself above the law..

[akhhorus]

i dont even begin to claim to know the politics of the prosecutorial team.
i think there were plenty in the GOP who were happy to see him swept off the stage


Okay, but your theory requires the democrats being behind this from the beginning. There are political prosecutions, there's a messy one involving Don Siegleman in Alabama that might land Rove in jail, but they sort of need the same players in place to start and end it.

problem being that if the prosecutors arent above reproach this is a certainty of happening.

again, not saying that Stevens wasnt corrupt, only saying that the greater risk is a prosecutorial system considering itself above the law..

Stevens and his lawyers can crow all they want to, but they never denied any of the items or services that Stevens received from VECO. They just gave some surreal explanations about them. So I doubt falsification of evidence or suborning perjury is on the table here.

[shally]

Okay, but your theory requires the democrats being behind this from the beginning. There are political prosecutions, there's a messy one involving Don Siegleman in Alabama that might land Rove in jail, but they sort of need the same players in place to start and end it.



Stevens and his lawyers can crow all they want to, but they never denied any of the items or services that Stevens received from VECO. They just gave some surreal explanations about them. So I doubt falsification of evidence or suborning perjury is on the table here.


as i said, i dont know what the politics of the prosecutorial team was, but the lure of bringing down a sitting senator had to have some place in it..

[akhhorus]

as i said, i dont know what the politics of the prosecutorial team was, but the lure of bringing down a sitting senator had to have some place in it..

That VECO scandal had been brewing in Alaska for years. It took down a lot of the Alaska GOP, including the governor and Don Young(LONG time sole congressman of Alaska) isn't out of the woods yet. Along with taking down most of the management of VECO on tax/bribery charges. Stevens was just part of it.

[Sweepea436]

That VECO scandal had been brewing in Alaska for years. It took down a lot of the Alaska GOP, including the governor and Don Young(LONG time sole congressman of Alaska) isn't out of the woods yet. Along with taking down most of the management of VECO on tax/bribery charges. Stevens was just part of it.

Out of curiousity (and being too busy to research it today) - Does anyone know off the top of their head if this is tied at all to the AF Col that killed him self a year of so back? I heard it was some sort of corruption deal - but that could've been rumor.

[akhhorus]

Out of curiousity (and being too busy to research it today) - Does anyone know off the top of their head if this is tied at all to the AF Col that killed him self a year of so back? I heard it was some sort of corruption deal - but that could've been rumor.

I did some research: unrelated. It appears he had some issues, but there doesn't appear to be any real scandal: he retired, but then was nominated for a civilian post. Then it came out that the Air Force allowed him to get paid by a contractor, who paid him 20k over a year. There was no investigation of any note, he killed himself after the Armed Services Committee wanted more info about it.

[Sweepea436]

I did some research: unrelated. It appears he had some issues, but there doesn't appear to be any real scandal: he retired, but then was nominated for a civilian post. Then it came out that the Air Force allowed him to get paid by a contractor, who paid him 20k over a year. There was no investigation of any note, he killed himself after the Armed Services Committee wanted more info about it.


That was quick. Thanks. I have a knack for getting little "light bulbs" years after the fact!! That sort of thing I think goes on quite a bit more than we hear about. Kind of points me back towards my original comment. I wish there was a "do-over" button we could push and flush all this corruption through the pipes. But the sad truth is that we'd probably end up right back where we are. Human nature I guess.

[akhhorus]

That was quick. Thanks. I have a knack for getting little "light bulbs" years after the fact!! That sort of thing I think goes on quite a bit more than we hear about. Kind of points me back towards my original comment. I wish there was a "do-over" button we could push and flush all this corruption through the pipes. But the sad truth is that we'd probably end up right back where we are. Human nature I guess.

As I tell people who complain about corruption: God forbid we should have a congress where they make decisions on principles. No one wants that. Seriously. It would be messy, rough and nothing would get done.

[Sweepea436]

As I tell people who complain about corruption: God forbid we should have a congress where they make decisions on principles. No one wants that. Seriously. It would be messy, rough and nothing would get done.

Pretty cynical viewpoint there, but there are alot of different principles out there, so I catch your drift. But you cant seriously think that this is the best we can get? You dont think if we start canning some of these crooks that it'd straighten things up a bit?

[akhhorus]

Pretty cynical viewpoint there, but there are alot of different principles out there, so I catch your drift. But you cant seriously think that this is the best we can get? You dont think if we start canning some of these crooks that it'd straighten things up a bit?

I think we should nail obvious and stupid corrupt politicians, but its better to have the system we have than a system where there's no money in the system and everyone decides a vote based totally on principles.

[Sweepea436]

I think we should nail obvious and stupid corrupt politicians, but its better to have the system we have than a system where there's no money in the system and everyone decides a vote based totally on principles.


So you think there is an acceptable level of corruption? I'm not trying to call you out here, I'm just trying to understand. That seems crazy to me. Is it the comfort of knowing how a guy is going to vote on certain issues because of the money he's taking in?



I'm trying to self educate and honestly, I dont know what to believe when I read the news. I take all articles and opinions with a grain of salt and try to piece it together.

[akhhorus]

So you think there is an acceptable level of corruption? I'm not trying to call you out here, I'm just trying to understand. That seems crazy to me. Is it the comfort of knowing how a guy is going to vote on certain issues because of the money he's taking in?



I think there's an acceptable level of BS in trading votes. And there's an acceptable level of money in the system that shouldn't be considered corruption. Blatantly paying off a member of congress for a vote is way over that line. Organizing donors for members of congress who vote the way you like(even if just on one issue) is free speech.

I'm trying to self educate and honestly, I dont know what to believe when I read the news. I take all articles and opinions with a grain of salt and try to piece it together.

Understand what the difference between an editorial and an article are. An editorial is usually partisan, and the writers of such usually have an agenda or are trying to advocate for a certain side of the aisle. An article, even from a media source that has a "bias" usually are straight forward reporting of the facts.

[Sweepea436]

I think there's an acceptable level of BS in trading votes. And there's an acceptable level of money in the system that shouldn't be considered corruption. Blatantly paying off a member of congress for a vote is way over that line. Organizing donors for members of congress who vote the way you like(even if just on one issue) is free speech.



Understand what the difference between an editorial and an article are. An editorial is usually partisan, and the writers of such usually have an agenda or are trying to advocate for a certain side of the aisle. An article, even from a media source that has a "bias" usually are straight forward reporting of the facts.

As to the top quote, I get that. I'm part of the Air Force Sergeants Association, who I'm supporting as (hopefully) my "voice" on Capitol Hill. So I see where you're coming from there.

For the bottom - I see peoples sources getting torn apart all the time here. Seems for most people, it doesn't matter what the story is - if it has a negative connotation for something they support, they'll dismiss it no matter where the news came from. Lol. But I still like the different perspectives I get even if I dont agree with it. The back and forth makes it worth hearing all the partisan stuff.

[akhhorus]

For the bottom - I see peoples sources getting torn apart all the time here. Seems for most people, it doesn't matter what the story is - if it has a negative connotation for something they support, they'll dismiss it no matter where the news came from. Lol. But I still like the different perspectives I get even if I dont agree with it. The back and forth makes it worth hearing all the partisan stuff.

Yeah, but a lot of that is people using editorials or articles that are just badly done. My advice would be to check out sites like Factcheck.org, who check out articles and speeches for truth/lies.

[Sweepea436]

Yeah, but a lot of that is people using editorials or articles that are just badly done. My advice would be to check out sites like Factcheck.org, who check out articles and speeches for truth/lies.

Added to my daily bookmark browsing gamut!

Our "homepage" has drudge on it, so that's usually my first stop in the morning.

[akhhorus]

Added to my daily bookmark browsing gamut!

Our "homepage" has drudge on it, so that's usually my first stop in the morning.

Drudge is pretty bad as a source. Regardless if he's pushing a story left or right, he's usually overblowing the story or ignoring key details. Google news is a great news source since you can see every different article on each story.

[Sweepea436]

Drudge is pretty bad as a source. Regardless if he's pushing a story left or right, he's usually overblowing the story or ignoring key details. Google news is a great news source since you can see every different article on each story.

Alot going on there. I like the customize feature. Thx again. At this rate, I'll accomplish nothing all day. But hey, there's a person at every job making sure the "nothing" gets done right?