Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

[Owlman]

The special prosecutor, a well-known defense attorney, was first recommended for U.S. attorney by the state's two Republican senators (John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchinson), initially much to the chagrin of liberal U.S. representative Lloyd Doggett. Because of the slow approval process, he backed out of the nomination. Where is the evidence that he empowered a democratic grand jury other than some suspicions by you?

The solution to getting the DA out of office is to impeach her (something the legislature declined to do), to elect somebody different, (something that was likely to happen in 2016 if Perry hadn't done this stunt), or to get the people to do a recall (something they are trying to do). The problem with what Perry did is that that office is in one respect his governing body meaning they are his real oversight. By threatening an elected official, and more importantly by defunding the one real office with the power to provide oversight of the government, he has potentially eliminated oversight of himself.

I'm on a Board of Directors that is state created under a judicial consent decree. The Board oversees an office that is designed to represent the mentally ill. The governor can line item veto our funding under the law. But if he does, he is violating the judicial consent decree. Under one rule, he is following the law, but under the consent decree, he is breaking the law. Needless to say, this is similar to the issue here.

[bluetick]

A helluva thing, waking up to this article headline. It definitely made me blink.

Nixon Declares State of Emergency, Orders Curfew to Curb Riots

[Toemeesleather]

RE: Rick Perry, nothing new, a tried and true strategy that will continue....


A court-appointed special prosecutor has determined that serious misconduct by Justice Department prosecutors tainted the federal investigation and trial of former Sen. Ted Stevens, according to a report released Thursday.

“The investigation and prosecution of U.S. Senator Ted Stevens were permeated by the systematic concealment of significant exculpatory evidence which would have independently corroborated Senator Stevens’s defense and his testimony, and seriously damaged the testimony and credibility of the government’s key witness,” the report noted.

In August 2008, Stevens was indicted on seven counts of false statement charges for allegedly trying to conceal information on his Senate financial disclosure forms related to a renovation project of his home in Girdwood, Alaska, and other gifts including a puppy from a charity event, a massage chair, and a statue of giant salmon.

After a trial filled with legal gaffes, numerous requests for a mistrial by the defense and stunning revelations of the prosecutors withholding evidence Stevens was wrongfully convicted by a federal jury in October 2008 just days before he faced election for his Senate seat. Shortly after the trial concluded, a key government witness David Anderson came forward and acknowledged that he provided false testimony and that the prosecutors allowed billing records from Anderson to be introduced into evidence although they knew they were inaccurate.

[bluetick]

Good reference, toe. The only thing Barack Obama and John McCain ever agreed on...that, after his conviction, Ted Stevens had to go. Possibly the most corrupt member of the U.S. Senate in our lifetime.

[aTm]

Owlman, I think what perry did was probably unethical (Perry? Unethical? Oh my what a shock) due to the oversight circumstance you keep bringing up, but I doubt it was illegal. Presumably you read the actual law I posted, but you never refer to it. Does it not matter?

[Owlman]

I did. You can't exert undue influence over a unit charged to be your oversight. That clause does not apply in this case. Last month, Cuomo's office got in trouble in New York for a similar thing. Note, the example I gave you. Under the governor's power, he can veto funding to the service that I am a Board member to. But under a court order agreed to by the government, he would be in violation and would surely be held in contempt. If he did it because he didn't like one of my colleagues on the Board, and he said it, the court would probably indict him as well.

As for the chances of conviction, I put it at about 40%. The problem is that Perry was so vocal in why he was cutting funding. He made the connection. No speculation was needed. (just more proof of the stupidity of Perry).

[Professor Tiger]

At this point what difference does it make?

[Owlman]

From a political standpoint, I don't really think it makes a difference. I don't think Perry has a snowball chance in hell as a President, Vice-President or a cabinet position.

[Johnette's Daddy]

From a political standpoint, I don't really think it makes a difference. I don't think Perry has a snowball chance in hell as a President, Vice-President or a cabinet position.

He'll end up running a Koch Industries funded think tank.

[hedge]

"He had the 2012 nomination sewed up if he hadn't shown his incompetence in the Republican debates."

Is he the guy who said he was in favor of entirely eliminating 3 or 4 federal departments, but, when asked which ones, could only name one?

[bluetick]

[youtube]MEhH2R42Ar8[/youtube]

[Professor Tiger]

He was so much like W it was creepy.

[bluetick]

I almost put on a jacket this morn, prof. That Al Gore fella needs to step outside once in awhile, wouldn't you say?

[Professor Tiger]

He's got people to step outside for him.

[innocentbystander]

"He had the 2012 nomination sewed up if he hadn't shown his incompetence in the Republican debates."

Is he the guy who said he was in favor of entirely eliminating 3 or 4 federal departments, but, when asked which ones, could only name one?

That is correct. He couldn't name all 3, only 2. He asked Ron Paul to help him out right there on the debate floor (all the while Romney was laughing his ass off, on the inside)....

...Rick Perry is not the brightest bulb to be sure. I'll assume that the majority of the graduates from Texas A&M (like our host aTm) are NOT Forest Gumpish like the governor from Texas.

[Johnette's Daddy]

So, Michael Brown was shot 6 times from 10 to 14 feet away. That doesn't quite jibe with being shot in the car while struggling over the gun.

[innocentbystander]

So, Michael Brown was shot 6 times from 10 to 14 feet away. That doesn't quite jibe with being shot in the car while struggling over the gun.

If this is what happened, then the DA will charge the cop with murder. He'll say that Michael Brown had his hands in the air as he was "running away" from him (not supposed to do that) and then it will be up to the jury to decide if the cop is lying or telling the truth and if the cop is telling the truth did the cop shoot Michael with intent to kill. It becomes subjective at best...

...that is assuming Brown was shot 6 times from 10 to 14 feet away.

[Owlman]

...Rick Perry is not the brightest bulb to be sure. I'll assume that the majority of the graduates from Texas A&M (like our host aTm) are NOT Forest Gumpish like the governor from Texas.

What an opening for a series of Aggie jokes now

[puterbac]

Good reference, toe. The only thing Barack Obama and John McCain ever agreed on...that, after his conviction, Ted Stevens had to go. Possibly the most corrupt member of the U.S. Senate in our lifetime.

You do know that the verdict was set aside and the judge called it the worst case of prosecutorial mis-conduct he had ever seen right?

On April 7, 2009 federal judge Sullivan formally accepted Holder's motion to set aside the verdict and throw out the indictment, declaring "There was never a judgment of conviction in this case. The jury's verdict is being set aside and has no legal effect," and calling it the worst case of prosecutorial misconduct he'd ever seen.[105] He also initiated a criminal contempt investigation of six members of the prosecution. Although an internal probe by the Office of Professional Responsibility was already underway, Sullivan said he was not willing to trust it due to the "shocking and disturbing" nature of the misconduct.[106]

In 2012, the Special Counsel report on the case was released. It said,[107]

The investigation and prosecution of U.S. Senator Ted Stevens were permeated by the systematic concealment of significant exculpatory evidence which would have independently corroborated Senator Stevens’s defense and his testimony, and seriously damaged the testimony and credibility of the government’s key witness.

— Special Counsel Report

And because of their mis-conduct the Dems gained a Senate seat and the people got ass-raped with Obamacare. Otherwise Stevens is re-elected and the Senate never get cloture.

Hi!

[bluetick]

The PD didn't do the town any favors. Claiming self-defense for their officer right out of the gate...was more instinctive than it was calculating. Right away you knew you had a bullet-riddled teen-ager who was unarmed, with eye-witnesses saying things about hands in the air. At the very least you take a neutral tone.