Sutton's media pitch on Border Patrol agents' conviction may be a spitball

narconews, the narcosphere ^ | January 20,2007 | Bill Conroy

[Kenny Bunk]

.....But Sutton wasn’t on Fox to address the House of Death. In fact, Sutton has refused to comment publicly on that case... strange seeing him make an appearance on national TV to address another case that has caused quite a stir in the conservative blogosphere.

... a prosecution carried out by Sutton’s office that was brought to national attention by Lou Dobbs of CNN.

Sutton’s appearance was an effort to spin the story in his favor. .... found it very fascinating, given that Sutton has refused to talk to Narco News (or any other media for that matter) about the House of Death mass murder.

Surely, though, if Sutton were to finally step into the media limelight to spin out talking points on the House of Death, his defense of actions taken by his office in that case would be grounded on the same philosophic underpinning that he is advancing in the case of the Border Patrol agents.

After all, in both cases, law enforcers have been accused of violating the civil rights of Mexican nationals through acts of violence and then working to cover-up evidence of those violations.

<

But that’s where Sutton’s talking points begin to lose their spin, because unlike the Border Patrol agents' case, Sutton himself is allegedly part of the cover-up in the House of Death case. And, unlike the case of Ramos and Compean, there has been no criminal prosecution pursued by Sutton’s office, or anyone within the Department of Justice, of law enforcers involved in the House of Death case to date.

Yet, for some reason as yet not clear, the conservative blog world, even the mainstream press, have failed to connect these two cases in any meaningful way, to point out the hypocrisy of Sutton’s media talking points.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Issaquahking, why haven't you delivered the transcript to Congress? What are you trying to hide?

What, you say, you aren't responsible for transcripts?

Neither is the Prosecuting attorney.

Might as well ask guest on Meet The Press why they haven't reprinted their transcripts yet.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Hey look, real left-wing moonbats agree with those who think Sutton is a bad man. Yes, by all means, you should trust this source, it's probably about as good as the talking points put out by the BP agent apologists.

[Kenny Bunk]

Yes, by all means, you should trust this source, it's probably about as good as the talking points put out by the BP agent apologists.

Insofar as this source shed some light into some very dark Johnny Sutton-DEA-DOJ-US Attorney corners, I did "trust" it. However, although I was born at night, it wasn't last night!

Delving into their coverage of other stories at the suggestion of the team here, and checking out various personalities on the masthead (insofar as is possible, because I am suspicious that some are writing under pseudonyms)I'll plagiarize from Ronald Reagan:

Trust, but verify.