[pissant]

Have you talked to Hunter about it? Or Rohrbacher. Call their congressional offices. At Hunter’s office, ask for Vicki Middleton.

[flattorney]

Ignore this uneducated pro-Johnny Sutton troll. As to his Duncan Hunter ignorant bashing post, Duncan can't garner the necessary support to get his bill through Congress. It's that simple.

Posted for FlAttorney by TAB

[Bob J]

Hunter and Rohrbacher know this. My question is why so many people on FR have been demanding a pardon (which Bush won’t do because they are not innocent of the charges related to the cover up) or putting all their hopes in a retrial (where is dangerous and problematic in itself) when the quickest answer lies right in front of them/

Let me tell you something about a retrial...it could end up worse for R&C and why I question the motives, if not the sanity, of people demanding one. If the justices hearing the appeal rule the 10 year mand out and give them a new trial, they are still on the hook for the assault and obstruction of justices charges. During the first trial and because of the 10 year mand, the judge did everything she could to minimize the sentences on these issues, only giving 1 and 2 years.

At a new trial the judge won’t be so constrained and may want to make an example of R&C and throw the book at them. And don’t believe this is not a possibility. There is no doubt, IMO, Ramos and Compean lied about what happened out there that day and no doubt Compean engaged in a cover up and destruction of evidence. Compeans cover up cost two other Border Agents their jobs and the judge and jury will take this into consideration.

If Hunter were to introduce legislation on the 10 year mand that gets R&C off the hook, they are out of jail as soon as their other time on the other charges is up. In other words, the one and two years remain as they are and cannot be increased.

So why would people support 2 strategies that may end up worse for R&C instead of the clean cut route?