Posted on 04/02/2009 4:34:22 AM PDT by jmaroneps37
April 1, 2009 In Alaska, Many See Stevens As Good As Vindicated
Ted Stevens lost his bid for an eighth full term in office just days after he was convicted in October. Getty Images
Attorney General Holder's Statement On The Stevens Case "In connection with the post-trial litigation in United States v. Theodore F. Stevens, the Department of Justice has conducted a review of the case, including an examination of the extent of the disclosures provided to the defendant. After careful review, I have concluded that certain information should have been provided to the defense for use at trial. In light of this conclusion, and in consideration of the totality of the circumstances of this particular case, I have determined that it is in the interest of justice to dismiss the indictment and not proceed with a new trial....
(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...
They did. And Republicans will do nothing about it
And yet Democrats what we KNOW are corrupt continue to be in office.
Reid
Pelosi
Feinstein
Boxer
Jefferson
Rangel
Obama
There is more behind this than meets the eye. I can see this shaping up to turn the investigation of Jefferson into another pardon or null and void the Deep Freeze bribe money to him.
The prosecutors should lose their law license.
This is another nifong moment.
If this was an ordinary citizen the prosecutors would have just allowed the innocent to rot in jail on the theory “well they must be guilty of something.”
All the lawyers involved need to have heads roll.
OK. Which is MORE INFURIATING?
A. That the DEMOCRATS would willfully do this OR
B. That the REPUBLICANS would willfully do NOTHING AT ALL?
All I hear is the SOUND OF SILENCE
I agree that there is something else behind this. Granted, the prosecutorial misconduct was really blatant in this case, but when has that ever bothered a leftist such as Holder?
I think this is being done to set the stage for something else.
we need a NEW PARTY.
obviously the old one is run by a bunch of cunning runts and please excuse my dyslexia.
The real question is why Mukasey couldn't see this misconduct while it was happening.
—as on all threads on this subject , it needs to be pointed out that it was the Bush Administration Dep’t of “Justice” that brought the charges-—
The only people Bush replaced were higher level people among the prosecutors, and then the Dems threatened to take him to court even for that (although he was perfectly within his rights). Clinton fired and replaced ALL prosecutors, and a lot of them remained throughout Bush’s term and are still in place.
I’m not defending Stevens, who probably is an old-style wheeler-dealer like Byrd and a number of others, but the prosecutorial misconduct included things like withholding exculpatory evidence, etc. This indicates to me that it was a politically motivated prosecution, probably intended to get Stevens out of his position so they could get a Dem in who would be more sympathetic to Dem radical environmental, anti-petroleum goals in Alaska.
Bush never intervened in prosecutions, even when they were unfair and obviously political, and clearly no one else in his Admin was permitted to do so, either.
I am sure this is actually a set-up for something else. As pointed out, the Dems had already achieved their objective (getting Stevens’ seat) and the prosecution was by now a moot point. Perhaps Holder knew that the misconduct would come out during any appeal, and perhaps there was something worse he wanted to hide. Or perhaps this is a set-up so that he can invalidate some future or current prosecution of a Dem.
Not likely to be about Jefferson. More likely about helping Blago and Burris. Blago will know lots of secrets about Obama and Rahm. The prosecutor in the case has already been accused of misconduct.
The conduct on the part of the part of the prosecutors must have been egregious, if the indictment is being dropped.
Malicious prosecution.
Democrats used the Stevens charges against Palin, lumping her in with him to imply that all Alaskan Republicans were corrupt.
In August/Sept., the stories of Stevens and Palin firing the policeman were often reported in one breath as if they were related to each other. There was a purpose in that and it was malicious.
I heard they ignored evidence that would have cleared him. What did they actually do?
And her bio is here:
http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/facinfo/tab_faculty.cfm?Status=Faculty&ID=1997
DC is one big cess pool.
Vince
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.