Message from Attorney on Traficant's Appeal

Hot Seat for Judges ^ | 07-25-2002 | Linda Kennedy

[Middle Man]

It looks like I can stay licensed as an attorney through my appeal so I will be directly helping Jim Traficant with his appeal. Many of you have volunteered to assist and I will be taking you up on that offer, and look forward to working with many of you who have taught me many new ideas. I greatly appreciate it.

The purpose of this email is to update everyone on what happened last night in the expulsion of Traficant, to give Traficant's position, to update you on what is happening around America that is not being reported by the biased media, and to give ideas and ask for suggestions on what we can do about it (your legal, nonviolent ideas are welcome).

First, we all need to remind others that this Traficant issue is not about political views, and not even about guilt or innocence. How can anyone decide guilt or innocence if the courts are so unfair, politically and financially motivated, or just plain corrupt, that the truth cannot be determined? That is the issue, friends, and that is why we rally around this public figure. In addition, we have a public figure who was elected by the people of his district, who was speaking out against the IRS, the Department of Justice (hello), against the Ruby Ridge and Waco government debacles (Reno), etc., who now appears to be targeted for total destruction and is to be silenced in spite of documented corruption in the courts (there have been admissions).

I spoke to Jim's office yesterday and then again early this morning. Let me summarize what happened and also tell you what the biased media is not reporting. First, before the vote for expulsion occurred, there was a motion to stay all proceedings until September, in order to look into the alleged corruption by the judge and prosecutor in his case. TRAFICANT WON the oral motion! However, Hefly put the pressure on Congress by asking for an electronic count, and amazingly, not one Congressman was willing to record a vote for Traficant. Does this tell anyone else anything? Isn't it apparent that someone(s) or something(s) has pressured Congress to vote against Traficant? By time the expulsion vote came to the floor, every Congressman in the room knew that no matter what they did orally, there would be the same intimidative electronic recording of their vote. The best Traficant's hard-core supporters could do was to write their name as a no-vote. And then of course you have Condit who had his own reasons for supporting Traficant, which the media is jumping all over to further discredit Traficant. Who or what is intimidating Congress, friends? Who or what is making our leaders total wimps on national TV, afraid of their own shadows? Doesn't this tell us something very important about who/what is really in control of this nation--and even more-- who is not (the people)?

Secondly, some have asked me why Traficant did not take more of his 45 minutes to discuss the corruption with the judge and questionable adverse witnesses who had financial interests with the Judge and the Judge's husband. Jim was told before the hearing that the Congress DID NOT CARE what type of trial he had. His witnesses were excluded both from trial and from the Ethics Hearings. So Traficant had to concentrate on the Congress's use of hearsay transcripts when Traficant was willing to produce live witnesses stating that they were threatened by the prosecutor and the IRS to lie against Traficant. CONGRESS DID NOT CARE WHAT KIND OF TRIAL HE HAD? Isn't it Congress's job to oversee the judges? But they did not care?

And of course there are the issues of the jury. Not only was there a Congressional rush to pass a bill disallowing TRAFICANT to have jurors from his own district, but jurors are now coming forward who were not even in his district, with stories which are bringing to light that the fix was on. Exposed on JAIL's Hotseat for Judges radio show last night, was the story of one juror who with only one week left in a 2-3 month trial, had a death in the family. He received special permission from the judge to attend the funeral. He was assigned a U.S. Marshall to make sure he would get back to the hearing fast. As indicated, the Marshall raced the juror back to the hearing. The juror, however, found out upon his arrival, that he was replaced and dismissed by the prosecutor. This was without Jim's agreement. Since his dismissal, it has been learned that this juror was very pro-Traficant. Not only is this unlawful, but how did the court and prosecutor know that this juror would damage their push to injustice against Traficant? Were there ears in the jury room? Were some of the jurors on the take and sent a message to the prosecutor and Judge informing them of this man's pro-Traficant position? What exactly happened here? This juror has agreed to help Traficant in any way he can because he knows that something is very wrong. There are other jury stories that I have put out before you earlier that I will not repeat here, which further stated that something was not right and that even these jurors who are not trained as many of you, were seeing it.

Ok, so what do we do? What do we do when Congress is not listening to the people? What do we do when the majority of Congress was willing to stay the proceedings until they were intimidated into recording an electronic vote, and then ran for cover, selling out Traficant on national TV? What do we do when the Courts are being bombarded with 372 complaints and in spite of it, Judge Wells, who has a financial interest in this matter (among other conflicts) just dismissed some of Traficant's motions in spite of her exposed conflicts of interest? What do we do when Elsebeth Baumgartner, suspended Ohio attorney who was trying to get the government to investigate major corruption in Ohio, is now going through a criminal proceeding today and tomorrow, which could put her in jail for 6 months (which is not even lawful)? I hope many have shown up for her hearing today and will show up tomorrow in Port Clinton, Ohio Municipal Court. She has spoken for us and we need to be there for her too. I am open to suggestions friends, as long as they are nonviolent and legal. Let's put our heads together, friends. Here are some things that we must do:

1) Is there any doubt that we need JAIL to be passed friends? We have to get the people back over this rogue leadership. We have no more time to talk about it. We must be led to act now.

2) If you believe that there has been judicial and prosecutorial corruption, then continue to file complaints. You can get directions and forms, and see samples, including 4 new ones on: http://www.mikebrownsolutions.com/traficant/drywells.htm as well as some other great sites.

3) There is an election coming up and we need to not just feel good about putting in our vote, but we need to get others who usually do not vote, registered and to the ballot box (drive them there), and get them to vote against ANY MEMBER OF CONGRESS who acted so cowardly as they did yesterday, to vote out an elected official without first investigating documented claims of corruption. In particular, we need to vote out the Congressmen in the following states if they are up for a vote: Missouri, California, Ohio, Colorado, as they showed extra venom in their speeches and their reliance on obvious tainted court proceedings. Additionally, at least one (Jones from Ohio), whose own character and honesty has been brought into question in Ohio, told Congress to ignore all the evidence and expel Traficant anyway--WOW!

4) We need to rally around Ohio and help Dan Charles (National Director) and John Francis (Ohio Director), of the American First Party in any way we can, to help Traficant get re-elected. Web site for the American First Party is: http://www.americafirstparty.org . Remember that this is not about being loyal to one party or another, it is about taking back America and we need to put up a great effort to show Congress and the Courts that they cannot continue to do this without repercussions from the people. What better message than a very strong showing for Traficant. Just because we are not all Ohioians we can still help.

5) We need to fight against any electronic voting. The ballots are corrupt enough. With electronics, whoever controls the hard drive controls the election. This election is going to be very big and those opposing Traficant will do anything to stop him from being reelected.

6) We need to continue to rally together. We need to be activists in action and not just in words. We have not lost until we decide we have lost. This is not over unless we decide it is over. If we do that, then all we have left is to lick our own wounds and admit defeat. No way, friends! No way!

[Middle Man]

I've been in email contact with this individual and she fills in some gaps (Baumgartner angle, push for electronic vote in Congress) that have not been covered elsewhere. In addition to being an attorney she is the host for the "Hot Seat For Judges" radio show.

[Middle Man]

Ping

[PJ-Comix]

First, before the vote for expulsion occurred, there was a motion to stay all proceedings until September, in order to look into the alleged corruption by the judge and prosecutor in his case. TRAFICANT WON the oral motion!

I still can't figure out why Congress couldn't WAIT for just 6 weeks until they came back into session to vote on expulsion. There was no Congressional business during that period so Traficant wouldn't even be able to do anything in Congress during that period. If they waited, at least they could have seen how the appeals process went. Instead, they RUSHED to judgement and acted like they were railroading Traficant out of office.

[Sunshine Sister]

The third paragraph tells me all I need to know. How can the man not be guilty if a jury considered the evidence and found him to be guilty?

[PJ-Comix]

What do we do when Elsebeth Baumgartner, suspended Ohio attorney who was trying to get the government to investigate major corruption in Ohio, is now going through a criminal proceeding today and tomorrow, which could put her in jail for 6 months (which is not even lawful)?

Among her charges are that of corruption by the hubby of Judge Wells---Charles Clark. This is the same guy who Traficant alleges was in business dealings with the prosecution. At least INVESTIGATE this allegation!!!

[weikel]

They didn't act like they were railroading him they were railroading him. Same thing happened to Nixon and I guess anyone else who PO's the Washington establishment.

[Middle Man]

When you go, as Traficant did, to the heart of what's wrong with this country -- big government -- no effort will be spared to silence you. These forces are becoming more brazen every day.

[Middle Man]

The author addresses that point -- and it's a valid one -- in Paragraph 6.

There are too many loose ends about this case. We have mass murderers in and out of government who beat the system for years on end, or never even make it to trial, yet this whole episode -- from indictment to expulsion -- happened within months. And this is only the second time in our history a sitting member has been ejected. Why the rush to judgment?

[sandydipper]

Traficant was guilty - he should go. Toricelli is guilty he sould be in jail. Clinton is guilty he should be in jail.

Traficant oughta rat out the worthless S/H's and write a book.

[Ravenstar]

I think you are being naive. Trafficant had become an independant so he had become a danger of doing what he wanted to. The "Reporats" of Congress knew the danger! I want you to notice that the Clinton and Torricelli evidence are well documented and incontrivertible. Trafficant's charges are documented by hearsay and innuendo. Clinton and Torricelli skate, Trafficant evicted with in months of being charged. Condit was told by the Demorats to vote for Trafficant to complete the guilt by association process. He was being a good Demorat or he would be ratted out as to his full involvement with Chandra. If you want to take your country back go to AmericaFirstParty.org. Note the justice department of BUSH under ASHCROFT is not going after Slick or Torricelli. Doesn't this even make you wonder????

Ravenstar

[Alberta's Child]

Here's an interesting repeat post from an earlier thread that I posted over the weekend. Traficant had no interest in "rooting out corruption" or "ending big government" or anything of that sort -- he was an opportunist who began casting votes with the Republican majority in Congress when it became clear to him that they would eventually decide whether to throw him out of Congress or not.

Traficant's lifetime American Conservative Untion (ACU) voting record is as follows:

1985 -- 0
1986 -- 9
1987 -- 5
1988 -- 8
1989 -- 25
1990 -- 13
1991 -- 15
1992 -- 8
1993 -- 21
1994 -- 33
1995 -- 48
1996 -- 50
1997 -- 76
1998 -- 64
1999 -- 52
2000 -- 60
2001 -- 76

Overall -- 34

I simply cannot understand how anyone who considered himself or herself a principled concervative could ever shed any tears over this loser. Those single-digit ratings from early in his career put him down in Maxine Waters territory, and he never even came close to a rating of 50 until after the Republicans took over control of the House in 1995.

And standing there with an oversized Brillo pad on your head complaining about the people in government who are pursuing a criminal investigation against you hardly makes you a principled public servant. He sounded no different than James Carville even on his best day.

[carenot]

I still can't figure out why Congress couldn't WAIT for just 6 weeks until they came back into session to vote on expulsion.

Richard Detore testified his lawyer in 2001 told him that "This administration wants him (Traficant) out."

They told Detore that Reno was not AG at that time. He said, "I know."

You can watch it again at C-Span.org

[Middle Man]

Dems seem to cross party lines (Sens. Nighthorse and Shelby, to name two) more easily than Republicans. Sometimes they do it just to win an election.

But like the Dems that voted for Reagan, he may have found himself over the course of his legislative career becoming more alienated from the...makeup and direction of the Democratic Party of today. Nothing wrong with growing in office.

[carenot]

. How can the man not be guilty if a jury considered the evidence and found him to be guilty?

There was only hearsay evidence from convicted felons that were promised easier time if they would lie about Traficant.

No FBI testimony, no fingerprints, no videos, no wiretaps, no nothing.

I need to watch the tape again where one of the idiot congressmen said Traficant was too smart to get caught! I can't remember his name.

[Alberta's Child]

It's one thing to "grow" while you're in office, but you simply don't go from an ACU rating of 0 to an ACU rating of 76 in the course of your career and call yourself "principled" by any stretch of the imagination. The fact that he was a bordeline communist until after the Republicans gained control of the House is just too much of a coincidence for me.

[Marysecretary]

It makes you wonder who has the goods on Bush and Ashcroft. Blackmail, maybe? I think they're both good men and men of integrity but may have something in their pasts that could really hurt them now.

[carenot]

Traficant was guilty - he should go.

Traficant is not guilty, and we need a lot more like him.

We don't need the people that voted to expel Traficant after they said they didn't believe he was guilty.

[carenot]

. Note the justice department of BUSH under ASHCROFT is not going after Slick or Torricelli. Doesn't this even make you wonder????

Not me. I expected it.

[Ohioan]

You may be doing Trafficant a major injustice. If you look at how far Left some men who had been Conservatives before FDR, swung in the 1930s, you will realize that changing one's direction is nothing new. Certainly Trafficant looks better than some Democrats who started out knowing what was right, and then to humor Roosevelt embraced what was wrong.

There is also a period in there, when he had beaten one set of charges, and was not under any immdediate attack, where he still continued to move to the Right--even though he comes from what has traditionally been the most "Liberal" section of my State.

There has been enough that is questionable about the drive to convict Trafficant, from my perspective, that I will withhold judgment on the merits of the Court Case. As for a man, who has increasingly expressed views with which I agree, and who has been unafraid to denounce outrages which should be denounced; I would be very unfair indeed, not to thank him for those views, even as I applaud those denunciations.

There is nothing about Jim Trafficant which would suggest a fawner. He is his own man; and has long demonstrated the fact.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[carenot]

Seems to me he went in believing in the Democrat Party, and learned about them and the Republicans as he went along.

He always voted what he thought was best for his constiuents.