Sign in to follow this  
Nailing Malarkey Too

Majority Think Senior Law Enforcement Officials Broke Law

Recommended Posts

Those who do not learn from history....

"In 2008, Senator Theodore "Ted" Stevens (R-AK) was running for re-election for his seventh term.  He was also a criminal defendant in a case over which I was presiding.  After a four week trial, and about one week prior to election day, a jury found Senator Stevens guilty of lying on Senate disclosure forms.  Stevens lost the election, a Democrat replaced him, and the balance of power shifted in the Senate.  This consequential chain of events may well have turned out differently had the government followed the law because during the course of post-trial proceedings, it became clear that the Stevens prosecution was permeated by systematic concealment of evidence favorable to the Senator in violation of the law, the Constitution, and the prosecutors' ethical duties"....

...After an investigation of nearly three years, during which both Senator Stevens and one of the attorneys who prosecuted him died, and following extensive collateral proceedings, Mr. Schuelke's report was made public. Based on his exhaustive investigation, Mr. Schuelke and his colleague William Shields concluded that "[t]he investigation and prosecution of U.S. Senator Ted Stevens were permeated by the systematic concealment of significant exculpatory evidence which would have independently corroborated [his] defense and his testimony, and seriously damaged the testimony and credibility of the government's key witness." Mr. Schuelke further found that at least some of the concealment was willful and intentional, and related to many of the issues raised by the defense during the course of the Stevens trial.

Judge Emmet Sullivan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dog said:

Those who do not learn from history....

"In 2008, Senator Theodore "Ted" Stevens (R-AK) was running for re-election for his seventh term.  He was also a criminal defendant in a case over which I was presiding.  After a four week trial, and about one week prior to election day, a jury found Senator Stevens guilty of lying on Senate disclosure forms.  Stevens lost the election, a Democrat replaced him, and the balance of power shifted in the Senate.  This consequential chain of events may well have turned out differently had the government followed the law because during the course of post-trial proceedings, it became clear that the Stevens prosecution was permeated by systematic concealment of evidence favorable to the Senator in violation of the law, the Constitution, and the prosecutors' ethical duties"....

...After an investigation of nearly three years, during which both Senator Stevens and one of the attorneys who prosecuted him died, and following extensive collateral proceedings, Mr. Schuelke's report was made public. Based on his exhaustive investigation, Mr. Schuelke and his colleague William Shields concluded that "[t]he investigation and prosecution of U.S. Senator Ted Stevens were permeated by the systematic concealment of significant exculpatory evidence which would have independently corroborated [his] defense and his testimony, and seriously damaged the testimony and credibility of the government's key witness." Mr. Schuelke further found that at least some of the concealment was willful and intentional, and related to many of the issues raised by the defense during the course of the Stevens trial.

Judge Emmet Sullivan

You point of the other side having done the same is duly noted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

You point of the other side having done the same is duly noted.

That makes it O/K doesn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2018 at 4:17 PM, Dog said:

It would mine. I doubt there is another person in America who if found with the shit she had on the computer would not have been charged. Cal20sailor had TS clearance and I asked him what would have happened to him. Not surprisingly he ignored my question.

Then there is the Stzork/Page texts with the "insurance policy. The nepotistic connection between the DOJ and Fusion GPS via the Ohr's. The spate of resignations and reassignments among the various players. Political contributions to McCabe's wife and his failure to recuse. The reluctance to comply with subpoenas. The use of the dossier in the FISA applications. Comey's admitted leaking of confidential information to prompt a special prosecutor......on and on....

Oh, there's smoke, more every day.

Why are you putting people in such danger here, when you were so opposed to it when the questions were about law enforcement and dead black folks?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Why are you putting people in such danger here, when you were so opposed to it when the questions were about law enforcement and dead black folks?  

My problem with the BLM claims of systemic targeting of blacks by law enforcement is not that they should not be investigated but that they had been and the claims are false. There are individual cases but the facts do not support a systemic targeting.  That and the fact that the accusers who purport to be concerned about blacks ignore a very real threat to blacks...Black on black crime.

You're doggiestyling again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dog said:

My problem with the BLM claims of systemic targeting of blacks by law enforcement is not that they should not be investigated but that they had been and the claims are false. There are individual cases but the facts do not support a systemic targeting.  That and the fact that the accusers who purport to be concerned about blacks ignore a very real threat to blacks...Black on black crime.

You're doggiestyling again.

Your second "fact", that accusers ignore black on black crime isn't a fact at all. It's an opinion.

First, rates of black on black violence is the same as white-on-white violence when compared by income level

Most whites are killed by whites, just as most blacks are killed by blacks (84 vs 90%)

Finally, rates of participation in "Stop the Violence" marches far outnumber that in BLM protests.

So please, learn the difference between creating Fake News and writing an opinion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this just in, the majority is susceptible to propaganda. As Eva Dent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this