Prosecutors recommend that Don Siegelman be sentenced to 20 years.

[madfloridian]

This literally makes me sick inside.

Developing story: Siegelman Trial

Federal prosecutors have recommended that former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman be sentenced to 20 years in prison when he receives a new sentencing hearing in federal court in Montgomery.

That’s a much longer sentence than the more than seven-year prison term Siegelman originally received for his 2006 conviction in a federal government corruption case. The recommendation comes after a panel of three appellate judges dismissed two of the seven charges the former governor was convicted of and ordered a new sentencing hearing.

Prosecutors made the recommendation in a letter to federal probation officers. The probation officers will prepare a report recommending a new sentence to U.S. District Judge Mark Fuller.

Do you remember the discussions here last year when a man now advising President Obama said that Democrats should not be prosecuting anyone from the previous administration?

Top Dems say keep harmony, protect Bush. Don Siegelman says "give me a break."

Politicians, legal experts and progressive activists grappled with Republican abuses of power at the third annual netroots convention on Friday, debating how an Obama Administration might restore the rule of law. Cass Sunstein, an adviser to Barack Obama from the University of Chicago Law School, cautioned against prosecuting criminal conduct from the current Administration. Prosecuting government officials risks a "cycle" of criminalizing public service, he argued, and Democrats should avoid replicating retributive efforts like the impeachment of President Clinton--or even the "slight appearance" of it. Update: Sunstein emailed to emphasize that he also said and believes that "egregious crimes should not be ignored."

Don Siegelman had something to say on that statement, but I guess no one is paying attention.

"Give me a break," responded former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman, when told about Sunstein's advice during an interview with The Nation. Siegelman took a court-sanctioned trip to tell attendees about his conviction for corruption, currently on appeal, which he says was motivated by a malicious Republican effort to destroy his career. Discussing alleged White House abuse of the Justice Department, which led to Alberto Gonzales' resignation, Siegelman said "what Karl Rove has been accused of doing would make Watergate look like child's play." The former governor also urged activists to press Congress to hold Rove in contempt for defying a House subpoena in a related investigation. His supporters have launched an Internet campaign, ContemptforRove.org, to advance the cause.

Glenn Greenwald also quoted Democrats Harold Ford and Chuck Schumer:

Salon: Political harmony v. the rule of law: an easy choice for the political establishment

Schumer:

Jane Mayer: Since you're in New York, let me tell you about a conversation I had with one of your senators, Chuck Schumer. When I asked him why, given his safe seat, and ostensible concern for civil liberties, he didn't speak out more against the Bush Administration's detention and interrogation programs, he said in essence that voters don't care about these issues. So, he said, he wasn't going to talk about them.

Harold Ford:

Former Congressman Harold Ford appeared at the Netroots Nation conference yesterday, argued that Bush officials shouldn't be held accountable for crimes they committed while in office, and then insisted that Democrats shouldn't be expected to defend civil liberties and Constitutional rights because "the Constitution doesn't poll very well." In arguing against prosecutions for Bush lawbreaking, Ford said that Bush officials already have been subjected to accountability for their lawbreaking: "'I think that accountability was brought in 2006 when lost in the House and the Senate,' Ford said. 'And we have only eight more months of George W. Bush . . .'"

What is happening to Don Siegelman is more than unconstitutional, it is a crime.

[annabanana]

1. What the hell is going ON down there?

I can't believe this is happening.....

[L. Coyote]

42. Politics as usual! And it needs to be stopped permanently. The Bush Junta

was an overthrow of the US Executive accomplished by illegal political conduct.
Allowing this kind of politics DOES have consequences! Every judge Bush appointed
needs to be closely examined for participation in political conspiracy of the criminal kind!

[sarah FAILIN]

43. I keep telling people it's red state hell down here

But you just don't realize how bad unless you live here in Al.

[merh]

2. It was referenced in the other thread - the AP article

The sentence was in the first sentence of the article. You didn't pay attention or you just don't like to post accurately. Also, your post has not included the clarification that was made in the other thread, that is the prosecutors seeking the increase in sentence are still the Bush appointed prosecutors. They are the Rove toys.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5640388

[madfloridian]

3. I missed it. If the same prosecutor is there...why? Why the same one?

I did not see the number of years. Apparently my over 30 years of teaching taught me nothing. :shrug:

BOY, this board is smoking today if anyone is not perfect.

:shrug:

I gave up reading the whole thread.

[merh]

5. You didn't read the thread

Federal Prosecutors Want Siegelman To Get A Longer Sentence
by RogerShuler
Tue May 12, 2009 at 11:37:40 AM PDT

Federal prosecutors will seek a 20-year prison sentence for former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman . . .

It only had 20 replies, you could have returned to it and read it for clarification, read the replies and even kicked it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5640388

[madfloridian]

6. What is wrong with you?

Why are you being so picky on this. I missed the number of years. It is not a case to be so ugly.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[madfloridian]

8. It IS the responsibility of this administration.

This IS the responsibility of the president. It IS the responsibility of the administration.

If Don Siegelman goes back to jail, someone will have to answer.

[merh]

9. Chances are Siegelman will go back to jail.

Siegelman appealed his case and 2 of the convictions were thrown out and the conviction for the bribery was upheld.

The 11th Circuit sent his case back to the federal court for purposes of resentencing. It is unlikely that the court will go for the 20 years as that is against the 5th amendment and legal precedence.

What may come of the federal prosecutors' efforts is that Holder may actually pay attention to this, he may see it as an effort on the part of the prosecutors to punish Siegelman for appealing his case and for publicizing their corruption. That may what tips the scale and makes Holder step in.

Like I said, if this interested you so, you could have kicked that other thread - the one that contained legitimate discussion and information.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sabrina 1]

57. But the point is

that the DOJ can step in because of the allegations of corruption. This recommendation for a longer sentence is still based on a corrupt process so it is, or ought to be, meaningless.

What may come of the federal prosecutors' efforts is that Holder may actually pay attention to this, he may see it as an effort on the part of the prosecutors to punish Siegelman for appealing his case and for publicizing their corruption.

Since the corruption WAS publicized, what has been done about it, and what excuse is there for Holder to do nothing about it when he did do something about Stevens' case? Why should he have to wait for something like this, assuming you might be right, to get involved? He certainly is familiar with the case isn't he?

[merh]

63. The OPR is the division of the DOJ that investigates allegations

of prosecutorial misconduct or abuses. It is investigating this matter and others like it.

Holder named Mary Patrice Brown as head of the OPR on April 8, 2009. The Siegelman case is not the only case - it is just one of dozens and it is not in the same posture that the Stevens case was when the DOJ withdrew the charges. The Stevens judge was the one that didn't let the prosecutor play their corrupt games, in the Siegelman case, the district judge is part of the corruptions.

I could give provide you a very long list of differences and try to explain the system to you, but I doubt it would have any impact. If you truly cared and truly wanted to know, you would do a little research and use reason.

As I said, this action by the Alabama AUSA gives the Siegelman team more ammunition - it allows them to continue to argue that the office is not about justice and all about vendettas and misconduct. Maybe you will take the time to write Holder and Brown a letter objecting to the continued abuses, maybe you will sign the petition to get Obama's DOJ nominees confirmed. It will take having all those offices manned before the state offices can be addressed.

[sabrina 1]

66. Thank you for the information

The difference in the two judges in both these cases, as you point out, does explain a lot. But we knew that, as does the DOJ, I would imagine. I see your point that this may give ammunition to the dept that is investigating the case as it is so outrageous. We'll see what they do about it.

As for your insinuation that I don't care enough to write or call, I just called Holder's office about 20 minutes ago and found that they are apparently getting many calls over this and was told they are very familiar with the case. I have asked for a return call to answer several questions I asked, which I probably won't get, but if not, I fully intend to call again, and again.

Justice delayed is truly justice denied. I fail to understand why in this country, it takes so long, many times too late for those wrongfully accused, to get someone to pay attention to their cases. Apparently our system is very broken and cannot in any way be called a democracy anymore, until these issues, people's very freedom, literally, are of paramount importance to those we elect.

While I get what you are saying, I find it appalling that there are so many excuses for not getting the job done, especially one as important as the right to a fair trial. I refuse to accept those excuses. What we need are more competent people in charge of these affairs. The rest of us cannot make these excuses for not getting our work done, even though in many cases, it is far less important work than what these people are charged with.

[merh]

67. You can bet that I wish it were as simple as folks think it should be.

I would rather it be easy, to have Holder say "release them all". That is not going to happen, it cannot be that simple - that would make a mockery of the system and would be politicizing the DOJ. Each case has to be reviewed and looked at thoroughly and professionally. The Stevens case was still in the hands of the lower court and the decision by the DOJ to dismiss the case was something they could do, it had not yet been finalized and appealed.

Siegelman's case is still on appeal (from what I read he intends to appeal his conviction to SCOTUS but I haven't seen any pleadings to that effect).

This effort by the Alabama US Attorney's Office, by the prosecutors, to increase the sentence beyond what they recommended at the original sentencing is something that Holder and the OPR can look into and possibly do something about. In addition, it is just another example of that office's efforts to abuse and misuse the office, they seem to be trying to punish Siegelman for perfecting his right to appeal and for getting some of the convictions reversed.

Please understand, correcting the abuses of the bush admin cannot be accomplished overnight. I don't know which dems in Alabama hold any power, they would be the ones that suggest the nominees for the US Attorney posts in that state. Once that happens, the heads of the different DOJ departments would review the suggested nominees. Since the Office of Criminal Investigation and the Civil Rights Division heads have yet to be confirmed, nominating lawyers to work under them in the US Attorney offices in the states seems unlikely. First you get the folks in the key posts, then you nominate the ones that work for them in each state.

And Siegelman isn't the only one that was subjected to political prosecution, there are others (including Siegelman's co-defendant - can you name him) and most of the others are actually serving their sentence. It would be great if they were freed and their convictions overturned, the prosecution dismissed.

It will take time, instead of being angry with the administration try to help them get the DOJ nominees confirmed so that they can do their jobs. Circulate those petitions and write letters to Holder and Brown. Complaints in writing have a greater impact than phone calls.

Also, if you know anyone in Alabama, find out if a potential list of nominees for the US Attorney job has been given to the Obama staff. If not, find out why not and when it will be done.

[sabrina 1]

72. good suggestions

However, to those awaiting justice, it what you suggest needs to be done before they can have any hope of having their cases addressed, we will have to go through several more election cycles. That is a long, long time if you are wasting away in a prison.

I thought that is what we were doing in the last several election cycles and that we prevailed when the Dems won the House, the Senate and the WH and that at least some of these issues would be addressed before the next election.

[merh]

74. You have a very naive and unrealistic expectation.

And the fight for those in prison continues, working positively toward justice is a much healthier means to achieve it than is the uninformed and unrealistic demands and expectations.

As I said, Siegelman's case isn't the only case - there are a great many of them and each person charged thinks that his/her case is the most important.

The efforts continue, you can be angry that they aren't happening the way you think they should happen today or you can take steps to try to make them happen - your choice.

[sabrina 1]

76. If that is the case, that I am naive and unrealistic

to expect people to just do the jobs they were elected to do, especially the 'good guys', the ones we picked because they promised to do better than the ones we fired, that is a terrible indictment of this democracy. I'd rather have high expectations of our elected officials than to believe that the entire system is so rotten that it cannot be fixed even when we work hard to put in place a government that claimed to be aware of the work needed to be done. Why keep working on that if we keep hearing the same excuses?

This is what we heard in 2006 after the Dems won a majority ~ back then it was 'we need a bigger majority'. So we got it, and the message now is, 'things are so bad, how can you expect them to fix anything until we go through more election cycles'.

Sorry, I expect people who are hired to clean up a mess, to at least show some signs of doing so. The Siegelman case eg, is not just any case. It is a case that calls into question our entire democratic system of government.

If, as alleged, an elected official is subject to false prosecution and imprisonment because of politics, that undermines democracy itself and puts us in the realm of a third world dictatorship. So, with that in mind, even acknowledging that things are so bad here that they are overloaded with cases, any case that undermines the very system we claim to value so much, deserves instant attention before it becomes 'just another case'.

This case also relates to the whole corrupt Bush administration's manipulation and use of the judicial system for political purposes, such as the firing of US attorneys, and for that reason, imo, deserves priority over other cases which, if this is not addressed, leaves little hope that cases of lesser importance have any chance at all, of being addressed judiciously.

[merh]

77. You don't expect them to do their jobs.

You expect them to do what you want them to do.

One cannot expect the new prosecutors to take office and dismiss and counter the cases of the previous office holder just because the accused or convicted claim the cases were political prosecution cases. Logic and reason must dictate and that means that each case must be reviewed and handled within the system, not just a blanket dismissal because "the other guys were involved."

Likewise, the DOJ is not operating at full power, the heads of various crucial divisions have not been allowed to assume their duties. The people have been nominated but they have not been confirmed. Why is it so hard for you to understand that Holder and Obama may want their head of the criminal division to review the cases and give them his opinion regarding the criminal case and the prosecutions handling of same?

It is childish to think that just because you elected dems those dems will take office and reverse the actions of the repugs. That would be Politicizing the DOJ - that would be doing exactly what you are angry with bushco for doing.

Rove is being investigated by the DOJ, the office of OPR is reviewing these cases and conducting their own investigation. They just are not doing it as quickly as you like.

Sorry, the DOJ will never be McDonald's drive thru.

[sabrina 1]

79. So you're saying is that six months

after the election, the DOJ is basically non-functional? There is no one there who can begin the process of reviewing cases such as the Siegelman case, the issues surrounding which were considered important enough by Congress to hold hearings about it and take testimony from witnesses, releasing Siegelman from jail? That doesn't happen often, does it?

My point, which you did not address is that this case does not just affect Siegelman, it has implications that go far beyond the individuals who were targeted by a corrupt administration, with enough evidence already available that points all the way to the WH.

A list of priorities is not that difficult to make, and imho, any case that threatens the democratic system of justice we are so proud of, ought to be given priority.

Someone WAS available to review the Stevens case and to conclude that there was enough evidence to convince the Justice Dept. that the verdict was tainted by wrong-doing on the part of the prosecution.

Maybe you have information on what cases are being reviewed, unless you're saying the entire system has stopped functioning because of a change in administration.

[merh]

80. See, I know you have no sincere desire for justice or the truth.

You are just out to slam Obama's administration.

You ask "how do you know that?"

It is as elementary as it is obvious - you type "six months after the election". The date of the election is not significant. Your benchmark is as flawed as your reasoning.

The date that Obama took office is the beginning of his administration, when he first had the legal ability to do his job. To try to add extra months to the "delay" is an exaggeration done, not for the truth, but to make the admin look bad.

Your ignorance of the process is as obvious as your desire to smear the Obama administration and your efforts to distort the truth. The OPR is investigating these cases. Nora Dannehy is investigating the firings and is supposed to be interviewing Rove and his lawyer soon.

As I pointed out to you, the Stevens case was different because of the phase the case was in. The case was not final, the trial judge was the one that called the prosecutor's behavior into question. That was not the case in Siegelman's case and you should know that. Actually, I believe you acknowledged the differences in a previous post in this very thread.

Your game is boring - you don't desire justice. You have no understanding as to how the justice system works or how complicated these cases are. I laughed out loud when you typed "unless you're saying the entire system has stopped functioning because of a change in administration." It is you that thinks the entire system should stop functioning, that all work of the previous administration come to a halt and things be changed just because there is a new administration. It is hardly that simple.

By the way, congress had no hand in seeing that Siegelman be released pending his appeal. That was the 11th Circuit, that was part of the justice system, not part of the investigation into his claims. There are various divisions of the government looking into his conviction and his claims. The courts review his legal claims and congress and the DOJ are reviewing the claims of prosecutorial misconduct.

[sabrina 1]

81. I won't waste anymore time

on this. Not much point as I'm not interested in personalities, either of people I meet online, in real life or in the personalities of whatever administration happens to be in power when issues of importance to this country are at stake.

I'll leave you to your deductions about me personally, which are of zero consequence to me. However, since I know them to be so completely wrong, it puts in question everything else you have to say, and that makes any further discussion about the issue, (which is what I thought we were discussing, not me or you) a waste of time for both of us.

[madfloridian]

4. You are getting very personal here. All of this post is correct.

I resent it.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[madfloridian]

14. That is a complete personal attack.

[Elwood P Dowd]

10. Obama and Holder have known about this travesty for months, and they haven't done a damn thing.

The same republican crooks are still working for the Justice Department, and our President and AG do fucking nothing.

:mad:

[merh]

12. Do you know if the Alabama dems have given them the names

of potential nominees?

Or do you think he should ask Shelby for the names?

And instead of bitching, have you written your letter to Holder complaining about the Alabama DOJ vindictive efforts to punish Siegelman for exercising his legal right to an appeal?

[Elwood P Dowd]

15. It's been 6 months since Obama was elected.

That is no excuse. A travesty like this should have been one of his top priorities. This shit should have been fixed by now.

[madfloridian]

16. You are right.

Thanks for saying that.

[Elwood P Dowd]

18. I'm beginning to think this poster wants Siegelman back in prison.

It should NOT take 6 months to fix this. It's like something out of Nazi Germany, and Obama/Holder are letting the Nazis continue to make policy 6 months after the war is over. Keep those concentration camps running and fry a few more Jews while we decide what the fuck to do about it. Give me a break.

[merh]

21. You don't know a thing.

I'll put my efforts on behalf of Siegelman and others in his situation up against your efforts any day of the week. You make me laugh, you don't even have the courage to admit when your post is flawed and that you were mistaken.

[Elwood P Dowd]

28. "....when you post is flawed and that you were mistaken. "

What is hell is that suppose to mean? You're saying Obama and Holder are suppose to just sit on their ass and wait around for some Alabama politicians to make recommendations before anything is done about this? Just how long? How many months and years must Siegelman wait for your system to work?

[merh]

32. Why don't you do something?

The first step would be to educate yourself.

Go to this link and you will see that Obama's nominees for key DOJ posts are being stalled. Sign the petition, get involved.
https://secure.pfaw.org/site/SPageServer?pagename=rjc_doj_nominees&autologin=true&JServSessionIdr010=ag7l2o64i1.app303b

And yes, someone new has to be appointed to the district to oversee the cases that are on going. There also has to be someone appointed to head up the Criminal Division of the DOJ and that nominee has yet to be confirmed. My best guess is that there won't be nominees made for each state post until the heads of the divisions within the DOJ are confirmed. It would not be wise to nominate folks without getting the input from the Division heads within the department.

Again, instead of whining on a message board, you can take the time to write letters and join the efforts to get the nominees confirmed and justice restored.


(Edit: A note about the post you quoted. It contained a typo that was fixed before you thought yourself so clever as to question it.)

[katandmoon]

49. HOLDER needs to do it! He letTed Stevens off the hook. Siegelman deserves the same treatment!

All the letters in the world from US isn't going to do a fucking thing!

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[merh]

19. Your ignorance of the system is no excuse.

Tell me, do you think Obama knows attorneys in every state in the Union? If so, do you think he should just name the ones he knows or should he ask the people of the state to give him a list of names to consider and vet?

Do you know if Obama's nominee for head of the Office of Professional Responsibility has been approved by the Senate yet? (that would be the office that is conducting internal investigations into these abuses).

Shit like this cannot be fixed with a swipe of the hand or a dab of ink on the paper.

As I opined above, it is just possible that this effort to further punish Siegelman beyond his original sentence will be the catalyst that will make Holder react and do something. We can pray that is the case and we can stop with the stupid whining and take the time to put our complaints in writing to Obama and Holder and to Conyers and Leahy.

Of course, some folks think that posting ugly smilies on a message board makes them superior and active.

[Elwood P Dowd]

20. Your support of a so called "system" is why we and Siegelman are in this fucking mess.

Fuck your system and fix this mess now!

[merh]

23. The system cannot be fixed overnight.

This is not McDonald's drive thru.

Believe me when I tell you that I know all too well how screwed up the system is - I don't like it but I also know that the abuses and wrongs cannot be fixed overnight and will not be fixed just by my posting on some message board "fuck your system and fix this mess now."

Have you written your letter yet? Have you personally become involved and put your name out there as someone that demands the system be fixed? Have you risked your safety and peace of mind by taking a stand and by making noise?

If not then may I suggest you consider doing more than just posting on a message board.

[The Wizard]

41. The system can be fixed overnight

with the public decapitation of Karl Rove.

[merh]

27. Here you go.

If you want the system fixed, you need to get involved.
http://site.pfaw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=rjc_main

It might help if Obama's nominees for key posts with the DOJ are confirmed.
https://secure.pfaw.org/site/SPageServer?pagename=rjc_doj_nominees&autologin=true&JServSessionIdr010=ag7l2o64i1.app303b

[Kaleko]

64. Thanks for the links and for injecting some reasonable arguments

into this discussion.

I signed three petitions there and am working on (yet another) letter to Holder about Don Siegelman's plight.

[merh]

65. If you send a letter to Hoder, be sure to copy or address it to

Mary Patrice Brown. She is Acting counsel for Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility.

My letter is voicing my concern that the US Attorney's office seems to be trying to punish Siegelman for appealing his case and getting a couple of the convictions reversed.

The prosecutors seem to have forgotten their oaths of office and their ethical duties.

[Kaleko]

68. Thanks again. Most of us here are not lawyers,

so some expert guidance is necessary and very much appreciated (well, at least on my part ;))

[merh]

69. I'm not a lawyer, I've just been working with some for the past 7 years

on one of the political prosecution cases. Believe me when I say no one on this board wants justice and the DOJ restored as much as I do.

I am grateful to you for your willingness to help - to take the time to sign the petitions and write the letters.

[sabrina 1]

56. Holder can start an investigation into

the allegations that Siegelman's prosecution was political and into the allegations made regarding how the trial was conducted.

If he could make the decision he made regarding Stevens, pretty much for the same reasons, that the trial was corrupted, why can't he do it for Siegalman?

I see zero excuse for the lack of action on the part of the DOJ regarding this case whatsoever and it's looking more and more like there won't be any more justice under this administration than there was under the last.

No one is asking him to go there, we are asking that he pay as much attention to the allegations re the trial of a Dem Governor as he did to the trial of a Republican Senator, that's all, but it appears to be too much to ask.

[Mithreal]

47. It's clearly one of those Obama second term problems.

I am willing to give a lil more time, but the justice system is looking weak. If I were a Ted Stevens fan though I would say they are doing smashingly well.

I have written multiple emails and called DOJ over Siegelman.

The other poster seems to stalk certain people's posts but is certainly right about doing something with the frustration.

[madfloridian]

13. It is a travesty.

[madfloridian]

17. Meanwhile Karl Rove gets to mingle with the big important Democrats.

This happened the other day.

Karl Rove being honored by Leon Panetta institute. Tops List of 2009 Panetta Lecture Invitees

"MONTEREY, Calif. - The Leon and Sylvia Panetta Institute announced Saturday it's 2009 list of invitees to it's popular public policy Lecture Series.

Among the names of political movers and shakers set to debate are Gen. John Abizaid, Tom Daschle, Michael Leavitt, David Plouffe, Alice Rivlin, Karl Rove and George Tenet. The theme of this year's Lecture Series is The Challenges Facing the New Administration."

[avaistheone1]

22. Man, I am going to puke.

Rove should be in jail not rubbing elbows down in Monterey with the political shakers.

It is terrible to see the Democrats in bed with that snake of a man.

:puke:

[glitch]

25. I bet it's a paid gig too. Disgusting. nt

[madfloridian]

30. And a prestigious one.

He gets lots of those.

[avaistheone1]

31. Would it surprise me either.

The Dems are probably paying him for speaking, paying for his food and his lodging too.

Ridiculous. All this for that evil con artist.

[readmoreoften]

36. The one party state gets even "one-i-er".

How am I supposed to support a party whose movers and shakers hang out with Rove?

[sabrina 1]

61. That is sickening!

War criminals and traitors get to party with the Democrats and discuss the administration we worked hard to put in their place so that they might be brought to justice.

What a slap in the face to those who thought they were bringing about 'change'.

Why wasn't Siegelman invited? I feel like throwing up now.

[Wednesdays]

24. K&R

:kick:

[Bjorn Against]

26. "The Constitution doesn't poll very well".

Let us be clear, anyone who uses that statement to justify ignoring our civil rights is our enemy every bit as much as George Bush was our enemy. I don't care if he has a D behind his name he is not on my side, and the Democratic Party needs to vocally speak out against anyone who so blatantly rejects the Constitution.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

34. I've never cared for Harold Ford - DINO in every TV appearance I've ever seen

but that quote is so reprehensible, I wish he was not even a DINO. I wish he would leave the party. He doesn't exist as far as I am concerned.

[Bluenorthwest]

40. Ford was disgusting on TV yesterday

And I mean disgusting. Not sure I want to share a Party with the likes of that 'man' and his 'mind'. If he's not leaving, I probably am leaving. I'm not into becoming a torturer's helper for the sake of Barack Obama and his choir of rootless Bush lickers.

[disndat]

46. Schumer is a disgusting lowlife

and should be booted out at the next New York Senatorial elections. Even the New York Times had a long article on how much Schumer had to do with the Wall St. meltdown. A scumbag of the first order. At first I thoght the resentencing of Siegelman for 20 years was an article from "The Onion."

[spanone]

29. congresspersons don't breathe the same air as mere citizens...it'as all about re-election

that all it's about

polls rule. period.

[The Backlash Cometh]

35. They're going to end up owing this man more than a million dollars,

by the time it's over.

[madfloridian]

37. There is another Dem in prison there who hardly got to see his dying wife.

I don't know the whole story there.

The buck stops at the WH on this.

[barbtries]

38. this is unbelievable.

how can those people still have jobs let alone be on the street.

[Bluenorthwest]

39. A travesty of justice, ie another day with Eric Holder

That craven spine free creature, Holder, is a worthless AG. Compromised and without a moral center. And Harold Ford can get the hell out of this Party. My state party called begging for money yesterday just after I saw Ford on TV being all pro Cheney and pro torture. I told them that the Democrats already elected were a waste of time, and they should go get their money from anti-gay, pro torture drug warriors down at Warren's chruch. Told them to call when they'd prosecuted the rapists and murderers, and until them I consider them acessories to those crimes they are covering up. We have a coupld of cyber acessories here today, attacking people personally as a way to defend the likes of Eric Holder, whose entire career has been in service to his criminal betters. A man of no value whatsoever.

[midnight]

44. This can't be right with the pending of Karl Rove's testimony.

What is going on?

[madfloridian]

45. I don't understand it.

I really don't.

[madfloridian]

48. DOJ says it can't do anything according to Sam Stein at Huff Post.

I am not a lawyer, and this is blowing my mind. Over 75 former state attorneys general are concerned as well and have written to Eric Holder.

It is just mind-blowing.

Siegelman Lobbies DOJ To Intervene As Court Deadline Nears

"If we get a rehearing then we have a few months to pursue options with the Department of Justice," Siegelman told the Huffington Post in an interview. "If we don't, then I'm going to be re-sentenced to prison by the same judge and prosecutors which I say, parenthetically with an exclamation point, is probably the most bizarre twist yet. I'd be still fighting the same right-wing Karl Rove-anointed and Bush-appointed prosecutors even with Barack Obama and Eric Holder in charge."

And yet, despite his pleas, federal intervention seems unlikely. The DOJ says there is virtually nothing it can do when it comes to Siegelman's appeal. "Because Mr. Siegelman has requested the full 11th Circuit Appeals Court to review the recent ruling by the three-judge panel, the Department will continue to litigate this matter in the courts, not in the media," said DOJ spokesperson Laura Sweeney. "The decision whether to hold an en banc hearing is the court's, not DOJ's."

Okay, so me, I am not a lawyer, and I don't understand that at all.

More:

The latest lobbying effort on the former governor's behalf came in the form of a letter sent to the Attorney General's office from Professor Bennett L. Gershman, author of the book, "Prosecutorial Misconduct."

"I have never encountered another prosecution in which it appears so clearly that the prosecutors were zealously bent on pursuing an individual, rather than on a crime," reads the note, obtained by the Huffington Post. "As an example of bad faith prosecution, the Siegelman case may be without parallel.... There is no better example of the corrosive effect on the reputation of the Department of Justice... than the prosecution of Don Siegelman."

The note follows a similar one penned by 75 former state Attorneys Generals asking Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate the matter.

More:

And while the recent dropping of charges against former Senator Ted Stevens for bungled prosecution breathed new life into Siegleman's efforts, there remains a fundamental difference. The Stevens' charges were dropped under proof of selective prosecution. Siegelman, according to a DOJ official, has "never filed a selective prosecution motion."

The Alabama Democrats insist that "there is really not a lot we can do" when it comes to raising that charge. They don't have the means to investigate selective prosecution. They hope that efforts on behalf of members of Congress to turn up new information might do the trick. Siegelman is also holding to see what the forthcoming OPR report reveals, though he remains worried that the right questions aren't being asked.

Sounds like neither state nor national Democrats are doing anything at all to help him while Ted Stevens is a free man.

Something is so wrong with that picture.

[sabrina 1]

58. This sounds like bullshit to me

The Alabama Democrats insist that "there is really not a lot we can do" when it comes to raising that charge. They don't have the means to investigate selective prosecution.

Who raised the charge in the Stevens case? How is it that Dems always seem unable to do things that Repubs have no problem doing?

What do they mean by 'we don't have the means'? Are they talking about money? Why don't they talk to Stevens lawyers and find out how a man who was surely more guilty than Siegelman ever was, was able to prevail, and rightfully imo, because of a corrupt process? Are there different rules for Democrats? Unbelievable!

[madfloridian]

59. Yes, I agree with you on the BS

Something is very wrong about this.

[Raine1967]

50. Thom just gave you a hat tip.

Great work MF!

[madfloridian]

53. Thanks for letting me know.

I forgot to turn on the radio today.

:hi:

[shireen]

71. Hartmann archives

http://www.620kpoj.com/cc-common/podcast/single_podcast.html?podcast=hartmann_nationwide.xml

good post!

[Doctor_J]

51. Why doesn't Obama just pardon him?

THEN prosecute Rove?

[sansf]

54. 1-202-514-2001 A.G. Holder direct line

[sabrina 1]

60. Thanks for the phone numberI

I just called and it seems they are getting lots of calls as the person who answered said she is familiar with the case.

I left a message and asked for a return call explaining why the DOJ has ignored the allegations of corruption in this case while treating the Stevens case differently.

I hope they are flooded with calls demanding an explanation about this.

[madfloridian]

73. I have never understood the difference in the two cases at all.

I would like more of an explanation.

[sabrina 1]

75. Well, I didn't receive a return call

not that I expected one. As to your (and my) question, a poster above claims at least one difference is the judges. The judge in the Stevens case, airc, made a big issue over the handling of the case by prosecutors, while in Siegelman's case, the judge did not.

However, since 75 US Attorneys have addressed the issues in the Siegelman case, I would think that might bring it some attention from the DOJ.

I also think that if we allow elected officials to be hounded out of office by political prosecutions, it affects our whole system of democracy. For that reason alone, the Siegelman case demands the attention of the DOJ, imo.

[Joanne98]

55. This is a fucking OUTRAGE!

[redqueen]

62. You're damned right it is.

They let Stevens off the hook but this guy is STILL being treated like a criminal?

:nuke:

[polmaven]

70. Big time SHOUT OUT!

It may be posted elsewhere..I wasn't able to get to DU last night.

CONGRATULATIONS, madfloridian - and DU, for that matter - for the SHOUT OUT - for this journal - yesterday afternoon on the Thom Hartman show!

We have only been able to hear that show in the Boston area since Monday. Does he give kudos to DU and the members often?

[depakid]

78. To say that Obama's "justice" department has been a disappointment would be an understatement

If things continue as they have been- he'll certainly NOT be getting my vote in 2012. I'll vote for a Green or an Independent (or simply "stay home") -as I expect a LOT of disillusioned folks will. Indeed, it won't surprise me in the slightest if we don't see some of that in 2010.