The prosecutorial arm of Tom Corbett's gubernatorial campaign is not having the best month.
"What we hope's going to happen and what actually plays out in a courtroom, as (has) been demonstrated for almost four weeks now, it doesn't always work out that way," Senior Deputy Attorney General E. Marc Costanzo told reporters.
We want to show you something: It's our shocked face.
We are not lawyers here at CasablancaPA, but we do know that you're bound to bump into things when you're walking backward. A successful criminal prosecution begins with a crime and leads to a suspect. Tom Corbett's gubernatorial campaign began with a suspect and searched for a crime.
Know what you get when you stumble backward through a prosecution? Witnesses who contradict the central premise of your case. Just yesterday former Mike Veon staff member and immunized prosecution witness Rich Pronesti testified that he did not volunteer for political campaigns in 2004 and did receive a bonus. He volunteered for political campaigns in 2005 and did not receive a bonus. In 2006, he did not volunteer for political campaigns and did receive a bonus.
In case it's unclear, the Tom Corbett gubernatorial campaign is trying to prove that bonuses were awarded in return for political volunteerism. So, naturally, they called a witness who testified to the contrary. The Tom Corbett gubernatorial campaign is trying to prove that staff members feared for their jobs if they did not volunteer on political campaigns. So, naturally, they called a witness who not only retained his job after declining to volunteer, but received bonuses, raises and promotions.
The Tom Corbett gubernatorial campaign called Pronesti's testimony an anomaly. When their star witness shredded his own credibility, they stammered, "he's not that vital a witness." (Well, he did testify to his own lack of vitality. Tee hee. Ahem. Sorry.)
Almost exactly 70 years ago, Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson foresaw the potential disaster of the Tom Corbett gubernatorial campaign:
If the prosecutor is obliged to choose his cases, it follows that he can choose his defendants. Therein is the most dangerous power of the prosecutor: that he will pick people that he thinks he should get, rather than pick cases that need to be prosecuted. With the law books filled with a great assortment of crimes, a prosecutor stands a fair chance of finding at least a technical violation of some act on the part of almost anyone. In such a case, it is not a question of discovering the commission of a crime and then looking for the man who has committed it, it is a question of picking the man and then searching the law books, or putting investigators to work, to pin some offense on him. It is in this realm—in which the prosecutor picks some person whom he dislikes or desires to embarrass, or selects some group of unpopular persons and then looks for an offense, that the greatest danger of abuse of prosecuting power lies.
One part of the Justice Department mess that requires more scrutiny is the growing evidence that the department may have singled out people for criminal prosecution to help Republicans win elections.
ReplyDeleteThe House Judiciary Committee has begun investigating several cases that raise serious questions.
The panel should determine what role politics played in all of them.
Putting political opponents in jail is the sort of thing that happens in third-world dictatorships.
In the United States, prosecutions are supposed to be scrupulously nonpartisan.
Individual Democrats may be paying a personal price.
There is another very worrisome fact. It’s looking increasingly obvious that there have been dozens of such corrupt prosecutions, and that a careful review needs to be made of the prosecutorial decision process in political cases.
Nothing is more important than justice. We must be unrelenting in our pursuit of it.
And we must learn to hate those who abuse and undermine it, and doubly so when they cloak their misdeeds in the name of our institutions.
We must have the courage to speak the truth and expose pitiful lies for what they are.
A Woman Wrongly Convicted and a U.S. Attorney Who Kept His Job:
ReplyDeleteRepublican opponents of Democratic Governor Jim Doyle of Wisconsin spent $4 million on ads last year trying to link the Democratic incumbent to a state employee who was sent to jail on corruption charges.
The effort failed, and Mr. Doyle was re-elected — and now the state employee has been found to be wrongly convicted.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which heard Ms. Thompson’s case this month, did not discuss whether her prosecution was political — but it did make clear that it was wrong.
And in an extraordinary move, it ordered her released immediately, without waiting to write a decision.
“Your evidence is beyond thin,” Judge Diane Wood told the prosecutor. “I’m not sure what your actual theory in this case is.”
The Republican United States attorney in Milwaukee, turned a flimsy case into a campaign issue that nearly helped Republicans win a pivotal governor’s race.
There was good reason for the appeals court to be shocked.
Ms. Thompson, a 56-year-old single woman, seems to have lost her home and spent four months in prison simply for doing her job.
Republican US Attorney Mr. Biskupic claimed that she awarded the contract to an agency called Adelman Travel because its C.E.O. contributed to Mr. Doyle’s campaign, but look past a mountain of evidence of innocence.
She was only one member of a seven-person committee that evaluated the bidders.
She was not even aware of the Adelman campaign contributions and, Adelman submitted the lowest-cost bid.
The prosecution proceeded on a schedule that worked out perfectly for the Republican candidate for governor.
Republican US Attorney Mr. Biskupic announced Ms. Thompson’s indictment in January 2006.
She went to trial that summer, and was sentenced in late September, weeks before the election.
Republican US Attorney Mr. Biskupic insisted in July, as he vowed to continue the investigation, that “the review is not going to be tied to the political calendar.”
But the Thompson case was “the No. 1 issue” in the governor’s race, says the Wisconsin Democratic Party chairman, Joe Wineke.
In a barrage of commercials, Mr. Doyle’s opponents created an organizational chart that linked Ms. Thompson — misleadingly called a “Doyle aide” — to the governor.
Republican Campaign Staffers placed Ms. Thompson appeared in an unflattering picture, stamped “guilty,” and in another ad, her name was put on a graphic of jail-cell doors slamming shut.
Mr. Biskupic insists that he prosecuted Ms. Thompson only because he believed a crime was committed, and that he did not discuss the political implications of the case or the timing with anyone in the Justice Department or the White House. Congress has asked the Justice Department for all e-mail messages about the case to help resolve the matter.
But even if there were no discussions, Mr. Biskupic may have known that his bosses in Washington expected him to use his position to help Republicans win elections, and then did what they wanted.
That would be ironic indeed. One of the biggest weaknesses in the case against Ms. Thompson was that to commit the crime she was charged with she had to have tried to gain personally from the contract, and there’s no credible evidence that she did.
So Mr. Biskupic made the creative argument that she gained by obtaining “political advantage for her superiors” and that in pleasing them she “enhanced job security for herself.”
Those motivations, of course, may well describe why Republican US Attorney Mr. Biskupic prosecuted Ms. Thompson.
If it happens in Wisconsin, it is happening in Pennsylvania.
Listen up-- the AG himself is now being investigated-- trust me-- requests for HIS employees activities are being made as we speak. He has prosecuted people for doing politcal work on state time, but he and his employees have been doing just that for years. Look for this to become public in near future.
ReplyDeleteAbout picking the defendant and looking for a crime:
ReplyDeleteVery well said.
It takes a very special journalist to not automatically put the prosecutors in the good guy category and the prosecuted in the bad guy group - and to be sophisticated enough to understand that all may not be as it seems. Sometimes prosecutors can have less integrity than the prosecuted. But perhaps journalists - at least in another state - are getting it. Here's a fascinating example:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/anton-kerner-otto-kerner-illinois-governor-supreme-court-review-honest-services-law/Content?oid=1267429
Do these Republicans go to campaign school to learn this stuff? Kind of like a get-rich-quick scheme, this is a get-rid-of-your-political-opponents quick scheme.
ReplyDeletehere's part of the full story that goes to the link above......
ReplyDeleteHis Father's Honor
Why the son of a shamed former Illinois governor is so interested in the Supreme Court's review of the "honest services" law
By Michael Miner
Media archives »
RICHARD NIXON: "What is the situation on Daley, ah, and his people—Kerner. Are you gonna do anything out there, or not?"
JOHN MITCHELL: "I believe there will be, we've, uh, had . . . "
RICHARD NIXON: "I'd like to see you get him."
When the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the legal theory of honest services fraud December 8, one of the spectators in the crowded courtroom was Amy St. Eve of Chicago. Her interest was singular: the court was reviewing the conviction by a jury of former newspaper baron Conrad Black, and two years ago St. Eve, a federal judge, ran Black's trial and sentenced him to six and a half years in prison.
St. Eve told me afterward she wasn't the first judge who ever showed up to hear the Supreme Court review his or her handiwork, not that it's routine. That was all she could tell me: the case might be remanded to her, so she wouldn't discuss any of the legal issues the court raised or even say whether she enjoyed her busman's holiday.
Pity the conscientious jurist—such interesting work and so little freedom to talk about it. The legal issue Black raised with the court is pretty damned fascinating. I've written about it myself several times and it's obsessed Anton Kerner for more than 30 years.
Kerner was another visitor from Chicago at the hearing. Kerner, a real estate broker, wangled a reserved seat from the Supreme Court marshal by explaining that in 1973 his father had been sent to prison for honest services fraud. That trial put the theory on the map.
The late Otto Kerner was the governor of Illinois when he supposedly deprived the citizens of the state of his honest services, and he was a federal appellate judge when he was indicted in 1971. But Anton Kerner insists there was no crime and he believes the courts are close to conceding it. In 1987 the Supreme Court overturned the law on which his father's prosecution was based, but Congress quickly revived it; now Kerner hopes to see the Court scuttle that language as well.
Anton Kerner believes his father was prosecuted because President Nixon wanted to get rid of him. The chairman of the 1968 U.S. Commission on Civil Disorders, which concluded that America was dividing into two separate and unequal societies, Kerner testified on May 25, 1971, before a Senate subcommittee exploring unemployment, race, and poverty. Three days later, Nixon and his attorney general, John Mitchell, had the taped exchange that begins above, an exchange Anton Kerner believes explains pretty much everything.
NIXON: "I'd like to see you get him."
MITCHELL: "Yeah, I would too, for a number of reasons. One, I don't like to see these bastards sitting on these courts, because they have just killed us, this political court out there in the Seventh Circuit. . . . They were the ones that started our wiretap problems. They're the ones that have held this Chicago conspiracy trial. . . . Now he's out talking about his Kerner Commission report . . . when he should be keeping his damn mouth shut as a judge."
NIXON: "Kerner—the son of a bitch coming in and talked about it—that was disgusting."
MITCHELL: "Yeah."
Otto Kerner was indicted seven months later and convicted in 1973....................
see link for full story
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteListen up-- the AG himself is now being investigated-- trust me-- requests for HIS employees activities are being made as we speak. He has prosecuted people for doing politcal work on state time, but he and his employees have been doing just that for years. Look for this to become public in near future.
February 25, 2010 9:41 PM
It is my understanding from some insiders within PARSC, there is a White Knight within the Office of the AG, not happy how the campaign has hurt long-time bi-partisan political allies, by using criminal charges to win elections.
There is irrefutable evidence, the kind that plays out on the internet.
It will show the tracking of their campaign operations even prior to 2008 Re-Election and there are some powerful wealthy Moderate Republicans that oppose some very wealthy Conservative Republicans, dating back to Rockefeller-Goldwater splits.
The problem was that the anti-Goldwater Republicans split their vote between Lodge, Rockefeller, and Scranton in 1964.
Reagan united them for awhile only by picking Bush as VP, but both Bush' never really were behind Reagan Political Philosophy.
It is well known among Republican Insiders that Tom Corbett did much campaign work for Tom Ridge on the government dime and it did not stop there and Specter's People know exactly what he did and when and how.
In an odd turn of events, there is a group within PARSC that do not want Corbett to become Governor.
We shall see what unfolds, but Corbett had big trouble raising money for a candidate that was a shoe in a year ago.
What will be fun to watch is how the Prosecutors will run to Lawyer up, plead the fifth, and turn on each other just like in Nixon Watergate, Iran Contra, and Scooter Libby cases, once the Investigators show up after the websites bring the story, that the media will not ignore.
Believe it or not, but some Prosecutors and Investigators actually are upset the Campaign Staff convinced Corbett on whom to bring charges based on the Campaign Plans not the evidence.
Some of been told, save your money, Corbett is in for some hard times using his own spider web of campaign violations once he captures the nomination.
ONCE AGAIN WE HAVE AG CORBETT'S PROSECUTORS DOUBLE SPEAK.
ReplyDeletePLEASE NOTE, THE AG PROSECUTORS HAS THEIR OWN WITNESS SAY SOMETHING AT TRIAL THAT THEY NEVER SAID AT THE GRAND JURY:
Caton is the first witness in the four-week-old trial to say he was directed by Veon personally to devote work hours to election efforts.
Veon attorney Dan Raynak said grand jury records do not show Caton previously making such a claim and said Caton would be pressed on the topic when court resumes Friday.
THE FIRST GROUP OF AG WITNESSES ESPECIALLY MANZO, FOREMAN, BRUBAKER, AND WEBB ALL SAID MIKE VEON NEVER ORDER THEM TO DO THE CRIMES THEY ADMITTED TO UNDER OATH.
NOW ALL OF SUDDEN THE AG PROSECUTORS PRODUCE A WIYNESS THAT NOW SAYS MIKE VEON ORDER HIM, BUT NEVER SAID IT 3 YEARS AGO DURING THE GRAND JURY UNDER OATH HEARINGS???
Tsk Tsk, Tsk,
Oh AG Prosecutors, how low can you stoop?
You make a sordid group,
Hey, how low can you stoop?
Poor, poor Corbett, case is fraying,
Situation's grave, hey, case is going away!
ONCE AGAIN, CORBETT'S AG PROSECUTORS HAVE TO FORCE WITNESSES TO MAKE UP NEW EVEIDENCE THEY COULD NOT PROVE AT THE GRAND JURY?
1) If Tracie Mauriello really is reading this blog, how come she never writes about the stuff that is explained on here??
ReplyDelete2) If you are reading this, Tracie, you're certainly free to tweet whatever the heck you want, but do you really think Bob Caton comparing campaigning to going to the dentist is more relevant to the trial than the fact that he just contradicted himself by admitting he performed campaign work on the state's dime before he went to work for Mike Veon? Like I said, Tweet what you want, but is that really your news judgment?
All Tracie did today was once again not pay attention, her Cell phone went off with Disco Duck Ringtones, so she cannot even remember to shut off her Cell Phone.
ReplyDeleteLet alone report properly on the Trial. Everyday she has another excuse and her tweets are just terribnle except for her family and friends.
The Post-Gazette is being let down big time.
If Corbett hired Frank Fina because of his DOJ Grand Jury EXPERIENCE, he has to be disappointed, to say the least.
ReplyDeleteThe Trial going on now is not confirming the Grand Jury Charges, and even worse, Fina's own witnesses have been caught making up new evidence that does not match what they said and did not say at the Grand Jury.
Even AG Corbett's Immunity Agreements lack the evidence needed to confirm Caton current testimony from his previous absent one at the Grand Jury and not seen anywhere in the Investigation papers.
If the Jury cannot see that, this case will be dumped on Appeal, and Fina should be subject to discipline by the Pennsylvania Bar and Supreme Court.
Oh, that is right, I forgot, until Zappala Grand Jury own findings are in on how Republican Senators campaign on state time for Republican Judges, it is still a Republican Dominated Court?
Wow and Sad come to mind as the Defense Attorneys tears apart AG Corbett's Boys putting on this travesty of a trial.
Well, at least Corbett will have someone to scapegoat on if he cannot earn convictions, after all Frank Fina is the new outsider and will be blamed and banished.
Here is bet for anyone...watch how many OAG Witnesses from now on, say they were told by Mike Veon to Campaign on State Time, in direct contradiction of those OAG Witnesses that have gone before and were the Managers that said Mike Veon never order them to do it.
ReplyDeleteAG Corbett's Prosecutors are making up their case as it goes along, instaed of showing what they investigated....THE LAST 3 YEARS?
I cannot wait for the other witnesses now, do you think teh Prosecutors have decided to join the Defense Team, based on how badly they are handling this case, maybe they are mad at Corbett's Campaign Staffers and this is a clever way to DO THE RIGHT THING, and get back at Corbett's Campaign Bonus Boys.
Disco Duck Ringtones??? This her music judgment???
ReplyDeleteGo to Briggs and Roxbury news, you will get the true stories without Tracie's mistakes.
In fact, someone Professional should be hired to report on the case to make sure we all read the whole tweets relevant to the trial.
If someone has a better Tweet Source please post the Link, Thank You.
Briggs Tweets Just revealed:
ReplyDelete"Caton sez he never got an email or had a conversation with Veon about the bonuses being for campaign work."
Tracie Tweet Just Revealed:
"Lunch break. There's a bowl of cheese soup with my name on it in the courthouse cafeteria."
TRACIE NEVER MENTION, RAYNACK"S CROSS_EXAMINIATION LAST COMMENT PROVING CATON JUST LIED ABOUT MIKE VEON TELLING HIM TO CAMPAIGN ON STATE TIME????
Hope she doesn't cut the cheese later on in the Courtroom, interrupting the Defense Cross-Exam like she let her Cell Phone do with Disco Duck?
To be fair, Tracie never said she was going to Tweet ABOUT the trial, she only said she was going to Tweet FROM the trial.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to know what's actually happening at the trial, you'll probably have to go, because the little we are getting from Twitter is a thousand times better than what's being reported in the newspapers and on TV.
"The Tom Corbett gubernatorial campaign is trying to prove that staff members feared for their jobs if they did not volunteer on political campaigns. So, naturally, they called a witness who not only retained his job after declining to volunteer, but received bonuses, raises and promotions."
ReplyDeleteBut, surely the prosecution will be calling to the stand someone who was fired because they refused to campaign. Or, at least, someone who was told they would be fired if they didn't campaign.
Won't they?.....
I mean, I've been around the Capitol for a long time and I've never heard of such a thing, but if this is the case the AG is trying to make, they must have found someone that it happened to.
Right?.....
ROXBURY NEWS:
ReplyDelete"Fina- in 2004-2006 1.6 million in bonuses were given to caucus members, could this be done without Mike Veon knowing? A-no"
Whoa, wait a minute Nellie? Hope The Jury Is Taking Notes!
How can Caton know that, did he go over every person's Bonus Payment?
Did Caton have access to HDC Personnel Payrolls before they were sent out or even after all got their Bonuses??
Did Caton testify at the Grand Jury he knew that Mike Veon knew about every $1.6 million Bonuses paid that out, Answer: NO?
Mike Veon was just the Majority Whip, Bill DeWeese had to sign off on those Bonuses not Mike Veon, how is it Caton all of suddenly knew all of the Bonuses that Mike Veon was suppose to know about, according to Frank Fina Redirect?
Yet, we also know from the OFFICE OF THE AG Grand Jury Findings and OFFICE OF THE AG Guilty Pleader Mike Manzo earlier Testimony at this Trial that Mike Manzo admitted he set up the Bonus System, awarded as he pleased.
In addition, it is on record Mike Manzo did so without telling Bill DeWeese all the details until the day, he was fired and before Witnesses that include an Inspector General????
Moreover, we know Bill DeWeese signature was a proven forgery by Independent Criminal Research Labs.
Finally, we also heard from a number of OFFICE OF THE AG Guilty Pleaders Immunity Witnesses UNDER OATH they forged Mike Veon signatures on Expense Forms without Mike Veon's permission???????
YET, OFFICE OF THE AG WITNESS CATON JUST SAID MIKE VEON KNEW ABOUT ALL THE $1.6 MILLION BONUSES UNDER OATH, BUT YOU ALL KNOW THE REST OF THE STORY....ABOVE!
From Paul Harvey's Grave May Paul Rest In Peace!
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteTo be fair, Tracie never said she was going to Tweet ABOUT the trial, she only said she was going to Tweet FROM the trial.
If you want to know what's actually happening at the trial, you'll probably have to go, because the little we are getting from Twitter is a thousand times better than what's being reported in the newspapers and on TV.
February 26, 2010 12:32 PM
HHHMMNNNN.DID THE POST-GAZETTE EDITORAL BOARD ENDORSED TOM CORBETT FOR GOVERNOR YET????
Looks like they made up their minds by hiring and sending Tracie to this Trial.
Are any of them related to Corbett, you do know Newspaper employees are loking for new jobs lately, as Print media goes down the You Tube Tubes.
Maybe Tracie is looking for another job, since her reporting ain't cutting it?
Anonymous said..."The Tom Corbett gubernatorial campaign is trying to prove that staff members feared for their jobs if they did not volunteer on political campaigns.
ReplyDeleteBut, surely the prosecution will be calling to the stand someone who was fired because they refused to campaign. Or, at least, someone who was told they would be fired if they didn't campaign.
Won't they?.....
I mean, I've been around the Capitol for a long time and I've never heard of such a thing, but if this is the case the AG is trying to make, they must have found someone that it happened to.
Right?.....
February 26, 2010 12:38 PM
Yeah, you are Correct Sir, I think the Corbett's Office of Prosecutors may call Mike Long, Former Staffer to Robert Jubelrier.
Mike Long the biggest Bonus Recipent of Anybody under the Green dome, lost his job after Campaigning on State Time for Robert Jubelrier that failed to win Re-Election.
AG Corbett felt bad for him, so hired him for Corbett's Staff to do Campaign Work for Corbett's Governor Race.
Mkike Long may be called to testify.....but by the Defense not by Corbett Office of Prosecutors...they are too afraid of him.
WE SHALL SEE, BUT WE STILL ARE WAITING FOR AG CORBETT TO SHOW HIS INVESTIGATION FINDINGS ON THE SENATE REPUBLICAN CAUSUS IT HAS BEEN over 3 "LONG" YEARS, AND THE PRIMARY AND GENERAQL ELECTIONS ARE COMING UP, BUT SO FAR INVESTIGATING THE REPUBLICANS SENATORS IS A "LONG" SHOT???
PPG Twitter:
ReplyDelete"Cott attorney Bryan Walk is asking Caton if he was told he has to return bonus. Caton says no"
Now every time I see on Roxbury News Video the interviewing of Deputy Attorney Costanzo Video comments, all he keeps repeating is how Tom Corbett's Office of the Attorney General is bringing these cases to protect and save Pennsylvania Taxpayers Money?????
So How Can This Be These State Witnesses Admit Crimes, Are Paid State Salaries With Immunity And Given Promotions, When They Admit Under Oath They Were Paid Bonuses For Breaking Work Rules and State Laws Ordered By OFFICE OF THE AG State Guilty Pleaders Manzo, Foreman and Brubaker, And The AG has Not recovered One Dime From These So-Called Crimes?
How Can That Be??
Oh, it "BE" Alright!
Alleluia, Deputy AG Costanzo Himself Caught in his own Double Speak For AG E. Marc Corbett And It Is On Video!
Call me stupid, but how can the Attorney General be protecting Taxpayers dollars and not asking for $4 million dollar Bonus Money back from their own admitted criminal witnesses?
What a great Campaign Video Ad for the Democrats in the future.
Do you think it is E. Marc Costanzo that that sabotaging the AG case, or is the entire OAG just not up to the task of finding the real truths?
Does the "E" in Marc Costanzo stand for his grades in Law School based on his ability to get back teh Bonus Money Costanzo says was illegal gotten gains from his own witnesses?
Right now, the best thing for Pennsylvania Attorney General Corbett campaign for Governor is if the Judge will grant a Mistrial.
ReplyDeleteA Mistrial will delay any further embarrassing information coming out on what Corbett's Office has not been able to stop right now.
For PPG's Tracie's Knowledge:
Mistrials are trials that are not successfully completed. They’re terminated and declared void before the jury returns a verdict or the judge renders his or her decision in a nonjury trial.
Mistrials can occur for many reasons:
Death of a juror or attorney
An impropriety in the drawing of the jury discovered during the trial
A fundamental error prejudicial (unfair) to the defendant that cannot be cured by appropriate instructions to the jury (such as the inclusion of highly improper remarks in the prosecutor's summation)
Juror misconduct (e.g., having contacts with one of the parties, considering evidence not presented in the trial, conducting an independent investigation of the matter)
The jury's inability to reach a verdict because it is hopelessly deadlocked.
Either side may make a motion for a mistrial.
The judge will either grant the motion and declare a mistrial, or he or she will not grant the motion and the trial will go on.
Now that I put it up on CASA, it will be consider by AG Corbett's Campaign staff For Governor.
Or maybe not now for the sake of his Corbett's Prosecutors?
This is not fair to Tom Corbett that is trying to do the best he can over many problems he found in Harrisburg.
ReplyDeleteI am a Republican Supporter and Tom better check into whether Mike Manzo and Tom Foreman has purposely not told the entire truth when they were under oath on the witness stand.
There is no way, the lower level employees were told by Mike Veon to campaign on commonwealth time for bonus money, and not told to Manzo or Foreman.
Someone is not telling the entire truth and this is going to hurt the case for the people's protector in Tom Corbett.
I cannot believe what I am reading on twitters.
I think Manzo and Foreman have set up the Attorney General Attorneys, I truly do.
Twitter said..In 2003 Martz also worked on campaign of Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato. Unclear if that was on state time or not.
ReplyDeleteTom Corbett better check that out, I want him to be Governor, not any Democrat.
If Onorato used commonwealth employees on commonwealth time, it should be investigated.
Lawyers for Federal Prosecutor Pitch Immunity Case to Supreme Court:
ReplyDeleteA federal prosecutor in Washington who is being sued for his alleged role in the removal of a local grand juror wants the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse a federal appeals court ruling that went against the government.
Lawyers for the prosecutor, Daniel Zachem, an assistant U.S. attorney in the District of Columbia, filed a certiorari petition Jan. 22 asking the Court to examine the case to resolve conflicts among the federal appellate courts.
The June 2009 ruling in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is at odds with rulings in two other appeals courts—the 2nd and 8th circuits—that afforded absolute immunity to prosecutors working with grand juries, Zachem’s lawyers at Crowell & Moring said in the petition.
The D.C. Circuit stripped Zachem of absolute immunity and remanded the grand juror’s case to the U.S. District Court for further proceedings on whether the prosecutor is entitled to qualified immunity.
“This is an issue of critical importance to the sound functioning of the criminal justice system, and if left undisturbed, the ruling below will have a potentially harmful and lasting impact on every prosecutor in the country who interacts with grand juries,”
Crowell partner Michael Martinez said in court papers. The Justice Department is paying Zachem’s legal bills.
The plaintiff, Peter Atherton of Northwest Washington, was a grand juror in D.C. Superior Court in April 2001 when he was abruptly removed from the panel.
Fellow grand jurors complained to Zachem that Atherton was impeding the deliberative process—that he was unable or unwilling to follow the rules, according to Zachem.
The grand jury was re-voting on charges that the panel had already heard, court records show, based on Atherton’s demands for more information.
Zachem reported the grand jurors’ observations to a Superior Court official, Suzanne Bailey-Jones, who dismissed Atherton as a juror.
Superior Court rules say the chief judge, or another designated judge, has the authority to dismiss a grand juror.
Then-Chief Judge Rufus King III was not contacted before Atherton’s dismissal, court records show.
Atherton sued in 2004 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
Acting pro se, he won an early victory in the D.C. Circuit. And then last year, with his case back before the appeals court, he won a second partial victory.
The D.C. Circuit ruled that Zachem is not entitled to absolute immunity because his actions in reporting on a grand juror were not “intimately associated” with the criminal process.
Zachem was not presenting evidence to the grand jury. He was not preparing for trial. The U.S. Attorney’s Office has no authority to dismiss a grand juror.
Martinez of Crowell said the D.C. Circuit ruling “erodes vital protections that have long been afforded to prosecutors engaged in conduct that is intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process.”
He said the circuit’s decision “will likely influence the conduct of every prosecutor in the United States with involvement before grand juries.”
Signor,
ReplyDeletePlease explain how one of the dumbest people on the planet--Michelle Borlinghaus--could, in 3 months, do "legislative work" that was of such quality to merit a bonus of 33%-ish of her salary in 2006, when in 9 months she was campaigning for one of the most arrogant, corrupt and despicable men to presume to "represent" hard working, blue-collar people.
No decent person would have supported Mike Veon without being corrupted by illegal incentives or threatened by illegal threats like firing.
My job was threatened for "not lifting a finger" to help Veon in 2006. Refusing to join the sycophantic cult that worshipped that joke of a man was one of the best decisions that I've made in life.
But enjoy being mired in the petty and corrupt world of PA politics, while I enjoy my J.D. from a top-10 law school.
The Caucus will probably not be so lucky to have someone like me work for them, for a long time, and this trial is a great reason why actual talent and intelligence--instead of hacks--can't be attracted or retained.
We certainly have no idea why anyone was awarded a bonus, or whether he or she deserved it. Your guess is as good as ours!
ReplyDeleteWill you be testifying about your experiences with the House Democratic Caucus, as Anonymous 12:38 suggested?
The value of my testimony, apparently, wasn't valuable enough. I would have done my duty and taken a few days off of law school to testify before the GJ, but it wasn't a prospect that I relished, especially since it would have likely conflicted with finals or finals prep.
ReplyDeleteAnd if you insist that you have "no idea" why bonuses were awarded, you're perjuring yourself on the blog--not in a legal sense--but in a sense that's an affront to the human capacity to engage in deductive reasoning.
LOL, is that what you're learning at your Top-10 law school?
ReplyDeleteI worked for the House for a long time, and believe me, people of TALENT were valued whether they campaigned or not. Just look at who got the biggest bonus in the caucus - someone who did NO campaign work.
"Deductive reasoning" would tell you what mistaken assumption you made in your last post, Riponsitter.
ReplyDeleteIf you look @ what Riponsitter said...you'd see it's a miserable double-bind for Veon (and DeWeese).
ReplyDeleteBut first, just b/c bonuses were given to non-campaign workers, doesn't mean all bonuses are legit. (You learn to avoid logical fallacies like that well before law school.) It would make sense that legit bonuses were given to maintain plausible deniability and/or to reward the good apples in the Caucus.
And now the double-bind...
1. Bonuses were all legit, and people who took months off at a time were somehow so brilliant as to perform such amazing work in a few months to merit 15%, 30% of their salary in bonuses...
While just about everyone who worked the WHOLE year without campaigning were so lackluster to deserve nothing.
If the bonuses were legit, then Veon and DeWeese have the worst judgment about who to manage their personnel. I'd think you'd ship out the lackluster employees to campaign and keep your stars doing the legislative work they get paid to do.
Or, just as bad, you have people managing personnel who have no clue how many people are necessary to do jobs. The buck has to stop with leadership.
It's hard to imagine this degree of incompetence in leadership--though it is easy to imagine how the Members of the Caucus were feckless enough to challenge that leadership.
2. Or the bonuses were illegitimate, and we're where we're at, with Veon on the hot seat, deservedly so, but DeWeese having avoided it thus far because he was higher up the chain and skillfully avoided the inquiries.
But take your pick--the Caucus personnel management was so abysmal that it let their best employees take off MONTHS of the year, without distributing the leave more evenly to less competent employees (if Borlinghaus could stuff envelopes, make phone calls, or knock on doors, you don't need any competence to campaign).
Or many, but not all, of the bonuses were for campaign work.
The first world requires to accept incompetence and failures in leadership of implausible proportions, especially from someone as "dedicated" and "hard working" as Mike Veon.
So that leaves the second world.
Either Veon was an inept, bumbling hack of unimaginable proportions, or a hard-working and dedicated man who conspired to break the law.
The Riponsitter said...No decent person would have supported Mike Veon without being corrupted by illegal incentives or threatened by illegal threats like firing.
ReplyDeleteFebruary 26, 2010 4:18 PM
I disagree Riponsitter, I know five Unpaid Volunteers that worked hard for Mike Veon's Re-election.
They had nothing to gain by doing it; they did for his past hard work.
They never ask or got a job, they just did whatever asked of them and they gave money to his campaign.
Nor are they stupid led followers but very well educated and can see the difference between a prosecution and political persecution coup for personal purposes.
AND and I swear I am telling you the full truth they disagreed with him at times on national, state, and local political views and votes.
They disagree with him on his views on Stetler, DeWeese, Rendell, and Eachus but still support and respect Mike Veon.
Mike Veon was a hard working legislator and loved his job and doing things for citizens that did not have the ability for themselves.
They even agree some lines were crossed but those lines were more of ethical lines and normal practices in both parties, not fodder for a Governor's Campaign highly selective for those chosen to be charged, and others in the Republican Party not even investigated let alone charged after 4 years.
Mike Veon and the other Defendants may not be right all of the time, and will admit flaws, but they are not hardening Criminals as the AG Corbett is trying to portray, for his own Campaign purposes.
I kid you not, and I am not lying to you, just trying to explain, all is not what it seems here, if Corbett had resign and then run for governor Fine, but he is doing more dirty things to good people for his own gain.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteRight now, the best thing for Pennsylvania Attorney General Corbett campaign for Governor is if the Judge will grant a Mistrial.
A Mistrial will delay any further embarrassing information coming out on what Corbett's Office has not been able to stop right now.
Now that I put it up on CASA, it will be consider by AG Corbett's Campaign staff For Governor.
Or maybe not now for the sake of his Corbett's Prosecutors?
February 26, 2010 1:27 PM
WHO ARE YOU?
A MYSTIC, PROPHET, OR PLAYER?
Frank Fina just did that with the smith Witness, and it looks like he did it to gain a Mistrial.
WOW.......all I got to say.....WOW!
This website is getting very scary, very dangerous too.
A mistrial? On what grounds? Defense incompetance? Look like rayovac just opened the habay door.
ReplyDeleteOOOOPS!
@ Anonymous 5:33
ReplyDeleteBad people can do good things too, and vice versa. But being a bad person and doing something good isn't a reason to escape responsibility for the bad.
And just as much, being a good person can't be reason to escape responsibility for doing something bad.
Even if there is a political element to the prosecutions, it doesn't change the fact that Veon's staff did massive amounts of campaign work on state time that would have been unnecessary had Veon a man of any integrity and not engineered the pay raise and then voted against it's repeal.
His arrogance, self-righteousness, and utter contempt for PA's taxpayers are the reason he's sleeping in the legal bed he's in. There couldn't be a better fate for a man done in by arrogance and pride than to be prosecuted and humiliated for his corruption.
But let's be adults here. There's no reasonable explanation for the bonuses the PG, and other PA media have exposed, than being a reward for campaign work. You'd think if there were a defense, supervisors would have gone to the press with projects and hard copies of stellar work that the bonus recipients did.
That there's been no defense or proof offered for the "legislative work" that merited the bonuses, refusing to speculate as to their purpose is nothing more than a juvenile suspension of reason for skepticism that is far more (cognitively) selective than the prosecution of Veon and cronies.
But of course, skepticism is a religion only found when reality is a pill too bitter to swallow.
The Riponsitter said...My job was threatened for "not lifting a finger" to help Veon in 2006. But enjoy being mired in the petty and corrupt world of PA politics, while I enjoy my J.D. from a top-10 law school. The Caucus will probably not be so lucky to have someone like me work for them, for a long time, and this trial is a great reason why actual talent and intelligence--instead of hacks--can't be attracted or retained.
ReplyDeleteFebruary 26, 2010 4:18 PM
First, you were not fired did you, so you are proof no one was fired for not volunteering to campaign.
Second, government needs the best and brightest right now in all areas. If you have passion to help, you should seek out and serve.
Third, graduating from a Top 10 Law School does not mean you will amount to being noble over other common citizens.
That kind of arrogance is more ignorance and over time, you will understand as perfections in thoughts hit realities of life.
As we all grow in life, we all stumble and fall especially when we judge others, and think we are above them.
Once it happens to you, only a friend can help you understand, if you go it alone, it will slowly eat at you into a decay of frightful boring neutralized nerves to do nothing.
Now may Mike Veon is not the gentleman you so quickly judge yesterday and today.
Maybe Mike Veon does not even know what a gentleman is. You see, my idea of a gentleman, if I owned a newspaper and I didn't like the way somebody was doing things, some politician say, I'd fight him with everything I had.
Only I would not show him in a convict's suit with stripes so his children could see the picture in the paper, or his mother, or his family and friends.
Riponsitter, I am proud you chose your own path in learning about the law and I have no doubt with your passion you will succeed in ways you never dreamed.
However, I caution to avoid the judgment of others especially politicians or you will end up being the greatest fool ever known.
If it was anybody else, I would say what is going to happen to you would be a lesson to you, if you do not stop the judgments.
Only you are going to need more than one lesson, if you keep thinking there is only one way, and only one way to be in this life.
And you are going to get more than one lesson, unless you come to understand, others choose another path and still succeed in helping many too.
Mike Veon is no evil person and he deserves respect not for his victories but due to to how he handled his own misjudgments and failures, like all of us.
I cannot tell you what is right all the time, but I do know what is wrong at times, and your attack on Mike Veon is wrong right now.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteA mistrial? On what grounds? Defense incompetance? Look like rayovac just opened the habay door.
OOOOPS!
February 26, 2010 5:46 PM
Not really, once the Judge reads over the Transcripts, you will see there no exigent situation.
Smith will be subject to being a Hostile Witness, and then you will see what is revealed whereby the OAG wil not be able to object....just wait and see.
It is a Mistrial or contempt for Fina, and then the real sparks and facts will fly!
Anonymous said...Here is bet for anyone...watch how many OAG Witnesses from now on, say they were told by Mike Veon to Campaign on State Time, in direct contradiction of those OAG Witnesses that have gone before and were the Managers that said Mike Veon never order them to do it.
ReplyDeleteAG Corbett's Prosecutors are making up their case as it goes along, instaed of showing what they investigated....THE LAST 3 YEARS?
February 26, 2010 12:18 PM
ONCE AGAIN, PREDICTIONS BECOME FACTS, AS SMITH DID EXACTLY THAT UNDER FINA AND ON CROSS-EXAM.
AWESOME!
JEREMIAH WAS NOT A BULL FROG BUT YOU ARE A PROPHET!
Anonymous said...Either Veon was an inept, bumbling hack of unimaginable proportions, or a hard-working and dedicated man who conspired to break the law.
ReplyDeleteFebruary 26, 2010 5:17 PM
Sorry, now you know everything in life comes in 3's, not just 2's?
1. If the Bonuses are Legit than why bring any case at all against just the House Democrats on Bonuses?
2. If the Bonuses are not Legit than why has there been no charges against House Republicans on bonuses, and Republicans and Democrats in the Senate?
3. At the same time, why did Corbett time these trials just on the Democrats in his election year, and not Republicans?
ALSO:
1. If The Bonuses are Legit then why bring any cases at all against those that got them, and then give Immunity or Guilty Pleas.
2. If the Bonuses are not legit, then why have those that admitted they were for campaign work on state time keep them, if you are using the trial to protect the taxpayers.
3. Why is AG Corbett using State Paid Employees that admitted breaking work rules and the law to testify and keep their jobs at the same time?
MOREOVER:
1. Corbett is not prosecuting this case as Attorney General; he is running for Governor as we speak?
2. Corbett did not resign the Attorney General’s Office to run for Governor he is using it to become Governor!
3. Corbett has employed Senate Staffers that took bonuses and not investigated them after 4 years, how can Corbett prosecute some Staffers that took Bonuses and hire other Staffers that got bonuses too without investigating them?
FINALLY,
1. George Washington had Benedict Arnold on his Staff without knowing he was paid as a spy for the British.
2. Jesus figure out Judas was going to betray him long before the Last Supper!
3. Ronald Reagan never knew his Staff helped sell arms to Iran to give the money to the Contras.
Sometime Staffers do things on their own for their own gain, and that has been going on since Cain and Able!
Everything comes in 3's in life,
Black, White and Grey!
Air, Water, Earth,
Liquids, Solids, Gases
Now you can put up everything you want and reach your own conclusions, but that ain't proof baby!
Somemore 3's:
The wheels on a tricycle
sides to a triangle
musketeers and sometimes cadbury cream eggs
Triplets
Power Puff Girls
Guitar chords in punk music
The points on many different types of leaves, such as certain ivy and oak
The Totally Spies
Sneezes
Reduce, reuse and recycle!
The Dixie Chicks
Celebrity deaths
Coins in a fountain
Little Piggies
Plane crashes
The Three Wise Men
The Three Stooges
Three men and a baby
Rub-a-dub-dub THREE men in a tub
Speeding tickets - amen to that !
The chipmunks
Harry Potter and his friends
Hockey forwards
Sweet tarts
Red fruit bites
Crappy Hollywood sequels
Tennis Balls
Trilogies
Members of Cream and Rush
Heads
3 Dog Night
Three Days Grace
Rings in a binder
Threesomes
Faith, Hope and Love.
The Holy Trinity: The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit
Neptune's Rings
Amigos
Yawns (Ha ha, now you've got to yawn)
Kisses
Donald Duck's nephews - Huey, Louie and Dewey
MAY I RESPOND IN CAPS SINCE YOU BRING UP GREAT ISSUES AND A CREDIT TO YOUR LAW SCHOOL AND FAMILY:
ReplyDeleteThe Riponsitter said...@ Anonymous 5:33...Bad people can do good things too, and vice versa. But being a bad person and doing something good isn't a reason to escape responsibility for the bad.
I AGREE, SO ASK YOURSELF IF CORBETT WAS RUNNING A FAIR INVESTIGATION WHY HAS IT TAKEN OVER 3 YEARS AND TIMED FOR GOVERNOR RACE ONLY AGAINST DEMOCRATS?
WHY DID HE NOT RESIGN AS ATTORNEY GENERAL TO RUN FOR GOVERNOR?
WHY DID HE NOT INVESTIGATE THE SENATORS WHEN HE WILL NOT HAVE TIME TO DO IT BEFORE HIS ELECTION?
IS THAT ACCOUNTABLE OR CALCULABLE, YOU WORKED THE GREEN DOME, DO YOU BELIEVE JUST VEON AND DEWEESE DID BONUSES BECAUSE PERZEL IS CHARGED WITH COMPUTER CONTRACTS AND OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE NOT BONUSES?
AND THE SENATORS HAVE NOT BEEN INVESTIGATED AT ALL AND HAVE THEIR STAFFERS EMPLOYED BY CORBETT'S CAMPAIGN?
GIMME THAT LSAT LOGIC YOU USED TO GO TO A TOP 10 LAW SCHOOL AND BE FAIR?
And just as much, being a good person can't be reason to escape responsibility for doing something bad.
AGREED, WHEN JESUS UPSET THE MARKET PLACE OUT OF ANGER, HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ARRESTED!
Even if there is a political element to the prosecutions, it doesn't change the fact that Veon's staff did massive amounts of campaign work on state time that would have been unnecessary had Veon a man of any integrity and not engineered the pay raise and then voted against it's repeal.
AND OTHERS THAT DID IN THE REPUBLICAN SENATE CAMPAIGNS, REPUBLICAN JUDGES CAMPAIGNS, AND IN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL CAMPAIGN SHOULD NOT BE INVESTIGATED??? OR SHOULD THEY?
His arrogance, self-righteousness, and utter contempt for PA's taxpayers are the reason he's sleeping in the legal bed he's in.
MIKE VEON ADMITTED THAT AFTER HE LOST HIS ELECTION. THE PEOPLE VOTED HIM OUT, FOR THOSE SAME REASONS AND HE ADMITTED ALL YOU SAY.
YET, AG CORBETT NEVER HAD TIME SO FAR TO INVESTIGATE HIS GOOD FRIEND SENATOR BOBBY JUBELRIER THAT DID THE SAME THING AND LOST HIS ELECTION TOO, AND AG CORBETT HIRED HIS STAFFER THAT GOT THE LARGEST BONUS?
NO ISSUE THERE WITH YOU?
MY RESPONSE CONTINUED BELOW...
MY RESPONSE FROM ABOVE CONTINUED...
ReplyDeleteThere couldn't be a better fate for a man done in by arrogance and pride than to be prosecuted and humiliated for his corruption.
YEP, THAT IS WHY THEY STABBED CAESAR, SO SAID BRUTUS THE MURDER!
MOSES KILLED A SLAVE MASTER!
MOHAMMED MURDERED MANY!
But let's be adults here. There's no reasonable explanation for the bonuses the PG, and other PA media have exposed, than being a reward for campaign work.
THE PG AND PA ALSO EXPOSED THEM FOR REPUBLICANS, BUT NO INVESTIGATION RESULTS TO DATE, IN THE VERY YEAR WE ELECT A GOVERNOR?
IS THERE A REASONABLE EXPLANATION FOR THAT TIMELY OUTCOME?
BE FAIR NOW?
You'd think if there were a defense, supervisors would have gone to the press with projects and hard copies of stellar work that the bonus recipients did.
RAMALEY WAS ACCUSED AND ACQUITTED AND YOU SAY YOU ARE GOING TO BE A FAIR-MINDED LAWYER FROM A TOP TEN LAW SCHOOL?
That there's been no defense or proof offered for the "legislative work" that merited the bonuses, refusing to speculate as to their purpose is nothing more than a juvenile suspension of reason for skepticism that is far more (cognitively) selective than the prosecution of Veon and cronies.
YOU ARE IN LAW SCHOOL, THE DEFENSE HAS NOT PUT ON THEIR CASE YET. SO YOU CONVICT WITHOUT WAITING TO SEE BOTH SIDES.
DO SOME RESEARCH ON GRAND JURIES AND YOU WILL BECOME SMARTER, I SAY THIS TO HELP YOU, NOT LAUGH AT YOU.
READ HOW PROSECUTORS CAN DO WHAT THEY WANT AND WHEN THEY WANT AND IGNORE EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE.
PLUS, YOU DO KNOW GRAND JURY FINDINGS ARE WRITTEN BY THE PROSECUTION FOR MEDIA PURPOSES BEFORE A TRIAL.
THEY ARE JUST CHARGES NOT THE FULL TRUTH?
AND YOU KNOW FROM LSAT LAW EXAMS WHEN THE MULTIPLE CHOICE ANSWERS HAVE THE WORDS “ALWAYS” AND “NEVER” IN THEM, THEY ARE THE WRONG ANSWERS.
YET, THE OFFICE OF THE AG PRESENTMENTS AND WITNESSES HAVE SAID ALWAYS AND NEVER IN THE GRAND JURY FINDINGS AND ON THE STAND UNDER OATH.
NOW FROM A TOP TEN LAW SCHOOL STUDENT YOU DON’T FIND THAT STRANGE?
But of course, skepticism is a religion only found when reality is a pill too bitter to swallow.
NICE QUOTE, NOW WHERE IS YOUR PROOF? QUOTES DON’T MAKE PROOF!
February 26, 2010 5:58 PM
What law school is in Ripon?
ReplyDeleteWE NEED A BREAK FROM ALL THIS DRAMA, MOVIE QUOTE TIME THAT is APPLICABLE TO CORBETT AND THIS CASE:
ReplyDeletePeople are gonna know who's responsible.
Now they're gonna get the truth in the Inquirer, quickly and simply and entertainingly and no special interests are gonna be allowed to interfere with that truth.
'I will also provide them with a fighting and tireless champion of their rights as citizens and as human beings.
'I'll provide the people of this city with a daily paper that will tell all the news honestly.
YEP, KATIE COURIC MAKES $15 MILLION WITH BONUSES WITH VERY LOW RATINGS AS CBS LOSES MONEY... BUT THOSE CBS EXECUTIVE MAKE EVEN MORE!
AND MORE MOVIE TIME QUOTES:
The fighting liberal, the friend of the working man, the next governor of this state, who entered upon this campaign......with one purpose only, to point out and make public the dishonesty, the downright villainy of Boss Jim W. Gettys' political machine, now in complete control of the government of this state.
I made no campaign promises, because until a few weeks ago, I had no hope of being elected.
Now however, I am something more than a hope.
Jim Gettys, Jim Gettys has something less than a chance.
Every straw vote, every independent poll shows that I'll be elected.
Now I can afford to make some promises.
The working man, the working man and the slum child know they can expect my best efforts in their interests.
The nation's ordinary citizens know that I'll do everything in my power to protect the underprivileged, the underpaid, and the underfed.
But here's one promise I'll make, and Boss Jim Gettys knows I'll keep it.
My first official act as governor of this state will be to appoint a special district attorney to arrange for the indictment, prosecution, and conviction of Boss Jim W. Gettys.
SOUNDS A LOT LIKE CORBETT'S CAMPAIGN DOES IT NOT, OR ELLIOT SPITZER AWHILE BACK?
ONTO MORE MOVIE QUOTES:
Headlines in the movie:
Candidate Kane Caught In Love Nest With 'Singer'
Don't worry about me. I'm Charles Foster Kane!
I'm no cheap, crooked politician, trying to save himself from the consequences of his crimes.
Gettys!
I'm going to send you to Sing Sing!
Sing Sing Gettys.!
Sing Sing!
AND WE CLOSE FOR NIGHT WITH SOME THOUGHTS FOR MONDAY!
Anonymous said...What law school is in Ripon?
ReplyDeleteFebruary 26, 2010 7:19 PM
I do not know, claims it is in the Top Ten, based on his attitude with the law, he may be a Special Admissions Student.
Or maybe Tom Corbett got him in, Tom had to go to go to Saint Mary's in Dallas, Texas, no decent North Eastern School would accept him?
Now you know why Corbett is not at this Trial conducting it himself.
But Corbett knows how to run for higher office while working on State Time without being charged by his Staff?
Anonymous said...What law school is in Ripon?
ReplyDeleteFebruary 26, 2010 7:19 PM
Anonymous said...I do not know, claims it is in the Top Ten, based on his attitude with the law, he may be a Special Admissions Student. Or maybe Tom Corbett got him in, Tom had to go to go to Saint Mary's in Dallas, Texas, no decent North Eastern School would accept him? Now you know why Corbett is not at this Trial conducting it himself. But Corbett knows how to run for higher office while working on State Time without being charged by his Staff?
February 26, 2010 7:45 PM
Well, let’s not forget Mike Manzo used Bill DeWeese name to get Angie Bertugli into Law Schools, and gave her a Job, Apartment, Bonus and Free Cable TV, without DeWeese knowing, until a DeWeese Staffer found it out, and reported to DeWeese.
Manzo then lied about it, lied to his wife, and continued his affair, as the OAG made sure Angie could not be fired and had to be transferred to Harrisburg, so she could tell it all to the Grand Jury???
And after all that, it only made Manzo Impotent as a Man, and Impotent as an Office of the Attorney General State Witness!
But don't forget the OFFICE OF THE AG is doing it to protect the taxpayer’s money for the little guys....if you want to believe it....Ripon has fallen for it, so far!
Hopefully, Ripon did not have to sleep with anybody to be admitted to Law School, like Angie did for herself.
What are you talking about? Nobody ever "reported it to DeWeese."
ReplyDeleteYou forget the best part of Citizen Kane quotes:
ReplyDeleteKane: I set back the sacred cause of reform, is that it? All right, that's the way they want it, the people have made their choice. It's obvious the people prefer Jim Gettys to me.
Leland: You talk about the people as though you owned them, as though they belong to you. Goodness.
As long as I can remember, you've talked about giving the people their rights, as if you can make them a present of Liberty, as a reward for services rendered...Remember the working man?
Kane: I'll get drunk too, Jedediah, if it'll do any good.
Leland: Aw, it won't do any good. Besides, you never get drunk. You used to write an awful lot about the workingman...He's turning into something called organized labor.
You're not going to like that one little bit when you find out it means that your workingman expects something is his right, not as your gift!
Charlie, when your precious underprivileged really get together, oh boy!
That's going to add up to something bigger than your privileges! Then I don't know what you'll do! Sail away to a desert island probably and lord it over the monkeys!
Kane: I wouldn't worry about it too much, Jed. There'll probably be a few of them there to let me know when I do something wrong.
Leland: Mmm, you may not always be so lucky...You don't care about anything except you. You just want to persuade people that you love 'em so much that they ought to love you back.
Only you want love on your own terms. Something to be played your way, according to your rules.
Leland asks to be transferred to the Chicago.
Kane: "I warn you Jedediah, you're not going to like it in Chicago. The wind comes howling in off the lake and gosh only knows if they ever heard of Lobster Newburg."
Kane: A toast, Jedediah, to love on my terms. Those are the only terms anybody ever knows - his own.
Anonymous said...What are you talking about? Nobody ever "reported it to DeWeese."
ReplyDeleteFebruary 26, 2010 8:07 PM
It is the Grand Jury Presentments, it was DeWeese Staffer that had an Email System to check for Ghost Employees, once Manzo moved her name to that Email, and a DeWeese Staffer told DeWeese...so says the Grand Jury as written by the Prosecutors!
Manzo in front witnesses on the day he was fired by DeWeese for keeping such things among others from DeWeese, Manzo admitted he lied and let DeWeese down and the entire HDC.
Why Veon's Lawyers did not use that on Cross-Examination of Manzo is beyond me, it shows Manzo was hiding many things from DeWeese, Stetler, Eachus and.....Veon!
Maybe they are saving it for the Defense cCase!
AND YET ANOTHER REPUBLICAN ATTORNEY GENERAL'S POLITICAL CREATED INVESTIGATION BITES THE DUSTS:
ReplyDeleteEthics panel clears congress members, including Murtha
Friday, February 26, 2010
By Daniel Malloy, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. House ethics committee today cleared all lawmakers, including the late Rep. John P. Murtha, D-Johnstown, of wrongdoing in a probe of lobbying firm PMA Group.
The 10-member Committee on Standards and Official Conduct released a 305-page report today finding that the targeted members involved with now-shuttered PMA and Pittsburgh native Paul Magliocchetti did not consider campaign contributions a factor when requesting earmarks, nor did they solicit contributions in return for earmarks.
But the committee did find that "there is a widespread perception among corporations and lobbyists that campaign contributions provide enhanced access to members or a greater chance of obtaining earmarks."
Reps. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, James Moran, D-Va., Todd Tihart, R-Kan., Peter Visclosky, D-Ind., and Bill Young, R-Fla., were the other lawmakers targeted in the now-closed investigation.
All serve on the House Appropriations subcommittee on defense, which Mr. Murtha chaired. He died Feb. 8 of complications related to gall bladder surgery.
PMA closed last year after federal agents searched its offices and Mr. Magliocchetti's home, seeking evidence that he used friends and family to steer donations to members of Congress in violation of campaign finance laws.
More details in tomorrow's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
Daniel Malloy: dmalloy@post-gazette.com or 202-445-9980. Follow him on Twitter at PG_in_DC.
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10057/1038891-455.stm#ixzz0ghAK3mZJ
I worked in LRO with "Riponsitting." His name is Jason Lawrence. He got his job with the caucus by begging Rep. Jake Wheatley to push leadership to hire him for a vacancy in Harrisburg. He left after about a year for the University of Chicago...oh, he talked incessantly about it. It was kind of a running joke even after he left.
ReplyDeleteJason was a pompous jerk. You can tell that yourselves from his "top 10 law school" remarks (overcompensation?) and his self-aggrandizing on his blog (i.e. "shark in a small pond.") Check it out for yourself:
http://adventuresinriponsitting.blogspot.com/
Jason, you really shouldn't mock the good people you are living and working with daily...they aren't dumb and can see condescension when a punk like you "deigns" to speak to them.
Although, I have a feeling you aren't the "shark" you prentend to be and are rather lonely right now. That is how I'm reading between the lines of your blog. Change your attitude and maybe you'll make some friends more quickly. Give it a try...folks that didn't go to a "top ten law school" will give YOU a chance if you make the effort.
Oh, and Jason was a liar. That's why Corbett's agents haven't gone to the trouble to drag him back to Pennsylvania from Ripon to testify. Corbett is having trouble with enough of his witnesses as it is. They don't need the problem of Jason on the stand who was the kind of guy who lied transparently in order to impress and seem more important than he was in reality. Check Jason out for yourselves here in an item from the Post Gazette.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08160/888329-85.stm
Don't you think if Jason was telling the truth and actually knew what he was talking about that Corbett would have brought him back?
Overall, it seems kind of sad to me that a "shark" like Jason would even worry about commenting on this blog or care about Mike Veon now that he is on the hunt in the big metropolis of Ripon.
Rather, Jason probably just took a break from yet another night of pleasuring himself alone under his grandma's afghan while looking lovingly at his U of Chicago diploma.
Keep the posts coming Jason, they're a hoot!
Fascinated by this, but even as the trial proceeds, it has raised numerous questions. Like, why the heck wasn't DeWeese charged for the bonuses. This blog constantly said it was because AG had somehow granted DeWeese immunity, which obviously turned out to be incorrect. So given that he had ultimate authority, and lots of people talked with him about it, and it went on for three years, shouldn't he be there on bonus charges?
ReplyDeleteSo that raises the question if it wasn't a secret deal with DeWeese, who had secret immunity? Will that ever be known?
The interviews at the end of the day with Raynak and Costanza seems like two different trials. Is the Judge more upset with one sides' behavior than the other? Will he find anyone in contempt?
Finally, why are defendants not permitted to twitter? What is the reason given?
Why on earth would you say, "which obviously turned out to be incorrect?". DeWeese was not charged in the events at the center of the current trial, and he remains uncharged. That he was indicted in connection with separate incidents is actually further evidence of a deal in the "bonus" case - Tom Corbett realized what a stupid mistake he'd made so he had to go looking for something else for which to charge DeWeese.
ReplyDeleteJason better hope he is not called to testify, if he is caught in one lie, he will be booted from Law School.
ReplyDeleteThe Bar Association will not accept such charges whether he graduates or not, he would subject to Chicago's Law School Honor Code.
This is actually worse than a Grand Jury!
Signor Ferrari said...
ReplyDeleteWhy on earth would you say, "which obviously turned out to be incorrect?". DeWeese was not charged in the events at the center of the current trial, and he remains uncharged. That he was indicted in connection with separate incidents is actually further evidence of a deal in the "bonus" case - Tom Corbett realized what a stupid mistake he'd made so he had to go looking for something else for which to charge DeWeese.
February 27, 2010 3:19 PM
Sig,
I support you 100%, but I must disagree on DeWeese.
There is no question DeWeese is not the Immunity Witness, or do you have evidence otherwise, or can explain his charges if he had Immunity?
I still think it is Senator LaValle, whose wife got into trouble, and we have heard nothing about it to date.
Prays are with you anyway even if I respectfully disagree with you.
Take Care!
".... can explain his charges if he had Immunity?"
ReplyDeleteImmunity from prosecution on one set of charges does not grant one carte blance for life. Do you suppose the witnesses in the "bonus" case are now free to rob banks? It is precisely because so much attention was called to the lack of charges against DeWeese in the bonus case - despite the abundance of evidence of his involvement - that he now is facing any charges at all.
@ Anonymous who worked in the LRO with me--post a comment on my blog with an e-mail where I could get in touch with you.
ReplyDeleteI'd be more than happy to hash out our differences and explain my motivations directly than in this silly way.
HEY Anon at 11:22AM. Thanks for exposing that pompous jerk and coward "Riponsitter"- aka Jason Lawrence. I remember when that idiot worked in the House Dem caucus and I remember when Rep Wheatley had to beg leadership to give this blockhead a job he didn't deserve. So he gets his job because of politics and then whines for the next xx number of years about "politics" in a caucus in the legislature. Just brilliant - and so typical of these people who pretend to be holier-than-thou. Thanks for exposing the real Jason Lawrence and the real story on how he got his job.
ReplyDeleteThis Lawrence guy seems to be even more full of himself now than he was when he worked for the House Dems -- if that's at all possible. Almost every staff person who ever came in contact with him laughed about what a pompous ass he was. It looks like he hasn't changed one bit as he continues to demonstrate with his own "blog" and bragging about what a genius he is - all the while making fun of the people who live and work in Ripon.
You sure seem to have shut his big, loud mouth for now -- but I sure hope not for long. It's so entertaining for those of us who knew this jerk to read his ramblings and to be able to laugh at him again.
So let's hear more about Corbett and the Ripon Society.
ReplyDeleteSo let's hear more about Corbett and the Ripon Society. We already know he didn't do well @Pennsylvania Society.
ReplyDeleteDid I see a Petition or a Website somewhere that was urging an investigation of Political Persecution and Profiling in Mississippi, against Alabama Governor Seligman and Cyril Wecht?
ReplyDeleteThat would hurt Tom Corbett and Mary Alice Buchanan in the General Election.
The Riponsitter said...
ReplyDelete@ Anonymous who worked in the LRO with me--post a comment on my blog with an e-mail where I could get in touch with you.
I'd be more than happy to hash out our differences and explain my motivations directly than in this silly way.
February 27, 2010 5:02 PM
Jason, what is your class rank at Chicago Law? Top ten?
@ Anonymous 7:18
ReplyDeleteYou're a master of the non-sequiter.
Deflecting blame to Corbett or trying to make a political issue of the timing of the case in no way excuses any defendants of their culpability.
And no prosecutor or defense attorney can do much about a trial schedule and court dockett. The pace and timing of a case is so much more in the hands of a trial judge than it is either side. The charges were brought a year and a half ago--that the actual trial is coinciding with the gubernatorial race is not the conspiracy of Tom Corbett, but the result of a slow-moving pre-trial process that's designed to ensure defendant's of their Constitutional rights.
We can only speculate why Corbett isn't going after R's for bonuses. My guess is that there were no "smoking gun" e-mails like the infamous "rock star" e-mail. Given Veon's arrogance feeling invincible enough to vote against the repeal of the pay raise, I can see how that attitude would trickle down to staff and lead to a lot of actions that were unwise in hindsight.
My guess is that Corbett would be crucifying some R's over bonuses too, but the evidence is all circumstantial and not nearly as good as the evidence in the case at hand.
But to claim this is all political theater against dems is totally disingenuous. It's probably not true, and even if it is, it's still deserved. "The other party controls the AG's office" can't ever be a serious defense to prosecution--our political system would break down if it were.
I'm in favor of more investigations and would love to see more charges filed in Bonusgate, provided there's evidence and the prosecutions would have enough of a chance of conviction to merit the resources invested in them.
Ramaley's acquittal in no way answers my point about the bonuses Harrisburg campaigners received for ostensibly "legislative work." Maybe the defense will have something to say about the legislative work of people who received bonuses, but I doubt it. I don't think you could build a case for a $15,000 bonus on three months of work even at an investment bank or hedge fund.
As for grand juries--you could get them to indict a ham sandwich. I know. But again, this in no way, addresses what is obvious to any fair-minded person reading the details of the Dems' 2006 bonus distrubutions: many of them were thinly veiled rewards for campaign work.
And for what it's worth, my reading of Julius Caesar is that Brutus and Cassius are the tragic heroes, ultimately done in by Caesar's lackeys.
And the invocation of Jesus in the marketplace was amusing. Thanks for that chuckle.
@ those who claim to have known me in the Caucus/Capitol
ReplyDeleteriponsitting@gmail.com
Feel free to bring the ad homs there. I'm more than happy to discuss things more civilly.
But here's one I can't resist:
@ Anonymous 8:03--I did something far worse to complete my law school applications: I had Jen Brubaker write me a letter of recommendation.
Of course, hindsight is 20/20, but I don't consider having a (soon to be) convicted felon writing that letter one of my finer moments...or now facing the prospect of answering questions about my tenure in the LRO.
But at least Jen gave me my out in "you didn't lift a finger to help Veon." Damn straight. Easily one of the best decisions I've ever made.
I can understand the ad homs being tossed this way, since I'd have a lot of cognitive dissonance and be upset about not having had the similarly good judgment to make that decision.
But with that said, I realize that it's probably been an incredibly stressful 3 years for a lot of people who's only mistakes were to be young, politically motivated, and desire to get ahead.
I can live with those young people not having to pay back their bonuses--a lot of them probably went to student loan providers or high-interest credit card bills. There's still a deterrent value to this trial that will save taxpayers money in the long run--see how it's already shut down bonuses in the Caucuses now.
But the grown ups that should've known better put a lot of decent young people in harm's way. If you want to know why I care, why I was a source for that article, and why I'm motivated to post here...that's a big reason why.
I got lucky and trusted my gut to not get involved with the politics after I heard coworkers explain the bonuses for campaign work after the '05 special out by Allentown. But I can see how a good person who's young and could use the money would've responded the other way.
The adults who put people like me--people who I considered friends--in that position need to answer for what they did. As for the staffers that were the pawns in the scheme--I hope that they learned a lot from their experience.
I followed this story every time something was published in the PG. I follow trial by twitter every day. That I still care--and I think for good reasons--I hope means something to silent readers that might have knew me.
But if the ad homs are going to take place in this forum:
@Anonymous 11:22/4:23 - What part of the PG story was a lie? Feel free to backchannel me with your concerns, but I'll defend everything I said. And no, I wasn't in the Top 10 of my class. If I were, I'm sure I'd be clerking for a federal appeals court judge somewhere. But again, if you want to discuss my performance in school, you have my e-mail.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete@ those who claim to have known me in the Caucus/Capitol
riponsitting@gmail.com
February 28, 2010 1:54 PM & February 28, 2010 2:13 PM
Corbett did not time the trials? Yet, Corbett has not time the investigations of the senate bonuses and skated on the Republican House Bonuses?
Anonymous said...@ Anonymous 7:18
ReplyDeleteAnd for what it's worth, my reading of Julius Caesar is that Brutus and Cassius are the tragic heroes, ultimately done in by Caesar's lackeys.
February 28, 2010 1:54 PM
HMMMNNN, Jason are you saying you condone murder, and Caesar Lackeys were wrong to seek justice of the murders?
And the invocation of Jesus in the marketplace was amusing. Thanks for that chuckle.
Chuckles, do you now how many Small Businessman lost income day, and Jesus was not even arrested for it?
Weird sens of justice you have?
Anonymous..riponsitting@gmail.com
ReplyDelete2:13 PM
@Anonymous 11:22/4:23 - What part of the PG story was a lie? Feel free to backchannel me with your concerns, but I'll defend everything I said. And no, I wasn't in the Top 10 of my class. If I were, I'm sure I'd be clerking for a federal appeals court judge somewhere. But again, if you want to discuss my performance in school, you have my e-mail. February 28, 2010 2:13 PM
Don't worry about not being in the Top Ten of your class, it is not important, as being admitted, what will be important is how you conduct yourself when out of Law School and serving your own interest as you please in the pursuit what you may feel is justice, community contributions, and public service.
To study at a Top Ten Law School or being in the Top Ten, will not amount to anything within in your heart and free thinker.
Clarence Darrow attended Allegheny College and Michigan Law School, but did not graduate.
He still was able to makwe an impact regardless of his rank!
Don't worry about not being in the Top Ten of your class, it is not important, as being admitted, what will be important is how you conduct yourself when out of Law School and serving your own interest as you please in the pursuit what you may feel is justice, community contributions, and public service.
ReplyDeleteTo study at a Top Ten Law School or being in the Top Ten, will not amount to anything within in your heart and free thinker.
I know this--I only threw out the detail of 'Top 10 law school' for two reasons: 1. to see if anyone would put the pieces together and say something about my identity...and thereby give me a feel for who's trolling here and who the authors are likely to be.
As an information-eliciting device, it worked wonders.
And 2.To make this point. What still obviously matters to some--see the baseless ad homs on me--is the "cult of personality" of which I consciously never took part in the Capitol. It's that polarization of politics, that combination of arrogance (Veon), vanity (DeWeese), and win at all costs mentality (a decade of oppression under Perzel's clownish rule) that lead to some really strange and f'd up priorities and decisions.
There was really no room for dissent (Individual self-promotion and taking a principled stand and not supporting Veon for the pay-raise vote were mutually exclusive). Either you were a part of the cult of Veon's personality, or your career was in danger of ending or going nowhere.
And that was really counterproductive and asinine, because it left no room for dedicated, but independent thinkers in the Caucus, especially those who would put their convictions ahead of hackery. If short-term political contributions were more important to the Caucus than long-term potential/intellectual upside in personnel decisions, promotions, and awarding bonuses, then things weren't being done right. (See, e.g. the testimony about Rachel Manzo's quick rise.)
For the sake of the Caucus, I hope the events of the past three years has changed a lot of that. In the long run, a highly competent, even if politically unmotivated from the foot-soldier point of view, will generate the policies and provide the service that will win durable majorities.
"I only threw out the detail of 'Top 10 law school' for two reasons: 1. to see if anyone would put the pieces together and say something about my identity..."
ReplyDeletePuh-leez. The last thing you expected or wanted was for anyone to say anything about your identity. Why else did you block acess to your Blogger profile immediately after people started responding to your comments?
And why else are you no longer using your Riponsitter identity?
I realize you're now embarrassed, but don't insult your fellow posters' intelligence (any more than you already have.)
LOL! "I meant to do that."
ReplyDeleteAccording to the article in the Philly Inky, a senior official of AG/Guber Candidate state-paid staff was sitting in the courtroom for the Bonusgate persecution so entertained by the testimony that he was folding paper airplanes out of sticky notes.
ReplyDelete1) Waste of government resources
2) No work job
3) Due to his position he should "know better"
So the question is when will he be charged?
Or, in the alternative, when will he be fired?
Most likely he will be taken off the state payroll and shifted to campaign staff, like so many before him...
Tommorow is a very big day for some people
ReplyDeleteI know most of this has blown over, but I was wondering if anyone knows why Michelle Borlinghaus is still employed at the House? After reading the grand jury presentment which lists only her as receiving immunity for her cooperation, and her blatant lack of competency for the position she held at the time, how is it that her salary increased to $55,000 in 2009? That far exceeds the maximum 3% increase from a salary of $44,000 in 2007. According to Mrs. Brubaker's account of her adequacy, I can't imagine her being well suited for any positions above the one she held at the time.
ReplyDeleteAlso, how many people are aware that Ms. Borlinghaus' current husband began working for the House campaigning in the summer of 2007, and is also a convicted felon (drug related)? His mother also works there. Since his nuptials to what seems to be a well connected/protected Ms. Borlinghaus, his criminal record has been wiped almost clean. At one time, its' pages (yes, pageS) were filled with many other drug related charges. All of which were dismissed, but then again we all know that sort of thing works, let the little fish go in order to catch the big ones.
Just wanted to throw that out there to see if there is any feedback.