Because we're following the "Bonusgate" case on Twitter, we think we've finally figured out what's wrong with Gubernatorial Candidate Tom Corbett's case. He's prosecuting the wrong defendant.
According to Roxbury News' Tweets:
"Foreman asked me [former Mike Veon staff member Rich Protnesti] to go to Beaver Co in the general election 2006, I refused, my wife was pregnant"
"Raynak- who told you [Pronesti] to lie A- Jeff Foreman, and things are getting very heated"
"Pronesti Foreman asked me to fly to Nashville TN pick up Mike's Harley - objection no charges were filed for a motorcycle in TN"
"Pronesti- after the payraise Foreman warned him - "people will be watching"
"Pronesti admitting working on campaigns without taking state leave, he was asked to work on the Albert campaign by Jeff Foreman"
Post-Gazette reporter Tracie Mauriello's Tweets:
"Pronesti says Jeff Foreman told him to lie on reimbursement form"
"In 06 Foreman told Pronesti, [former Veon staff member] Melissa Lewis & others to accrue compensatory time so they would have time to campaign."
"Foreman wanted Pronesti & others to move to Beaver for 10 weeks leading up to 06 primary. Pronesti refused."
"Pronesti: Jeff Foreman (who pleaded guilty in #bonusgate) asked him to go to Beaver to campaign against Veon political foe James Albert."
"Pronesti: Travel expenses were paid by caucus, too. Jeff Foreman told staff to submit those expenses for reimbursement by caucus"
"KSB [Karen Steiner Blanar, former Veon staff member]: Foreman told her and PJ Lavelle "to delete information and start protecting ourselves."
"KSB- Foreman wanted me to uproot and move to Beaver Co for 3 or 4 months I got out of it by crying, I was very upset"
ABC 27 reporter Andy Briggs' Tweets:
"[Former Veon staff member Esther] Reever sez Foreman was "persistent" in pushing campaign work. Sent her emails and came to her desk."
Hey, guys? Foreman already pleaded guilty! You can stop now.
30 comments:
You guys can beat up on Foreman, or Manzo, or Webb, or Steiner, or Lavelle, or DeWeese but it doesn't make you innocent. It was Brubaker that testified Brett Cott's reaction to the bonus gate stories was an e-mail saying now maybe more people will volunteer. It was Pat Cook who testified about Veon tasking him to get his cowboy boots shined, pick up his drycleaning and buy his cigars. It was Bliss who said Brett Cott did mostly campaign work.
More to come.
Brubaker who's testifying under a plea agreement? Cook who's testifying under an immunity deal? Bliss who's testifying under an immunity deal?
When will we hear from a witness who doesn't have something to gain by toeing the prosecutor's line?
Anonymous said...
You guys can beat up on Foreman, or Manzo, or Webb, or Steiner, or Lavelle, or DeWeese but it doesn't make you innocent.
It's not the defense's job to prove innocence; it's the prosecution's job to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That's hard to do when all the witnesses have so much incentive to lie.
Anonymous said...
Brubaker who's testifying under a plea agreement? Cook who's testifying under an immunity deal? Bliss who's testifying under an immunity deal?
Well, let's see. That's because anyone who got close enough to any of the defendants had to get down in the mud and play. It seems no one came away clean after working on that staff.....
Anonymous said....
When will we hear from a witness who doesn't have something to gain by toeing the prosecutor's line?
When either pigs fly or one of the defendants gets on the stand....so I guess it's when pigs fly.
What about the motorcycles that two Veon staffers transported from Utah to South Dakota? I suppose Veon knew nothing about that, either.
Maybe Foreman gave the staffers (wasn't one of them Brett Cott?) the motorcycle keys and told them to make the delivery.
But in that case, Veon would have had to have reported the bikes stolen if he didn't know about the transport plans.
Anybody see a headline that said, "Veon reports motorcycles stolen from garage"? I didn't think so.
Anonymous said...
Veon would have had to have reported the bikes stolen if he didn't know about the transport plans.
Just because he knew about the transport plans doesn't mean he knew anyone was paid with state funds for them. Witness after witness has testified that it was Foreman who directed them to charge their expenses to the state. Perhaps it diluted his guilt over charging the taxpayers for time spent on his private law practice.
When this case started, we were told how Veon was paying staff to do all these bad, bad, bad things. Now we have at least 3 witnesses (Lavelle, Bliss and Pronesti) who all testified that they forged his signature on their reimbursement forms...
And these are the type of upstanding, civic-minded folks are who the jury is relying on to convict the defendants???
Pronesti declined to do campaign work and remained employed, continued to receive promotions, continued to receive raises?
The AG is now under investigation for the same conduct-- campaigning on state time. So are his employees. He has done this for 2 years and it will come to light soon.
Pronesti is another unindicted co-conspirator still employed by the House Democrats; as is Lewis, Steiner, Bliss, Reever, and Cook. Not to mention Caton, Hazlewood, Lesperance, Martz, Steve Webb, Tom Andrews, Bill Sloane, and so many more.
Anonymous said...
When this case started, we were told how Veon was paying staff to do all these bad, bad, bad things. Now we have at least 3 witnesses (Lavelle, Bliss and Pronesti) who all testified that they forged his signature on their reimbursement forms...
Please look up the definition of a word before you use it. If a person has permission to use that signature, there is no forgery. I believe the objection was made and sustained.
If one has permission to sign another's name to one document, does he have his permission to sign his name to any document he chooses? Could the witnesses have signed Veon's name to, say, personal loan applications? Could they have written themselves checks from his accounts? One assumes they did not have permission to sign Veon's name to fraudulent documents.
Do you really think anyone but a complete numbskull would believe that not one, not two, not three, but all of these staffers were doing all of these things without Veon's knowledge?
So everyone around him was trying to set him up, and he had no idea?
Maybe he will be brave enough to take the stand and testify that that was the case. But I'm betting he will take the fifth.
Anonymous said....
One assumes they did not have permission to sign Veon's name to fraudulent documents.
One may assume anything one wants, but you know what they say about assuming.
Anonymous said...You guys can beat up on Foreman, or Manzo, or Webb, or Steiner, or Lavelle, or DeWeese but it doesn't make you innocent. February 24, 2010 5:38 PM...
Sure, it does, everyone is innocent until proven guilty, that is not just the law, and it is a Constitutional Right.
AG Corbett's case from the start has been a political power play in pursuit of his Governors Campaign, not a pursuit of Justice.
If it was, it would include ALL POLITICAL PEOPLE that the AG has charged to these 4 Defendants, and it would have included after 3 Years, Republican and Democratic Senators too.
Do you you actually believe only these 4 Defendants committed all these so-called made into crimes by wayward Prosecutors with Runaway Grand Juries????
The Defense did not beat up any of these Witnesses, Immunity Witnesses or Guilty Pleaders Witnesses the AG has put up for evidence to support their case.
The only thing the Defense has done is proven these AG Puppets have been proven liars by how they admitted they lied on the job, by the Prosecutors guidance, and for AG Corbett, do not blame the Defense Attorneys that got to the real truth.
If you are upset the real truth is coming out, and then ask yourself, why Corbett’s Prosecutors cannot produce the crimes they alleged in the Grand Jury and now on the Witness Stand. Then ask why Corbett is running for Governor instead of prosecuting this case himself???
RESPONSE IN CAPS:
Anonymous said...Brubaker who's testifying under a plea agreement? Cook who's testifying under an immunity deal? Bliss who's testifying under an immunity deal?
Well, let's see. That's because anyone who got close enough to any of the defendants had to get down in the mud and play. It seems no one came away clean after working on that staff.....
WELL, AFTER 3 YEARS OF THIS OAG INVESTIGATION, WHY WASN'T REPUBLICAN SENATORS INVESTIGATED TO DATE AS CORBETT GETS NEARER TO HIS CAMPAIGN GOAL FOR GOVERNOR???
ARE WE TO BELIEVE ONLY THESE 4 DEFENDANTS DID ALL OF THIS WITHOUT REPUBLICANS DOING ANYTHING???
I MEAN, IF THIS INVESTIGATION AS FAIR, WHY NO INVESTIGATIONS INTO REPUBLICAN SENATORS TOO?
Anonymous said....
When will we hear from a witness who doesn't have something to gain by toeing the prosecutor's line?
When either pigs fly or one of the defendants gets on the stand....so I guess it's when pigs fly.
REPUBLICANS HAVE FLYING PIGS TOO, BUT CORBETT NEEDS THEM TO BE ELECTED, AND YOU WANT JUSTICE?
February 24, 2010 5:58 PM
RESPONSE IN CAPS:
Anonymous said...Brubaker who's testifying under a plea agreement? Cook who's testifying under an immunity deal? Bliss who's testifying under an immunity deal?
Well, let's see. That's because anyone who got close enough to any of the defendants had to get down in the mud and play. It seems no one came away clean after working on that staff.....
WELL, AFTER 3 YEARS OF THIS OAG INVESTIGATION, WHY WASN'T REPUBLICAN SENATORS INVESTIGATED TO DATE AS CORBETT GETS NEARER TO HIS CAMPAIGN GOAL FOR GOVERNOR???
ARE WE TO BELIEVE ONLY THESE 4 DEFENDANTS DID ALL OF THIS WITHOUT REPUBLICANS DOING ANYTHING???
I MEAN, IF THIS INVESTIGATION AS FAIR, WHY NO INVESTIGATIONS INTO REPUBLICAN SENATORS TOO?
Anonymous said....
When will we hear from a witness who doesn't have something to gain by toeing the prosecutor's line?
When either pigs fly or one of the defendants gets on the stand....so I guess it's when pigs fly.
REPUBLICANS HAVE FLYING PIGS TOO, BUT CORBETT NEEDS THEM TO BE ELECTED, AND YOU WANT JUSTICE?
February 24, 2010 5:58 PM
Anonymous said...
What about the motorcycles that two Veon staffers transported from Utah to South Dakota? I suppose Veon knew nothing about that, either.
Maybe Foreman gave the staffers (wasn't one of them Brett Cott?) the motorcycle keys and told them to make the delivery.
But in that case, Veon would have had to have reported the bikes stolen if he didn't know about the transport plans.
Anybody see a headline that said, "Veon reports motorcycles stolen from garage"? I didn't think so. February 24, 2010 6:50 PM
What about Mike Long Republican Senator Robert Jubelriers Staffer and the biggest Bonus recipient, now working for AG Corbett, and never investigated by Corbett's AG Office?
As for Veon's Defense, they were able to establish what happen and how the AG Office was upset and then moved into areas that Veon was never charged with at trial.
Just because the AG Office at Trial with under oath testimony cannot prove the AG Office Grand Jury Findings that they created, is not Veon's problem, it is the AG Office.
Anonymous said...Veon would have had to have reported the bikes stolen if he didn't know about the transport plans.
Just because he knew about the transport plans doesn't mean he knew anyone was paid with state funds for them. Witness after witness has testified that it was Foreman who directed them to charge their expenses to the state. Perhaps it diluted his guilt over charging the taxpayers for time spent on his private law practice. February 24, 2010 7:30 PM
You Betcha.....wonder why the AG Office did not ask $378,000 Per Year Paid Disbarred Attorney Foreman, why he could not tell the Jury under Oath, that Mike Veon order him to send those Motorcycles on State Time with State Money????
Is it because Foreman could not lie under Oath and the AG Office could not prove it AT TRIAL or BOTH!
Foreman is testifying for the OAG and if the OAG could not get Foreman to tell the Jury Veon ordered it, then did it happen at all on Veon's orders?
We already have seen how much the AG Office Witnesses have admitted doing things without the knowledge of Mike Veon and others!
So, where is the OAG Case now, start to consider they never had one, but the case for Corbett to become Governor?
Once again, why is Tom Corbett not prosecuting these cases if he is the Attorney General?
Signor Ferrari said...
If one has permission to sign another's name to one document, does he have his permission to sign his name to any document he chooses? Could the witnesses have signed Veon's name to, say, personal loan applications? Could they have written themselves checks from his accounts? One assumes they did not have permission to sign Veon's name to fraudulent documents.
February 25, 2010 7:53 AM
BUT,,,,,the Attorney General Office had them sign their Guilty Pleas and Immunity Agreements, knowing full well, they lied at the Grand Jury Hearings.
Why?
The Attorney General refuse any evidence of innocence or exculpatory evidence for Defendants because they are allow to do it, but the Trail is a different place where proof must be proven, not made up.
Funny, the more this case goes on, the more you know these charges were brought just for Corbett's Governor Campaign, and that will come out soon too.
Anonymous said...
Pronesti is another unindicted co-conspirator still employed by the House Democrats; as is Lewis, Steiner, Bliss, Reever, and Cook. Not to mention Caton, Hazlewood, Lesperance, Martz, Steve Webb, Tom Andrews, Bill Sloane, and so many more.
February 24, 2010 11:00 PM....
And since they all admitted UNDER OATH, they were hired for political work (If You Can Believe Them), now all of a sudden they are doing legitimate HDC work????
What they actually are is STATE PAID WITNESSES for the Office of the Attorney General, and have been proven liars as we have seen at trial under oath under those conditions of employment by the OAG.
None of them have been ordered to pay back the Bonuses they claim from political work either?
Now why did the AG permit this kind of state bribery by their Prosecutors?
What happen to protecting the Taxpayers Money???
Anonymous said...
REPUBLICANS HAVE FLYING PIGS TOO, BUT CORBETT NEEDS THEM TO BE ELECTED, AND YOU WANT JUSTICE?
Again, political double speak. Not responsive to what I said at all. Always take people off the topic and go finger pointing elsewhere.
BTW Republicans were indicted. Did you miss it?
And as I understand it, both senate caucuses are next.
This whole discussion is futile and won't effect the outcome. But of course, if it makes you feel better, by all means....
Response in (Response):
Anonymous said...
REPUBLICANS HAVE FLYING PIGS TOO, BUT CORBETT NEEDS THEM TO BE ELECTED, AND YOU WANT JUSTICE?
Again, political double speak. Not responsive to what I said at all. Always take people off the topic and go finger pointing elsewhere.
(Not at all, Corbett's slowness to investigate Republican Senators over 3 years with 800 OAG employees is very relevant to this case. Why have you not responded to it, is it because of Corbett's Campaign, tell us why so long and not investigation of just 50 Senators??)
BTW Republicans were indicted. Did you miss it?
(Yes, 1 sole Republican Lawmaker and his Staffers indicted on Computer Contracts not Bonuses. So, tell us why no Republican Senators??? There are just 50 Senators (30 Republican) and they gave out the biggest bonuses?)
And as I understand it, both senate caucuses are next.
(Really, will that before the Spring primary or November Elections, tell us, when. i have not even seen a Grand Jury on Senator even formed after 3 years.)
(Please tell me when you expect tom corbett to investigate and indict Republican Senators this year?)
This whole discussion is futile and won't effect the outcome.
(Oh really, is that because you cannot answer any of the questions we asked on the no investigation on 50 Republican Senators during Corbett's election campaign for Governor? Or you are just Stupid?))
But of course, if it makes you feel better, by all means....
(All I want is fairness to make me feel better, what do you want, ignorance is bliss....)
(I ask you 3 simple questions:)
(1. Why 800 OAG Employees cannot investigate Republican senators after 3 years?)
(2. Why does AG Corbett employ these Republican Senators aide that got Bonuses without having them investigated to date?)
(3. Will AG Corbett investigate, charge and put on Trial Republican before his Primary and November elections dates?)
(IF NOT WHY SO LONG?)
February 25, 2010 10:23 AM
Anonymous said....
(Oh really, is that because you cannot answer any of the questions we asked on the no investigation on 50 Republican Senators during Corbett's election campaign for Governor? Or you are just Stupid?))
When you can't argue the law, argue the facts, when you can't argue the facts argue the law, when neither the law nor the facts are on your side, call the other guy names.
Anonymous said...
Anonymous said....
(Oh really, is that because you cannot answer any of the questions we asked on the no investigation on 50 Republican Senators during Corbett's election campaign for Governor? Or you are just Stupid?))
When you can't argue the law, argue the facts, when you can't argue the facts argue the law, when neither the law nor the facts are on your side, call the other guy names.
February 25, 2010 1:43 PM
You have argued neither law or facts and your quote does not answer any of our questions?
No one called you a name that you have earned by not answering the simple questions, just waiting for your answers?
So, once again, tell us, why after 3 years and 800 AG employees, when is the public going to see the investigations results of Republican Senate Caucus by Tom Corbett before the Primary election or before November election or never?
We just want to know and you can't answer it so far, so does stupid apply does it not?
If Corbett was fair his Republican Friends and Lawmakers would have at least been brought before a Grand Jury by now after 3 years, or am I stupid for asking?
Anonymous said...
You have argued neither law or facts and your quote does not answer any of our questions?
No one called you a name that you have earned by not answering the simple questions, just waiting for your answers?
Why in the world would I answer even one of your questions? When I did respond earlier, I got the "yeah, but.....and had my questions answered with your questions. Evasive?
Not one of you has ever answered a straight question with a straight answer....."the Republicans have flying pigs, too"
I feel like I'm in the playground with a bunch of bullies. You're not interested in others' answers because you claim to know all the inner workings of all of the grand juries, the entire OAG, how and why everything was, is, and is going to happen.
For such an omnipotent being, you seem to be most intolerant of any ideas other than your own, and completely lacking a sense of ethical behavior.
I know, I know, yeah, but Tom Corbett, and then, and then, and then. I leave you to your loyal cadre of head bobbers and name callers.
Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...Why in the world would I answer even one of your questions?
When I did respond earlier, I got the "yeah, but.....and had my questions answered with your questions. Evasive? February 25, 2010 2:53 PM....
We have answered your questions, the Defense Lawyers have done a great job on Cross-Examination proving Ag Corbett's, State Paid For Immunity Witnesses and AG's Guilty Pleaders have told two different stories before two different Juries.
The Grand Jury because it did not hear ALL of the Excuplatory Evidence voted for charges, that the AG Prosecutors cannot sustain with their own Witnesses.
We told you this happen because Corbett is running for Governor.
Now once again, we ask you, why after 3 years and over 800 OAG employees Corbett still has NOT started an investigation, grand jury, on his Republican Friends within the Republiacn Senate and will it happen before the Primary and General Election?
It has been asked to you 3 times, and 3 times you whine about being evasive.
We feel these investigatuions are completely political for the political agenda of Tom Corbett and his Republican Friends, that is our answer.
So where is your answer NOW?
Anonymous said...For such an omnipotent being, you seem to be most intolerant of any ideas other than your own, and completely lacking a sense of ethical behavior. February 25, 2010 2:53 PM
All they did is ask you a question and you said the above diatribe of what you call name-calling, me thinks the kettle on you is calling someone back??
For those working at the Office of the Attorney General, here is a definition you need to learn:
Exculpatory evidence is the evidence favorable to the defendant before a Grand Jury or in a criminal trial, which clears or tends to clear the defendant of guilt.
Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...For such an omnipotent being, you seem to be most intolerant of any ideas other than your own, and completely lacking a sense of ethical behavior. February 25, 2010 2:53 PM
All they did is ask you a question and you said the above diatribe of what you call name-calling, me thinks the kettle on you is calling someone back??
February 25, 2010 3:47 PM
STILL WAITING FOR YOUR ANSWERS?
Post a Comment