Wednesday, December 21, 2011

LIES, DAMNED LIES AND STATISTICS ABOUT CORBETT'S CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS

We can't take it anymore.

Earlier this month, the Patriot-News falsely reported that Tom Corbett "refused any campaign contribution that had a state lawmaker’s name attached."

Now, Philadelphia Magazine repeats the lie in Patrick Kerkstra's column, saying Corbett "eschewed campaign donations from state lawmakers, lest it taint his Bonusgate investigation."

This is pure prevarication. Senate Republicans gave Corbett's campaign at least $90,000.

Here's how they did it:  Senator Joe Scarnati gave $50,000 to Corbett's running mate, Jim Cawley, who gave $40,000 of it to Bob Asher's PAC, Pennsylvania Future Fund, which gave $36,000 directly to Corbett.  Meanwhile, the Senate Republican Campaign Committee gave $50,000 to Cawley. Cawley gave the $50,000 to the state Republican Party, which spent nearly every contribution it received on Corbett's campaign. Asher's PAC also gave $5,000 to the state party days after receiving Cawley's contribution.

These contributions are not easily explained away.  The $50,000 from Scarnati and the $50,000 from SRCC are not only the largest contributions Cawley received, they're among the only significantly large contributions he received. And contributions to the state party and Asher's PAC are among the largest contributions Cawley gave.

The same pattern of contributions was nowhere to be found in Lt. Gov. candidate Jim Matthews campaign finance reports from 2006.

A few media outlets reported the Senate Republicans' contributions to Cawley, but not how Cawley directed the contributions to Corbett. Not that contributions to Cawley should be considered anything other than contributions to Corbett.

Furthermore, Corbett allowed former House Republican Chief of Staff Brian Preski to contribute to his campaign and host a fund-raiser in December of 2007.  When confronted, Corbett claimed "we didn't have all the facts in front of us"  .... because it was a big secret that Preski was Chief of Staff.

If a Democratic politician had been the beneficiary of such financial shenanigans, legislative Republicans would be denouncing him from the rooftops, and the Capitol Stenographers Corps would be dutifully lapping up every indignant word.

Need we remind anyone that Corbett never subpoenaed a single witness from the Senate Republican Caucus during his politically-motivated investigation of the legislature and overlooked clear evidence of illegal campaigning in a Senate Republican office?

Caught red-handed accepting lawmakers' contributions through his running mate, Corbett claimed ignorance, but Scarnati's Chief of Staff, Drew Crompton (Swann campaign aide and recipient of a $20,000 taxpayer-funded bonus) ratted him out, saying, there was 'an acknowledgement' from the Corbett camp that a contribution from Scarnati to Cawley would not be returned."

By the way, both the Patriot-News and Philadelphia Magazine were presented with the facts of Cawley's finance reports, and both have chosen to ignore them.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Attorney General Kelly will be held accountable for the sins of Attorney General Corbett and over time will regret following Corbett's orders to go after DeWeese when she knows the case is weaker every day.

Attorney General Kelly was smart to drop the charges on Patterson after hearing the Trial Judges concerns about how the Prosecutors conducted themselves, but Patterson was a Republican like her.

She should do the same on DeWeese because the Prosecutors Case is even weaker than Patterson, but then DeWeese is a Democrat?

When it is all over, it will be too bad that Kelly is held accountable for her misjudgments on covering up for Corbett’s Election To Be Governor.

Nixon was stubborn too, had a an enemies lists just like Corbett created.

Yet, it was John Mitchell and Robert Bork that paid the price for Nixon’s Campain Crimes, just like Corbett is covering today.

Attorney General Kelly should be more Independent before prosecuting DeWeese on such flimsy evidence illegally altered by Corbett's Prosecutors, before it is too late for her career.

Anonymous said...

I suspect that there are many more legislators who should meet the bar of justice for various activities and not just Mr. DeWeese. Maybe Mr. Perzel can give him some hints.

"Chief Deputy Attorney General James P. Barker countered that the grist of the allegations in the grand jury information was presented during that hearing."

So, prosecutor, you have edited grand jury transcripts and entered them into evidence? If you people worked for a private law firm you'd all be unemployed right now.

The Attorney Generals office needs to be weeded. Corbett brought too many of his 'law and order republicans' with him, and they don't have the common sense to not give the court altered testimony from a grand jury.

Students at Widener Law are laughing at you in class today.

I am glad Bill DeWeese is taking on this political investigation by, of, and for Republicans. In the end, it will expose Governor Corbett's duplicity just like in the Sandusky Case.

Anonymous said...

I find the Attorney Generals website attribute to the Attorney General's Press Release and edited Grand Jury Testimony are a revision in twisting of facts and truth.

We should blame this misrepresentation on an overzealous prosecutor in charge of the Grand Jury investigation for the language in the Grand Jury Presentment that was laughably wide of the mark in its misleading description of the testimony of Bill DeWeese.

The Pretrial defense argument by Assistant Attorney General Barker leaves no doubt that the intentionally distorted Finding of Fact in the Presentment was a product of the Prosecutor in charge.

Now that we know about the donations to the campaign of now Governor Corbett during the year he investigated Veon, Prezel, DeWeese & Sandusky investigations there have more reason to question the motives of the Attorney General.

Manzo, Sidella, Novasky, and other Immunity Witnesses have testified to their "belief" in witnessing some kind of bonuses, but they are unspecific. He has stated that under oath they are not 100% certain.

That means these witnesses have reasonable doubt and no jury can convict if reasonable doubt exists.

Therefore, it seems this emphasis on the Grand Jury Testimony is actually detrimental to the prosecution of DeWeese. It raises reasonable doubt that could potentially poison a jury against the prosecution and the testimony of the actual victims.

Moreover, AGA Barker said they removed DeWeese Grand Jury Testimony that was self-serving when it actuality that was Testimony under oath before a Grand Jury.

It is not self-serving to tell the total truth Grand Juries want to hear the total truth, not changed transcripts to suit the Prosecutor's lack of evidence. If not the AG should have charged Obstruction of Justice or Perjury for lying under oath, but they cannot because DeWeese told the truth.

The Attorney General Office of Prosecutors has committed a crime by changing Grand Jury Testimony.

The Prosecutors misconduct has caused charges to be brought against Bill DeWeese base on a difference in recollections of words used in the Grand Jury Testimony at the Preliminary Hearing. The absurdity of that seems incredible to anyone.

These charges are a sham and discredit. They cannot be sustained. So what is the rationale?

Clearly, it is a diversion with a function?

Does making this case about Speaker of the House Bill DeWeese give the press some big game to chew on instead of delving into what the Governor knew and why he dragged his feet as Attorney General?

How can an AG not protect abused children being raped and where Sandusky was seen committing a sexual assault on a young boy of about ten years of age with a 10-Person Professional Children Predators Unit displaced by one sole State Trooper?

If anything, the Attorney General should be investigated for changing Bill DeWeese Testimony and still insists on a trial. The more we see revealed the more we know the truth and the worse the AG and the media look.

Anonymous said...

I understand the GJ summary is meant to be a prosecutor's weapon.

But one can hardly help but think that the AG went way beyond what was reasonable here.

If the this blog is one-sided, I don't think it's any more one-sided than the GJ testimony is, and we all know how everyone outside the OAG family reacted to that.

When all is said and done, this will be Harrisburg version of "Bonfire of the Vanities" by Scott Turow.

Something bad happens, and a lot of people get involved, not to help the commonwealth, but to make a name for themselves - including the media, AG Corbett, and Governor Corbett which by the way has the motive to change GJ Reports for his benefit.

Dory Hippauf said...

Connecting the Dots: The Marcellus Natural Gas Play Players – Part 1
By Dory Hippauf
You Can’t Tell the Players Without a Scorecard!
http://commonsense2.com/2011/12/naturalgasdrilling/connecting-the-dots-the-marcellus-natural-gas-play-players-part-1/


Connecting the Dots: The Marcellus Natural Gas Play Players – Part 2
By Dory Hippauf
Chesapeake Energy – Peeking Behind the Curtain
http://commonsense2.com/2012/01/national-politics/connecting-the-dots-the-marcellus-natural-gas-play-players-part-2/