Thursday, January 26, 2012

DeWEESE'S INCONSISTENCIES

Here's a puzzle:

Since the very moment craven liar H. William DeWeese struck a deal with then-Gubernatorial Candidate and Attorney General Tom Corbett to escape indictment in the "Bonusgate" case, DeWeese has pointed to his very cravenness as evidence of his innocence and his ethics.

After "discovering" evidence that his chief of staff and other staffers were engaged in illegal electioneering, DeWeese says, he fired them.

But he never fired his former taxpayer-funded political operative Kevin Sidella, and he never fired his former press secretary Tom Andrews, despite overwhelming evidence of their participation in the same activities.

Why?

Don't expect prosecutors in DeWeese's trial to ask the question, even though this week DeWeese's lawyer actually invoked Sidella's involvement in the "Bonusgate" case in an effort to discredit Sidella's testimony against DeWeese.

And, although hope springs eternal, we don't expect the Capitol Stenographers Corps covering the trial to ask or even acknowledge the question.

The answer is simple: the very same evidence that implicated Sidella and Andrews implicated DeWeese himself.

That's why DeWeeese never turned it over to Corbett. And though it made its way to the OAG through another route, Corbett never acted upon it, or charged DeWeese for witholding it.

Much of Harrisburg seems to have forgotten, but when Corbett first launched his campaign for Governor by issuing subpoenas and executing search warrants on House Democrats, Bill DeWeese actively obstructed the investigation. He fought to quash the subpoenas and sought "legislative privilege" for the seized documents.

After the state Supreme Court shot him down, DeWeese negotiated a deal with Corbett, the precise terms of which remain confidential.

Then, with the taxpayer-funded help of high-powered fixer Bill Chadwick, DeWeese gathered emails and documents that implicated his former colleague Mike Veon and several staffers, turned them over to Corbett and leaked them to Corbett sycophant Dennis R. Roddy. At the same time, he fired most of the staffers implicated therein.

Just before that, however, DeWeese eased Sidella off the state payroll and continued to pay him the equivalent of his state salary out of campaign funds.

Andrews remained a part of DeWeese's Harrisburg staff until DeWeese was indicted on separate charges. Forced to resign his leadership position within the caucus, DeWeese had to downsize his staff. Andrews was spurned in favor of hypocritical whore Paul Sunyak, who remains assigned to DeWeese. Andrews was reassigned within the caucus, but remains loyal to his old boss.

We're curious what lies DeWeese might tell to justify his inconsistency in retaining ties with Sidella and Andrews while throwing up other staff as human shields.  But prosecutors won't ask, because it might reveal the 2007 "negotiation" that both Corbett and DeWeese want desperately to remain a secret.

17 comments:

  1. If DeWeese didn't hand everything over or misled investigators, then wouldn't that void any deal he had with the OAG? And, doesn't that implicate Chadwick? Because some one should turn that over to Attorney's Licensing Board. If Chadwick was involved in bad practices he's the biggest hypocrite of all. As for how Tom Andrews stays on staff dispite all the evidence - good question!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Someone in the press should investigate who was deeply implicated in documents and trial testimony that are still on state payroll, how much they make and who employs them. That'd be interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous said...Someone in the press should investigate who was deeply implicated in documents and trial testimony that are still on state payroll, how much they make and who employs them. That'd be interesting. January 26, 2012 5:32 PM

    Chris Casey, Nora Wickelman, and Todd Eachus have some explaining to do.

    ReplyDelete
  4. So Mike Veon brought Mike Manzo in and Kevin Sidella.

    No wonder the Democrats failed, were investigated, and brought to justice, these two slime are a piece of work.

    DeWeese does not deserve this kind of abuse.

    How many GOP caucus members trolled polling places without putting in for a day off?

    And why did Corbett fail to address that part of the corruption at the State House?

    Why isn't Sidella required to pay back every cent he feels was obtained illegally?

    If he felt this was wrong why did he do it for years.

    If the case was so good why would the state give imunity to the people who took the money they say was part of the crime.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What does it matter what kind of a deal DeWeese tried to make with the AG's office . The AG's office is trying to put DeWeese in PRISON . That is PRISON , as in with bars , guards ,bad food , and generally nasty people . Some friggin deal !If Veon had pled guilty he would be free now . He chose wrong and used a moron of an attorney .Get over it . He made the wrong decisions . DeWeese , Veon , Feese , Perzel and Preski are all going to be in the same place very soon .But all will be out before Veon is .

    ReplyDelete
  6. Don't bet on Perzel, Preski, Feese, Orie or Manzo being out before Veon. My money is they'll all be numbers in a prison after Veon and Fumo are out walking the streets.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Those deeply implicated in documents and testimony but still on the state payroll, all keeping their bonuses and some with promotions, very high salaries and high profile jobs are many. It's not JUST Tom Andrews, Bob Caton, Pat Grill, Bill Sloane and Manzo's mistress.

    ReplyDelete
  8. If testimony says Jim Lovette told DeWeese he wasn't allowed to fire employees fior not doing political work, why wasn't he called to testify?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Perzel, Preski and Manzo likely will not spend a day in prison. A few months in work release is the most they'll see.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Was there ever testimony about DeWeese making employees line up dates for him, line up lobbyists to pay for his dates and make employees go out and buy condoms for his date nights? Those weremy favorites!

    ReplyDelete
  11. "If testimony says Jim Lovette told DeWeese he wasn't allowed to fire employees fior not doing political work, why wasn't he called to testify?"

    Maybe because Lovette would have had to have told what he did to earn his money - set up Caucus lunches and restock the fridges.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Remember this: Casablanca said no Republicans would ever be charged but they were. Casablanca said DeWeese couldn't be charged because of immunity, but he was. You said DeWeese would never go to trial, but he did. You said if he went to trial you'd publish his defense fund info, but you didn't. You may be great on investigative reporting, but your predictions not so much.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous 12:40 certainly raises some very valid points. We would first point out that Corbett clearly had no intention of charging any Republicans until it became clear that it would be a political necessity. We take at least partial credit for fanning the backlash that led to his pursuit of Republican indictments. In other words, it is at least partly because we predicted there would be no charges against Republicans that Corbett felt the need to charge Republicans.

    Second of all, DeWeese wasn't charged in "Bonusgate" and remains uncharged in Bonusgate. Here, again, had it not been for the leak of the infamous "U R welcome" and other incriminating emails, DeWeese never would have been charged with anything at all.

    Third, we did predict DeWeese would not go to trial and he has. He is more delusional than even we predicted. But we won't invite our readers to contribute to his legal defense fund because, as taxpayers, they already are paying for his defense. Or did you think we didn't know about the extra payments DeWeese received from the caucus?

    ReplyDelete
  14. One prediction I find hard to accept: the DeWeese and Costooulos prediction that HWD will testify. Oh but I hope he does get on the stand.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous said... "If testimony says Jim Lovette told DeWeese he wasn't allowed to fire employees fior not doing political work, why wasn't he called to testify?" Maybe because Lovette would have had to have told what he did to earn his money - set up Caucus lunches and restock the fridges.
    January 27, 2012 11:11 AM

    James Lovette was a State Witness, the AG did not bring him mto testify.

    ReplyDelete
  16. DeWeese would have plead guilty if he could have saved his pension . The longest prison sentences will go to Veon, Feese , and DeWeese (but fewer counts so less exposure ) - because they all went to trial ( by jury ) . Had Perzel gone to trial , then he would have won the prize with an 8 or 9 year sentence , and Preski would have been right behind him .

    ReplyDelete
  17. Fewer counts hardly mean less exposure. Jill Seaman was convicted of 40 counts in a supposed $10 million crime and received less than half the sentence of a defendant convicted of 3 counts in a supposed $50K crime. Corbett tied the OAG's hands by cutting a short-sighted deal before he realized what a political liability failure to charge DeWeese would become.

    ReplyDelete