<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Siegelman Scrushy case revisited</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bhamweekly.com/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bhamweekly.com/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/</link>
	<description>News, Entertainment &#38; Points of View</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 04:10:23 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: The Skeptic</title>
		<link>http://www.bhamweekly.com/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-545</link>
		<dc:creator>The Skeptic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 03:16:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bhamweekly.com/blog/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/#comment-545</guid>
		<description>Anyone who believes that Don &amp; Dick were convicted because of some political motive are naive.  While it is arguable that they were indicted because of politics, a jury convicted them after a lengthy trial. As far as we know, nobody named Karl Rove, Bob Riley, or anyone else connected with this so called conspiracy to bring Don down were on the jury. Oh sure, we&#039;ll hear about improper communications amongst jurors, the judge had it in for the defendants, etc. But, who among us is stupid enough to believe that the jurors were bought off. The fact of the matter is that they knew both of these guys had been getting away with theft on a massive scale for years, and had the guts to do what the idiots on Scrushy&#039;s jury didn&#039;t do in Birmingham.  If you think that jurors don&#039;t violate the judge&#039;s instructions not to discuss the case outside of the jury room during deliberations in damned near every case tried in this state (civil or criminal), I&#039;ve got some JeffCo bonds I&#039;d like to sell you.

The simple fact of the matter is that a lot of what the US Attorney does is politically motivated. After all, he or she is an appointee of the then sitting administration. If you don&#039;t think Doug Jones&#039; (a Clinton appointee) prosecution of the bombers of the church, nearly 40 years after the act, was anything other than political grandstanding and patting oneself on the back, think again. The irregularities in that trial reads like a novel. The inadmissible evidence allowed would fill a 55 gallon garbage can. I wonder if the jury would have been moved to tears by Chris McNair&#039;s testimony if he had appeared as a convicted felon who had participated in stealing millions of dollars of the county&#039;s money to build an addition to his vacation home in Arkansas (ah, a Clinton conspiracy thread, no?) and outfitted his photography studio with the latest and greatest equipment.

In closing, stop yelling about what motivated the U S Attorney to seek these charges. Focus instead on whether these men conspired to exchange a substantial sum of money for a specific &quot;special favor&quot;.  That is what the appeals court will focus on.  If they overturn the convictions, so be it. If they uphold the convictions, God knows we will have to endure more bitching, whining and outrage over the Bush appointees railroading them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone who believes that Don &amp; Dick were convicted because of some political motive are naive.  While it is arguable that they were indicted because of politics, a jury convicted them after a lengthy trial. As far as we know, nobody named Karl Rove, Bob Riley, or anyone else connected with this so called conspiracy to bring Don down were on the jury. Oh sure, we&#8217;ll hear about improper communications amongst jurors, the judge had it in for the defendants, etc. But, who among us is stupid enough to believe that the jurors were bought off. The fact of the matter is that they knew both of these guys had been getting away with theft on a massive scale for years, and had the guts to do what the idiots on Scrushy&#8217;s jury didn&#8217;t do in Birmingham.  If you think that jurors don&#8217;t violate the judge&#8217;s instructions not to discuss the case outside of the jury room during deliberations in damned near every case tried in this state (civil or criminal), I&#8217;ve got some JeffCo bonds I&#8217;d like to sell you.</p>
<p>The simple fact of the matter is that a lot of what the US Attorney does is politically motivated. After all, he or she is an appointee of the then sitting administration. If you don&#8217;t think Doug Jones&#8217; (a Clinton appointee) prosecution of the bombers of the church, nearly 40 years after the act, was anything other than political grandstanding and patting oneself on the back, think again. The irregularities in that trial reads like a novel. The inadmissible evidence allowed would fill a 55 gallon garbage can. I wonder if the jury would have been moved to tears by Chris McNair&#8217;s testimony if he had appeared as a convicted felon who had participated in stealing millions of dollars of the county&#8217;s money to build an addition to his vacation home in Arkansas (ah, a Clinton conspiracy thread, no?) and outfitted his photography studio with the latest and greatest equipment.</p>
<p>In closing, stop yelling about what motivated the U S Attorney to seek these charges. Focus instead on whether these men conspired to exchange a substantial sum of money for a specific &#8220;special favor&#8221;.  That is what the appeals court will focus on.  If they overturn the convictions, so be it. If they uphold the convictions, God knows we will have to endure more bitching, whining and outrage over the Bush appointees railroading them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: anon</title>
		<link>http://www.bhamweekly.com/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-544</link>
		<dc:creator>anon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:12:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bhamweekly.com/blog/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/#comment-544</guid>
		<description>Now, the reason to corrupt Alabama has become oh sooo clear!

&quot;U.S. Air Force Selects Northrop Grumman to Provide the New KC-45A Aerial Refueling Tanker&quot;

The politicization of defense spending seems to be fast following on the heels of the politicization of the justice system.

Maybe Alabama Republicans should print &quot;Corrupt Bastards Club&quot; tee-shirts too!
Follow the money with the link.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now, the reason to corrupt Alabama has become oh sooo clear!</p>
<p>&#8220;U.S. Air Force Selects Northrop Grumman to Provide the New KC-45A Aerial Refueling Tanker&#8221;</p>
<p>The politicization of defense spending seems to be fast following on the heels of the politicization of the justice system.</p>
<p>Maybe Alabama Republicans should print &#8220;Corrupt Bastards Club&#8221; tee-shirts too!<br />
Follow the money with the link.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Big Brother</title>
		<link>http://www.bhamweekly.com/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-543</link>
		<dc:creator>Big Brother</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 04:33:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bhamweekly.com/blog/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/#comment-543</guid>
		<description>Lovely writing as always.  I do love the smithery of the words...however...

It is a tad defensive about Alabama journalism - would be more interested in the facts that you are supporting your case with.

They don&#039;t like us because we&#039;re journalists from Alabama is as much a conspiracy as the WTC crap the permeates the air we breath...even in France.

Are you saying that there is no validity in these charges against Rove?  That&#039;s the info I&#039;m after.

KGB</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lovely writing as always.  I do love the smithery of the words&#8230;however&#8230;</p>
<p>It is a tad defensive about Alabama journalism &#8211; would be more interested in the facts that you are supporting your case with.</p>
<p>They don&#8217;t like us because we&#8217;re journalists from Alabama is as much a conspiracy as the WTC crap the permeates the air we breath&#8230;even in France.</p>
<p>Are you saying that there is no validity in these charges against Rove?  That&#8217;s the info I&#8217;m after.</p>
<p>KGB</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laney</title>
		<link>http://www.bhamweekly.com/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-537</link>
		<dc:creator>Laney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 17:33:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bhamweekly.com/blog/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/#comment-537</guid>
		<description>&gt; Alabama media have taken a beating for being so skeptical

The Birmingham News can always be counted on to print Republican Party press releases as if they were independent reporting.  I guess this is what you mean by skeptical.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt; Alabama media have taken a beating for being so skeptical</p>
<p>The Birmingham News can always be counted on to print Republican Party press releases as if they were independent reporting.  I guess this is what you mean by skeptical.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: K. Whitmire</title>
		<link>http://www.bhamweekly.com/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-538</link>
		<dc:creator>K. Whitmire</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 17:10:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bhamweekly.com/blog/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/#comment-538</guid>
		<description>Daniel,

Certainly, the sentences were stiff, but they were not out of line with other public corruption cases I&#039;ve seen go to trial. Also, Judge Fuller&#039;s sentences for Scrushy and Siegelman took downward departures from the federal sentencing guidelines.

The guidelines called for a sentence of 10 to 12.5 years for Siegelman and eight to 10 years for Scrushy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Daniel,</p>
<p>Certainly, the sentences were stiff, but they were not out of line with other public corruption cases I&#8217;ve seen go to trial. Also, Judge Fuller&#8217;s sentences for Scrushy and Siegelman took downward departures from the federal sentencing guidelines.</p>
<p>The guidelines called for a sentence of 10 to 12.5 years for Siegelman and eight to 10 years for Scrushy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel</title>
		<link>http://www.bhamweekly.com/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-539</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 16:55:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bhamweekly.com/blog/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/#comment-539</guid>
		<description>As an outsider, come-lately to this story - I&#039;m trying to wrap my arms around this - perhaps you can help.   If I assume all the prosecution alleges - the seven year sentence seems...overdone?  It would seem the punishment does not fit the crime.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As an outsider, come-lately to this story &#8211; I&#8217;m trying to wrap my arms around this &#8211; perhaps you can help.   If I assume all the prosecution alleges &#8211; the seven year sentence seems&#8230;overdone?  It would seem the punishment does not fit the crime.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eva Ritchey</title>
		<link>http://www.bhamweekly.com/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-541</link>
		<dc:creator>Eva Ritchey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 13:15:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bhamweekly.com/blog/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/#comment-541</guid>
		<description>This is about one issue and one issue alone--a fair and just judiciary.  When the firewall that separates the judiciary from the political is breached, our country is lost.  Alabama and the entire South has been hurt by this and the Alabama press would do well to lead the charge for a special prosecutor.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is about one issue and one issue alone&#8211;a fair and just judiciary.  When the firewall that separates the judiciary from the political is breached, our country is lost.  Alabama and the entire South has been hurt by this and the Alabama press would do well to lead the charge for a special prosecutor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: marty</title>
		<link>http://www.bhamweekly.com/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-542</link>
		<dc:creator>marty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 11:46:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bhamweekly.com/blog/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/#comment-542</guid>
		<description>nice use of the straw man. just call it &quot;conspiracy theory&#039; and we can all relax.

a deliberately disgraceful summary of the concerns over siegelman&#039;s charging and  conviction. are people in alabama so dumb that they take mistake this kind of vacuous nonsense for political coverage?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>nice use of the straw man. just call it &#8220;conspiracy theory&#8217; and we can all relax.</p>
<p>a deliberately disgraceful summary of the concerns over siegelman&#8217;s charging and  conviction. are people in alabama so dumb that they take mistake this kind of vacuous nonsense for political coverage?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andress</title>
		<link>http://www.bhamweekly.com/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-540</link>
		<dc:creator>Andress</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 07:00:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bhamweekly.com/blog/2008/03/03/siegelman-scrushy-case-revisited/#comment-540</guid>
		<description>&quot;SIEGELMAN HAD TO BE PUT AWAY SO RILEY COULD BE GROOMED&quot;

The Siegelman story has been suppressed in Alabama mainly because of the three largest newspapers which are owned by Newhouse Publications which are part of Bush&#039;s left wing attack machine. Some of the smaller Independents newspapers have done a really good job of reporting the truth.

Alabama is controlled by corrupt politicians, top elected state judges and Bush appointed federal judges.

Siegelman had to be taken care so Bob Riley could become governor of Alabama. Riley is being groomed as a future GOP candidate for vice president. Being a past congressman wasn&#039;t enough, he needed to have experience as a governor. To give him a record of success Bush&#039;s left wing supporters mainly U.S. senators and congressmen have allowed Riley to take all credit for the millions of dollars of large government/military contracts that have magically flowed into Alabama.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;SIEGELMAN HAD TO BE PUT AWAY SO RILEY COULD BE GROOMED&#8221;</p>
<p>The Siegelman story has been suppressed in Alabama mainly because of the three largest newspapers which are owned by Newhouse Publications which are part of Bush&#8217;s left wing attack machine. Some of the smaller Independents newspapers have done a really good job of reporting the truth.</p>
<p>Alabama is controlled by corrupt politicians, top elected state judges and Bush appointed federal judges.</p>
<p>Siegelman had to be taken care so Bob Riley could become governor of Alabama. Riley is being groomed as a future GOP candidate for vice president. Being a past congressman wasn&#8217;t enough, he needed to have experience as a governor. To give him a record of success Bush&#8217;s left wing supporters mainly U.S. senators and congressmen have allowed Riley to take all credit for the millions of dollars of large government/military contracts that have magically flowed into Alabama.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>