I have watched your other posts so I ask you a question with respect. Why do you think his prosecution was politically motivated? Has he been a porker, has he violated his office?

Stevens, you old corrupt pork producing embarrassment for Conservatism and for the Country! good by and all like you! I, as a citizen, am sick and tired of politicians like you!

“Justice” my arse! More like “Leftist thuggery from the so-called “Justice Department”.

Yes, I was hoping he would win, resign, then another (R) would’ve replaced him eventually.

Here’s the problem with that scenario: He wasn’t staying in the race just so he could then step aside and let another R take his seat. He didn’t think he did anything wrong…had he won re-election, he would have taken it as a signal that everything was OK, and that his conviction on several felonies was just “political.” For another example, look @ Larry Craig. Delusional, in denial. Gotta go.

Stevens should have removed himself from the race when first indicted so the GOP could have put up someone respectable

bjc, my sentiments exactly.

The whole purpose for bringing the matter to trial was to cause Stevens to lose his seat. Whether his former “good friend” made some extra embellishments on Stevens’ house beyond the pale is really immaterial to the prosecution’s efforts.

After all, Stevens did not get his house rebuilt for “free” – he paid for most of it.

What the prosecution did is allege that Stevens got a little more than he paid for from an old buddy at a time when Stevens was spending most of his time in DC and wasn’t keeping track of things, and it’s entirely understandable how that could have happened.

I think a lot of people seem to be totally missing an obvious point. It’s very easy to see that many government agencies have been infiltrated with Lefties and the “Justice Department” is no exception.

Don’t you think it’s kind of “strange” that Republicans get prosecuted for relatively trivial matters just before an election and Democrats don’t seem to ever get prosecuted?

How many Democrats has the “Justice Department” conveniently “neglected” to prosecute lately?

Why was no one prosecuted when the NYT printed classified information? Why was Chuckie Schumer not prosecuted for “conveniently” starting the Financial Meltdown just in time to make the Republicans look bad the election? Why is Charlie Rangel not in court yet? How come William Jefferson is still walking around without an orange jumpsuit?

I think the Left has figured out that Conservatives are really pretty S-T-U-P-I-D people who think their “image” is a lot more important than winning elections.

Maybe Conservatives deserve to lose.

The legislature passed a new law about appointments. Then the public voted on a referendum that requires a special election within 90 days of a vacancy. The two are in slight conflict with each other, and a court case may be required to resolve it. Sarah Palin explained this on the local radio interview she did right after she got home from Pheonix.

I think Sarah could have appointed a replacement to fill the seat, then call for a special election and her appointment would be the defacto R candidate, who would have to run. No one is quite sure what would happen if the appointment was challenged in court.

None of that matters now because the felon lost anyway. FWIW, Sarah also said that she would not have appointed herself to that seat because when she ran against Murkowski in the R primary gov. race that was a main issue against him. This was all silly speculation from people who miss her already down here in the lower 48, as I do.

I’m not sure about the Senate for Sarah. She seems like the type of person that would not enjoy that place. She is an executive more than a legislator, that’s my read on it.

If we want to somehow save this nation someday, we’re going to have to learn how to play nastier than our opponents. Anything less is to guarantee failure.