See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #1
   On April 1st, 2009 at 11:10 am, MBuck said:

   Frankly, I would be willing to let most of the Socialists in our Fed just retire without criminal charges, so long as they JUST LEAVE.

2. #2
   On April 1st, 2009 at 11:14 am, mijacat said:

   Good riddance!

   The Repubs didn’t need a kleptocrat they could keep getting hammered over, any more than they need Larry Craig or Trent Lott.

   Alaskans need to find a better replacement for Stephens, but this is one less albatross around the necks of the GOP in 2010 and 2012.

   Mew

3. #3
   On April 1st, 2009 at 11:17 am, Schweggie said:

   Sorry! Very O/T but sneakyville put back the Obama teleprompter video with Benny Hill theme.

4. #4
   On April 1st, 2009 at 11:17 am, Jet Jaguar said:

   Does he still get to keep his post “service” benefits?

5. #5
   On April 1st, 2009 at 11:18 am, cicerokid said:

   “An entrenched Washington corruptocrat…”??!!

   At 85 years old i’d say Methusala was about 36 years past being entrenched.

   He fought the Japs. There, I said something nice.

6. #6
   On April 1st, 2009 at 11:19 am, Jet Jaguar said:

   On April 1st, 2009 at 11:17 am, Schweggie said:

   Sorry! Very O/T but sneakyville put back the Obama teleprompter video with Benny Hill theme.

   I can’t think of a more appropriate tune for him, except maybe Darth Vader’s Imperial March theme.

7. #7
   On April 1st, 2009 at 11:25 am, RufusTFirefly said:

   Schweggie–funny you should mention ‘Benny Hill’ when the other thread has gone the way of British comedies…

8. #8
   On April 1st, 2009 at 11:28 am, Defector01 said:

   He’s free on a technicality and the prosecutor screwing this up royalty. Doesn’t change the fact he’s a piece of work and doesn’t make me want to see him ever again.

   Go spend the rest of your time in obscurity in that lobbyist remodled house of yours

9. #9
   On April 1st, 2009 at 11:31 am, GladzKravtz said:

   prosecutor screwing this up royalty

   Our competent government working for us…

10. #10
    On April 1st, 2009 at 11:42 am, richardbo said:

    Republican skates-hard to believe.
    Abuse of prosecutorial power–regular.
    Called on abuse of power–wow!

11. #11
    On April 1st, 2009 at 12:18 pm, theloneranger said:

    The Stevens trial was engineered by Lefties in the “Justice” Dept. solely to kill Stevens’ reelection bid and win the seat for the Democrats. You may cheer the convictions on minor corruption charges, but the loss of that Senate seat and the corruption in the so-called “Justice” Dept. is costing you dearly right now, Comrades. Better bend over and grab your ankles whilst you are chortling.

12. #12
    On April 1st, 2009 at 12:18 pm, walterc said:

    “Guilty as hell, free as a bird. Is this a great country or what?”

    Where have I heard that before? That’s right, that’s what Bill Ayers said after he was released as a terrorist after government screw ups.

    Steven’s will probably end up with a position in the administration in OB’s efforts to be inclusive. Maybe FBI
    Director, or Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.

13. #13
    On April 1st, 2009 at 12:19 pm, WarTip said:

    The same efficiency in government that is going to run the rest of our lives very soon!

    Is there any difference between the D and R at the back of these names any more? Skroomall!

    Welcome to the new world!

14. #14
    On April 1st, 2009 at 12:23 pm, On-my-soap-box said:

    As for Ted “Bridge to Nowhere” Stevens, he may not be a criminal under the legal definition, but he was an entrenched Washington corruptocrat whose arrogance and fiscal recklessness remain a stain on the GOP.

    On April 1st, 2009 at 12:18 pm, walterc said:

    Steven’s will probably end up with a position in the administration in OB’s efforts to be inclusive. Maybe FBI
    Director, or Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.

    Beat me to it. For sure he will win his next seat as a (D).

15. #15
    On April 1st, 2009 at 12:25 pm, regularguy said:

    Now, now. If he’s corrupt, it’s only because he was taking care of his district.

    Wait a second. My bad, I’m talking about the wrong corrupt politician. It all seems the same from thread to thread somehow.

16. #16
    On April 1st, 2009 at 12:37 pm, lgm said:

    GladzKravtz said (#9):

    prosecutor screwing this up royalty

    Our competent government working for us…

    Bush appointed prosecutors, Republican incompetence. Republicans believe government is dysfunctional and they work night and day to make it so.

    While you’re at it, recall that Oliver North had his conviction tossed on a technicality. Newt Gingrich was caught committing a felony but could not be charged because the evidence was illegal, though public.

17. #17
    On April 1st, 2009 at 1:03 pm, RabbidSquirrel said:

    Im sorry…. who is this guy again? Hmmm no doesnt ring a bell.

    Now, see how easy that was? Thats what I want to be saying about most of congress after the 2010 elections.

18. #18
    On April 1st, 2009 at 1:05 pm, RabbidSquirrel said:

    On April 1st, 2009 at 12:37 pm, lgm said:

    Dont forget G Gordon!! But its good to see you defending a Republican for once.

19. #19
    On April 1st, 2009 at 1:06 pm, Tazed and Confused said:

    The prosecution NEVER EXPECTED TO WIN. Their sole purpose was to remove Ted and replace him with a Democrat, tipping the Congressional balance more in favor of their schemes.

    Obama’s thugs prevailed.

    This case was dismissed due the potential damage it would bring to the Obama’s corrupt regime.

20. #20
    On April 1st, 2009 at 1:08 pm, Socky said:

    The real object of the trial was to get a Democrat installed in the seat. Now that it’s ‘Mission Accomplished,’ there’s no point in going after Stevens.

21. #21
    On April 1st, 2009 at 1:29 pm, rightisright said:

    Stevens, a shining example as to why we need term limits.

22. #22
    On April 1st, 2009 at 2:47 pm, Phredd said:

    The solution is simple: 1) if an appeals court determines the withheld evidence material, hold a retrial; and 2) the prosecutors who withheld the evidence should face disciplinary action, perhaps suspension.

23. #23
    On April 1st, 2009 at 3:55 pm, sandydog said:

    The title of this piece speaks volumes. . . I am surprised that you, Ms. Michelle, would write it.
    Were you privy to all of the facts at the trial? Did you sit in the jury box throughout? Were you present at the prosecutors’ meetings? Were you fully apprised of the defenses’ case? Do you know everything that the judge now knows?
    Your statement is grossly unfair–an emotional and unreasoned piece of bigotry unworthy of you.
    The Government, with all of its power, denied Mr. Stevens elementary justice. They stacked the deck of jsutice cards illegally–and patently unnecessarily, had they possessed an ironclad case to begin with. Clearly, their case could not stand on its merits, so they grotesquely propped it up with lies, half-truths, and innuendo.

    Some justice. Mr. Beria would be proud.

24. #24
    On April 1st, 2009 at 5:02 pm, lgm said:

    sandydog said (#23):

    The title of this piece speaks volumes. . . I am surprised that you, Ms. Michelle, would write it.

    Disappointed maybe, but not surprised. Conservatives can tell who is innocent or guilty without trials. The people in Gitmo are all guilty. Tom Delay is innocent.

25. #25
    On April 1st, 2009 at 6:51 pm, Jet Jaguar said:

    On April 1st, 2009 at 5:02 pm, lgm said:

    sandydog said (#23):

    The title of this piece speaks volumes. . . I am surprised that you, Ms. Michelle, would write it.

    Disappointed maybe, but not surprised. Conservatives can tell who is innocent or guilty without trials. The people in Gitmo are all guilty. Tom Delay is innocent.

    Wow, lgm, you must be a closet Republican, being such a shill for a Republican Senator. You don’t care about the truth. You just want to argue. You are right about Conservatives not needing trials to determine guilt, for example, it’s obvious that you are guilty of idiocy, you idiot.

26. #26
    On April 1st, 2009 at 7:36 pm, sandydog said:

    lgm’s asides aside, there is an awful emphasis in the court system on winning as opposed to seeking truth. Both sides lie, cheat, obfuscate and obstruct. The defense gets to do that–it’s encouraged by the rules of court, rightly or wrongly (mostly wrongly). The prosecution, on the other hand, is supposed to be seeking TRUTH, not a conviction at all costs.
    Yes, those at Gitmo are guilty. Tom Delay is innocent. Obama is really Cthulhu. Any other questions?

27. #27
    On April 1st, 2009 at 8:19 pm, frontierguy said:

    Nifong works in Alaska now?

28. #28
    On April 1st, 2009 at 9:02 pm, cabrerski said:

    We have just witnessed the future of any member of Congress who goes on trial for corruption. Having established a presedent, now every Congress critter that gets tried will have an incompetent prosecutor. The prosecutor will feel shame for 2 minutes, then go on with his life with no other consequence whatsoever.

    Within the Beltway, they take care of their own. Just watch if and when the William Jefferson trial ever takes place.

29. #29
    On April 1st, 2009 at 9:05 pm, cabrerski said:

    precedent…precedent…I will write it 500 times tonight…sorry, Mrs. Sutton.

30. #30
    On April 2nd, 2009 at 5:35 am, theloneranger said:

    Yes. We are still waiting for the William Jefferson trial, now aren’t we? Someone want to tell me about this “Justice” Dept. again?

31. #31
    On April 2nd, 2009 at 9:27 pm, thirteen28 said:

    I can’t totally agree with you on this one Michelle. The fact that Stevens was a total pork guzzler was not the question here, and regardless, he deserved a fair trial. When the prosecution goes so far as to intentionally withhold exculpatory evidence, to the point that they go through great lengths to redact exculpatory text from documents submitted to the court, then a fair trial and true justice are no longer possible. Furthermore, the evidence is tainted to the point that it’s impossible to say with anything approaching certainty that Stevens was guilty.

    Furthermore, the prosecutors didn’t merely “screw up this case”, they committed an egregious abuse of power, not much different than what Mike Nifong tried to do. Throw in all the prosecution’s strategically timed leaks, the fact that the trial was held before a DC jury (as if a Republican could ever get a fair trial in DC – remember Libby?), and you have a total travesty of justice.

    Given the rash of cheating prosecutors we’ve seen lately, I don’t think this is something to dismiss so lightly, regardless of how much of an earmark addict that Stevens was.

32. #32
    On April 2nd, 2009 at 9:30 pm, thirteen28 said:

    BTW, Redstate has a great post about this topic. Money quote:

    The second thing is that I have to note that Achance, again, was right. Republicans, in a bid to appear as white as the driven snow, have been tricked, again and again, into committing fratricide. For all that Obama can give the world lessons in throwing people under the bus once they become inconvenient, Republicans are hardly slouches. All it takes is an accusation, a news headline and the entire concept of “innocent until proven guilty” is thrown out the window in a rush to condemn and disassociate (as if the MSM would ever forget to attach the big scarlet ‘R’).