READER COMMENTS ON

"Feeney Catches a Break: Appellate Court Limits Allowable Evidence in Federal Investigation"

(11 Responses so far...)





COMMENT #1 [Permalink]

... Ancient said on 2/6/2009 @ 1:30 pm PT...





Wow, a snap ruling on a huge, nationally important decision makes me skeptical that this was rammed through before Holder fully takes the reins at the Justice Dept. From the wapo article,

"In this instance, the judges, Stephen F. Williams, Douglas H. Ginsburg and Brett M. Kavanaugh, issued the order hours after hearing oral arguments on Jan. 23, according to sources and a terse docket entry.

The sources said the order and lack of clarity surrounding it will temporarily halt aspects of the Feeney investigation and could compromise the government's case. Depending on the scope of the opinion, other investigations may also be affected, the sources said."

And also from wapo's article,

" …Legal experts said it was unusual for an appeals court to issue an order the same day as oral arguments. "It signals they feel strongly about the issue," said John O'Quinn, a former top Justice Department official, who has no knowledge of the Feeney investigation.

O'Quinn and other experts said the court may have wanted to halt "imminent" grand jury proceedings involving Feeney." An oh yeah, did I mention all 3 judges were appointed by,you guessed it...republicans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brett_Kavanaugh http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_F._Williams http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Ginsburg Although, I found this interesting in the article about Ginsburg,

"…Citing the "speech or debate" clause, a panel on the same court ruled 2 to 1 in August 2007 that FBI agents violated the rights of former representative William J. Jefferson (D-La.) when they searched his congressional office without consent. The court said that members of Congress have the right to review documents sought by investigators.

Under the ruling, lawmakers can seek to withhold documents, which are later reviewed by a judge to determine whether prosecutors may see them. Ginsburg, one of the judges in the Feeney case, sided with Jefferson."

But still, is this what we need, courts protecting possible criminal activity by congress members? I sure hope they don't take forever releasing their opinions so its forgotten down the crisis memory hole.

COMMENT #2 [Permalink]

... molly said on 2/6/2009 @ 5:37 pm PT...





Don't think this will hold up. They are all just stalling. When are judges and prosecutors who withhold evidence or squelch , as in this case , going to be fired and prosecuted?

COMMENT #3 [Permalink]

... Alexander Woods said on 2/6/2009 @ 10:46 pm PT...





They should suspend all the rules for Feeney. The man is a complete crook and has betrayed the public trust time and time again. I'm in his district, and I can say with confidence that voters made the right decision in November. Let's hope Kosmas does better; the bar is set pretty low.

COMMENT #4 [Permalink]

... czaragorn said on 2/7/2009 @ 4:19 am PT...





Feeney Feeney bo beeney, banana bana fo eeny, fee fi fo meeney, Feeney!

COMMENT #5 [Permalink]

... Ancient said on 2/7/2009 @ 6:51 am PT...





With the corruption of our justice system and the stacking of the courts, reining in abuses of power has gotten all but miraculously possible. But if no attempt is made to do just that, you can kiss your children’s children future in a viable democracy good bye. The imperceptibly gradual lead up to this brazen deconstruction of our democratic American way of life has taken place since the last failed coup attempt in 1930s.

“Quote from: Naomi Wolf

"A small group of people began very systematically to use the law and dismantle the Constitution and put pressure on citizens to subvert the law - and that opened the door for everything that followed," When I started reading, not only are tactics and strategy being reproduced exactly right now by the Bush administration - but actual sound bytes and language and images and scenarios are being reproduced. Everybody that wants to close down a Democracy does the exact same ten things, the same classic steps and unfortunately we're starting to see these ten steps being put in place in the United States. There was a scheme in the 30's and Prescott Bush was one of the leaders of this scheme, an industrialist who admired fascism and thought that was a good idea - to have a coup in the United States along the lines of the coup they saw taking place in Italy and Germany. Smedley Butler had been involved with violent regime change throughout his career, but he was approached by these conspirators, including Prescott Bush, and he outed them and he testified to Congress that they were planning a coup in the United States - it's in the Congressional record. The coup was being bankrolled by German industrialist and one of Hitler's chief financiers Fritz Thyssen. What is amazing to me and resonant to me is that when the Nuremberg trials were finally put in place, these Nazi industrialists, some of whom had colluded with Americans including IBM, were about to be brought to trial and sent to prison - there was a moment at which they were going to look into turning the spotlight on their American partners. The family history is that you can make so much money uniting corporate interests with a fascist state that violently represses people, that's why when I saw the recycling of so much Nazi language, Nazi tactics, Nazi strategies, Nazi imagery in the Bush White House and then finally belatedly people brought to me this history of Prescott Bush's attempted coup and Smedley Butler's revelations - it gives me absolute chills. History shows the only safe course for preserving freedom in such a climate is to prosecute and jail the protagonists of the coup as early as possible, a process many would argue should have been enacted several years ago." Here are the ten steps to help you put our recent history in perspective: “Her ten steps; 1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy

2. Create a gulag

3. Develop a thug caste

4. Set up an internal surveillance system

5. Harass citizens' groups

6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release

7. Target key individuals

8. Control the press

9. Dissent equals treason

10. Suspend the rule of law Add on top of that KKKarl’s machiavellian centralization of power by any means possible like propagandizing in the media they now own: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machiavelli and blow your face off’s expansion and tortured distortion of executive power: http://levin.senate.gov/...008/Detainees.121108.pdf and bingo, you have the total meltdown we are experiencing right now! They are salivating for President Obama to fail, even going so far as to outright call for his “implosion” as a joy during a time of war, when just a scant few months ago to even question their administration would get you labeled “unpatriotic.” Just a little something to ponder over a thawing weekend!

COMMENT #6 [Permalink]

... Phil said on 2/7/2009 @ 7:59 am PT...





(Article swiped from a Slashdot post and reformatted with comment.)

EAC Certifies MicroVote EMS 4.0 Voting System Instead of "How Does a Voting System Get Certified by the EAC?" shouldn't we be asking, "How Does a Voting System Get Outlawed by the EAC?" Until we can manage to motivate 4 million people to turn off their ABC, CBS, FOX, PBS, NBC, and quit wasting time blogging where nobody gives a crap, and get off the couch and into the streets of Washington DC, it's going to be a dark night with no public oversight, where ballots of our future are counted!

COMMENT #7 [Permalink]

... Ancient said on 2/7/2009 @ 12:02 pm PT...





Great question Phil! I have a way cool friend in dc if you ever need a place to stay. And once again, don't ya just love the timing of idiot boy's lingering dumps. PU, stinkin to high heaven!

COMMENT #8 [Permalink]

... Mark A. Adams JD/MBA said on 2/7/2009 @ 5:07 pm PT...





So, supposedly a secret appellate court order curtails a grand jury investigation into one of the key Republicons behind secret vote counting and election fraud. Amazingly, according to the United States Supreme Court, a grand jury is supposed to have virtually unlimited power to subpoena evidence and compel testimony. For example, see Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 700 (1972). It is amazing how often secret orders which are completely contrary to the rule of law get entered in cases dealing with election fraud. For an example of some of the curious action taken to cover up the evidence from the election contests in which I represented Clint Curtis, John Russell, and others, see Justice in Florida's Supreme Court and don’t miss the documents at the links below the video.

COMMENT #9 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 2/7/2009 @ 7:00 pm PT...





For the record, Mark. This case, as far as I know, has nothing to do with Election Fraud, other than it includes Feeney (and his relationship to Abramoff). As to "virtually unlimited power", the keyword there is "virtually". In this case, a legitimate(-ish) argument seems to be being made concerning the separation between the branches of Government. It was applied similarly in the William Jefferson (D-LA) case, and supported by Dems as well, on the basis of pushing back against unlimited power by the Executive to interfere with the Legislative branch I'm not sure I disagree with proceeding very cautiously in that area, particularly on the basis that you'll never have any idea what sorta person will be sitting in that Executive branch.

COMMENT #10 [Permalink]

... Mark A. Adams JD/MBA said on 2/8/2009 @ 10:44 am PT...





It would be nice to see the motion for a protective order by Feeney, the DOJ response to it, the order issued on this by the judge presiding over the grand jury proceedings, the appellate briefs, and the appellate court's order. The question about the limits of a grand jury's power is a very important one as the grand jury is supposed to be the means by which the people can hold those in government criminally accountable for their actions. For more information about this, see What Happens When the People Lose the Power to Control Government This article explains when control of the grand jury was usurped by the executive branch, and it highlights some of the serious consequences resulting from the citizens' loss of this power. Along those lines, I'm not surprised that a prosecuting prince with the DOJ hasn't brought up anything relating to election fraud in this proceeding. After all, the people on the grand jury just might be interested in investigating that issue.

COMMENT #11 [Permalink]

... Ancient said on 2/10/2009 @ 3:12 pm PT...

