Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Slap on wrist for prosecutors who changed history by wrongfully convicting Ted Stevens

Slap on wrist for prosecutors who changed history by wrongfully convicting Ted Stevens

I’ve written before about the wrongful conviction of the late Alaska Senator Ted Stevens just before the 2008 election, and how it changed history:

So many things had to go wrong for Obamacare to evade a Senate filibuster.  Arlen Specter had to switch parties.  Al Franken had to pull out a slight victory.  And Senator Ted Stevens needed to lose reelection just after being convicted of corruption.

If any one of those had not happened, we would not have Obamacare.

In the Stevens case, the conviction was overturned later for prosecutorial misconduct.  But the election results stood.

An independent report released last March detailed the prosecutorial misconduct:

The judge who presided over the Stevens trial appointed Henry F.  Schuelke to investigate the prosecutors who handled the case. Schuelke’s  524-page report, which was unsealed this week, paints a picture of a  prosecution team so hampered by infighting that disgruntled attorneys  cut corners by assigning document-review duties to FBI and IRS agents  who were left largely unsupervised. Crucial information — including the  fact that trial witness Bill Allen had once bribed a child prostitute,  whom he’d had a relationship with, to commit perjury, and that the home  repairs in question were worth hundreds of thousands of dollars less  than originally alleged — was never given to Stevens’ defense team.

The Justice Department has concluded its own investigation, and has given a slap on the wrist to two of the supervising attorney’s involved, with minimal suspensions:

The Justice Department has found that two prosecutors involved in the botched 2008 corruption trial of Senator Ted Stevens engaged in “reckless professional misconduct,” but it stopped short of firing the men, saying their mistakes were not intentional.

In a cover letter to a 672-page report provided to Congress on Thursday, alongside additional attachments and findings, the Justice Department said the two prosecutors would be suspended without pay — Joseph Bottini for 40 days, and James Goeke for 15 days….

There was at least one major difference, however: the special prosecutor concluded that Mr. Bottini and Mr. Goeke had intentionally withheld evidence, while the Justice Department investigation found that their mistakes — while showing reckless disregard for their disclosure obligations — were not deliberate.

As the letter linked in the quote indicated, the attorneys were deemed part of “civil service” and therefore were protected from firing except upon the most egregious circumstances, which apparently does not included recklessly convicting a sitting United States Senator up for reelection.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

“reckless professional misconduct” MEANS intentional.

In the law, “reckless” does not mean you screwed up…human error…ordinary negligence. I means you screwed up intentionally, or with callous disregard to the rights of someone. Or, in this case, to your oath of office.

But this is the Holder DOJ. That man…by himself…is reason enough to get rid of Pres. Choom-a-rang.

    So who has standing to sue Joseph Bottini and/or James Goeke ?

      Ragspierre in reply to Neo. | May 29, 2012 at 12:19 pm

      The global answer is “nobody”.

      In most jurisdictions, there is such a thing as “attorney immunity”. For rather good reasons, you cannot sue an attorney for what they do in litigation.

      There ARE exceptions. I have sued other attorneys (which is REALLY not a popular thing to do). Interestingly, most judges in my experience are not aware of the exceptions to the “attorney immunity” umbrella.

      Someone with more knowledge of Federal criminal procedure would have to answer beyond this.

“…the attorneys were deemed part of “civil service” and therefore were protected from firing except upon the most egregious circumstances..”

BS Clinton fired dozens in one fell swoop…

Federal lawyers working as tools of the regime are exempt.

    Ragspierre in reply to OcTEApi. | May 29, 2012 at 11:06 am

    In the DOJ there are two separate tracks for attorneys.

    One is political appointment (often fired wholesale at the change of an administration).

    The other is career-track. They are provided essentially civil service status.

    Holder has run a lot of the latter off…since they tend NOT to be hacks and toadies. I think J. Christian Adams is a good example.

      OcTEApi in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 12:50 pm

      You have a twisted though process, I don’t care what “status” they’ve achieved, they’ve been convicted of being hacks and toadies .. even though you believe they TEND not to be..

      They should be gone. PERIOD.

        Ragspierre in reply to OcTEApi. | May 29, 2012 at 1:51 pm

        I’m confused by your confusion.

        I conveyed information. You read stuff I did not write.

        You also somehow formed the notion these guys were “convicted” of something. Where did you get that?

          OcTEApi in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 2:53 pm

          I’ve read you right as a pseudo-conservative from the first time I ever read your postings…

          Don’t try moonbat tactics to fray the topic on me, in your ever-so zealous efforts to be first poster and then control the direction of debate, you’ve exposed yourself as a supporter of big government statism…

          You say crazy stuff, like the most regulated industries in America, Healthcare and Insurance could be (w/o political repercussion) easily “blank page” reformed “like the tax code” but in your own words implied these lawyers who’ve committed ““reckless professional misconduct” MEANS intentional” shouldn’t be fired because they’re just a couple of bad apples, implied they should retain their jobs because there are good “civil servants” like J. Christian Adams

          …just like every one of the 23 career leftist radical civil service attorneys
          hired since Obama took office?

          OcTEApi in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 3:18 pm

          Thumb down 1

          hilarious, “blank page” say’s what?

          consult your 60’s hippie choom guide and get back to me.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 3:25 pm

          Wow.

          So much hateful, delusional rambling…

          And so many demonstrable lies.

          Tell you what, I will wait to post anything until you have.

          Would that make it all better…???

          OcTEApi in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 4:51 pm

          typical, charge lies, haterism

          truth is mean? .. you’re like a child.

          -and now you express ridicule.

          listen up fruitcake, now that you mention it I’ve avoided whole threads, moved on and not challenged (in the name of promoting a harmonious atmosphere) what you’ve posted. I believe you have a right to your opinion even though most times its complete nonsense.

          and I’ve asked/warned you to keep a wide berth while I was around, I admittedly have a low tolerance for blunt skull asininery such as yours.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 4:59 pm

          You say crazy stuff, like the most regulated industries in America, Healthcare and Insurance could be (w/o political repercussion) easily “blank page” reformed “like the tax code”
          *****************

          You lie. But you can easily show me wrong.

          Post the link to my comment where I say ANY of that would be “easy” or “without political repercussion”.

          We can start there, liar.

          OcTEApi in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 5:27 pm

          There are many pledges/plans to overhaul the tax code, the proverbial “blank page” to eliminate corporate welfare loopholes, reduce individual income tax rates across the board, reduce corporate tax, eliminate death or federal estate tax, and cut down the size of IRS.

          it was your summation that this process could be done to the most regulated industries in America, “blank page” reform of one sixth of the economy… you proposed this ignorant plan in an easy-peazy “without political repercussion” manner.

          I don’t need to post he link to your words because you know you said it and I have no desire to be drawn into moonbat debate.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 6:02 pm

          Waiting…

          Admit you lied or post the link.

          Or haven’t you done that already…?

          OcTEApi in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 7:25 pm

          You go run and fetch, its your comment.

          anyway, I never said YOU made the statement that “ANY of that would be “easy” or “without political repercussion”.”

          Those were my words in characterization of your ignorant proposal…
          so moonbat debate FAIL.

          look jackass, I’ve been very tolerant of your insinuations that I’m a liar, with the personal attack characterizations of confused, hateful, delusional and rambling.
          (more proof you’re just a leftists twat masquerading as a conservative and that you never had a standpoint to defend)

          So GFY, you podunk POS.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 7:35 pm

          Sad when you see someone so mean and crazy they cannot tell the truth.

          “You say crazy stuff, like the most regulated industries in America, Healthcare and Insurance could be (w/o political repercussion) easily “blank page” reformed “like the tax code” but in your own words implied…”

          But…

          “I never said YOU made the statement that “ANY of that would be “easy” or “without political repercussion”.

          Just sad. And why? Because I provided some information you took as a put-down, but which was totally neutral.

          Sad.

          Milhouse in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 8:06 pm

          It’s amazing that an ignoramus of OcTEApi’s magnitude is nevertheless able to string words together into sentences that are structurally valid, although they convey no meaning.

          OcTEApi in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 8:57 pm

          First you defended these dirtbag lawyers keeping their jobs because they achieved a “status” of “civil servant” …just like every one of the 23 career leftist radical civil service attorneys hired since Obama took office?
          http://blog.heritage.org/2011/08/17/political-uniformity-and-legal-radicalism-at-obamas-doj/

          Then when I described your asinine “blank page” proposal of reform for one sixth of the economy as something you implied was w/o political fallout and as easy as the MANY tax code reform proposals… you tried to fray the topic, try to put the burden of proof -on me- or else I was a liar … total moonbat debate tactic.

          Now you’re back to defendING these dirtbag lawyers again and saying your comment was innocent neutral information.
          … all this peppered with personal attack.

          I’M CONVINCED YOUR WHOLE MIND IS A “BLANK PAGE” AND EVEN YOU’RE NOT SURE WHATS GOING TO COME OUT OF YOUR MOUTH NEXT.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 9:55 pm

          Well, not surprisingly—

          you are wrong on all counts.

          1. I point out the totally neutral INFORMATION (that you were ignorant about) that there are two tracks in the DOJ.

          2. Noting the civil service track gives career DOJ lawyers protections the political types don’t have is not defending anybody.

          3. The “23” you keep referring to are JUST IN ONE DIVISION. There are LOTS MORE.

          4. With Holder heading the DOJ, and with civil service protections, NONE of the offenders (and there are LOTS) are going anywhere (the political types are safe until the DOJ changes hands, too)

          5. I identified you as a liar. That is not calling you names. I haven’t sunk to your level.

          6. You, conversely, have been very busy calling me names, telling me to shut up, and GFY.

          7. You seem a very delicate personality. Instead of dealing with ideas directly, you warn me to “stay away”. That seems very insecure. I am not a threat to you. But you sure seem to take me for one…hence your SCREAMING at me.

          8. When I say something mistaken, I am not personally challenged when someone provides information from which I may learn. I appreciate the correction.

          9. I often state things in short, declarative statements. I am a radical. I think in terms of the “root” problem. Some of what I say is stated in very stark, simple terms. That NEVER implies it would be easy to effect.

          10. I could not, and have never wished to try to, drive comments on any thread any particular way. Indeed, part of my motive here is to state ideas, and open them to criticism. This is my idea of forensic debate. Join me.

          OcTEApi in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 10:20 pm

          Nice try, the fact that you stated that “since they (some) tend NOT to be hacks and toadies” they deserve civil service protection from firing except upon the most egregious circumstances which you yourself declared these lawyers acted “reckless professional misconduct” MEANS intentional.”

          Bottom line is that you’re a moonbat, you’re supportive of big government statism.

          I’m done with you, you’re now trying to muddy the water and vindicate yourself through yet another moonbat tactic of excessive bloviation.
          In fact, I was done with you @ GFY, you podunk POS.

          OcTEApi in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 10:29 pm

          “You seem a very delicate personality. Instead of dealing with ideas directly, you warn me to “stay away”.

          I warned you to keep a wide berth simply because you’re a moonbat… I have a low tolerance for libtardism and pointedly your ideas are crap.
          Now I’ll add that you’re a pretty effeminate dude, probably from years of being a 60’s hippie baker.

          you’re embarrassing yourself STOP

          OcTEApi in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 10:40 pm

          I remember when Ragis blamed the public school system, brainwashed him and kept him a captive liberal for years.

          man up, you’re a libtard through and through due to your own personal failings… you’ve never held any valid conservative beliefs, principles or values for any period of time in your life, and now you masquerade as a pseudo-conservative, you over-compensate fo the failings and your need for acceptance by forcing your particular “moonbat” POV in your ever-so zealous efforts to be first poster and then control the direction of debate.

          FAIL

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2012 at 10:56 pm

          “I remember when Ragis blamed the public school system, brainwashed him and kept him a captive liberal for years.”

          Now you’re just making shit up.

          More lies, and crazy ones, at that. Oh, well…

Much like Nifong, and now the Florida prosecutor, I think we should raise the standard.

I’m thinking old Japan style where they cannot live with their shame.

I was listening to Dan Carlin’s podcasts on the fall of the Roman Republic this weekend. Talk about parallel realities.

Captain Hate | May 29, 2012 at 11:25 am

Who cares about firing them; they should be incarcerated.

So buying off Stevens and counting votes until he lost wasn’t going work. I realize that I’m preaching to the choir but was obamaocare really worth it?

i recall reading that one of the prosecutors involved committed suicide. i think it was in the new yorker.

If a sitting senator is not safe from the gross abuse of granted power, what hope is there for the people they serve? So, this is why so many of our elected representatives go along to get along.

The market model is the optimal model in both economics and politics. It is a model derived from the natural world that recognizes the dynamic of competing interests when there are finitely accessible resources and so many who dream of instant gratification.

As for the Justice Department, they are a progressive failure with Holder at the helm. Apparently, he likes to play games, and, unfortunately, he is not alone.

[…] » Slap on wrist for prosecutors who changed history by wrongfully convicting Ted Stevens – Le… I’ve written before about the wrongful conviction of the late Alaska Senator Ted Stevens just before the 2008 election, and how it changed history: So many things had to go wrong for Obamacare to evade a Senate filibuster.  Arlen Specter had to switch parties.  Al Franken had to pull out a slight victory.  And Senator Ted Stevens needed to lose reelection just after being convicted of corruption. […]

[…] Obamacare received a crucial vote in the Senate. As it turns out, Stevens was wrongfully convicted. Legal Insurrection has the background, as well as the story about how the prosecutors whose misconduct set it all in […]

Many GOP establishment, conservatives and Tea Party people abandoned Ted Stevens who although was a prolific earmarker, he was also an effective legislator for the people of the State of Alaska.
Alaska is a unique state where 65% is federal land, such a loss of tax base, the vast expanse requires the kind of leadership Ted Stevens brought to the table.

I have a belief that the Tea Party is being woefully ignorant with its strict policy of booting out the old guard, people they believe are out of touch and incapable of changing along with the times.
This mess took a long time to create and its going to take a long time to fix, and after all its my belief that the GOP has a serious problem of being out maneuvered by the democrats .. that’s one of my reasonds for supporting Newt.

I was brokenhearted over this entire debacle.
” Uncle Ted” came down from the mountain to give me a hand when I needed it. He did his job, and lived the life of an advocate of the Citizens of Alaska. His interest’s were always secondary.
Begich and the Democrats had to swing the power of the Senate to gain control. They got the job done.
For this, I have no respect.
My loss is personal.
I cannot be objective in this.
Uncle Ted is sorely missed.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend