Democrats & Liberals Archives

What About David Vitter?

Now that Larry Craig has stepped down, you can expect a flurry of Republican self-congratulation. Surely they have demonstrated that when a sinner is found in their midst he is swiftly cast out? Not exactly. Losing Craig will cost the GOP nothing. The Republican governor of Idaho* will name another Republican, and that person will almost certainly be elected in 2008.

Consider a similar case in a state with a Democratic governor, where the Republicans can no longer practice cost-free moral posturing. This is the case of US Senator David Vitter of Louisiana. In July 2007, David Vitter's number was found in the phone records of Deborah Jean Palfrey, the "DC Madam". Following this revelation, Vitter issued the following statement:

This was a very serious sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible. Several years ago, I asked for and received forgiveness from God and my wife in confession and marriage counseling. Out of respect for my family, I will keep my discussion of the matter there - with God and them. But I certainly offer my deep and sincere apologies to all I have disappointed and let down in any way.

I am not going to get into the details of the accusations against Vitter, but you can find them here. To be fair, they date from the 1990's.

Considering the timing, I don't think you have to read very much between the lines to see that Vitter is acknowledging that he visited prostitutes. Due to the statute of limitations, Vitter is apparently in no danger of being prosecuted. He is also in no danger of being asked to resign, at least as long as Louisiana has a Democratic governor who can name his replacement. If I were him, I would hope and pray that Bobby Jindal (R) doesn't get elected Governor of Louisiana this year. Otherwise, his GOP colleagues may not pass up the chance to show how upright they are by getting rid of him when it is safe to do so.

Some will argue that visiting a prostitute is not a serious offense, and should not even be illegal. I happen to agree, but I am not a Republican. If the Republicans start pushing to legalize prostitution, then they can defend Vitter all they want.

*CORRECTION: I originally had Craig in Utah.

Posted by Woody Mena at September 2, 2007 9:35 AM
Comments
Comment #231492

“The Republican governor of Utah”

I didn’t know that the governor of Utah could appoint a senator for Idaho.

Woody, the problem isn’t the prostitute, the problem is the self-righteous attitude of those in power, and their immediate, and very public mea culpa invoking God’s forgiveness for their very human weaknesses.
This would be hysterical, if it weren’t so sad.

Posted by: Rocky at September 2, 2007 10:43 AM
Comment #231494

Woody, Craig is from Idaho not Utah, but that is only a minor point.

Vitter is NOT in any danger regardless of prosecution. You see Craig’s big mistake was that he did not discuss his “problems” with his republican colleagues. They need time to SPIN, and if they don’t get it they are going to force you out of the club!

True, Craig’s ousting was cost-free to the republicans, but I don’t think he would have been forced out so efficiently if he had sought “forgiveness” from his republican mates (LOL) and given them the opportunity to downplay yet another well publicized incident of “family valules hypocrisy” as only the republicans can do it.

I think I will take the opportunity the context your article provides and say the following:

It is too late for republicans to want the media and/or their constituents out of their sex lives. After what they put Bill Clinton through, they simply just have to ride this wave until it crashes—serves them right as far as I am concerned. They can’t throw down a sex scandal gaunlet then pick it back up when the public furry is now unleashed on them. Pitty they had to waste millions in taxpayer dollars to reaffirm such a basic principle, “People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.”

Posted by: Kim-Sue at September 2, 2007 10:47 AM
Comment #231499

Or maybe that should be “people in public restrooms shouldn’t pick up strange tp” ;)

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at September 2, 2007 12:28 PM
Comment #231506

Vitter has been one of the more moralistic politicinas with grandstanding legislation like sponsoring “national marriage week” and claiming amending the constitution to ban gay marriage as the single most important issue to the country. It’s apparent he’s trying to stop himself before it’s too late.

Posted by: chris2x at September 2, 2007 1:40 PM
Comment #231524

Isn’t Congressman Jefferson still in office? Still on committees?

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/08/iraq-diary-no-s.html?cid=81422297#comment-81422297

Should the Dems be congratulating themselves here?

Craig should resign, he behaved against his voting records, the Reps were right to push for his removal. The fact that the Gov gets to replace him simes convenient because he is Rep.

Posted by: Honest at September 2, 2007 4:37 PM
Comment #231526

Okay, chris2x, I’ll bite…..what is it he’s trying to stop before it’s too late? He has already committed illegal actions, so it can’t be that. Perhaps he’s going to try and stop doing it again………….and again?

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2007/07/sen_vitters_madam_problem_1.html

Methinks he is probably laying low somewhere hoping that his indiscretions won’t be thrown into the fray again.

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at September 2, 2007 4:47 PM
Comment #231536

IMO the most disgusting part of this whole thing is Craig’s defense, “I’m not gay, I’ve never been gay”!

Well, who gives a rats hiney! Being gay is not what you were arrested for or what you plead guilty to!

It’s the “gayness” that’s under indictment by the GOP ………. sheesh, they’ve been seeking the passage of a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT to institutionalize discrimination against gays and lesbians for many moons now ……. it’s become one of the major rallying cries of the GOP.

It’s all a combination of homophobia, “taliban-gelism”, and the trademark hatred that the GOP is well known for, whether it’s hatred of largely fictionary “welfare queens” or their obvious hatred of minorities as evidenced by the level of care shown to predominantly black refugees of Katrina or Tancredo’s view of “third world” Miami!

As long as the Republican “base” insists on hatred as a party platform they can kiss my @$$.

Posted by: KansasDem at September 2, 2007 6:50 PM
Comment #231540

KD, you’re right! And something I just can’t get through my thick head, is how….a group that does run their spin machine on all that is so spiritual and good, and of high moral values, is so incredibly full of hatred and venom. Never could figure how hatred and idolatry can exist in the same person, both to the extreme.

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at September 2, 2007 7:04 PM
Comment #231541

Yes, Sandra, with the latest in Republican hypocrisy Vitter must turn to legislation not to save “Marriage” but to save him from destroying his own. Vitter should have sponsored a “national fidelity week” to underscore the importance. Now, his place on the Giuliani campaign finally makes sense. I don’t blame him for disappearing. I’d be afraid too if my wife threatened to do a Lorena Bobbit on me as his wife bizarrely seemed to indicate was her preference.

There’s a Karl Rove push-poll in the making here somewhere… “Do you approve of David Vitter’s philandering destruction of his family or cutting his penis off?”

With the hypocrisy meter right up there with Mark Foley, Larry Craig, and the feigned disbelief of the Republican leadership and candidates for POTUS perhaps Vitter’s anti-gay marriage proposals are to protect him from that too.

Posted by: chris2x at September 2, 2007 7:04 PM
Comment #231546

Honest,

I tried your link but it doesn’t relate to Jefferson but a story about U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

I don’t know much about Jefferson except anyone politician with that much money in his freezer must be corrupt.

Of course, did he sponsor anti-bribe legislation? I wonder.

Posted by: chris2x at September 2, 2007 7:51 PM
Comment #231549

If the media were doing a responsible job, they would have retorted to Craig, “If you say you are not gay, will you also say you are not Bi-Sexual”

For if Craig is bi-sexual, he is denial of being gay would be truthful. But, no one has asked this pertinent question, and what the Idaho paper has run as a history of Craig’s encounters with witnesses, this is a question that should have been asked immediately. If the paper’s witnesses are truthful, and Craig denies bi-sexuality, his lie will bury his political future. But, so far, regardless of the veracity of the paper’s story, Craig has not technically lied to anyone regarding his sexual history if he is indeed bi-sexual which is different than being gay.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 2, 2007 8:07 PM
Comment #231551

The Jefferson story has indications of being a Republican sting operation either framing or entrapping Jefferson. The reason this statement is true is, if Gonzo’s Justice department had nothing to fear from prosecuting him, he would be in jail right now. The evidence reported by the Justice Dep’t. appears to be more than sufficient to have obtained a guilty verdict by a jury. Which begs the question: What is the Justice Dep’t. afraid of in pursuing this case against Jefferson.

I am not arguing that Jefferson is innocent of taking a bribe. I am arguing that this situation has all the appearances of law enforcement having been complicit in arranging for his guilty act, which in and of itself, is a violation of law.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 2, 2007 8:12 PM
Comment #231552

David, even if his preference is French poodles, it would be irrlevant. The charge is solicting sexual favors in a public place.

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at September 2, 2007 8:16 PM
Comment #231556

Sandra, I thought it was apparent from my discussion I was not talking about his legal case, but, his political and public relations case.

Whether or not he is gay is irrelevant to the legal charges against him. Perhaps you missed that implication in my comments.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 2, 2007 8:27 PM
Comment #231571

Honest,

Yes, Jefferson is still in the House. No, he does not have any committee assignments. Yes, the Dems should be embarrassed that he has not resigned.

Posted by: Woody Mena at September 2, 2007 9:42 PM
Comment #231572

“If the media were doing a responsible job”

David,

IMO we’d hear some questioning of Minnesota officials about this “sting” operation, not particularly specific to Craig ……. just the basics or as Friday used to say, “just the facts ma’am”.

They might also have asked Romney just exactly what he found so “disgusting” about the entire affair. Ask him to elaborate!

We also might hear more about things like this:

Iran reportedly bombs villages in northern Iraq
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20542458/

Even if it’s only to debunk MSNBC on the issue. I’ve also read it in Arab news sources so I tend to think there must be something to it.

Count on the MSM for nothing and you’ll seldom be disappointed.

Posted by: KansasDem at September 2, 2007 9:49 PM
Comment #231576

While the Press has created a huge furor over Idaho Republican, Sen. Craig’s brush with the law in an airport, there has been another unlawful incident that has been completely ignored by the National Media. California Democratic Rep. Bob Filner just last week was charged for his run-in with a baggage clerk, also at an airport. The significance of this is that although Republican Sen. Craig’s charge was simply a misdemeanor Disorderly Conduct, Democratic Rep. Filner was charged with Assault and Battery. The severity of these charges are as follows:

Disorderly Conduct
Almost every state has a disorderly conduct law that makes it a crime to be drunk in public, to “disturb the peace”, or to loiter in certain areas. Many types of obnoxious or unruly conduct may fit the definition of disorderly conduct, as such statutes are often used as “catch-all” crimes. Police may use a disorderly conduct charge to keep the peace when a person is behaving in a disruptive manner, but presents no serious public danger.

Assault Basics
Assault is an intentional attempt or threat to inflict injury upon a person, coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm, which creates a reasonable apprehension of bodily harm or offensive contact in another. Assault does not require actual touching or bodily harm to the victim. Assault and battery are sometimes used interchangeably, but battery is an unjustified harmful or offensive touching of another. Battery also differs from assault in that it does not require the victim to be in apprehension of harm.
Assault developed in common law, meaning it developed through usage, custom, and judicial decisions rather than from legislative enactment. Modern-day assault statutes closely reflect the ancient common-law definition. An assault is both a crime and a tort. Therefore, an assailant may face both criminal and civil liability. A criminal assault conviction may result in a fine, imprisonment, or both. In a civil assault case, the victim may be entitled to monetary damages from the assailant.

Battery Basics
Simple criminal battery is most often prosecuted as a misdemeanor. Repeat offenses or the specific nature of the offense may warrant more severe treatment. For example, in some states, a second or third offense against the same individual is a felony. In cases of domestic violence, many states do not permit battery charges to be dropped against the defendant, even at the request of the victim, because of the potential for repeat or escalated harm.

Aggravated battery is a simple battery with an additional element of an aggravating factor. This is most often the addition of a weapon (whether use was real or merely threatened), and is almost always a felony offense. Other aggravated batteries include those committed against protected persons (children, the elderly or disabled, or governmental agents); those in which the victim suffers serious injury; ***or those occurring in a public transit vehicle or station***, or school zone, or other protected place. These are all aggravating factors that will enhance simple misdemeanor batteries to the level of felonies.

While Republican Sen. Craig’s misdemeanor Disorderly conduct is receivied demands for his ouster, Democratic Rep. Filner’s assault and battery charges are getting no attention whatsoever, and are being swept under the rug. With the fact that the Battery on the Airline attendant occured in a public transit station, the battery charge should be considered a felony Aggravated battery.
So, the question is, why is such scrutiny and attention being placed on the Republican misdemeanor while Filner’s two charges, 1) assault and 2) battery, which should be considered a felony is being given no news coverage at all? Is the media being biased here? I think definitely so!


New information since the first posting of this article:

A San Diego blog has posted that California Congressman Filner was also engaged in another shoving match. This time it was not with a mere Airport Attendant, but with INS agents at the El Centro Detention Facility in California back in 2002. According to the post, which lists the Copley News Service as its source, Filner was trying to visit an illegal immigrant in the facility, along with the immigrant’s wife, and several reporters. When the INS would not let him through, he became belligerent and attempted to force his way through the INS Officers. The article cites quotes from the facility’s supervisor, alleging that Filner had threatened to have the supervisor arrested if he did not let him through. When the supervisor refused, Filner was alleged to have said to one of the other officers, “Are you going to stop me, big man?”, and other like statements to other officers. Filner then alledgedly forced his way into a controlled area. At that time the situation had reportedly escalated to the point that the supervisor and seven other INS officers had to “persuade” Rep. Filner to return to the foyer area. The supervisor is quoted as saying the Congressman stated, “I am a Congressman and I can do whatever I want”. The report claims the supervisor attempted to leave to call his superior, and Filner once again attempted to follow by pushing his way through the officers.
Filner eventually was let in to see the detainee.

If this new report is accurate, apparently, this violent behavior is not uncommon of Rep. Filner. Yet, he is not being asked to resign for any of this conduct which one could certainly call conduct unbecoming a U.S. Representative, at best, and prone to fits of violent rage, at worst.

JD

Posted by: JD at September 2, 2007 11:25 PM
Comment #231581

Sorry chris2x, just do a general search on MSNBC and you’ll find the relative link. My bad.

Thank you Woody, I appreciate the answers.

Mistakes are made by both sides, the Reps just seem to get the attention. Not sure why.

Posted by: Honest at September 2, 2007 11:58 PM
Comment #231587

Of course, did he sponsor anti-bribe legislation? I wonder.
Posted by: chris2x at September 2, 2007 07:51 PM

Didn’t all of the Democrats pledge to rid the Congress of all manner of this “Culture of Corruption”?
Oh, pardon me, they were only making reference to Republicans when they signed their pledge with a great fanfare of production with Barak Obama being put in charge. I wonder if the Press will have the audacity to ask Barak what he thinks of Filner’s Assault and Battery charges at the next Democratic National Presidential Debate? They certainly don’t seem to have any qualms about asking the Republican Leadership what they think of Craig’s behavior, now do they?

JD

Posted by: JD at September 3, 2007 1:00 AM
Comment #231608

JD,

It is true that congressman named Bob Filner is being charged with misdemeanor assault and battery against an airline employee. (You left out the misdemeanor part.) He may cop to a lesser charge, as Craig did.

We will see how the media follows this. It broke about the same time as the Craig story which has admittedly gotten more attention. I think the main reason is that any congressman trolling for sex in public bathrooms is just more titillating than air rage.

If Republicans don’t think this is being covered enough, they will have plenty of chances to bring it up when asked about Craig. Filner deserves the presumption of innocence like anyone else. Craig already pled guilty (even if he is trying to weasel out of it).

Actually there seems to be an epidemic of members of Congress being nasty with security people. Christopher Shays (R) got pretty rough with a security person recently. And we all remember Cynthia McKinney (D). Of course, any who abuses their power this way is a jerk and deserves public shame at the very least.

Posted by: Woody Mena at September 3, 2007 8:27 AM
Comment #231609

Incidentally, I don’t think this was even the worst story for the GOP last week. In term of electoral significance, it was probably the retirement of GOP Sen. John Warner. His seat will probably got Democrat Mark Warner (no relation).

Posted by: Woody Mena at September 3, 2007 8:39 AM
Comment #231634

JD,

The Democratic leadership will not give Jefferson any committee assignments even if his constituents want to reelect him next year which they probably won’t.

“Congressman Krupt” is an old, damaging, and sad story with a long history on both sides of the aisle. What gets me about the Republicans lately is the constant moralizing about things that don’t affect me when they don’t have the fortitude to stand by their own convictions. The hypocrisy and grandstanding is just offensive to the core. Most politicians are guilty of hypocrisy, it just seems much fewer democrats are guilty of the in-your-face “family values” variety.

Sounds like Filner may get his although I know little of his case. Anyone with an anger problem that gets physical isn’t fit for office. Of course Craig is a long-time Senator and has been in congress since ‘81. His status and attempt to conceal a plea to a charge as unsavory as trolling for sex in a public bathroom is just more sensational.

Posted by: chris2x at September 3, 2007 1:41 PM
Comment #231635

Honest,

The Reps get more attention because they are so in-your-face on gays and family values. The hypocrisy meter is just higher and more sensational. Vitter, Foley, and Craig sure know how to create a scandal.

Posted by: chris2x at September 3, 2007 1:46 PM
Comment #231636

David,

I agree with you the declarations by Craig of “I am not gay” and “I have never been gay” are just sickening. He hasn’t said, “I’ve never had sex with a man” or “I am bisexual”. However, has he even given the media a chance to ask him such questions?

Although the gay aspect of Craig’s case is the reason his fellow Senators have been unusually vicious towards a colleague of 25 years if you took the gay aspect out it would be difficult to defend. Of course, that hasn’t stopped the Republicans from defending David Vitter.

Posted by: chris2x at September 3, 2007 1:56 PM
Comment #231639

chris2x, also Republicans have had 10 such scandals in the last decade and Democrats only 5. Twice the media coverage aimed at Republicans for morality scandals.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 3, 2007 2:50 PM
Comment #231673

The Reps get more attention because they are so in-your-face on gays and family values. The hypocrisy meter is just higher and more sensational. Vitter, Foley, and Craig sure know how to create a scandal.
Posted by: chris2x at September 3, 2007 01:46 PM

Wait, there just a minute, chris2x. It was the Democrats that ran their campaign in 2006 on the need to rid the Congress of corruption, not the Republicans. You say it is the Republicans that rode the high horse. I beg to differ. That is the fallacy of the left that allows them to be immune to any criticism for their corruption. By attempts of the Press and Democrats to hold Republicans more accountable, it is a recognition that Republicans, then actually do have a higher moral standard. By saying that the Republicans have a higer moral standard therefore, their hypocrisy should be pointed out to a greater extent you allow Democrats to completely crawl under the rug and avoid their criminality and lack of scruples. It should not be that Republicans are held at the so-called Republican standard, and Democrats should be held at the Democratic standard, whatever standard it is that the Democrats claim for themselves. This is the truest form of Press bias. Yet, it seems to be their mode of operation continually.

Here are a few more Democrats we may wish to keep an eye on in the future:

Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D, HI):

Rep. Neil Abercrombie, (D-Hawaii), said yesterday that a two-day trip to Boston in 2001 to speak before a social organization was paid for by the group and not a lobbying firm as originally reported on a House travel document.
House ethics rules prohibit members from allowing lobbyists to pick up their expenses.
Travel underwritten by nonprofit organizations, trade associations, private companies and others is common among lawmakers and allowed under House and Senate ethics rules. Members of Congress have taken about $16 million in 5,410 privately financed trips since 2000, according to a recent study by Political Money Line, an online service that provides campaign-finance and lobbying data.
That total includes 19 trips by Abercrombie, valued at $26,185

Rep. Gary Ackerman ( D- NY):

WASHINGTON - Rep. Gary Ackerman, who has been a vocal critic of the war in Iraq, has earned at least $85,000 from investing in a military supply company a year before it won a major government contract, according to financial records reviewed yesterday by Newsday. On March 9, 2002, Ackerman, a senior member on the International Relations Committee, purchased between $1,001 to $15,000 of stock in Xenonics, which is today valued at between $100,000 and $250,000, according to financial records. Since Ackerman’s stock purchase and the invasion of Iraq Xenonics has received numerous contracts and multi-million dollar earmarks pushing their stock to higher and higher. Gary Ackerman is the ranking Democratic member of the Middle East subcommittee of the House International Relations Committee.
Did Ackerman earmark these funds? Well, we don’t know because there is no transparency in the process. Perhaps someone should ask. But, doubtful anyone will!

Rep. Michael Arcuri (D- NY):

In 2002, Arcuri, a New York District Attorney, personally prosecuted Joseph A. Smith of Oneida for the murder of Desiree Case of Yorkville. Smith was arrested on November 29, 2001 after he was charged with two counts of second-degree murder in a sealed indictment. After one mistrial, a jury found Smith guilty of both counts of murder in March of 2002. In late June of 2002 a judge set aside the conviction, on a technicality, when it was discovered the defense was not provided all of the evidence in the case. Smith was released from jail on August 1, 2002. He later filed a claim for misconduct and negligence against the Oneida County District Attorney’s Office and the City of Utica, N.Y., Police Department, which was settled out of court. However, Case’s actual killer, Earl Wright, was located within the New York State Prison System and would eventually plead guilty to manslaughter while an accomplice, Michael L. Nero, would plead guilty to assault.
Congressman Arcuri states on his Congressional Web Page:
“Those officers knew they could count on me as DA, and now they know they can count on me in Congress to make sure police officers have the assistance they need to keep our communities safe.” Yeah! Right!

Here is what one blogger said about the case.

Utica, NY — State police have offered to assist local authorities probing the murder of a 16-year-old prostitute following criticism from the mayor that the investigation had ”stagnated.” Utica Mayor Tim Julian delivered an ultimatum to city police, who have yet to find the killer of Desiree Case, who was found stabbed to death Feb. 26, 2000, in an abandoned building. Julian said if they could not crack the case in three months, he would invite state police to take over the investigation. He also changed lead investigators in the case. A state police commander has called Police Chief Benny Rotundo to offer assistance, said state police spokesman Trooper James Simpson. State police will provide any help Utica police request, including investigative help, Simpson said.
Nov. 29, 2000 — A former county corrections officer has been charged in the February 2000 slaying of a 16-year-old girl. Joseph Smith, 33, a former Madison County correction officer, was charged with two counts of second-degree murder in the slaying of Desiree Case in an indictment unsealed Thursday, Oneida County District Attorney Michael Arcuri said. Smith appeared in county court Thursday but did not enter a plea because he could not reach his attorney, Peter M. Dunn, of Oneida, after his arrest Wednesday night, Arcuri said. Smith was scheduled back in court Friday morning. He was being held at Oneida County Jail without bail. Case’s battered and half-clothed body was found in the upstairs bedroom of an abandoned house on Feb. 26, 2000, after being stabbed. Utica police came under criticism from Case’s family, who alleged that authorities seemed uninterested in finding the girl’s killer. In January, Utica Mayor Tim Julian appointed a new lead investigator in the case and said he would ask for assistance from state police if his own department could not crack the case in three months.
Arcuri said Smith became a suspect in April. He said DNA is part of the prosecution’s case against Smith but declined to elaborate. Case’s mother, Debbie Groves, and family members attended Smith’s court appearance Thursday. ”It’s been a long time coming. I hate myself for hating so much. I’m not a hateful person. I don’t like myself right now,” Groves said. ”I went to the cemetery last night just to let her know we got him.”
June 27, 2001 — Suspended Madison County jail guard Joseph A. Smith resigned earlier this month, and a misdemeanor criminal charge alleging that he gave away a uniform shirt has been dropped. Smith, 33, submitted a resignation letter June 8, and he stopped working that day, said Mary Krause, the county’s personnel officer. Neither Smith nor his lawyer, Peter Dunn of Oneida, could be reached for comment. Smith, who started working for the jail in 1990, has been suspended with pay since October. He made $14.15 an hour as a full-time corrections officer, Krause said. Sheriff’s officials have declined to comment on the reason Smith was suspended. Earlier this year, the sheriff’s department charged Smith, an Oneida resident, with misapplication of property. Investigators said Smith gave a jail guard uniform shirt to the brother of Desiree Case shortly after she died in February 2000, according to Oneida City Court documents. Dunn said in April that Smith “absolutely denies” the allegation. Oneida City Court officials said Tuesday that the charge was dismissed Friday. Case was a prostitute that Smith had been living with, according to court documents. Smith has maintained that he had a platonic relationship with Case and that he was trying to help her.
Dec. 6, 2001 — Former Madison County Corrections Officer, Joseph Smith, Friday continued to maintain his innocence in the February 2000 death of 16-year-old Desiree Case. Smith, 33, was charged with two counts of second-degree murder in an indictment unsealed Thursday, according to Oneida County District Attorney Michael Arcuri.
Smith was arrested Wednesday night and appeared in county court Thursday without counsel. He has been held in Oneida County Jail without bail. Friday, Smith, led into Judge Michael Dwyer’s courtroom in shackles and an orange prison jumpsuit, was represented at his arraignment by attorney Michael St. Leger. St. Leger entered a plea of “not guilty on all counts” on behalf of his client. Case’s battered and half-clothed body was found in the upstairs bedroom of an abandoned house on Feb. 26, 2000, after being stabbed.
Feb. 20, 2002 — Accused killer Joseph Smith fingered a drug dealer called “Capone” and a man named “Rock” as suspects behind the 2000 death of Yorkville teen-ager Desiree Case, according to statements released Tuesday. Smith, a former Madison County jail guard and a former Oneida resident, repeatedly told Utica police he had nothing to do with the 16-year-old’s death, according to three depositions filed in Oneida County Court.
Police arrested Smith, 34, last November. A grand jury indicted him on two counts of murder in Case’s death. Case’s body was found Feb. 26, 2000, stabbed to death in a vacant house on Francis Street in Utica. Smith gave two statements to police that were signed by investigators and filed as depositions. A third deposition filed in court has Smith’s name on it but no signature or date at the bottom. The judge in the case did not release the statements into Smith’s court file until Tuesday. Smith told Utica Police Lt. Jennifer Asker that he last saw Case Feb. 12, 2000, when he dropped her off on Waverly Place. He also told her he believed a drug dealer with the street name of “Capone” killed Case, according to Asker’s deposition. He said he saw “Capone” a month before Case died. The dealer was standing across the street from the vacant home where her body was later found, Smith said in Asker’s deposition. Capone, who had a pit bull puppy, approached a car Smith was sitting in. The dealer pointed to the home, said it was vacant and “then told Joe that he used to live there and sell drugs from the second floor,” the deposition states.
“Smith felt that ‘Capone’ was responsible because of that information,” the deposition states. In a separate deposition, Smith stated that he searched for Case in the area of Chestnut and Francis streets shortly before her body was found. This is the deposition that has no signature or date at the bottom. Smith said he ran into a man named “Rock” and asked him if he had seen Desiree. “He started crying and said, ‘I can’t take this anymore. I didn’t want to hurt anyone, my mama didn’t raise me like this,’ ” Smith said in the deposition. Smith said he wanted to learn more, so he offered “Rock” a ride home. He took him to a residence, but he learned nothing more, according to the deposition.
Smith also told Asker he visited a psychic a few weeks after Case died, “to find out who was responsible for this murder,” Asker’s deposition states. Smith told the investigator he brought with him a candy wrapper and a picture of Case. The psychic told him “it would be years before the killers would be caught.”
The third deposition filed in Oneida County Court offers few details about the case. Utica Senior Detective Frederick R. Bruzzese stated that he interviewed Smith Feb. 28, 2000, but that that interview was cut short by Smith’s lawyer at the time, Andrew Dunn.
Oneida County Judge Michael Dwyer has scheduled Smith’s trial to start March 18.
TRIAL
March 21, 2002 — DNA evidence scraped from the fingernails of Desiree Case took center stage Wednesday at the Oneida County murder trial of Joseph Smith. Forensic scientists told jurors they found enough DNA underneath fingernails from both of Case’s hands to develop profiles that show whom the DNA came from. Blood specks found under Case’s left-hand fingernails gave scientists a DNA profile that indicated the blood came from Case herself. Material found under the nails on her right hand pointed to Case and a man. Stephen Swinton, a supervisor for DNA services for the state police, said that man was Joseph Smith. The combination of DNA found under the right-hand fingernails was 16 trillion times more likely to come from Case and Smith than from Case and any other male, Swinton testified. Swinton was one of eight witnesses called on the third day of Smith’s trial. Smith, 34, faces two counts of murder in Case’s death. The 16-year-old was found stabbed to death in an abandoned Utica apartment Feb. 26, 2000. Smith, a former Madison County jail guard and former Oneida resident, has pleaded innocent.
Forensic scientist Alison Eastman called DNA the “blueprint for life” during testimony heard before Swinton took the stand. Eastman said DNA lies in every cell in the body, and it contains identifying information about the person it came from. Prosecutors opened Wednesday’s testimony by recalling Case’s mother, Deborah Groves, who testified Tuesday. District Attorney Michael Arcuri asked Groves if Case was pregnant and if Smith knew it. Groves replied that her daughter had a miscarriage, and that Smith knew because Case called her on a cellular phone from Smith’s car to say she was bleeding.
Groves testified Tuesday that Case and Smith were romantically involved.
Canastota-based psychic Connie Burke testified Wednesday that Smith visited her in April 2000. He told her he wanted to know about an individual who had been murdered and stabbed 10 times, she said.
He also gave Burke a necklace of Case’s that Groves had given to her daughter. Groves testified Tuesday that she could not find that necklace after Case died.
VERDICT
March 23, 2002 — A speck of DNA lodged under the fingernail of a dead teen-age prostitute helped convict Joseph Smith of murder on Friday afternoon. An Oneida County jury deliberated for nearly five hours before finding Smith, a former Madison County jail guard, guilty of one count of second-degree murder in the death of Desiree Case.
He will face a prison sentence of 25 years to life at his scheduled sentencing May 17, Oneida County District Attorney Michael Arcuri said.
Another blogger states:
“In the end the man who was wrongly convicted settled for a pittance and left the area, heart-broken and sad. He had not only lost his love but was ill served by the system that he himself was part of. The local detectives resigned/retired from their positions after all was said and done. IMHO they and the DA got off too easy.”
Too easy? He was promoted to U.S. Representative!
These are just the Democrats in the House whose names start with the letter A. Shall I continue on to letter B?

JD


Posted by: JD at September 3, 2007 10:49 PM
Comment #231685

Letter B

Rep. Corrine Brown (D- FL):

Controversy has followed Brown since the start of her national political career, from her actions while a state legislator. The Florida Ethics Commission fined Brown $5,000 for using legislative employees as dual employees of her travel business.
A few weeks after becoming a member of the U.S. House in 1993, the Federal Elections Commission began investigating her. Her former campaign treasurer quit and said Brown had neglected to take action against an aide who had committed forgery, forging the treasurer’s signature on her financial documents, and Brown told the FEC that her federal campaign reports contained several errors. The staffer alleged to have forged the treasurer’s signature stayed with Brown and as of 1998 was her chief of staff. In 1996, there was another investigation concerning charges that Brown improperly received and spent a $10,000 check from a secret account used for money laundering by National Baptist Convention leader Henry Lyons. Brown admitted receiving the check but denied she had used the money improperly. She was accused of not reporting the check or reporting who she received the money from. Brown said that she had taken the check and converted it into another check made out to Pameron Bus Tours to pay for transportation to a rally she organized in Tallahassee. She said that she didn’t have to report the money because the rally was to protest the reorganization of her district lines, and she did not use it for herself. If the $10,000 gift had been reported, it would have exceeded the $1,000 individual donation limit.
Brown had had previous dealings with Lyons; in 1992, her campaign paid $5,000, allegedly for a computer, to a company owned by Lyons. The company had shut down six years earlier. Her office once arranged for Lyons to buy several airline tickets at the government discount rate. Under Congressional rules, only members of Congress and their staffers are allowed to take this rate.
In 1998, Brown hired jazz and gospel singer Roslyn Burrough as a “congressional outreach specialist”. Burrough was paid $40,000 at taxpayer expense for two 12-week engagements.
In another discrepancy, Brown did not disclose the $40,000 sale of her Tallahassee travel company and improperly reported the sale of her Gainesville travel agency in her Congressional financial documents. In 1994, Brown was sued for $94,000 by a group of airlines alleging her travel agency had not paid them for services. She was investigated by the IRS for $14,000 in unpaid taxes. She attempted to pay a $5,697 debt to the University of Florida with a bad check.
In 2004, Brown referred to the Bush Administration as a “racist bunch of white men” in a meeting with senior State Department officials and members of Congress
On June 9, 1998, the Congressional Accountability Project filed an ethics complaint against Brown. One of the complaints was that Brown’s daughter Shantrel, a lawyer who worked for the EPA in Washington, had received a $50,000 Lexus LS 400 automobile as a gift from an agent of a Gambian millionaire named Foutanga Sissoko. Sissoko, a friend of Congresswoman Brown, had been imprisoned in Miami after pleading guilty to charges of bribing a customs officer. Brown had worked to secure his release, pressuring U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno to deport Sissoko back to his homeland as an alternative to continued incarceration. Shantrel Brown later admitted at least the appearance of impropriety by selling the car and donating the proceeds to the African Methodist Episcopal Church’s scholarship fund. The Project held this violated the House gift rule, but Brown denied she had acted improperly. The congressional subcommittee investigating Brown found insufficient evidence to issue a Statement of Alleged Violation, but said she had acted with poor judgment in connection with Sissoko.
In June 2007, Citizens for Ethics released a report reporting Brown’s daughter Shantrel Brown-Fields as a congressional lobbyist; the organization maintains that Congressional relatives working as lobbyists for special interests are a conflict of interest for lawmakers. Brown-Fields is employed by Alcalde & Fayte, with clients including ITERA, Miami-Dade County Commission, and Edward Waters College. In 2006, Brown’s campaign committee paid her daughter’s husband, Tyree Fields, $5,500 for political consulting work. Rep. Brown has earmarked millions of dollars in federal funding for her daughter’s client Edward Waters College.
On the first day of early voting for the 2004 General Election, Brown, with several supporters, stood on the steps of the entrance of the Duval County Supervisor of Elections headquarters, an early voting site, and began passing out a “pseudo-ballot,” directing people to vote for only Democratic candidates and Florida amendments that should pass. It was not until noon that Brown and her supporters moved to the mandatory fifty feet away from the entrance. Brown claimed her intention had been to increase awareness of early voting, and that she had not knowingly violated the fifty feet rule.

JD

Posted by: JD at September 4, 2007 12:59 AM
Comment #231711

Letter C

Rep. Wm. Lacy Clay (D- MO)

Clay made news in early 2007 when, as a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, he objected to the possible inclusion of white congressman Stephen Cohen from Tennessee, who represents a majority black district and had made a campaign promise to attempt to become the first white member of the CBC. Although it is not part of the CBC’s bylaws that members must be black, all members so far have been black. He said, “Mr. Cohen asked for admission, and he got his answer. He’s white and the Caucus is black. It’s time to move on. We have racial policies to pursue and we are pursuing them, as Mr. Cohen has learned. It’s an unwritten rule. It’s understood.” In response to the decision, Rep. Cohen stated, “It’s their caucus and they do things their way. You don’t force your way in.”
Rep. Clay issued an official statement from his office in reply to Rep. Cohen’s complaint: “Quite simply, Rep. Cohen will have to accept what the rest of the country will have to accept — there has been an unofficial Congressional White Caucus for over 200 years, and now it’s our turn to say who can join ‘the club.’ He does not, and cannot, meet the membership criteria, unless he can change his skin color. Primarily, we are concerned with the needs and concerns of the black population, and we will not allow white America to infringe on those objectives.” Some have said that since Cohen represents a district with 60% black voters, that he has a legitimate interest in helping the goals of the CBC, and the decision should not be solely based on skin color.
Citizens for Ethics issued a report in June 2007 saying that Clay’s sister Michelle Clay is a registered lobbyist for the Kansas City airport and previously, for the city of St. Louis. They reported that in the 2006 election cycle, Michelle Clay’s law office, Clay and Associates, received $51,800 in consulting fees from her brother’s campaign funds, along with an additional $9,963 for reimbursements. In the 2004 election cycle, Michelle Clay’s firm received $52,514 for consulting, and in 2002 Michelle Clay herself was paid $32,00 for campaign management and legal fees. During the 2004 election, Clay’s campaign reimbursed his father more than $6,000 for book purchases.
Obviously, Rep. Clay has no problem with racial profiling or racial exclusion. “Hey, Clay, should the House have separate Black and White restrooms, too, just like their caucuses?”

Rep. John Conyers (D- MI)

In letters sent separately to the House Ethics Committee, the FBI, and the US Attorney’s office by two former aides of Conyers, they alleged that Conyers repeatedly violated House ethics rules. The aides allege that Conyers used his staff to work on several local and state campaigns and forced them to baby-sit and chauffeur his children. In late December 2006, Conyers “accepted responsibility” for possibly violating House rules. A statement issued December 29, 2006 by the House Ethics Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) and Ranking Minority Member Howard Berman (D-Calif.), said that Conyers acknowledged what he characterized as a “lack of clarity” in his communications with staff members regarding their official duties and responsibilities, and accepted responsibility for his actions. In deciding to drop the matter, Hastings and Berman state: After reviewing the information gathered during the inquiry, and in light of Representative Conyers’ cooperation with the inquiry, we have concluded that this matter should be resolved through the issuance of this public statement and the agreement by Representative Conyers to take a number of additional, significant steps to ensure that his office complies with all rules and standards regarding campaign and personal work by congressional staff.

Rep. Jerry Costello- (D-IL)

September 25, 1997
Honorable James Hansen, Chairman
Honorable Howard Berman, Ranking Minority Member
House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
HT-2, The Capitol
U. S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
RE: Ethics Complaint and Request for Investigation of Representative Jerry Costello
Dear Representatives Hansen and Berman:
This letter constitutes a formal ethics complaint against U. S. Representative Jerry Costello (D-IL) and a call for an investigation into whether Representative Costello violated criminal prohibitions against the acceptance of an illegal gratuity or a bribe, whether he violated federal financial disclosure requirements, and whether he tried to obstruct a federal gambling investigation. According to news reports, Rep. Costello was an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of Amiel Cueto, who was convicted on June 11, 1997 of one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States and three counts of obstructing justice.
We are writing pursuant to House Rule 10, which authorizes the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (“Ethics Committee”) to investigate “any alleged violation, by a member, officer or employee of the House, of the Code of Official Conduct or of any law, rule, regulation or standard of conduct applicable to the conduct of such member, officer, or employee in the performance of his duties or the discharge of his responsibilities.”
A: Outside Counsel Should Investigate Whether Rep. Costello Accepted an Illegal Gratuity or a Bribe
A “stipulation of facts” between Thomas Venezia, his attorney, and Assistant United States Attorneys Miriam F. Miquelon and Norman R. Smith states that:
In December 1993 [Amiel] Cueto and Venezia entered into another business deal involving the purchase of 32 acres of property on the riverfront in East St. Louis. Initially, the deal was to be split 50-50 but later Cueto told Venezia that each of them would only get 1/3 with the remaining 1/3 to be given to Congressman Costello…..The deal later fell through and Cueto kept the property in his name. It was later deeded on February 11, 1994 into EnFuturo and made part of another joint business venture….
Before the seventh circuit order came down, Cueto and Venezia formed EnFuturo to hold the riverfront property. Cueto again explained that 1/3 was for Congressman Costello. In 1994, Cueto, Venezia, and Bechtold formed DKCO for the purpose of opening the first land based gambling casino in Illinois. Land based gambling was illegal with the exception of a casino operated on an Indian reservation. Cueto got Congressman Costello involved in getting the Indian tribe recognized to help the deal go forward. Cueto, Venezia and Bechtold formed a company known as IllArt to hold their interest in the DKCO casino operation. Cueto was given 50% of IllArt. Venezia used Erin Griffin as his nominee to hold his 25% and Bechtold put his 25% interest in his son’s name. Cueto told Bechtold and Venezia that he got 50% because he had to take care of Congressman Costello and give him 25%. According to Cueto, this was not to be put in writing until after the first of the following year so that the Congressman could avoid some reporting requirements.
During the trial of Amiel Cueto, Assistant United States Attorney Miriam Miquelon and Thomas Venezia expanded on these details. According to Charles Bosworth Jr. of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch,
Venezia identified a letter to Costello that Venezia said laid out the ownership of the land by the three men [Venezia, Cueto, Costello]. The letter, projected briefly on a screen in the courtroom, was dated Dec. 30, 1993, and was written on letterhead from Cueto’s law firm. It was addressed to Costello at his congressional office at 327 West Main Street, Belleville. The heading of the letter said it concerned the property on Front Street in East St. Louis.
But Miquelon took the letter off the overhead projector before it could be read by reporters. U.S. District Judge Stephen Limbaugh later denied a request by the Post-Dispatch for access to the letter after it was placed in evidence. He cited court policy on media access to evidence.
A similar letter addressed to Venezia also was shown briefly on the screen. Venezia then identified a legal description of the property, which was titled “9-L-Costello.leg,” and Venezia said it was prepared by a title and escrow service.
Venezia said Cueto had told him to have the letters prepared by lawyer Thomas LeChien of Belleville, who handled such matters for Venezia, so the ownership would be spelled out on the record….
Miquelon told the jurors in opening statements last week that the letter proved Costello was a “silent partner” in the casino deal. She said Cueto even told LeChien not to file the letter until after the end of the year “to avoid some reporting requirements.”
Miquelon also said Cueto enlisted Costello’s help to try to get a bill passed in Congress to recognize an Indian tribe so the men could try to open the first land-based casino in Illinois. She said Costello was the person referred to in the indictment as Cueto’s “undisclosed business partner who was then a public official.”
At Amiel Cueto’s trial, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported that Assistant United States Attorney Miriam Miquelon said that Cueto had prepared a document showing that he held a financial interest in the casino project for Costello and that Cueto had instructed the lawyer handling the project to wait until after a certain date to file the document to avoid requirements for filing congressional financial reports.
Miquelon also said jurors would hear testimony that Costello met with Cueto and other casino developers in 1994 to discuss a bill in Congress to recognize the Indian tribe involved in the deal and then sent letters to the developers telling them the bill had passed.
Miquelon said Cueto had turned to Costello for more help later, while Cueto was trying unsuccessfully to set up the indictment of Bonds Robinson, a state liquor agent working undercover with the FBI to investigate Venezia.
Miquelon said Costello had met with State’s Attorney Bob Haida to offer him a judgeship if he would resign as prosecutor so Cueto could be appointed his successor. As prosecutor, Cueto planned to indict Robinson in state court before he could help get the federal indictment that ultimately led to the conviction and 15-year sentence for Venezia in 1995, Miquelon said.
These are serious allegations, made by an Assistant United States Attorney, in open court. Assistant United States Attorney Miquelon has shown documents in court which, she says, demonstrate that Rep. Costello held an ownership interest in the Front Street property. The Ethics Committee should request and obtain the relevant documents shown by Miquelon in court, and evaluate whether Rep. Costello had any ownership, either beneficial or real, over the property on Front Street in East St. Louis.
House Rule 10 authorizes the Ethics Committee to “investigate…any alleged violation, by a Member, officer, or employee of the House, of the Code of Official Conduct or of any law, rule, regulation, or other standard of conduct applicable to the conduct of such Member…” Certainly, possible violations of bribery or illegal gratuities laws are within the purview of the Ethics Committee.
Federal bribery law, 18 U.S.C. §201, states that it is a crime for a federal official to “directly or indirectly, corruptly” receive or solicit “anything of value personally or for any other person or entity, in return for…being influenced in the performance of any official act.” Criminal law on illegal gratuities, 18 U.S.C. §201, prohibits a federal official from directly or indirectly soliciting or receiving anything of value other than “as provided by law…for or because of any official act performed or to be performed.”
B: Outside Counsel Should Investigate Whether Representative Costello Violated Financial Disclosure Requirements and House Rules
The Ethics Reform Act of 1989 requires members of the House of Representatives to prepare annual financial disclosure statements. According to the House Ethics Manual, “Financial Disclosure Statements must indicate outside compensation, holdings, and business transactions, generally for the calendar year preceding the filing date.”
Assistant United States Attorney Miquelon’s statements and descriptions of documents in open court suggest that Rep. Costello may have violated provisions regarding disclosure of assets and business transactions. The Ethics Committee should evaluate the veracity of Rep. Costello’s financial disclosure reports, which contain no mention of the DKCO casino or the Front Street property.
If Rep. Costello was a “silent partner” in the casino deal with Venezia and Cueto, then Costello may have violated House Rules prohibitions regarding voting on matters of personal interest when he voted to extend federal recognition to the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians. House Rule 8 states that every House Member “shall vote on each question put, unless he has a direct personal or pecuniary interest in the event of such question.”
C: Ethics Committee Should Review Costello’s Efforts to Win Prosecutor Post for Cueto
At the trial of Amiel Cueto, testimony from State’s Attorney Bob Haida suggests that Rep. Costello may have attempted to assist Cueto in derailing the federal gambling investigation of Cueto and his business partner, Thomas Venezia. On May 2, the St. Louis Post Dispatch reported that:
U.S. Rep. Jerry Costello tried to get his friend, Amiel Cueto, appointed state’s attorney in St. Clair County while Cueto was trying to block a federal gambling investigation, State’s Attorney Bob Haida testified in Cueto’s federal trial Thursday.
In six hours of testimony, Haida told jurors that Costello, D-Belleville, offered to help Haida get a judgeship in April 1995 on the condition that Haida persuade County Board Chairman John Baricevic to appoint Cueto to succeed Haida as county prosecutor.
Even so, Haida said Costello had applied no pressure with the offer and graciously accepted Haida’s refusal.
The Ethics Committee should review this testimony and other evidence to determine whether Rep. Costello was obstructing the investigation of Cueto and Venezia. It should also determine whether — even if Costello was not obstructing justice — he was violating the House Code of Official Conduct by bringing dishonor to the House of Representatives. Members of the House of Representatives should not obstruct prosecutorial investigations of their friends. The House Code of Official Conduct states that:
A Member, Officer, or employee of the House of Representatives shall conduct himself at all times in a manner which shall reflect creditably on the House of Representatives.
D: Conclusion
The allegations against Rep. Costello made by Assistant United States Attorney Miriam Miquelon’s statements in court are serious and warrant an investigation by the Ethics Committee. We urge you to obtain evidence presented in court regarding whether Rep. Costello had an ownership interest in the Front Street property. If he did, then we strongly urge you to and authorize outside counsel in this case as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
Gary Ruskin
Director

“Amiel Cueto, a disbarred Belleville lawyer who spent six years in prison for shielding the $48 million gambling empire of his client Thomas Venezia, lost a last chance to regain his law license.
On Monday the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear his appeal, according to an Associated Press report.
Cueto had sought to have his 1997 conviction overturned. He claimed his indictment had been altered to remove the name of U.S. Rep. Jerry Costello, D-Belleville, a childhood friend.
Cueto was disbarred by the Illinois Supreme Court in November 2004. In December 2005, a U.S. appeals court ruled that Cueto’s trial and conviction did not violate his constitutional rights.
Venezia, who was convicted of gambling and racketeering in 1995, took his life in July 2005 in a murder-suicide. He also shot his 21-year-old roommate, Jennifer Anderson, in the back of the head at their Belleville apartment.
During his trial, Cueto was accused of calling on Costello to oust St. Clair County State’s Attorney Bob Haida so that Cueto could be appointed to the job. According to the Oct. 2 AP report, prosecutors said Cueto wanted to “press trumped-up bribery charges against a state liquor agent investigating Venezia’s gambling empire.”

Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX)

During Bush’s 2006 State of the Union address, a Washington Post photographer snapped a photo of Cuellar standing on the Republican side of the aisle, gleaming as President Bush affectionately grabbed his face.
Though this is not an actual crime, it would be considered one by most Democrats.

JD

Posted by: JD at September 4, 2007 1:44 PM
Comment #231725

Look, a shiny object!

Sorry, your diversionary tactics aren’t going to make people forget about Craig, Vitter, etc.

Posted by: Woody Mena at September 4, 2007 3:35 PM
Comment #231726

Are we allowed to copy and paste this much (in it’s entirety) from other areas without using quotes and posting sources?

Posted by: womanmarine at September 4, 2007 4:11 PM
Comment #231727

JD,

Just because you can bore us with pages of commentary on supposed crimes, pseudo crimes, indiscretions, and plain innuendo of eight or so Democratic politicians doesn’t mean Craig and Vitter are off the hook. Nor does it mean Democrats are just as guilty as the Republicans. I could find as much if not more typeface on Republican crimes and indiscretions if necessary but it isn’t.

Most Democratic politicians are not going around claiming moral superiority when it comes to family values and then falling flat on their faces about it. How many of the Republican presidential candidates for POTUS are divorced or committed adultery? Compare that to the Democratic candidates. If the Republicans want to make supposed “higher” moral standards an issue (and in Vitter’s case, the most important issue facing our country) then why defend them when they are hoisted on their own petard?

Posted by: chris2x at September 4, 2007 4:13 PM
Comment #231739

womanmarine, quotations from the Congressional record are public property and not subject to proprietary copyright laws. So, in short, the answer is yes. Though, quotes or blockquote HTML codes would make it more readable and comprehensible as to who is speaking.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 4, 2007 5:31 PM
Comment #231743

David:

Thanks. I guess I kind of thought that excessive quotes were linked to as a courtesy. Guess I was wrong.

Posted by: womanmarine at September 4, 2007 6:17 PM
Comment #231744

Also, not to be contentious, but are these all from the congressional record? I thought I saw quotes from at least one blogger? And with that exception, was it all from the congressional record? If so, I would love to see it. Is there a link?

Posted by: womanmarine at September 4, 2007 6:21 PM
Comment #231750

JD,

For the record, I am sure plenty of Democratic politicians are sleeping around and committing adultery. Positions of power tend to attract non-upright people when it comes to sex (pun intended). They just don’t claim it is a vital issue to the country because it isn’t.

Still, I would have a hard time voting for someone who claimed fidelity to their partner and didn’t live up to that promise. But if two consensual adults can work out problems of infidelity then I don’t have much a problem with it. Unless, that is, they plant their flag in the ground of superior morality and make it a campaign issue.

Posted by: chris2x at September 4, 2007 8:12 PM
Comment #231784

chris2x,

Every single Blue Dog Democrat that took a Republican seat in the House ran on the “Culture of Corruption”. The Democrats were the Party that “stuck the flag in the ground”. That is why I laughed the entire time they were running on it in 2006. I couldn’t believe anyone would be gullible enough to actually fall for such hypocrisy. But, I have to admit, I was wrong. There really are millions of people out there voting that have no clue as to the Democratic scandals throughout the 90’s which helped Gingrich take over the House and Senate. One of those which was huge, was the Congressional Post Office scandal, in which Congressmen were writing all manner of blank checks for themselves. People are just so easily duped because they do not pay attention. Fortuneately, for the Democrats there are voters out there that live by the old saying, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, well, OK. Fool me thrice, could you please fool me again? Please! Pretty please! Oh, pleease!!!!!!

JD

Posted by: JD at September 4, 2007 11:49 PM
Comment #231888

JD,

Problem is JD, on corruption you can say the exact same thing about Republicans. Do they keep fooling you? Of course, if you don’t believe them but vote for them anyway at least your eyes are wide open.

But it doesn’t change the fact the Republican party is unique in its moral depravity when they talk such a good game!

Posted by: chris2x at September 5, 2007 7:16 PM
Comment #235506

SONG OF DEBORAH
..they chose new gods then war was in the gates.. awake awake deborah utter a song.. the Lord gave you dominion over the mighty.. curse you bitterly the inhabitants thereof who came not to the help of justice against the mighty.. they divided the prey, to every man a damsel or two.. let all thine enemies perish o Lord and the land rest forty years..

Deborah palfrey deserves the Pemberton Award for Clean Governance.
Palfrey list is like the Black Book of 1918.
That trial of the Century is deleted from all books, cursed be reporters.
The list there had 47000 names.
The list here has 46000 phone bills.
The listed are not womenizers, machos or ordinary sinners.
They are power brokers gay lutheran shock and awe agitators of all wars and all panics.
These wretches are one dirty cover to the real pimps deep underground.
A curse on the kingpins, Justice Charles Darling then and Judge Adolph Kessler now.

Noel Pemberton-Billing
Trial of the Century 1918

Posted by: Billing at October 7, 2007 9:23 AM
Comment #235853

Song of Deborah


…They chose new gods; then was war in the gates… Awake, awake, Deborah: awake, awake, utter a song… the LORD made you have dominion over the mighty… Curse ye Meroz, said the angel of the LORD, curse ye bitterly the inhabitants thereof; because they came not to the help of the LORD, to the help of Justice against the mighty… Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? So let all thine enemies perish, O LORD: but let them that love him be as the sun when he goeth forth in his might. And the land rest forty years. Judges 5.

Deborah Palfrey deserves the Pemberton Award for Clean Governance.
Palfrey list is like the Black Book of 1918.
That Trial of the century is deleted from all books.
The list there had 47000 names.
The list here has 46000 phone bills.
The listed are not womenizers, machos or ordinary sinners.
They are power brokers, gay lutheran shock n awe blitzkrieg agitators of all wars and all panics.
These wretches are one dirty cover to the real pimps deep undercover.
A curse on the kingpins, Justice Charles Darling then and Judge Adolph Kramer Kessler now.

Noel Pemberton-Billing
Trial of the Century 1918


Posted by: billing at October 11, 2007 7:40 AM
Post a comment