Blog powered by Typepad

« "Then they came for the Jews" | Main | A small ray of light and hope from South Africa »

Friday, 29 April 2016

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

A Stalin era show trial brought to modern times. The pendulum will swing back.

Not the first time this thugocracy has subverted justice for it's own political motivations.
http://spectator.org/articles/66150/bob-mcdonnell%E2%80%99s-revenge
Yes we may have some weird laws, but the abuse by this current junta's justice dept is despicable.

missred, you've noticed that too?

I would be thick as a brick if I didn't WW. Wait, did I just insult most of my friends and relatives? >haha<

Thanks for that, Miss Red, I hadn't reached that far in the always excellent American Spectator.

There's a long tradition David in American jurisprudence of using "financial law" when "regular people law" isn't, quite up for it.

Al Capone and Hillary Clinton spring to mind (though admittedly Hillary's is yet to play out).

Hastert continues to enjoy his defenders - Tom Delay and (former CIA Chief) Porter Goss for instance. And as Whitewall above notes "the pendulum will swing back."

Indeed that pendulum, especially when its anywhere near Washington DC, has a habit of, not so much swing as, spinning like a gyroscope.

I believe David you'll find just the first paragraph from this 2006 article ... well ... I was gonna type "delicious" but given the particular peculiarities ...

http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1542077,00.html

Yes, JK, the irony in that story is indeed delicious. However, we shouldn't confuse one issue with another. For whatever reason the legal system failed to deal with Hastert when it should have done so but now we have the obnoxious sight of the Feds beating him up not for his transgressions but because of his politics. And if 'HillBilly' wins the election you can expect more of the same!

Not disagreeing in anyway with your reply David but, from just over the transom I read; "The U.S. Supreme Court approved a new rule Thursday allowing federal judges to issue warrants that target ... outside their jurisdiction ..."

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/the-supreme-court-expands-fbi-hacking-powers

So, "more of the the same" (Patriot Act) no matter who wins the election.

Checking that link above (for whatever reason - didn't work) I came upon something else.

I'm sure David - this will pique your interest.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/06/magazine/the-plot-to-take-down-a-fox-news-analyst.html

Yes, JK, that story has even reached The Daily Mail 'over here'. What a chancer!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3274731/Fox-News-guest-analyst-arrested-lying-working-CIA.html

David

To hit on JK's first point. When a crime is committed usually more than on law is broken. He may have a good alibi for the high profile item and forget to cover his tail on the others. Which do you charge him with -- the one easiest convict. Usually the big cases that fall apart the prosecutor went for the big one with the weak evidence to look tough on crime, instead of the easy conviction on a more mundane charge.

However "Structuring transactions", in my opinion is one of the most dubious laws because it is so easy for a person with no criminal intent to accidently violate it.

No Hank, that's not the point. The point is that structuring is making a crime out of something that is not a crime. Like refusing another drink because you have to drive home, or saving money using tax efficient investment programmes etc.

Basically its the state saying doesnt matter whether you break the law or not, we dont like you and are going to get you for something.

Cuffy

That is true too.

The comments to this entry are closed.