Welcome to PatsFans.com

Pelosi = Washington = Corruption = Americans Suffer

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Real World, Nov 22, 2006.

  1. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,795
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +290 / 4 / -2

    So, I guess Nancy Pelosi & the Dems idea of eliminating corruption is to name corupt people to leadership positions. GREAT! Aclee Hastings was impeached for corruption when he was a judge. He and Murtha seem to have alot in common. I keep trying to tell you people to see things for what they are. That's Coke or Pepsi.


    Time
    Posted Tuesday, Nov. 21, 2006
    Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi, who stumbled badly last week when she publicly backed the failed candidacy of Rep. John Murtha for majority leader, could be headed for another political tumble if she presses ahead with long-standing plans to elevate Rep. Alcee Hastings, a senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, to the panel's chairmanship.

    Hastings was elected to Congress in 1992, but his first big moment on Capitol Hill came three years before that. Appointed as a federal judge in Florida in 1979, Hastings had been acquitted in a 1983 criminal trial on charges of soliciting a $150,000 bribe two years earlier in a deal to provide favorable treatment for defendants in a racketeering case before him. Despite his being legally cleared, Congress determined that the evidence against Hastings was still powerful enough to remove him from the bench, which the Senate voted to do in 1989 ? even though Senators Arlen Specter and Jeff Bingaman, the top Republican and Democrat who supervised the proceedings, voted against expelling Hastings from office. The impeachment proceedings were later invalidated by an appeals court judge in 1993, although that ruling was itself later vitiated by the Supreme Court. Reports on those impeachment proceedings were posted Monday evening on the blog of the left-of-center ethics watchdog, Committee for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, fleshing out the details of an episode that Hastings, and surely Pelosi, would much rather forget.




    The link below has a much more detailed description of what happened. It's a much longer read but is quite informative. It really gives you a breakdown of went went on.

    Even his peers could no longer ignore Hastings? situation. This and other evidence led to Chief Judge William Terrell Hodges of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida and Chief Judge Anthony A. Alaimo of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida ? Hastings? own court ? to file a complaint against Hastings under the Code of Judicial Conduct?s requirement that judges who become aware of unprofessional judicial conduct by other judges make it known.

    The final report issued by the five-judge committee appointed to investigate the charges concluded that at his trial, Hastings had fabricated documents submitted as evidence and committed perjury 14 times. The report concluded, ?Judge Hastings attempted to corruptly use his office for personal gain. [The committee found] clear and convincing evidence that Judge Hastings sought to conceal his participation in the bribery scheme.... Judge Hastings? conduct was premeditated, deliberate and contrived.?



    http://www.freedommag.org/english/vol27I6/page28a.htm
  2. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,619
    Likes Received:
    64
    Ratings:
    +120 / 7 / -13

    Since he is a dem it doesn't matter if he is a crook.
  3. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,795
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +290 / 4 / -2

    Patsfan, I think recent history has shown us that the GOP doesn't care either when it comes to less than ethical members. Her being a Dem is irrelavent. My point was that we just got over massive amount of scandals, and criminal revelation in washington, and this woman said she was going to restore ethics. Well, after reading today's Herald article about Hastings, I see that she is going to be more of the same. Both party's are disgustingly arrogant. If you took the (D) away from their names and installed an (R), nothing would change. So far Pelosi is 0 for 2. I'm not as cautiously optomistic as I was the day after the election.
  4. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,727
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +160 / 4 / -4

    I think all you ask of a Congress is that it conduct its business honestly. I don't think it's possible to put together a coalition without including some of the power brokers. The House of Reps has always been a mix of good and unseemly, and it remains to be seen whether Pelosi can keep it honest. She must have had a damn good reason to choose Hastings, assuming that article presents the facts fairly (which is a big assumption, considering it's from the Church of Scientology).
  5. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,619
    Likes Received:
    64
    Ratings:
    +120 / 7 / -13

    I'll have to disagree here when corrupt pubbies are exposed they are forced from office, corrupt dems are not touched. DeLay was forced out without a trial having been conducted, HAstings has been impeached and is being put in a leadership position, Ney was forced out, Kennedy is not, Foley out, Stidds not. beginning to see a pattern here.

    There are corrupt pols on both sides of the aisle, the reactions of their respective cacuses are very different.
  6. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,059
    Likes Received:
    124
    Ratings:
    +328 / 1 / -9

    Massachusetts has been sending a "Murdering, Drunken, Lying, Cowardly, Immoral, Dishonest Women Abusing Pig back to the Senate for years and the fools love him, why is this, because he is a Liberal Left Wing Democrat.

    Trent Lott was punished for "a remark" the same people that wanted Trent Lotts head on a platter get down on their knees and kiss the rings of Sen Robert Byrd (KKK) and Uncle Killer Kennedy (Lying Cowardly Murdering Drunk)

    "Oh look, there's Ted Kennedy, Hi Teddy, we love you"
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2006
  7. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,727
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +160 / 4 / -4

    The Republicans appointed people to leadership positions where they used their power to corrupt the institution of Congress. I'm talking about people like Delay, Cunningham, Ney, and quite a few others, most likely. When they got caught, the Republicans defended them for as long as possible before finally pushing them out.

    Now that our system of checks and balances is restored, I strongly suspect that this last Congress will prove to be the most corrupt in the modern era. After all, let's face it, the Republicans were doing what they could to protect their political interests. Once the investigations start, who knows what will be found. But, I would bet that evidence of Republicans protecting each other will certainly be found, as in the Foley scandal.

    There's no evidence that Foley or Ney were forced out. Kennedy's crime, if there was one, had nothing to do with Congress. Studds received the exact same punishment as a Republican who was accused at the same time of a similar (but hetero) abuse.

    As far as Hastings (and the others) go, I suppose the question is whether you believe one can be rehabilated. I certainly do, and you obviously did at least in the case of Bush, who was rehabilitated from alcoholism (arrested and pled guilty to DUI), and possibly drug abuse and other minor crimes:

    http://www.slumdance.com/blogs/brian_flemming/archives/000637.html

    Or perhaps your standard is that its okay for drunks to be president, but not okay for impeached judges to be leaders of House Committees. Maybe that's not completely unreasonable; on the other hand maybe the will of the people (who keep reelecting Hastings) and the likelihood that he's reformed is more fair.
  8. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,795
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +290 / 4 / -2

    The first excerpt is from Time Magazine.

    Lets not make excuses here Patters. When the GOP's scandalous actions were being exposed, you clearly cited ethical behavior as being a must, and as being something the repubs didn't have, and the Dems did. Clearly, the factual history of both Murtha & Hastings leaves little to be desired. That Pelosi, and your Dem party would puppet these ethically challenged politicians to the front of their lines is inexcusalbe. It clearly proves me right. That there is little difference between the two parties when it comes to party versus principle. Each is only interested in itself, and less interested in the people. I never knew this about Hastings till I read the Herald article. Then I googled his name, and was surprised. How do people elect these clowns to being with?
  9. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,795
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +290 / 4 / -2

    My brother argues this with me all the time. That the GOP is held to a higher ethical standard than the Dems. In a sense, you and he are right. Dems seem to tolerate more from within their party. However, the scale of corruption that has been exposed inside the GOP recently, leads me, and most, to feel that the GOP has a larger problem than that of the Dem party. It is funny how the Dems never kick out their fellows who misbehave.
  10. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,795
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +290 / 4 / -2

    The fact remains though that the GOP pols, be it forced or not, left office, while the Dem pols haven't. Clear as day. Furthermore, your "checks and balances" are going to be run by corrupt, convicted, and impeached politicians. How anyone could defend that is beyond me.




    What utter BS. Sure, kicking alchoholism, and getting impeached as a judge for collecting cash via corruption are exactly the same. What nonsense. Frauders is at it again. Typical party stooge defending the indefensible because there is a (D) involved. Again, most of you need to wake up and see the light. Party over principle is assinine. Frauders is example #1 of that. Here, the Dem pol is clearly a corrupt looser, just as the GOP pols who were run out of town were. Frauder correctly criticized the Repub boys, but defends and supports the Dem ones. FRAUDERS!
  11. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,059
    Likes Received:
    124
    Ratings:
    +328 / 1 / -9

    Republican Crook -Bad Guy
    Democrat Crook -Good Guy

    I bet Aunt Nancy has a few more of these "Democrat Crooks" she will be pulling out of her bonnett.

    The whole world now knows what Auntie Pelosi's teeth look like.

    America, you wanted them, well you got em.

    I wonder if George Clooney and the Pelosi Gang will lead us into another war with Sudan, if they do it will be a Democrat War and the NY Times will call it "The Good War" :singing:

    Dafur Humans are better than Iraqi Humans.
  12. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,727
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +160 / 4 / -4

    So, you don't believe that criminals can be reformed, but you do think that alcoholism, even DUI, is not serious? That's awfully convenient of you. Let's remember that Hastings was acquitted by a jury, but impeached by the House Democrats! Hastings actually went to court and sued the Democrats to rescind the impeachment, but ultimately lost. (See that, Real World, these situations are always more complicated than the simplistic reasoning of a Republihack .) That said, we have no right to punish people a second time just because we may not have gotten in right the first time around.
  13. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,795
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +290 / 4 / -2


    you need to research the Hastings incident a little more thoroughly. The guy was a crook & you know it.

    The difference between having a drink, or too many, and accepting bribes as a judge and pissing on the very office you swore to upheld, is infinite. Quiting alchoholism is like beating obesity, or smoking. Ones alchoholism does not affect the legal system, government policy, or piss on the constitution. A judge accepting dirty money and pissing on the law affects everyone. Now, if someone had been arrested for robbing a bank, or mudering someone, you might have a point. In this case, you're a far off as can be.

    You are a liberal loon, and a party stooge. I'm sure that you would give John Abramoff a fair shake if he ran for office right? HA! Fraud. Corruption and criminal activity has no place in our government. If you wanted to hire Hastings to run your own company that is your right, I'm sure you wouldn't though. See, I'm a realist. If a sex offender went to jail, did his time, and was looking for a job in a day care center, I'm not hiring him. Anyone who would, citing he'd served his pentence, would need a pshycological evalutation.

    Hmm....when was the last time you had a doctors visit Frauders? Might be time for a check up.
  14. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,727
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +160 / 4 / -4

    I don't know it. Obviously, there was something suspicious, but the fact is a jury didn't convict him because there was only one witness, and that person refused to testify. The fact that the Dems impeached him reveals there was some extremely serious impropriety. But, he got his punishments and that's that. Isn't that the way our system works? Aren't we supposed to try to rehabilitate people?

    At the same time, there's ample evidence that alcohol does permanent mental damage and, in fact, some experts say Bush's speaking impediment could be alcohol related. Perhaps he did some real damage affecting his judgement. But, my main point, is a legitimate question? Can someone who broke the law ever be truly forgiven? Can someone be rehabilitated? Obviously, there are some crimes beyond hope: psychopathic murderers, child abuse, and so on, but crimes like taking bribes and DUI should be treatable.

    Once Abramoff serves his sentence, he should be free to do as he please. If his sentence is inadequate, that's another issue altogether. As far a sex offenders go, as I said above, it's a different sort of issue. There appears to be evidence that sex offenders often cannot be cured. (That said, our goal should be to find a cure.)

    Don't be childish. The issue here is penance and rehabilitation. Shouldn't we try to forgive?
  15. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,795
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +290 / 4 / -2

    Sure, rehabilitate them, but don't put corrupt judges into political office. You are out of your mind. Of course, there is a (D) involved, so we know why you would have such an opinion.



    Oh, so wait, maybe we shouldn't put anyone in office that has a drink? Furthermore, the brain is the one part of the body that heals itself in ways that we can't understand completely. Technically, it could be that his 20 years of sobriety have returned his damaged cells back to normal, or possibly, stronger than ever. Which would be the opposite of those in office who still drink. Maybe we should ban politicians from drinking altogether? Do you drink? In reading your posts, I'd say you swim in alchohol. Anyhow, I have no idea what I am trying to say here, because I'm too busy laughing att your logic, and figured I'd ramble on a bit. Maybe it was the scotch I drank last night.

    So, now, you are questioning whether or not someone who broke the law can ever truly be forgiven. Hmmm....isn't that the polar opposite of your defense of Hastings? Afterall, for Hastings you said he was free and clear since he was "rehabilitated". Hypocracy? Nah, of course not, GW is an (R), Hastings a (D), we know the rules.

    Anyhow, have you ever driven about the speed limit Frauders? Have you ever had a drink in public? Pissed in an alley when you couldn't hold it? (I will get to this one below) Hmmm...if so, did you know you broke the law!

    Your Abramoff reply = HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! I hope the guy gets out of jail and wins a political seat in Texas or something. That way I can watch you eat crow.

    As for sex offenders, this is an interesting position Frauders. So, it does depend upon the crime committed, or it doesn't? Hmmm....Seems sTudds was a sex offender, you defended him right? Oh, I almost forget, he had a (D) somewhere.

    A cure? I've got one, would only take seconds too.

    [​IMG]

    :singing:




    Sure, forgive whomever you want to, just never forget it. When a judge accepts bribes to determine how he rules a case, he should never be permitted into any form of government. EVER! He should be allowed to live his life, you could hire him if you like, but he should never serve the public again. Sorry but REALITY is what it is. I have a friend who stole stuff from his work when he was employed by a state agency. The state will never hire him again. He will never get another state job. That is fact. Want to know what? That's how it should be.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>