She's not even sleeping with the enemy. Actually, I guess from an election integrity standpoint, she IS sleeping with the enemy!!

She is sleeping with the government (the FBI - Fucking Bumbling Idiots) and in exchange, she gets off scott free for committing the very crimes the Repugs CLAIM to abhorr (or is that ab whore?).

This piece of shit's bony little ass should be sent up the river for the maximum time allowed by law. But until the Dems get some balls, she will show them who wears the pants in this two-party system.

SHIT!!!

I told you guys last year that this was going nowhere. The woman accidentally voted two blocks away from her house! This hardly qualifies putting her in jail.

A rational prosecutor could have looked at this case and dismissed it in a day. But your liberal friends over at the Bluffington Post are REALLY pissed off so it makes it all worth it.

Why couldn't liberals just come out and say "I hate Ann Coulter and I want her to get busted for something." LOL. This was so transparent and Anderson talking about investigations onto people is a major pot calling out a tiny kettle.

In the end, Coulter got attention and liberals got what they deserved. Kind of like what they got on Fitzmas Day - NOTHING!

Doesn't Florida have laws, like other states do, prohibiting the release of the voter registration records and driver's license records of stalker victims and other individuals who are afraid for their lives? If so, you'd think Ann Coulter, who now claims she is a stalking victim, would have taken advantage of that law. Anyone know whether Coulter had an out like that available under Florida law?

Liberalsstrikeagain:
What absolutely qualifies as a felony is the fact that she LIED about her address on her VOTER REGISTRATION APPLICATION and DRIVER'S LICENSE!

And please...Ann Coulter has built her reputation on being deliberative and calculating...nothing she does is accidental.

''there was insufficient probable cause to determine that Ann Coulter willfully or deliberately'' violated any laws. The case was closed on April 12. The development was first reported by The Palm Beach Post.

If she wrote a wrong address down to proptect her privacy, KNOWING that it was still PALM BEACH, that does not PROVE that she willfully broke the law. Willfully breaking the law requires intent. Since you seem to be so informed of laws and how cases are built, perhaps you can explain to us all what Coulter had to gain from this situation. Did she get to vote twice? Did a certain official get elected as a result? WHAT WAS HER INTENT?

"The poll worker said Coulter ''may have misunderstood him'' that she simply needed to change the address in voter registration records, and not vote in the wrong precinct."

What's the evidence at the end of the day? Before liberals go around using monikers like "criminal" or felonious", they really need to build their case to explain a.) what was done wrong? b.) what their proof is. and c.) what was the intent of the wrongdoing?

There was none; thus explaining the first paragraph of this post. This is no threat to society or democracy.

Reference:
Miami Herald (5/11/2007)

coulter is a treat to the human Race . . .

Seriously, this explains why she's been laying low lately. I've been wondering why she hasn't been on the trail shooting her big, hate-filled mouth off lately. She and her boyfriend have been busy "fixing" her voter fraud case, and having articles put up with fake headlines absolving her.

Brad, I obtained an original copy of the article with the byline...it said, "by Ann Coulter".

People must come to understand that AP stands for "America's Pravda."

"Seriously, this explains why she's been laying low lately."

Yeah, just about a month ago she used a word to describe John Edwards. Liberals and the press didn't make a peep about it. Other than that, showing up with JJ from "Good Times" seems to be the only thing that she's had going on.

BigDan, there was never a case here. Talk to a real lawyer and don't depend on people like Arthur Anderson.

Liberalsstrikeagain:

Privacy, my ass!

The way I read Florida's law below, all Ann Coulter had to do, IF she were an actual stalking victim, was to send a written request to the State Driver's License Division and Palm Beach County Registrar of Voters asking that her home address and other identifying info in those records be exempt from public access.

Of course, the law also states that along with her written request, she "must include official verification that an applicable crime has occurred," which, as a stalking victim, she of course would have right?

Florida Public Records Law

1119.071 General exemptions from inspection or copying of public records.--
(2) AGENCY INVESTIGATIONS.--

(j)1. Any document that reveals the identity, home or employment telephone number, home or employment address, or personal assets of the victim of a crime and identifies that person as the victim of a crime, which document is received by any agency that regularly receives information from or concerning the victims of crime, is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. Any information not otherwise held confidential or exempt from s. 119.07(1) which reveals the home or employment telephone number, home or employment address, or personal assets of a person who has been the victim of sexual battery, aggravated child abuse, aggravated stalking, harassment, aggravated battery, or domestic violence is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution, upon written request by the victim, which must include official verification that an applicable crime has occurred. Such information shall cease to be exempt 5 years after the receipt of the written request. Any state or federal agency that is authorized to have access to such documents by any provision of law shall be granted such access in the furtherance of such agency's statutory duties, notwithstanding this section.

http://www.leg.state.fl....mp;URL=Ch0119/ch0119.htm

JStraight:

Okay, here is how it works: The Florida Election Law reads the following regarding Coulter's specific case:

"(1) A person who willfully swears or affirms falsely to any oath or affirmation, or willfully procures another person to swear or affirm falsely to an oath or affirmation, in connection with or arising out of voting or elections commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084."

What that means is that she would have had to sign a phony registration card with the intent of voting in a separate precinct. Proving intent of willful criminal activity involves finding out "probable cause." What was the probably cause here? Wanting to test the power of her celebrity by seeing if she could get away with voting 2 blocks away from her actual residence?

What was her intent? What is the probable cause to indict her on?

And as a serious attorney, would you really bring your would-be argument before a judge at the expense of being laughed out of the courtroom and getting sacked for wasting the taxpayers' money?

She's Ann Coulter, not Paris Hilton.

Brad--A Suggestion:
Have you considered routing some of your better, deeper stories to Greg Mitchell at Editor & Publisher?

E&P is a newspaper trade paper and MItchell is a columnist who is quite outspoken on several issues in the dead-tree media as well as politics in general.

I would encourage you to get to know him if you don't already. The Coulter/AP thing sounds like something he would be interested in.

#12

Did you go to Regent University "law school"? Your legal analysis sounds like torture Gonzology 101.

Such analysis and "I can't recall remembering" excuse mentality & testimony is very funny to me. The law according to Goodling two shoes:

However, it could be a watershed moment for another reason. Because of the recent oversight given to the Executive Branch, we now know that the Justice Department has circumvented the legal process and issued tens of thousands of "national security letters." These documents allow DOJ/FBI to forego getting a Judge's approval for a subpoena. In other words, it allows bureaucrats to violate the Constitutional rights with no Judicial oversight. It is also done in secret.

(Link, emphasis added). They even think it is ok to spy on Americans without a search warrant.

They have turned the search warrant law into a variation of "Mother May I". I expect that Judge Roy L. Bean will be nominated next for the Supreme Court, and Coulter will be head of the FEC.

Also, how do we know that this FBI agent was really her boyfriend or ex-boyfriend? Why would this even be mentioned? Don't investigate the FBI helping Ann Coulter, BECAUSE THE AGENT WAS HER BOYFRIEND???

LiberalStrikesAgain says, "She's Ann Coulter, not Paris Hilton. " I laughed so hard at that statement, blood started coming out of my nose! Thanks for the laugh!!! Yes, Ann Coulter is NOT Paris Hilton: Paris Hilton did NOT commit "voter fraud"!

LSA is saying, as usual for shills, "Move along...nothing to see here...no laws broken..."

Dear liberalsstrikeagain,

I would have to disagree with your satutory interpretation of the Florida voting statute. That statute does not require intent to vote in the wrong precinct. It requires the accused knowingly, that is, with volition, gave the false information in connection with voting. The registration process is connected to voting.

Further, Ms. Coulter allegedly gave the same false address on her driver's license. Providing false information on a state-issued i.d. card is usually in and of itself a criminal act.

Finally, as I pointed out yesterday, if Ms. Coulter were concerned with a stalker, it would make no sense for her to have put her own name on the deed that gave a legal description of the location of her residence, and give that same address to send the tax bill. Property records are not only public, but widely available; anyone with access to DataQuick could find the property information anywhere in the world.

As I thought about it yesterday, it would seem to me that Congress could investigate this matter. At a minimum, I would think that Chairman Waxman's Government Oversight Committee could look into the policies and procedures of the FBI that allowed, acquiesced, or failed to address Mr. Fitzgerald's actions. I am struck by the irony; in a Justice Department that was obsessed with voter fraud, how is it that a Justice Department official acted to stop such an investigation by another agency?

Greggp #18

Well said.

I think the infusion of many graduates of Pat "We Should Assassinate" Robertson's law school into the Department of Justice Just Us will lead to the type of legal opinion that then led to torture, warrantless search and seizure, spying on US citizens, US Attorney hirings and firings based on partisan political loyalties, and favoritism of the Ms Coulter sort.

Fundies are noted for "Us v Them", "We are the only true christians", and other attitude anomalies. There is a very sound reason for keeping religion and the state seperate.

So if it were not an innocent accident, what was her intent?

The Paris Hilton comparison was to illustrate this nonsense about Coulter's alleged celebrity status getting her out of trouble.

Here in my hometown, my voting registration still shows an address that I lived at 5 years ago. Even though I may vote in a wrong precinct, my vote is only being counted once and I'm still voting for the same candidates.

Coulter voted for the same candididates one time. She stood to get nothing out of intentionally breaking the law. In this whole case, not one person could come up with a reasonable intent of why this was such an immoral action.

BigDan your comment made me laugh even harder - "Paris Hilton did not commit voter fraud." No, she only drove intoxicated, got caught, had her license suspended, drove intoxicated again, was caught twice without her license and warned and put lives at risk by being a egotistical airhead. (I bet she votes for Hillary Clinton.)

I was saying "move on" a year ago at this nonsense. I'm just having fun watching liberals having a hissy fit over this. Much like the day they had their hissy fit over Patrick Fitzgerald's announcement of his indictments.

I'm a Republican and it's fun.

Serious question though. Who do you think truly makes Ann Coulter a celebrity? Conservatives or liberals?

Brad

"AP FAILS AGAIN"

I found an article that analyzes this all to often behavior of the AP you have focused on. That mentality, however, is everywhere newsy:

The standard political reporter's trope through the 1980s and 1990s was the failures and/or ineptitude of the Democratic Party, its fracturing, shrinking base, its lack of talented politicians (with the exception of the personally flawed Bill Clinton). At the time, this made a lot of sense. Tom Edsall wrote an excellent book about this in the 1980s. Klein had an insightful take on Clintonian politics and policy. The standard view of the Republican Party, meanwhile, was that it was vicious, but competent - and for demographic reasons, probably the future.

This basic outlook was both echoed and amplified by the emergent conservative media - Fox News, Limbaugh, Drudge - whose principal purpose wasn't dispassionate analysis, but to harsh on the Democrats and build up the Republicans.

As a result, the media has been endlessly rerunning the 1988 presidential race in its head - and ours.

(Huff po, emphasis added). Posters here from time to time over the years have reflected that state of mind too.

AP wake up, it is time to be about NEWS not about OLDS.

GREGGP,

In most cases, intent or probable cause has to be proven to influence proper punishment. I'm telling you, if you took this before a judge, you'd be laughed out of the courtroom.

Just a year ago, the same people who wanted Ann Coulter to go to jail for 3 years wanted Arnold to pardon Tookie Williams - a convicted murderer who slaughtered a convenient store worker and walked away with his friends giggling about the noises the victim was making as he choked on his own blood.

We have liberal judges giving convicted child molesters 3 months probation as proper punishment.

We had liberal judges on the Warren and Berger courts in the 60's and 70's easing up on executions of people who murder and rape.

But because Ann Coulter voted only once 2 blocks from her house, throw her in jail for three years!

Am I just partisian to think that anyone who advocates such nonsense is crazy?

#20

You should listen to the professor at post #18.

It is the sign of a neophyte to confuse intent with mens rea during a strained statutory construction.

Actually, it is also a sign of a current bushie member of the Department of Justice Just Us.

The statement "intent follows the bullet" grabs the essence. The law says we intend all the natural consequences of our behavior.

So if we shoot at a rock, the bullet ricochets, and hits a person, the law says we intended to shoot that person.

The violation is not, of course, murder. But if could be (depending on applicable state law) one of the degrees of manslaughter (involuntary or negligent manslaughter for example). And it could be civil or criminal assault and battery.

Coulter intended all the natural consequences of her perjury or falsehood.

Rove and other officials of the White What House and Department of Justice Just Us have been operating under the false assumption that they do not have to testify under oath or affirmation before congress upon subpoena.

Monica Goodling graduated from Pat Robertson's law school, and has been ordered by a federal court to appear and testify before the judiciary committee, her refusal to do so notwithstanding:

... it is ... ORDERED ... that Monica Goodling may not refuse to testify ...

(Court Order). Now this is fun #20.

No Dredd she did not intend natural consequences. Nobody has proved that she knowingly intended to break the law and she derived nothing out of voting in a different precinct.

At best, perhaps she should have lost a right to vote for a year, in my opinion. But to have to massively investigated, hauled into a courtroom at taxpayers' expense is just hideous.

Throw all of it aside and tell me with all of the other things I mentioned in post 22, what do you think should have happened to her?

OT- Hummmm... funny how haloscan goes down when very important news is being commented on. . . . . isn't that a coincidence . . .

I wonder who haloscan is in bed with ? the gop.
Is this greatest oil heist in the history of the world or what . . .
A troop in every tank . . .

I've been following this thread on Ms. Coulter for quite some time. I must take offense that LSA would infer that Ms. Coulter is a stupid, ignorant, uninformed bitch. As I'm sure you know, Ms. Coulter remains an active bar member and in the past has written many briefs concerning civil rights and voter issues. To suggest that she 'had a blond moment' impinges on her integrity of the lady.
As towards your previous alludations of voter registration accumen, I can only surmise but a few things. Either you haven't cast a vote in the last 5 years or you have just publically admitted to voter fraud.(com#20) Of course there may be a third option motivating your posts. At any rate, good call on identifing yourself as a 'fun kinda guy'.

"LiberalsStrikeAgain" stuck his head in the sand and said:

What's the evidence at the end of the day? Before liberals go around using monikers like "criminal" or felonious", they really need to build their case to explain a.) what was done wrong? b.) what their proof is. and c.) what was the intent of the wrongdoing?

Apparently, you haven't read anything about what the Bush DoJ has been prosecuting in terms of "voter fraud" allegations. Including a woman on probation for writing a bad check, who had never served jail time, who registered to vote not knowing she couldn't, but who was then charged with "voter fraud" and sent to jail for it.

Or the Pakistani man, in this country for 10 years, married to an American woman, with an American daughter who was told by a BMV official to fill out a registration form accidentally, which he did, and never voted, but was subsequently deported to Pakistan because of it, separated from his wife and child and a stranger in his own land.

Get a clue. Go read something. Like this recent NY Times report on it:
"In 5-Year Effort, Scant Evidence of Voter Fraud"

Of course, those two examples from that story were minorities, not seen as likely to vote Republican (if they had bothered to actually vote), so they come under the Rule of Law, unlike Ann Coulter who does not.

"LIberalsStrikeAgain" further apologized for the criminal Ann Coulter by saying:

BigDan, there was never a case here. Talk to a real lawyer and don't depend on people like Arthur Anderson.

Guess you didn't read the previous article, with the quote from the Law Professor or the original Town of Palm Beach County Police Report on the Coulter crimes.

Or if you did, you thought it was better to lie and protect criminals because you like their politics.

Last bit of nonsense, from the armchair attorney LSA, who believes he knows more about law than the actual law professor, GreggP.

He said:

In this whole case, not one person could come up with a reasonable intent of why this was such an immoral action.

First, the question was not whether it was an immoral act, the question is whether it was an illegal act. Which is was. To both the letter and the spirit of the law, as your cite of the law points out (thanks for that).

As to whether knowingly lying (which she did, repeatedly) and knowingly signing an oath attesting to fraud (which she did) is an immoral act, I'll leave to others to decide. Obviously, it depends on whether they are Democratic (see Bill Clinton) or Republican (see Coulter, Limbaugh, Ney, DeLay, Feeney et al), but my coverage of Coulter's knowing voter fraud was never about the morality of it. It was about the criminality of it. Which is quite clear.

No matter how many times you try to suggest that Republicans should be held to a different standard than Democrats.

(Have you read that NY Times article I linked to yet?)

GTASH - Am in close touch with Greg Mitchell and others at E&P. They frequently site The BRAD BLOG in their reports, and several times, in fact on the Coulter matters.

While Rome America Burns Have some fun . . .

Speaker On !

We cut right through the BULLSHIT here...at Brad Blog... This isn't Limboob.com , goddammit! We're not stupid!!!!!!!!!!

I love when these guys think you have to be an expert to comment.

"I'm a lawyer, and blah blah blah..."

or

"I know a lawyer, and..."

or

"It's OK that she broke the law, because..."

Bullshit is bullshit, and the law is the law, and you don't have to be an attorney or posess a law degree..etc..., to comment on whether a law is broken or not. Facts are facts. Spin is spin, and you're engaging in spin! And we're all sick of it!!!

Here's a good one, more Ann Coulter wanna-be GOP voter fraud: (What's THESE Ann Coulter wanna-be's excuses...stalkers? Or will it be a NEW excuse. Let's all have fun, thinking of excuses for Republican voter fraud!)

http://www.rawstory.com/...-in-question-at-rep.html

CBS leaves the story short of how big it really is, according to this link. Maybe whoever put the article that Ann Coulter was cleared of voter fraud, works for CBS!

Liberal Strikes Back: Care to offer some excuses for these guys, too?

Liberal Strikes Back: "Hemmenna hummenna hemmenna....."

DAMN! How much Republican voter fraud is going on???

Speaking of Pat "We Should Assassinate" Robertson's law school. Miller talks about this and it is much more involved than we think...very scary in fact.

Laughing In The Dark

http://markcrispinmiller...05/laughing-in-dark.html

(entering code twice again!)

When will Anne Coulter apologize for saying that Barack Obama leading in the polls helps al Qaeda?

#40 obamamania - When hell freezes over . . . . . Don't hold ya breath waiting. . .

Hmm.

So all this FBI boyfriend stuff traveling around the net started HERE ?!?!?!

Brad, is there ANY other sources?

This reeks like the Curtis dog killing you breathlessly reported as fact because Clint said so.

You do yourself no favors and make bloggers in general look bad when you publish this crap BEFORE you verify it.

You validate the worthless MSM when you cut such important corners trying to be first on the scoop. Like Leopold your days as a credible source are numbered.

Even if it is Coulter's Boyfriend your unethical reporting of hearsay as fact with catch up to you.

Peace

{Ed Note: Sourcing for Coulter's "FBI boyfriend" is appropriately disclosed in the story itself. The "Curtis dog killing" story that the commenter mentions, was verified and confirmed by several sources, including the police report on the incident, when it was reported. That, despite the commenter's obvious, yet dubious attempts to try and invalidate my accurate reporting on both matters. --- BF}

#25

I watched the US Attorneys, who Rove fired, speak about the scandal at a Seattle law school. They pull no punches and explain why what was done was illegal, unethical, and criminal. And they think weird Al G. is lying, misrepresenting, or incompetent, depending on the subject.

Meanwhile, in the cases I am aware of, it is republicans who are going to jail and being indicted for Coulter fraud:

The CBS News Investigative Unit has learned a man who was a field coordinator in Congressman Patrick McHenry's (R-NC) 2004 campaign has been indicted for voter fraud in North Carolina.

The indictment charges that Michael Aaron Lay, 26, illegally cast his ballot in two 2004 Congressional primary run-offs in which McHenry was a candidate. The charges indicate that Lay voted in a district where it was not legal for him to vote.

At the time Lay was listed as a resident in a home owned by 32-year-old McHenry but campaign records indicate Lay's paychecks were sent to an address in Tennessee. McHenry won the primary by only 86 votes. According to Gaston County, North Carolina District Attorney Locke Bell, Lay was indicted on Monday, May 7 by a local grand jury.

(CBS News, emphasis added). The big difference between this guy and Coulter is that the guy did not have an insider at the FBI to "fix" it as Coulter has.

"I Said" says,

"...your unethical reporting of hearsay as fact with catch up to you..."

I think you have this site mixed up with FOX News...Brad is not affiliated with FOX News...just wundrin' if you knew that...........

...continue following the stories that Obama went to a terrorist school and Mark Foley is a Democrat and..................

I was unable to respond yesterday afternoon. I saved a draft, and some of what appears below may have been addressed by others.

First, I would point out that liberalsstrikeagain cited only one portion of the statute. The rest of the statute states:

"A person who willfully submits any false voter registration information commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083." F.S.A. 104.011(2).

Under this portion of the statute, the giving of the false information would be the actus reus and the willful giving of the information would constitute the mens rea. Motive, in that it is an investigative tool, has little or no relevance to criminal liability. Why a defendant did what she did might factor into the sentence, but not the liability.

Criminal law professors are fond of saying "intent follows the bullet." If you were to shoot a gun at a moving passenger train, and your bullet hit and killed someone inside, it would avail you nothing to claim you didn't intend to kill anyone.

The Florida Supreme Court has said as much:

"The statute denounces willful and corrupt false swearing or affirming when interrogated as to one's qualifications as an elector."

Leavine v. State, 133 So. 870, 872 (Fla.1931).

That's pretty much the word on the intent element; there have been very few reported cases concerning this statute since the passing of the Voting Rights Act in 1965 (I'll leave it to others to speculate as to why that's so).

Second, I think liberalsstrikeagain has confused not only motive and intent, but also probable cause and, I guess, burden of persuasion (often called generally burden of proof). Probable cause is the standard for issuing a search or arrest warrant; a complaining witness must demonstrate that it is more likely than not that a particular crime has been committed, and the accused committed it. The burden of persuasion in a criminal case is beyond a reasonable doubt.

As to probable cause, while I would not presume to think that I can evaluate the evidence from where I sit, in my experience, criminal defendants are routinely bound over for trial on much less than the documentary record in this case. I believe a grand jury would be able to indict on the evidence we know about.

I agree with liberalsstrikeagain that conviction may be difficult to obtain. A defendant who has the resources to put up an aggressive defense has a better chance of establishing reasonable doubt.

I express no opinion as to what penalty the defendant ought to face should she be convicted. That decision is a matter of discretion for the trial court.

Nevertheless, I will engage in a little idle speculation as to what motive Ms. Coulter might have besides voting itself.

Jurors shall be taken from the male and female persons at least 18 years of age who are citizens of the United States and legal residents of this state and their respective counties and who possess a driver's license or identification card issued by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles pursuant to chapter 322 or who have executed the affidavit prescribed in s. 40.011.

F.S.A. § 40.01.

This statute applies to both petit juries and grand juries.

Part of the accusation against Ms. Coulter is that she supplied a false address on her driver's license application. What does this say about her fitness to serve on a grand jury? How interesting would it have been if Ann Coulter had been on the grand jury that considered the indictment of Rush Limbaugh?

Here in Florida, IT IS A BIG DEAL! When voters all over the state are losing their right to vote because of technical snafus ,similar names (like Jose Garcia and Juan Garcia)being purged and letters being returned resulting in voter registrations being revoked, people being fined for registering voters and turning in the forms "late" (read: League of Women Voters) and coincidentally seeming to target ethnic names and "colorful" districts/neighborhoods, how did Coulter's voter registration slip past these safeguards to "voter fraud"? I thought "Choicepoint" was on top of all that fraud.

Liberalsstrikeagain:

Looks like you lost this one.

Guess you're just not a big enough fish like Coulter. Then you could win even if you lost. Kind of fun to see a troll taken out by a team of experts.

GWN #39

Nice link! Nobody lays it out there like Miller!

Smart, gutsy and a great communicator for these dark times.

#25

"Throw all of it aside and tell me with all of the other things I mentioned in post 22, what do you think should have happened to her?"

Once a poster convinces me that the poster's sole purpose is deceit (self deceit or otherwise), I directly participate in the matter on the thread no further.

Republicans: WRONG about Iraq

Republicans: WRONG about Bush

Republicans: WRONG about respect for the law

No surprise here at all. The AP is a reliable stenographer for the right-wing noise machine.

Dredd re:#43 - It seems that the story is even MORE bizarre than reported by CBS news:

Not Just One Voter In Question At Rep's Home

But I'm SURE Karl Rove is making a SPECIAL EFFORT to have these allegations of voter fraud thoroughly investigated.

/s

BTW, shouldn't someone send the "Coulter cleared" information to the attorney for Mr. Lay, and anyone else recently convicted of voter fraud?

I mean, don't we now have a legal precedent? We can even name it after her - the "Coulter defense", meaning "the law doesn't apply to me because I hate liberals."

Not that I want to see more criminals set free, but it looks like it's going to have to be challenged in the courts a few times before someone figures out that certain people are, indeed, being considered "above the law".

Black ops was back @ the house the other day . . . . . Please at least close the door behind ya black ops . . . . . some may rob me . . .

KBE #53

Yes indeed.

Karl has sent FBI dudes, US Attorneys, and others to defend Ann, Scooter, Lay, Ney, DeLay, Abramoff, Cunningham, Foley, Allen, and on and on, ad nauseum.

As we have noticed, he is in full "support the trolls" mode. He has sent many of them here as we have witnessed before.

Where the hell is Ricky when you need someone to rank on?

If we follow the money we will find what is at the heart of it all.

The billions in oil, cash, and treasure that has gone missing in Iraq finds its way back home to the RNC ... Thru casinos and other washeterias. And we run across those paths from time to time which causes the moderate republican to gulp and experience denial once again.

Ground hog day is waking up each morning to a new RNC scandal. I think Rove still thinks he can continue to pull it off because only 5% of the ops get fingered.

There are getting to be so many scandals, they are having a difficult time scheduling witnesses.

BTW, using an FBI agent to obstruct justice is called "obstruction of Justice".

The name of the wierd Al G. department is difficult for me. I don't know whether to call it the Department of Justice Just Us, or the Department of Obstruction of Justice.

Democracy NOW!
Monday, May 14th, 2007
Investigative Journalist Greg Palast Reports on the Firing of New Mexico Attorney David Iglesias

We turn to the latest in the US attorney firing scandal. Nearly half of the US attorneys slated for removal by the Bush administration last year were targeted for not doing enough to prosecute voter fraud. According to the Washington Post, of the twelve US attorneys known to have been dismissed or considered for removal last year, five were identified by presidential advisor Karl Rove or other administration officials as working in districts that were trouble spots for voter fraud: Kansas City, Milwaukee, New Mexico, Nevada and Washington state. Four of the five prosecutors in those districts were fired.
Perhaps the most well-known of these US attorneys is ousted New Mexico prosecutor David Iglesias. His case has been at the center of the political firestorm. Investigative journalist Greg Palast has been closely following this story. He files a report and joins us in our firehouse studio.

http://www.democracynow.....pl?sid=07/05/14/1426254

http://play.rbn.com/?url...roto=rtsp&start=9:17

Where is "Liberal Strikes Again"???

... Liberalsstrikeagain said on 5/12/2007 @ 9:26 am PT...

"So if it were not an innocent accident, what was her intent?"

1. When was the last time you forgot where you live? COME ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2. That is exactly why there SHOULD be an investigation...NO ONE "accidentally" forgets where they live...I've never seen it before, unless there was some funny business going on, like Rick Santorum saying he lived in Pennsylvania!!!!!!!!! I'll bet he doesn't say he lives in Pa., now that he lost the election!

Ann Coulter calls it "stalking" when someone "confronts her with the truth". This is the pattern of Rovian neoCons. "True conservatives and republicans" are waking up:

One of the most prominent conservative blogs has started a crusade against Republicans who it says continue to promote ethically questionable congressmen and ignore the will of their base.

"A group of men and women across this nation ... are tired of defending a party that continually puts into positions of power known perverts, louts, and corrupt common criminals," RedState.com editor Erick Erickson wrote in a post Monday outlining his "battle plan" against Republican leaders. "We must be willing to wage war upon them until they bend to common sense and decency."

(Raw Story, emphasis added). This is what I predicted (link upon request ) and requested of the republicans a long time ago in posts here.

What remains to be seen is whether or not the Conservatives vs neoCons war will wake up the moderate republicans, who thought they were in the decency party.

Some have used the word "unnerved" to describe the furor:

"Private conversations with Republicans throughout America reveal doom and gloom about a politically paralyzed presidency and party," he notes. "Almost two-thirds of Americans disapprove of Bush's job performance; that is Richard Nixon territory."

(Raw Story). Annie "Get Your Gun" Coulter is "doin a heckuva job" again.