Comments on: Mary’s Buggin’ http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/ It rankles me when somebody tries to tell somebody what to do. Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:36:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Bill from PA http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85978 Bill from PA Sun, 13 Apr 2008 12:24:32 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85978 These links send you to a local paper op-ed as well as letters to the editor on the case. It pretty much speaks to the predominant sentiment in Pittsburgh about this one. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08104/872531-149.stm http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08104/872530-35.stm These links send you to a local paper op-ed as well as letters to the editor on the case. It pretty much speaks to the predominant sentiment in Pittsburgh about this one.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08104/872531-149.stm
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08104/872530-35.stm

]]> By: deoxy http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85781 deoxy Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:56:09 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85781 "The politicization of the DOJ has been greatly accelerated in the last 8 years." It's been "greatly accelerated" longer than that - it started in the Clinton years, though as best I can tell, Bush has cheerfully continued the process. “The politicization of the DOJ has been greatly accelerated in the last 8 years.”

It’s been “greatly accelerated” longer than that - it started in the Clinton years, though as best I can tell, Bush has cheerfully continued the process.

]]> By: z http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85662 z Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:24:22 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85662 Obscenity cases are the new black: http://washingtondc.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel08/wfo040808.htm Obscenity cases are the new black:

http://washingtondc.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel08/wfo040808.htm

]]> By: Edmund Dantes http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85655 Edmund Dantes Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:52:39 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85655 The politicization of the DOJ has been greatly accelerated in the last 8 years. The DOJ doesn't function the same way it used to function. We now have an AG arguing it's possible for an administration to immunize itself from the rule of law simply by having an opinion (no matter how wrong or inane) written that says doing something is legal. It's a shame, but the reality is you put people in charge of government that argue government does not work, you will get government that does not work. If they make government work, they've destroyed their entire message. The politicization of the DOJ has been greatly accelerated in the last 8 years. The DOJ doesn’t function the same way it used to function. We now have an AG arguing it’s possible for an administration to immunize itself from the rule of law simply by having an opinion (no matter how wrong or inane) written that says doing something is legal.

It’s a shame, but the reality is you put people in charge of government that argue government does not work, you will get government that does not work.

If they make government work, they’ve destroyed their entire message.

]]> By: James http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85647 James Fri, 11 Apr 2008 10:58:04 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85647 The Pittsburgh Tribune Review ran an article this morning about how the FBI are harassing the former jury in the first Wecht trial. The article notes how many lawyers disagree with US Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan's assertion that the FBI contacts of the jury are routine. Additionally, please note that the prosecution has already decided to retry the case without polling the jury. There really is limited reason they should be contacting the jury now since the retrial decision was already made. Also, please understand the judge in the Wecht case improperly told the jury to refrain from talking about the case to anyone (even though they lawfully could). I'm sure having the FBI contact them would never intimidate a jury after the judge's statements to them. Here is the link to the article. It also notes that the majority of the jury felt the case was political. http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/cityregion/s_561792.html The Pittsburgh Tribune Review ran an article this morning about how the FBI are harassing the former jury in the first Wecht trial. The article notes how many lawyers disagree with US Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan’s assertion that the FBI contacts of the jury are routine.

Additionally, please note that the prosecution has already decided to retry the case without polling the jury. There really is limited reason they should be contacting the jury now since the retrial decision was already made.

Also, please understand the judge in the Wecht case improperly told the jury to refrain from talking about the case to anyone (even though they lawfully could). I’m sure having the FBI contact them would never intimidate a jury after the judge’s statements to them.

Here is the link to the article. It also notes that the majority of the jury felt the case was political.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/cityregion/s_561792.html

]]> By: James http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85645 James Fri, 11 Apr 2008 10:54:26 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85645 Oh, if I did not make it clear. Mary Beth Buchanan is part of the central office of the DOJ and has been for sometime now. She has held dual positions in the central DOJ office and the US Attorneyship in Western PA. Recently she had to give up her central DOJ responsibilities because congress threatened to put forth a bill preventing an acting US Attorney holding another position outside their district in Washington DC. The nerve of congress attempting to get US Attorneys to concentrate on fighting crime in their districts opposed to pushing their political ambitions in DC. Oh, if I did not make it clear. Mary Beth Buchanan is part of the central office of the DOJ and has been for sometime now. She has held dual positions in the central DOJ office and the US Attorneyship in Western PA. Recently she had to give up her central DOJ responsibilities because congress threatened to put forth a bill preventing an acting US Attorney holding another position outside their district in Washington DC. The nerve of congress attempting to get US Attorneys to concentrate on fighting crime in their districts opposed to pushing their political ambitions in DC.

]]> By: James http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85644 James Fri, 11 Apr 2008 10:50:47 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85644 CHSW, US Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan is known as a Bush zealot. Sorry to burst your bubble, but she is not independent. Since taking on her office, Mary Beth has been pushing the priorities of the Bush White House in order to curry favor. She has been appointed to the Director of the Executive Office of US Attorneys where she was implicated in being involved with the US Attorney firings. She also was appointed to the Director of the Violence against Women's Office or something like that. Hell, her initial appointment is known in Pittsburgh as being a result of her pulling strings in the Republican party. I'm sorry, but she is not independent and as I read more about other US Attorneys such as Rachel Paulose, it is clear that GW Bush and Co. put political hacks in these offices that would not act independently at all. CHSW,

US Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan is known as a Bush zealot. Sorry to burst your bubble, but she is not independent. Since taking on her office, Mary Beth has been pushing the priorities of the Bush White House in order to curry favor. She has been appointed to the Director of the Executive Office of US Attorneys where she was implicated in being involved with the US Attorney firings. She also was appointed to the Director of the Violence against Women’s Office or something like that.

Hell, her initial appointment is known in Pittsburgh as being a result of her pulling strings in the Republican party.

I’m sorry, but she is not independent and as I read more about other US Attorneys such as Rachel Paulose, it is clear that GW Bush and Co. put political hacks in these offices that would not act independently at all.

]]> By: chsw http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85544 chsw Thu, 10 Apr 2008 23:34:44 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85544 Radley, you are making an assumption that the US Attorneys march in lockstep with some central DOJ mandarin's marching orders. In fact, the best way to view a US Attorney is as a fairly independent petty baron with a small fiefdom. Some are good, some are bad and some are incompetent. The US Attorneys prosecuting Wecht and not prosecuting Hayne are two different petty barons who have made very bad decisions. chsw Radley, you are making an assumption that the US Attorneys march in lockstep with some central DOJ mandarin’s marching orders. In fact, the best way to view a US Attorney is as a fairly independent petty baron with a small fiefdom. Some are good, some are bad and some are incompetent. The US Attorneys prosecuting Wecht and not prosecuting Hayne are two different petty barons who have made very bad decisions.

chsw

]]> By: UCrawford http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85540 UCrawford Thu, 10 Apr 2008 22:22:09 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/2008/04/10/marys-buggin/#comment-85540 <blockquote>What I’m wondering is how the Department of Justice can see fit to spend two years and likely seven figures in taxpayer dollars to investigate a medical examiner for sending personal faxes on his publicly-owned machine, but thus far has seen no reason to look into Mississippi’s Dr. Steven Hayne.</blockquote> Because their boss is one of the slimiest little hacks ever to sit in the Oval Office. Seriously, you're surprised that a man who made his personal fortune off of eminent domain laws, land theft and tax hikes isn't above using the DOJ to persecute people who merely criticize him? http://www.pensitoreview.com/2005/11/08/more-on-bushs-eminent-domain-14-mil-windfall/

What I’m wondering is how the Department of Justice can see fit to spend two years and likely seven figures in taxpayer dollars to investigate a medical examiner for sending personal faxes on his publicly-owned machine, but thus far has seen no reason to look into Mississippi’s Dr. Steven Hayne.

Because their boss is one of the slimiest little hacks ever to sit in the Oval Office.

Seriously, you’re surprised that a man who made his personal fortune off of eminent domain laws, land theft and tax hikes isn’t above using the DOJ to persecute people who merely criticize him?

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2005/11/08/more-on-bushs-eminent-domain-14-mil-windfall/

]]>