Blagojevich convicted on 1 of 24 counts

Jason P

I think the Blagojevich trial exemplifies why the government keeps suspected terrorist in Guantanamo Bay and out of the U.S. court system. Sad but true ...

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/08/blagojevich-convicted-on-1-of-24-counts.html

mrvedderson

I think the crazy man Blagojevich has been telling the truth. Otherwise he would have been convicted on a lot more. Orrrrrrr, the government needs to invest in some good lawyers who know how to prove someones guilt.

unsung

They are going to retry him and they are talking about being more aggressive by doing things such as getting Tony Rezko, Stuart Levine, and Obama to testify.

It was one lone person who held this up, everyone else was going to convict. That smells of dead fish and Chicago politics.

81

unsung wrote:

They are going to retry him and they are talking about being more aggressive by doing things such as getting Tony Rezko, Stuart Levine, and Obama to testify.

It was one lone person who held this up, everyone else was going to convict. That smells of dead fish and Chicago politics.

they said it was between one and five for non conviction on each count.

but yeah, talk about bs.

fuck

Jason P wrote:

I think the Blagojevich trial exemplifies why the government keeps suspected terrorist in Guantanamo Bay and out of the U.S. court system. Sad but true ...

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/08/blagojevich-convicted-on-1-of-24-counts.html

are you kidding? if Blagojevich was a Muslim suspected of terrorism, he'd have been convicted on every single charge. A trial would have hardly been necessary.

Jason P

_outlaw wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I think the Blagojevich trial exemplifies why the government keeps suspected terrorist in Guantanamo Bay and out of the U.S. court system. Sad but true ...

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/08/blagojevich-convicted-on-1-of-24-counts.html

are you kidding? if Blagojevich was a Muslim suspected of terrorism, he'd have been convicted on every single charge. A trial would have hardly been necessary.

I don't think so. There would be way too much circumstantial evidence that could be exploited. An accomplished trial defense lawyer would have a field day going through military records All it would take is one juror to have doubts.

I think this is why the Obama administration has been waffling on this issue. They know that if a suspected terrorist is able to beat the system then the American public will be calling for Obama's resignation.

cajunkiwi

unsung wrote:

They are going to retry him and they are talking about being more aggressive by doing things such as getting Tony Rezko, Stuart Levine, and Obama to testify.

It was one lone person who held this up, everyone else was going to convict. That smells of dead fish and Chicago politics.

If you have dead fish sitting on a jury, that's your problem right there...

Cosmo

Can't they charge him for having the worst hair? I mean, he should go to prison because of that haircut... right?

fuck

Jason P wrote:

_outlaw wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I think the Blagojevich trial exemplifies why the government keeps suspected terrorist in Guantanamo Bay and out of the U.S. court system. Sad but true ...

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/08/blagojevich-convicted-on-1-of-24-counts.html

are you kidding? if Blagojevich was a Muslim suspected of terrorism, he'd have been convicted on every single charge. A trial would have hardly been necessary.

I don't think so. There would be way too much circumstantial evidence that could be exploited. An accomplished trial defense lawyer would have a field day going through military records All it would take is one juror to have doubts.

I think this is why the Obama administration has been waffling on this issue. They know that if a suspected terrorist is able to beat the system then the American public will be calling for Obama's resignation.

i'll forgive your ignorance because you obviously lack knowledge of the ongoing efforts by the FBI and Justice Dept (by ongoing I mean since 9 years ago especially) to use the patriot act and infiltrate muslim communities using government entrapment and agent provocateurs, which led to over 400 convictions of muslim "terrorists" in the US based on some of the most bullshit circumstantial evidence you'll ever find in a court case.

TriumphantAngel

Jason P wrote:

I think the Blagojevich trial exemplifies why the government keeps suspected terrorist in Guantanamo Bay and out of the U.S. court system. Sad but true ...

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/08/blagojevich-convicted-on-1-of-24-counts.html

i disagree.

whatever happened to using direct, conclusive evidence to get a conviction?

somebody has to be untouched by corruption. somebody has to love the truth. right?

unsung

Cosmo wrote:

Can't they charge him for having the worst hair? I mean, he should go to prison because of that haircut... right?

That or his voice, it makes me want to jam an ice-pick into my forehead.

gimmesometruth27

Cosmo wrote:

Can't they charge him for having the worst hair? I mean, he should go to prison because of that haircut... right?

the only thing the jurors could agree on is that blago needs to take an inch or two off of the top....

Jason P

_outlaw wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I don't think so. There would be way too much circumstantial evidence that could be exploited. An accomplished trial defense lawyer would have a field day going through military records All it would take is one juror to have doubts.

I think this is why the Obama administration has been waffling on this issue. They know that if a suspected terrorist is able to beat the system then the American public will be calling for Obama's resignation.

i'll forgive your ignorance because you obviously lack knowledge of the ongoing efforts by the FBI and Justice Dept (by ongoing I mean since 9 years ago especially) to use the patriot act and infiltrate muslim communities using government entrapment and agent provocateurs, which led to over 400 convictions of muslim "terrorists" in the US based on some of the most bullshit circumstantial evidence you'll ever find in a court case.

Forgive me, El Guapo. I know that I, Jefe, do not have your superior intellect and education. But could it be that once again, you are angry at something else, and are looking to take it out on me?

fuck

Jason P wrote:

_outlaw wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I don't think so. There would be way too much circumstantial evidence that could be exploited. An accomplished trial defense lawyer would have a field day going through military records All it would take is one juror to have doubts.

I think this is why the Obama administration has been waffling on this issue. They know that if a suspected terrorist is able to beat the system then the American public will be calling for Obama's resignation.

i'll forgive your ignorance because you obviously lack knowledge of the ongoing efforts by the FBI and Justice Dept (by ongoing I mean since 9 years ago especially) to use the patriot act and infiltrate muslim communities using government entrapment and agent provocateurs, which led to over 400 convictions of muslim "terrorists" in the US based on some of the most bullshit circumstantial evidence you'll ever find in a court case.

Forgive me, El Guapo. I know that I, Jefe, do not have your superior intellect and education. But could it be that once again, you are angry at something else, and are looking to take it out on me?

no, my post wasn't angry, I was responding to you. did i hurt your feelings because i used the word 'ignorance'? in any case, my point still stands.

Jason P

_outlaw wrote:

Jason P wrote:

Forgive me, El Guapo. I know that I, Jefe, do not have your superior intellect and education. But could it be that once again, you are angry at something else, and are looking to take it out on me?

no, my post wasn't angry, I was responding to you. did i hurt your feelings because i used the word 'ignorance'? in any case, my point still stands.

My feelings are OK. That quote just popped into my head when I read your response.

Anyway, if it will be a slam-dunk conviction for the government, why don't they proceed. And in regards to my ignorance on the 400 b.s. arrests, I can't really debate whether or not all 400 are b.s. without reviewing each case individually. Is it b.s. because the patriot act was used to collect evidence? Was entrapment used? Were all 400 cases involving model citizens that were all framed? What ratio of the cases involved 100% innocent parties?

I will approach this with an open mind. Just provide me with links to resources that address this issue as long as they are from respectable sources (i.e. no fox news, msnbc editorials, left/right wing blogs, etc.)

Commy

every single news group convicted this guy before he ever set foot in court, from Fox to MSNBC, to Jon Stewert to Glenn Beck.


what scares me is how pervasive his supposed guilt was on tv, at how organized the so called independent news outlets were. EVERYONE was against this guy, turns out he may have been innocent after all.

wonder what he did to piss everyone off?