• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Abramoff Prosecutor Resigns

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,603
Reaction score
26,254
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Noel L. Hillman, chief of the department's public integrity division, and the chief prosecutor in the Jack Abramoff case, has stepped down. The reason? President Bush just appointed him to be a judge. Bush says it is routine. Democrats are calling for a special prosecutor. This thread is going to be fun. Should we give kudos to Bush for creative methods of obstructing justice, or are the Democrats whining again? Me thinks it could be a little of both. The Dems are thinking right now "If only Clinton had that kind of power, Monica never would have become an issue."

Article is here.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Frankly, this is too coincidental. I posted this in a thread I started, but I'll add my post here too.

So this occurs at the same time that (1) we find out that Abramoff attended staff meetings at the White House and (2) we find out that there are about 6 pictures of Bush and Abramoff that Bush refuses to release after, of course, he said he didn't even know the man (who raised $100,000 for the Bush/Cheney campaign).

Let's not forget that Bush's top federal procurement official, David Safavian, was arrested at the White House (yes, where he was literally handcuffed and taken out of the White House) in conneciton with the Abramoff scandal.


The prosecutor, Noel Hillman, is chief of the department's Office of Public Integrity, and the move ends his involvement in an investigation that has reached into the administration as well as into the top ranks of the Republican leadership on Capitol Hill.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...NGCNGU1J01.DTL

Ahhh, the Culture of Corruption continues..........
 

tecoyah

Back
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
9,777
Reaction score
3,417
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I am in no way suprised.....disgusted yes...suprised no. You gotta admit though, these guys are wicked smart when it comes to this stuff...Kudos to the machine.
 

scottyz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
tecoyah said:
I am in no way suprised.....disgusted yes...suprised no. You gotta admit though, these guys are wicked smart when it comes to this stuff...Kudos to the machine.
I suppose they learned from Nixon that firing a prosecutor is bad juju
 

jfuh

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Messages
16,631
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Pacific Rim
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Republican lobbyist, helps GOP win majority in congress through corruption, then gets busted.
Bush Inc with scandle after scandle after scandle then "fires" the prosecutor so they don't get busted. I won't be surprised if they stick in an idiot prosecutor and a few files of the indicment go "missing".
What does surprise me is how Democrats in congress have an opportunity to call foul, yet do nothing except for screaming over something that is unlikly, that being the debate over Alito.

I call for an independent special prosecutor. Hell, the guy that investigated the CIA leak case Fitzgeral would be good.
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
jfuh said:
Republican lobbyist, helps GOP win majority in congress through corruption, then gets busted.
Bush Inc with scandle after scandle after scandle then "fires" the prosecutor so they don't get busted. I won't be surprised if they stick in an idiot prosecutor and a few files of the indicment go "missing".
What does surprise me is how Democrats in congress have an opportunity to call foul, yet do nothing except for screaming over something that is unlikly, that being the debate over Alito.

I call for an independent special prosecutor. Hell, the guy that investigated the CIA leak case Fitzgeral would be good.
He wasn't fired. Even the terribly biased truthout article says he stepped down. If Bush and Abramoff were friends, why would the president promote the very man trying to bring him down?
 

tecoyah

Back
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
9,777
Reaction score
3,417
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
KCConservative said:
He wasn't fired. Even the terribly biased truthout article says he stepped down. If Bush and Abramoff were friends, why would the president promote the very man trying to bring him down?
Think about it....by promoting this man out of the position, he creates a vacuum in the prosecution, and at the same time takes the man with the power to damage, and brings him "under the wing". I mean...come on....even someone fully indoctrinated into the Administration mindset can see how unethical this move is.
If you were in the situation, and new you were innocent...wouldnt it make sense to...oh...I dont know....wait till the man had finished his job...then promoted him to judge. There is only one obvious reason for the timing in this.....Only One.
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
tecoyah said:
Think about it....by promoting this man out of the position, he creates a vacuum in the prosecution, and at the same time takes the man with the power to damage, and brings him "under the wing". I mean...come on....even someone fully indoctrinated into the Administration mindset can see how unethical this move is.
If you were in the situation, and new you were innocent...wouldnt it make sense to...oh...I dont know....wait till the man had finished his job...then promoted him to judge. There is only one obvious reason for the timing in this.....Only One.
For this to assertion to have legs, you'd have to prove that his promotion signals that no one will take his place as prosecutor. Abramoff isn't off the hook by this. There's plenty of dirt surrounding this case. No need to create more where there isn't any. And your final sentence about "one obvious reason" is speculation only, pure opinion.
 

jfuh

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Messages
16,631
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Pacific Rim
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
KCConservative said:
He wasn't fired. Even the terribly biased truthout article says he stepped down. If Bush and Abramoff were friends, why would the president promote the very man trying to bring him down?
Did you not read my post at all? Or is your partisanship so hardcore that you simply replied after reading to the part of getting fired then start hollering back nonsense? I answered already the very question you have asked in this reply post. Go back and re-read my former statment.
 

libertarian_knight

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
KCConservative said:
He wasn't fired. Even the terribly biased truthout article says he stepped down. If Bush and Abramoff were friends, why would the president promote the very man trying to bring him down?
Because it's a promotion that stops the man trying to "bring him down" from bringing him down. See now the prosecutor has no authority over the case anymore. Furthermore, it wasn't really a "promotion" since he is not going to be working in the same Federal Department. Now the prosecutor is not longer part of the DOJ.

It's not like he was put in a position above his, it's lateral, sideways even. Also note, "fires" was used in "quotes."

Education in Grammar and Punctuation may help.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
libertarian_knight said:
Because it's a promotion that stops the man trying to "bring him down" from bringing him down. See now the prosecutor has no authority over the case anymore. Furthermore, it wasn't really a "promotion" since he is not going to be working in the same Federal Department. Now the prosecutor is not longer part of the DOJ.

It's not like he was put in a position above his, it's lateral, sideways even. Also note, "fires" was used in "quotes."

Education in Grammar and Punctuation may help.
And so since he was promoted, you're just thinking Aramoff is off the hook? There will be a prosecutor in this case.

I already explained this once. Reading comprehension may help.
 

libertarian_knight

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
KCConservative said:
And so since he was promoted, you're just thinking Aramoff is off the hook? There will be a prosecutor in this case.

I already explained this once. Reading comprehension may help.
Of course, no kidding it's going to go on, just like the war on terrorism would have gone on if Bush lost the presidency. But of course, you recognize that idfferent leadership, particularly someone central in the case, changes how the case is handled.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
KCConservative said:
And so since he was promoted, you're just thinking Aramoff is off the hook? There will be a prosecutor in this case.

I already explained this once. Reading comprehension may help.
The problem is that the man most intimately involved in the case has now been removed from it and it just so happens that right at the time there is discussion about Abramoff being in the White House. It sounds a little suspicious to me.
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
aps said:
The problem is that the man most intimately involved in the case has now been removed from it and it just so happens that right at the time there is discussion about Abramoff being in the White House. It sounds a little suspicious to me.
What doesn't sound suspicious to you? How about we get all upset about this if Abramoff gets off scott free or whatever you're suspicious abvout. Until then, let him have his day in court. What difference does it make which prosecutor hears the case?
 

jfuh

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Messages
16,631
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Pacific Rim
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
KCConservative said:
What doesn't sound suspicious to you? How about we get all upset about this if Abramoff gets off scott free or whatever you're suspicious abvout. Until then, let him have his day in court. What difference does it make which prosecutor hears the case?
Ever been in a court case? Ever seen a court case? When the most intimately involved prosecutor that knows everything with the case is taken out such as in a mob shooting, the case rarely ever proceeds to the very end or to the very top of the chain of associates.

I think it fair to say that everyone agrees that any politician tied to this guy should be thrown in jail and locked away, right? So let's call for an independent special prosecutor in this case. Again I nominate Fitzgerald.
 

Conflict

Banned
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
745
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
libertarian_knight said:
Of course, no kidding it's going to go on, just like the war on terrorism would have gone on if Bush lost the presidency. But of course, you recognize that idfferent leadership, particularly someone central in the case, changes how the case is handled.
There would be no war on terror hypothetically if Bush had not used nepotism to secure his role as our president, and then turn his back on his main source of financial support. When a corrupt deal go's bad... it goes real bad. It's unfortunate that the prosecutor didn't have the balls to stomach his iniative. There are too many like him in the DOJ. Perhaps one day someone will step up and decide that enough is enough. Until then the FBI and their cohorts are nothing but a conformative group of well-to-do yes men (and ditzy conservative Coulter fans).
 

Conflict

Banned
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
745
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
jfuh said:
Ever been in a court case? Ever seen a court case? When the most intimately involved prosecutor that knows everything with the case is taken out such as in a mob shooting, the case rarely ever proceeds to the very end or to the very top of the chain of associates.

I think it fair to say that everyone agrees that any politician tied to this guy should be thrown in jail and locked away, right? So let's call for an independent special prosecutor in this case. Again I nominate Fitzgerald.
Do you really believe that anything will come of Fitzgerald's inquisition. Do you really believe that any faith should be held within the jurisprudence fo the Federal Bureau of Investigations and/or the United Stated Department of Justice? Should we really believe that they are not binded by the strings of a puppet?

No Official in this country has shown the bravery and courage to simply use their mind to attempt to defeat that which is considered as corruption. They stand by, idly. Corruption runs so thick in this land... so dispicable... Do you really believe that anyone in the DOJ is sincerely doing their homework as far as this administration is concerned?

Golly I wish that were the case but it simply is not.
 

jfuh

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Messages
16,631
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Pacific Rim
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Conflict said:
Do you really believe that anything will come of Fitzgerald's inquisition. Do you really believe that any faith should be held within the jurisprudence fo the Federal Bureau of Investigations and/or the United Stated Department of Justice? Should we really believe that they are not binded by the strings of a puppet?

No Official in this country has shown the bravery and courage to simply use their mind to attempt to defeat that which is considered as corruption. They stand by, idly. Corruption runs so thick in this land... so dispicable... Do you really believe that anyone in the DOJ is sincerely doing their homework as far as this administration is concerned?

Golly I wish that were the case but it simply is not.
Very sadly, I must agree.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
KCConservative said:
What doesn't sound suspicious to you? How about we get all upset about this if Abramoff gets off scott free or whatever you're suspicious abvout. Until then, let him have his day in court. What difference does it make which prosecutor hears the case?
I just find it too coincidental that as questions arise regarding Bush's contacts with Abramoff, the lead prosecutor in the Abramoff scandal has been nominated BY BUSH for a federal judgeship. The issue isn't about what will happen to Abramoff--the issue is what kind of information is the prosecutor aware of regarding Abramoff's relationship with those in the White House.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/22/AR2005092202204.html

(Rove's personal assistant, Susan Ralston, used to be Abramoff's secretary.)
Bush removal ended Guam investigation
US attorney's demotion halted probe of lobbyist
By Walter F. Roche Jr., Los Angeles Times | August 8, 2005

WASHINGTON -- A US grand jury in Guam opened an investigation of controversial lobbyist Jack Abramoff more than two years ago, but President Bush removed the supervising federal prosecutor, and the probe ended soon after.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/w.../08/08/bush_removal_ended_guam_investigation/
 

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,603
Reaction score
26,254
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
libertarian_knight said:
Of course, no kidding it's going to go on, just like the war on terrorism would have gone on if Bush lost the presidency. But of course, you recognize that idfferent leadership, particularly someone central in the case, changes how the case is handled.
You are so right on that. The same thing happened before in Guam. Bush replaced the prosecutor, and the new prosecutor disbanded the grand jury. We will have to see what happens here.
 

libertarian_knight

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
KCConservative said:
What doesn't sound suspicious to you? How about we get all upset about this if Abramoff gets off scott free or whatever you're suspicious abvout. Until then, let him have his day in court. What difference does it make which prosecutor hears the case?

Amramoff pleaded guilty, he already had his day in court.... it's everyone else implicated by the scandal that is of concern now.
 

jfuh

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Messages
16,631
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Pacific Rim
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
libertarian_knight said:
Amramoff pleaded guilty, he already had his day in court.... it's everyone else implicated by the scandal that is of concern now.
Lol, why didn't I catch that?
Exactly the point.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
[Moderator Mode]

Moved to "Political Scandal Du Jour...belatedly...

[Moderator Mode]
 

libertarian_knight

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
jfuh said:
Lol, why didn't I catch that?
Exactly the point.

Don't worry, us libertarians will always be here to show democrats what they missed and got wrong. We show republicans too.

:lol: :rofl
 
Top Bottom