Ted Stevens Pleads "Not Guilty"

[Knightskye]

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Stevens.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

If you haven't heard already, Ted Stevens (the guy who said the Internet was a "series of tubes") was indicted for not reporting over $250,000 in gifts that he received from a company named VECO, on Senate financial reports.

There's just one problem:


Two top VECO executives have pleaded guilty to bribing state lawmakers.

:D

Stevens' court date is set for September.

[cska80]

Only the Republicans make big news. If you're a Democrat, it's ok.

[RonPaulFever]

http://www.needlenose.com/i/gb/Tar&Feather.JPG

[Knightskye]

Only the Republicans make big news. If you're a Democrat, it's ok.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliot_Spitzer
http://www.google.com/news?sourceid=navclient-ff&rlz=1B3DVFC_enUS239US277&hl=en&ned=us&q=Eliot+Spitzer&btnG=Search

I'm sorry, would you like to try that again? :rolleyes:

[micahnelson]

Take them all down. Unleash the hounds. Find the coke, the pics, the transgendered prostitutes, the communist contributions, the kickbacks, the back scratches. Lets make prison overpopulation the sort of problem you want to have.

[Knightskye]

Take them all down. Unleash the hounds. Find the coke, the pics, the transgendered prostitutes, the communist contributions, the kickbacks, the back scratches. Lets make prison overpopulation the sort of problem you want to have.

433 + 100 = 533. I'm sure you could fit that in a small prison. They'd probably go to an equivalent of "Camp Cupcake" (that place Martha Stewart went for insider trading).

[micahnelson]

Hey, it aint just the elected ones- its the whole bureaucracy. We might even have to let some people caught with an ounce of weed go free to make room.

[cska80]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliot_Spitzer
http://www.google.com/news?sourceid=navclient-ff&rlz=1B3DVFC_enUS239US277&hl=en&ned=us&q=Eliot+Spitzer&btnG=Search

I'm sorry, would you like to try that again? :rolleyes:

There was a reason they, as in the establishment, went after Spitzer. He was persuing things they did not like.

[Knightskye]

There was a reason they, as in the establishment, went after Spitzer. He was persuing things they did not like.

No, no. Your beef was that Democrats didn't make big news - presumably when they're in the middle of a scandal. And I proved you wrong with a pretty recent example.


Only the Republicans make big news. If you're a Democrat, it's ok.

Or maybe you knew you were wrong, so now you're trying to change the subject?

[RonPaulFanInGA]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliot_Spitzer
http://www.google.com/news?sourceid=navclient-ff&rlz=1B3DVFC_enUS239US277&hl=en&ned=us&q=Eliot+Spitzer&btnG=Search

I'm sorry, would you like to try that again? :rolleyes:

Not comparable. The Spitzer case was not something that involved a federal politician and had a sex-angle that made the media want to cover it.

The Ted Stevens thing is all over the news. But strangely the media seems and has seemed pretty silent on the William "cold cash" Jefferson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_J._Jefferson#Corruption_investigation) (D-LA) case.

[GunnyFreedom]

http://www.needlenose.com/i/gb/Tar&Feather.JPG

Dude, are they waterboarding that guy?!?!?!

[Knightskye]

Dude, are they waterboarding that guy?!?!?!

Whatever they're pouring, it's going into his mouth, which doesn't have a cloth over it. Nor does his head.

[Knightskye]

Not comparable. The Spitzer case was not something that involved a federal politician and had a sex-angle that made the media want to cover it.

He said "if you're a Democrat, it's okay."

He didn't say anything about "federal politicians" (whatever that means), or sex.

But anyway. Bill Clinton's a Democrat. He made big news. He was a "federal politician" and his was something that involved a "sex angle". Satisfied?