I'm on Pam's list but confess, I haven't read her mail for weeks. The news was just too depressing for too long.

Why didn't they look into "home confinement" while they pursued an appeal? He'd be well more than half done:

He was asking for the same thing Stevens asked for and got. A dismissal of the conviction. Stevens trial was corrupt, although he was most likely guilty. The question is why was one dismissed and the other not?

This was a political witch hunt and should have been dismissed and even retried. But any conviction or even pardon based on that crooked process is a disgrace.

the earliest (if ever) but my opinions is its because of why is because of the potential political issues with issuing said pardon.
Sucks though.

from Alaska's trial. When a trial has been corrupted, the right thing to do is what was done in that case. Stevens' guilt was far more obvious than Siegleman's. He should not be pardoned as that admits guilt. Rove was involved in all of this.

There should be an investigation by the DOJ into what went on in that prosecution. I do not know why it was done for a Republican and not for Siegelman. Justice should not be political. A man's freedom is at stake, this should have been taken care of at least three years ago. It is a huge disappointment that a Democrat got such different treatment. I guess pandering to Republicans was the goal, but apparently you can't bend over far enough to please them, as we all knew. Siegelman's conviction should have been overturned at the same time as Stevens'.

is if Obama was to step in right now after the court had its say that the Republicans as we all know would in all likelyhood attempt to use it against him and the other dems on the ramp up to the Nov elections.
Yes, I know that sucks but nonetheless its a fact that they will try to use whatever they can from the petty isues to the big ones to weaken him and the dems in their quest to regain majority control of the country.

It is this fear of Republicans that got us to where we are. That is no excuse for allowing a gross injustice to take place. It is shameful in fact to say a man should go to jail so a politician doesn't 'look bad'. In fact it makes a politician look worse to allow that to happen for that reason.

And worse to pander to stupid bullies by letting one of theirs off the hook to try to appease them when everyone knows you cannot appease bullies.

The American people admire courage and in general will support exposing corruption no matter which side it's coming from. Karl Rove isn't exactly the most popular person, even among Republicans, in this country. So we've allowed war criminals and economic criminals and corrupt Republicans, like Rove, off the hook, in order to appease the far right? And has that stopped them from criticizing the President? Maybe it would help to show them we don't care what they think and they might stop intimidating democrats especially if they are busy trying to defend themselves from criminal charges.

that you find the answer displeasing but it is what it is.

What the hell, President Obama - do it now! Pardon Don Siegelman. I think he has the wind at his back on this one.

better late than never.
I don't want them to get away with "never."

if not mistaken, doesn't the person being pardon'd have to appologize and basically atone for his crimes to be considered in the first place for a pardon?

now, maybe what should happen is what they did with Scooter Libby, is to say time served and to free him that way (but it would still be on his record.) Commute his sentence.

that could be done, and use Libby as an example, however, the President has issued pardons
fewer times than any other modern day President.
He could easily commute Rodney B's sentence too (who made dreaming of riches a crime?)
and while he is at it, pardon that teenager kid Bush locked away Lindh, that was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

But I don't expect anything like this would happen before the election or even at Christmas time 2012 if Obama is reelected.

go after this very special prosecution.

Perhaps we could trade with Lieberman's Right-wing prosecutorial desires.

I don't think Siegelman would confess to a crime he didn't commit so that he can be pardoned.

The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii

n/t