NationStates Jolt Archive

Senator Ted Stevens has been found guilty on all seven counts. I'll have a link as soon as possible unless someone beats me to it.

Better keep an eye on him or he might try to escape in an internet tube.

Ted who now?

Link. (http://www.kapptv.com/news/?sect_rank=1&section_id=22&story_id=8442)
Hm.
Gotcha', LG.

Ted who now?

Ted "Bridge to Nowhere" Stevens. Sarah Palin's bestest best buddy.

Ted who now?

Alaskan senator. He's the ancient and withered technophobe who until recently was chairman of the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. Apparently, he didn't think he needed to report the free work done to his home by one of the lobbyists he provided fat government contracts to.

Ted "Bridge to Nowhere" Stevens. Sarah Palin's bestest best buddy.

So has this crushed any chances of McCain catching up?

Link. (http://www.kapptv.com/news/?sect_rank=1&section_id=22&story_id=8442)
Hm.
Gotcha', LG.

Blast! :mad: CNN.com has a big red banner but no article yet.

Yeah, I saw the breaking news banner on CNN.com, but haven't seen any detailed articles pop up yet. It's an interesting development, and one would think it would mean a fairly easy victory for his Democratic opponent? But then, I don't know how things are looking up in Alaska right now other than that they like their Republicans (although the largest paper endorsed Obama). So who knows, maybe this just means that they'll vote in Stevens' replacement on the Republican ticket.

Either way, he had it coming. They had the guy on tape talking about how "the worst thing that will happen is a little jail time".

A more interesting question to me is: how close (politically) are Palin and Stevens, and what does their ASSOCIATION (OMG OMG GUILT BY ASSOCIATION), if any, say? Of course, I don't think it would say anything about Palin, but it would be fun to see the argument she's so fond of using these days turned around on her.

So has this crushed any chances of McCain catching up?

Nope. I think McCain did that.

Yeah, I saw the breaking news banner on CNN.com, but haven't seen any detailed articles pop up yet. It's an interesting development, and one would think would mean a fairly easy victory for his Democratic opponent? But then, I don't know how things are looking up in Alaska right now other than that they like their Republicans (but the biggest paper endorsed Obama). So who knows, maybe this just means that they'll vote in Stevens' replacement on the Republican ticket.

Either way, he had it coming. They had the guy on tape talking about how "the worst thing that will happen is a little jail time".

A more interesting question to me is: how close (politically) are Palin and Stevens, and what does their ASSOCIATION (OMG OMG GUILT BY ASSOCIATION), if any, say? Of course, I don't think it would say anything about Palin, but it would be fun to see the argument she's so fond of using these days turned around on her.

It was a close race and Stevens was making a comeback...until now. ;)

Nope. I think McCain did that.

Will this make it worse?

Blast! :mad: CNN.com has a big red banner but no article yet.That's right. "Last Hour", for the win. :)

It was a close race and Stevens was making a comeback...until now. ;)...If he still gets elected...
Uh.
...He would be able to travel freely to and from Congress. Even though he was a convicted felon.
It isn't possible to hold a Congressional seat and be a convicted felon, is it?

The chances of him actually going to prison are low, but at least his rep took a good hit.

...If he still gets elected...
Uh.
...He would be able to travel freely to and from Congres. Even though he was a convicted felon.
It isn't possible to hold a Congressional seat and be a convicted felon, is it?

He can communicate with Congress through a tube. :)

He can communicate with Congress through a tube. :)Nice. :D

CNN's article (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/27/stevens.jurors/index.html) on it at the moment. It's not all that interesting, but hey.

...If he still gets elected...
Uh.
...He would be able to travel freely to and from Congress. Even though he was a convicted felon.
It isn't possible to hold a Congressional seat and be a convicted felon, is it?

I believe he has to be formally censured by Congress in order to be expelled, but James Traficant (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Traficant)is currently in jail, and not in congress, so it's not like it's never happened before.

And I can't believe it's been that long since Jimmy went to jail. :eek:

I believe he has to be formally censured by Congress in order to be expelled, but James Traficant (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Traficant)is currently in jail, and not in congress, so it's not like it's never happened before.

And I can't believe it's been that long since Jimmy went to jail. :eek:
Trafficant isn't currently representing anyone. Except maybe that small animal perched on his head.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/James_Traficant.jpg

Trafficant isn't currently representing anyone. Except maybe that small animal perched on his head.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/James_Traficant.jpg

:eek: AAHHH! Kill it! Kill it!!

:eek: AAHHH! Kill it! Kill it!!

LG iz scared? Wow...

LG iz scared? Wow...

Evil cranium rats are not to be trusted!

Trafficant isn't currently representing anyone.

Because he was expelled from congress, after being convicted of taking bribes. Sound familiar? :p

Except maybe that small animal perched on his head.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/James_Traficant.jpg

Nah, that small animal perched on his head is a woman from Pittsburgh. Although Youngstown is basically the same thing, so, maybe...

Ted "Bridge to Nowhere" Stevens. Sarah Palin's bestest best buddy.

True friendship never ends, but politicians don't do friendship. I've heard that Jesus saves, it seems like the Saviour is Stevens' best bet.

the irony? We found out about this through a series of tubes

the irony? We found out about this through a series of tubes
I'm still waiting for an internets that was sent to me last Friday.

His hair alone should have been reason enough to prosecute him.

Stevens has been involved in Alaskan politics since before Alaska was a state. He and Palin have obviously worked together but I don't think they're particularly close.

Stevens has been involved in Alaskan politics since before Alaska was a state.

You mean he's an immortal Russian infiltrator?

:eek:

congrats senator begich

No more tubes :(

You know, I recall an event, just about exactly 2 years ago, when another congressmen from the Republican party got involved in a few shenanigans. his name was Mark Foley.

Anyone remember how his party turned out in the following election?

You know, I recall an event, just about exactly 2 years ago, when another congressmen from the Republican party got involved in a few shenanigans. his name was Mark Foley.

Anyone remember how his party turned out in the following election?

Hehe.

Speaking from a state that swung blue against many people's predictions in that election, though, I think Foley had a lot less to do with it than the network of powerful Republicans protecting Foley (and that that had a lot less to do with it than frustration about actual issues, but that may just be wishful thinking on my part). Stevens hasn't had quite that much support in his brand of shenanigans, but I have no doubt this conviction is going to hurt the party of "good, old-fashioned, all-American values" a wee bit. :tongue:

...If he still gets elected...
Uh.
...He would be able to travel freely to and from Congress. Even though he was a convicted felon.
It isn't possible to hold a Congressional seat and be a convicted felon, is it?

Unless someone's already beaten me to this, he's still entitled to hold his seat even as a convicted felon.

He could either: 1) resign or 2) be expelled by a two-thirds vote in the Senate.

Stevens has been involved in Alaskan politics since before Alaska was a state. He and Palin have obviously worked together but I don't think they're particularly close.
she worked for one of his pacs i think

but im pretty sure that ALL alaskan republican office holders have to have something to do with ted stevens.

OH SHIT, i just realized that palin has been palling around with convicted felons.

she worked for one of his pacs i think

but im pretty sure that ALL alaskan republican office holders have to have something to do with ted stevens.

OH SHIT, i just realized that palin has been palling around with convicted felons.

Sen. Ted Stevens is practically a terrorist, now.

Quick, ship him to Guantanamo Bay before he blows up the tubes of the Internet!

He and Palin have obviously worked together but I don't think they're particularly close.

http://blip.tv/play/Acrwf4eFGg

Well, Palin's response seems to be both somber and chiding, and in keeping with her reformist mavericky ways - pretty much the only safe response:

This is a sad day for Alaska and a sad day for Senator Stevens and his family. The verdict shines a light on the corrupting influence of the big oil service company up there in Alaska that was allowed to control too much of our state. And that control was part of the culture of corruption that I was elected to fight, and that fight must always move forward regardless of party affiliation or seniority or even past service.

Palin went on to urge the Senator to "do the right thing for Alaska". Presumably this means to gracefully step down and not try to drag the party or the state into anything messy.

But not so fast Palin! I think I think Senator Stevens might have a little something to say in response to that.

“I will fight this unjust verdict with every ounce of energy I have,” the 84-year-old Stevens, the Senate’s longest-serving Republican, said in a written statement after the jury came back Monday afternoon. “I am innocent.”

Doh! Oh well, let the mud wrestling begin.

Palin went on to urge the Senator to "do the right thing for Alaska". Presumably this means to gracefully step down and not try to drag the party or the state into anything messy.
Translation of the bolded for non politicos = shut the hell up and don't screw up the election any more than it already is.

Ted Stevens is guilty. He took bribes from oil cronies. He is a friend of Sara Palin's. Sara Palin claims to have been fighting energy corruption. Was she part of bringing him down? Protecting him? Has she not been fighting energy corruption at all but just pretending to?

Stevens has been involved in Alaskan politics since before Alaska was a state. He and Palin have obviously worked together but I don't think they're particularly close.

Um. They have been close allies.

Palin Was a Director of Embattled Sen. Stevens's 527 Group (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/01/palin_was_a_director_of_embatt.html):

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin began building clout in her state's political circles in part by serving as a director of an independent political group organized by the now embattled Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens.

Palin's name is listed on 2003 incorporation papers of the "Ted Stevens Excellence in Public Service, Inc.," a 527 group that could raise unlimited funds from corporate donors. The group was designed to serve as a political boot camp for Republican women in the state. She served as one of three directors until June 2005, when her name was replaced on state filings.

Palin's relationship with Alaska's senior senator may be one of the more complicated aspects of her new position as Sen. John McCain's running mate; Stevens was indicted in July 2008 on seven counts of corruption.

Palin, an anti-corruption crusader in Alaska, had called on Stevens to be open about the issues behind the investigation. But she also held a joint news conference with him in July, before he was indicted, to make clear she had not abandoned him politically.

Stevens had been helpful to Palin during her run for governor, swooping in with a last moment endorsement. And the two filmed a campaign commercial together to highlight Stevens's endorsement of Palin during the 2006 race.
*article continues, emphasis added)

you want to hear something amusing? Under law, Stevens, as a convicted felon, is not eligible to vote in any Alaska election. However, he is still able to run for office.

So he can run for election, he just can't vote for himself.

You know, I recall an event, just about exactly 2 years ago, when another congressmen from the Republican party got involved in a few shenanigans. his name was Mark Foley.

Anyone remember how his party turned out in the following election?

Why must you lie? Foley was a democrat and you know it.

http://www3.allaroundphilly.com/blogs/reporter/wesleym/Foley%20Dem%202.jpg

:p

Um. They have been close allies.

Palin Was a Director of Embattled Sen. Stevens's 527 Group (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/01/palin_was_a_director_of_embatt.html):

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin began building clout in her state's political circles in part by serving as a director of an independent political group organized by the now embattled Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens.

Palin's name is listed on 2003 incorporation papers of the "Ted Stevens Excellence in Public Service, Inc.," a 527 group that could raise unlimited funds from corporate donors. The group was designed to serve as a political boot camp for Republican women in the state. She served as one of three directors until June 2005, when her name was replaced on state filings.

Palin's relationship with Alaska's senior senator may be one of the more complicated aspects of her new position as Sen. John McCain's running mate; Stevens was indicted in July 2008 on seven counts of corruption.

Palin, an anti-corruption crusader in Alaska, had called on Stevens to be open about the issues behind the investigation. But she also held a joint news conference with him in July, before he was indicted, to make clear she had not abandoned him politically.

Stevens had been helpful to Palin during her run for governor, swooping in with a last moment endorsement. And the two filmed a campaign commercial together to highlight Stevens's endorsement of Palin during the 2006 race.
*article continues, emphasis added)

Yet Obama's "connections" to Rezko are what we really should be talking about. Hes the one with connections to corrupt politicians.

Yet Obama's "connections" to Rezko are what we really should be talking about. Hes the one with connections to corrupt politicians.

Rezko isn't technically a politician.

I'm gonna assume you forgot the sarcasm tag there before I dig into that anymore.

Rezko isn't technically a politician.

I'm gonna assume you forgot the sarcasm tag there before I dig into that anymore.

Have you really not payed attention to anything Ive ever posted were you assume that I really believe we need to look at an Obama/Rezko connection?

Will this make it worse?
we can only hope.

You know, I recall an event, just about exactly 2 years ago, when another congressmen from the Republican party got involved in a few shenanigans. his name was Mark Foley.
Speaking of which, I wonder if we're going to see FOX run "Ted Stevens: (D-AL)" under footage of Stevens this time round.
accidently of course. repeatedly accidently.

Does the Governor of Alaska get to appoint the replacement for Stevens?

Does the Governor of Alaska get to appoint the replacement for Stevens?

no, in the wake of the nepotistic murkowski appointment, alaskans passed a ballot initiative that got rid of political appointments for vacancies.

Ted Stevens is guilty. He took bribes from oil cronies. He is a friend of Sara Palin's. Sara Palin claims to have been fighting energy corruption. Was she part of bringing him down? Protecting him? Has she not been fighting energy corruption at all but just pretending to?

All polititicans pretend to be doing something, the same will be for the next President and VP.

But to say Palin is guilty because someone she knows is guilty is a low blow and drawing a long bow.

Yeah, I saw the breaking news banner on CNN.com, but haven't seen any detailed articles pop up yet.That is why I use NSG for my daily news updates.:D

I believe he should be hog tied.

All polititicans pretend to be doing something, the same will be for the next President and VP.

But to say Palin is guilty because someone she knows is guilty is a low blow and drawing a long bow.

But if she actually was trying to fight energy corruption, seems like she is somehow involved in his fall. The longest seated senator? This is big. If she starts spiking the ball and saying "I got that bastard!" I hope she will provide proof. If she avoids the topic, then it would seem likely she is just another oil cronie with a moose gun!

NOOOO!!! Why is it always the crazy politicians that get arrested? Five years ago, they stole my one true love, James Traficant, and now they're taking away my second one true love!
Why won't they stop robbing me of my one true loves?

you want to hear something amusing? Under law, Stevens, as a convicted felon, is not eligible to vote in any Alaska election. However, he is still able to run for office.

So he can run for election, he just can't vote for himself.

Hee, I hadn't thought of that. Awesome.

Hee, I hadn't thought of that. Awesome.

Extra choice if he were to lose by a singe vote...

So has this crushed any chances of McCain catching up?

1st I think Obama will win.
but there is something you got to know about the US and polls. When there is a black candidate and a white candidate running for office people tend to lie about who they are going to vote for(including on exit polls). The reason being their is a fear of appearing racist. so white poll respondents will say they are voting for the black candidate when in fact they have not.
As for how much of a sway this will produce i don't know never had this issue on a national election. though I suspect it will be greater then the margin of error.

He can communicate with Congress through a tube. :)And if the appeal doesn't make it, perhaps his cellmates are gonna communicate to him through his tubes.

I hate to gloat, but dammit, it's about time. Who's next? I don't care what party it is. Cronyism, graft, and the rest of the bullshit we're supposed to believe is part of the greased-wheel business as usual in Congress sets my teeth on edge. Byrd? Kennedy? Pelosi? Line 'em up.

Speaking of which, I wonder if we're going to see FOX run "Ted Stevens: (D-AL)" under footage of Stevens this time round.
accidently of course. repeatedly accidently.

Wow, that would be wrong party AND wrong state. The rare double, even for Fox. (It'd be D-AK, unless he moves to Alabama.)

I hate to gloat, but dammit, it's about time. Who's next? From Alaska? Don Young.
http://cleveland.indymedia.org/news/2008/10/32772.php
:)

Speaking of which, I wonder if we're going to see FOX run "Ted Stevens: (D-AL)" under footage of Stevens this time round.
accidently of course. repeatedly accidently.Yes, putting the wrong party AND state would be a lovely means to one up their Foley mistake.

Wow, that would be wrong party AND wrong state. The rare double, even for Fox. (It'd be D-AK, unless he moves to Alabama.)
oh, you know what I mean! :mad::$

But to say Palin is guilty because someone she knows is guilty is a low blow and drawing a long bow.
you mean like, say, accusing someone of 'palling around with terrorists' simply because they'd met them 40 years after they'd committed a crime?
something like that?

Ted Stevens is guilty. He took bribes from oil cronies. He is a friend of Sara Palin's. Sara Palin claims to have been fighting energy corruption. Was she part of bringing him down? Protecting him? Has she not been fighting energy corruption at all but just pretending to?

Not actually directed at anything in your post, rather, your Chalmers Johnson quote in your siggie.

The US defense budget is way most definitely not 3-4 trillion dollars. It's an (eye-popping, admittedly) 500 billion.

Here's the wiki link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States

but there is something you got to know about the US and polls. When there is a black candidate and a white candidate running for office people tend to lie about who they are going to vote for(including on exit polls). The reason being their is a fear of appearing racist. so white poll respondents will say they are voting for the black candidate when in fact they have not.

got any recent evidence of that? like, within the past decade?

1st I think Obama will win.
but there is something you got to know about the US and polls. When there is a black candidate and a white candidate running for office people tend to lie about who they are going to vote for(including on exit polls). The reason being their is a fear of appearing racist. so white poll respondents will say they are voting for the black candidate when in fact they have not.
As for how much of a sway this will produce i don't know never had this issue on a national election. though I suspect it will be greater then the margin of error.

You mean the "Bradley Effect"? Numbers now would seem to indicate that it would take nearly every white person who claimed to be voting for Obama to have been lying. I have been worried about it, but with one week left to go, it's begginning to look like my fear was unfounded.

Speaking of which, I wonder if we're going to see FOX run "Ted Stevens: (D-AL)" under footage of Stevens this time round.
accidently of course. repeatedly accidently.

Yeah, it would be hilarious if that happened, wouldn't it? (http://users.rcn.com/xxwyldroguexx/DSC01982.JPG)

I'm almost afraid to ask...is that a real pic? 'Cause if it is....oy, that'd just be too much. Honestly, even for FOX that would be too much.

I'm almost afraid to ask...is that a real pic? 'Cause if it is....oy, that'd just be too much. Honestly, even for FOX that would be too much.

It seems to be. I was only able to see it on a couple of blogs, and while I suppose it could be photoshopped, it doesn't look like it.

http://imperialwitness.blogspot.com/2008/07/fox-news-so-predictable.html
http://www3.allaroundphilly.com/blogs/reporter/wesleym/blog.html

Oy, that's just too much. Honestly, I can understand one "mistake," they can let it slip by with an "Oops, my bad" and swear to never do it again, but seriously, this? How can they possibly expect people to buy this again?

Of course, the public has actually swallowed bigger whoppers, so I suppose it's not that far-fetched.

Oy, that's just too much. Honestly, I can understand one "mistake," they can let it slip by with an "Oops, my bad" and swear to never do it again, but seriously, this? How can they possibly expect people to buy this again?

Of course, the public has actually swallowed bigger whoppers, so I suppose it's not that far-fetched.

The trick is to get the guy who isn't really paying attention. To casually, generally associate democrats with corruption in the minds of the populace. No one who looks into it will be fooled into thinking that Ted Stevens is a democrat, but people might, when thinking of corruption scandals they've heard of, think back to this one and remember it being a democrat.

It's insidious.

It is that, but I'm thinking that the Democratic party could actually make a fairly compelling libel suit against FOX news for this; it's fraudulent information, and a clear attempt to associate their party with corruption, as you just said. In an age where people are suing the grumpy old neighbor next door for keeping their football, this stands a legitimate chance of a court appearance.

Since this thread's still up, thought it prudent to show this:

http://www.adn.com/ted-stevens/story/570995.html
The Republican Party of Alaska is urging voters to support Stevens anyway as he returns to Alaska today to make a final push before Tuesday's election. The message: If Stevens wins and then resigns or is expelled from the Senate, there would be a special election giving Republicans another opportunity to keep the seat out of Democratic hands.
+
"If it's not Sen. Stevens, we need the choice to have someone else," said McHugh Pierre, the Alaska party spokesman. "But right now Sen. Stevens is our candidate, we're behind him 100 percent, he says he's innocent, he's going to fight these charges, I believe he's innocent and we're going to make sure that our membership and other conservative Alaskans can find it in them to vote for him and prolong their options." Both the Stevens campaign and the state GOP suggested that Palin, who characterizes herself as a reformer as she campaigns for vice president, is saying what she needs to say to get votes in the Lower 48 and Alaska voters should not listen.
+
"They can't come out and endorse him; how's that going to look?" Pierre said. Palin, in her statement, seemed open to the possibility that Stevens could stay in office long enough to win re-election next week and then resign, saying that, "even if elected on Tuesday, senator Stevens should step aside to allow a special election to give Alaskans a real choice of who will serve them in Congress."
They DO have a real choice, for a change. Someone NOT republican. Someone ELSE.
Already.

So has this crushed any chances of McCain catching up?

McCain calls on Sen. Stevens to step down (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27418037/)

I doubt it.

It is that, but I'm thinking that the Democratic party could actually make a fairly compelling libel suit against FOX news for this; it's fraudulent information, and a clear attempt to associate their party with corruption, as you just said. In an age where people are suing the grumpy old neighbor next door for keeping their football, this stands a legitimate chance of a court appearance.

Fox have deep pockets. Unless you have an insider, or memos they forgot to burn, or some other evidence of intent to mislead, I think you'd just be throwing money at Fox's lawyers.

I can never understand this:
Stevens faces up to five years in prison on each of the seven counts arising from his failure to the remodeling of his home in the ski resort town of Girdwood and other gifts from Bill Allen, former head of VECO Corp., an oil-services company. But the 84-year-old senator is considered likely to receive a lighter sentence because of his age and his years of public service.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27422198/

leniency due to age I understand, but leniency due to his public service? It was because of his public service he got all those freebies! He abused the trust we place in his public service to line his own - and that of his friend's - pockets.
If anything, his years of public service should count against him and make the sentences longer.

Fox have deep pockets. Unless you have an insider, or memos they forgot to burn, or some other evidence of intent to mislead, I think you'd just be throwing money at Fox's lawyers.

I'm no lawyer, but FOX has done this now on several occasions with two seperate republicans. Surely they can show that once is a mistake but 3, 4, however many times, to two seperate individuals shows not a mistake but a delibrate intent?

Obama shd use some of his vast fortune of donations to sue FOX on behalf of all Democrats. Hasn't he raised something like 1/2 a billion $ now?

I can never understand this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27422198/

leniency due to age I understand, but leniency due to his public service? It was because of his public service he got all those freebies! He abused the trust we place in his public service to line his own - and that of his friend's - pockets.

Leniency due to age is a crock of shit. Old folks are plain fucking lucky to be alive, and if there is some implicit "incompetency to make decisions due to age" I want that made explicit ... and applied to judges and administrators. If they're not fit to do the time, remove them from situations where they can do the crime. Exactly the same conditions that apply to children: protect them and others from the consequences of incompetent decisions, BEFORE they get to make those decisions.

But you are absolutely right on the public service thing. Unless they're talking about some other public service than that which he apparently abused ... perhaps some unpaid charity work? ... then no, there is absolutely no way it should count in his favour.

Principle requires that I say it should not count against him either.


If anything, his years of public service should count against him and make the sentences longer.

I think that's implicit in a corruption charge.

Taking money to make this-rather-than-that decision? Pretty much legal in the private sector, up to the highly-regulated levels of a major company board, where it is considered public policy (rightly or wrongly I'm unsure.)

Taking money from businesses, while you make decisions on behalf of the public about those businesses? Wrong, always ...

RANT!

Leaving my grey area. Money can buy good advice. Politicians should be exposed to the best advice from all sides. I am undecided about where to draw the line between "well thought out, well researched and well expressed advice" and "tips to make you personally rich." The first is informative, empowering ... the second is corrupting, subjugating.

It's not a fine line. It's no-man's-land, between the lines. Who shoots you depends on which way you move, not where you are. "Oh can you see, by the rocket's red glare?" Well, no, not really. Ain't nobody ever saw shit by that.

When the election is over, he'll fall on his sword. He'll be deeply sorry and all, beg for the forgiveness of the people of Alaska for betraying their trust, etc etc ... but he can't do that NOW. Now is the time to follow his lawyer's orders, like a dumbstruck pickpocket called to witness in a murder trial. Can't see shit, by the rocket's red glare.

Paw. Shake hands! Good doggie.

I'm no lawyer, but FOX has done this now on several occasions with two seperate republicans. Surely they can show that once is a mistake but 3, 4, however many times, to two seperate individuals shows not a mistake but a delibrate intent?

I'm not a lawyer either, but "beyond reasonable doubt" I think allows a defence of "hey, so we fucked up four times, but we got it right ..." um, hundreds of times?

Civil case maybe. But you won't get much money (provable harm to others?) and it doesn't have the moral authority of a criminal conviction.

Obama shd use some of his vast fortune of donations to sue FOX on behalf of all Democrats. Hasn't he raised something like 1/2 a billion $ now?

Dud idea there.

Donate money to help X candidate get elected! If X chooses, they may spend your donation trying to make his fat sister's high school rival say sorry about the spelling mistake which ruined her prom!

It looks damn silly and cheap, until you realize that damn silly and cheap is the full asking price of some sitting members. Then it looks like corruption.