GOP leaders are appropriately turning on Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who was convicted Monday on seven counts of failing to disclose about $250,000 in gifts and services. John McCain said that Stevens “has broken his trust with the people” and should step down. But Stevens has vowed to fight on and urged Alaskans to re-elect him next week.
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
53 Comments
I would think this subject is the sole business of the citizens of Alaska, let them decide.
McCain Says Alaska Senator Should Resign
His fellow Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona called for him to resign his seat, saying, “I hope that my colleagues in the Senate will be spurred by these events to redouble their efforts to end this kind of corruption once and for all.”
Mr. McCain’s running mate on the Republican presidential ticket, Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, also called on Tuesday for Mr. Stevens to quit, CNBC reported. The cable channel said Ms. Palin had called for the senator’s resignation in an interview with Maria Bartiromo.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/29/us/politics/29stevens.html?ref=us
CNBC
The only station with more letters in their name than viewers.
SolDevVB,
Not true, you forgot about MSNBC.
Oh nooo…he falsified documents. CRUCIFY him!!
Never mind that the lib hero, Clinton, was impeached for lying UNDER OATH. There were no calls for him to resign from this paper, were there? Of course not..lying is only a crime if it is someone other than a Democrat doing the lying.
Such hypocrites.
So, media and governmental departments are endangering the alphabet? Will we need to manufacture more letters if they use them all? ;-) At least we would have the possibility of adding manufacturing jobs…
Stevens should stay in the race.
“Stevens should step down”
Don’t worry, he will, even if he has to do it kicking and screaming!
The man’s toast.
CNBC
The only station with more letters in their name than viewers.
Maybe true, but Joey Ramone wrote a song about Maria Bartiromo!
Never mind that the lib hero, Clinton, was impeached for lying UNDER OATH.
Let’s see: you’re an equating an federal impeachment where the president was acquitted to a criminal trial where the senator was convicted.
Anyone with a functioning conscience can spot the real hypocrite here.
I think that Sen. Stevens should stay in the election; if he is defeated, then he doesn’t need to resign. If he wins, then he can resign if he so chooses, with the governor appointing his replacement. Should he determine to not resign, then it is up to the Senate to consider exclusion, should it so elect.
Raptor, true about the impeachment; but Pres. Clinton wasn’t convicted by the Senate (which would have involved removal from office). Sen. Stevens was tried and convicted by a jury on all counts. He still has his appeals to file. That’s why I think he should continue in the election, because legally, it isn’t over, and in the final analysis, as I posted above, let the election go forward; and leave it to the residents of Alaska.
I’m sure Alaska’s corruption fighting Governor will be calling for Stevens to step down in short order!
Holding my breath.
He could stay in, and if he wins, bush could pardon him (along with Libby) on the way out. He could beat the system that was and make alot of repubs happy.
Guess I should of read the post above from Linda first! Exhaling.
Alaska’s vacancy statute examined:
http://electionlawblog.org/archives/012072.html
He should step down, but as previously mentioned, up to the people of Alaska and pressure from his fellow Senators. 40 years in the Senate is long enough.
He could stay in, and if he wins, bush could pardon him (along with Libby) on the way out. He could beat the system that was and make alot of repubs happy.
Entirely plausible, since Poppy set the precedent in 1992. Look for it on Christmas Eve.
I wonder how much I would have to contribute to the RNC for Bush to slip a few pardons my way
the Ones Polital Machine. Corrupt.
How do we know that Chicago’s so corrupt? The most straightforward way to measure corruption is to check the number of convicted local officials. Between 1995 and 2004, 469 politicians from the federal district of Northern Illinois were found guilty of corruption.
Hummmmmmmmm…
nice place.
don’t suppose the One knew any of these do ya?
Rage, thanks for the link. The question posed by the author on the possible conflict with the 17th Amendment is an interesting academic one. I would need to know more about how initiative questions are dealt with under Alaska law before even hazarding any guess on that issue.
You’re welcome, VT. Whether it will it have an practical effect in these circumstances is beyond me to say.
Sounds to me like Chicago system is working if they’re weeding out corrupt politicians. Guess Alaska isn’t capable of weeding them out without federal indictments, too many gobn dontcha know?
Phantom, what state is Chicago in?
What state is Alaska in?
Well, it’s too late to get him off the ballot.
So it doesn’t really matter whether he resigns or not.
Whether Senator Stevens is reelected, and whether he resigns we the people will provide a very comfortable retirement.
It will be interesting and telling of the Alaska voters to see how they react to this. SURELY he would not win re election after this.
It’s a red state and he does have the requisite “R” behind his name.
Any Polly convicted of corruption should be caned publicly!
And remember these are not people, they are politicians!
I’d settle for ‘we the people’ don’t need to provide the comfortable retirement for a convicted felon, and let the courts deal with the legal ramifications.
OK Linda, I offer a compromise: Chain Gang/Hard Labor sentence.
Punishment seem to be in the courts hands as it should be. I think there are probably sentencing guidelines. ;-)
I would be all for whatever CHANGE needs to be made so ‘we the people’ don’t support criminals for the rests of their life with a comfortable retirement.
What would that take? Would it be up to members of Congress? If so, I’d say the chances of change are slim…
“…and whether he resigns we the people will provide a very comfortable retirement.”
I’m not entirely sure about that.
He has seven felony convictions. Unless he wins on appeal or is pardoned, he may be losing his pension. I seem to remember something like that.
Linda, I am afraid that you have no imagination….
:)
Even if he DID win re election, the Dem controlled Senate may have options.
Linda, there are sentencing guidelines; I don’t know what the guideline sentence would be, but I’ve a feeling the punishment will not be too severe, given Sen. Stevens’ convictions and, to the best of my knowledge, no prior criminal history. Frankly, the severity of the crime counts, too; and he was convicted on seven counts of making a false statement.
As to the pension issue, I’m not too sure any material change would be forthcoming on the false disclosure filings that led to the conviction. Remember, he wasn’t convicted of taking bribes, and while one may feel he was, he wasn’t charged for that offense, thus that’s not the basis of the convictions.
He will probably die before he is sentenced. Unfortunately with all things that are political/legal this will be dragged out for years.
Linda, IIRC, “Duke” Cunningham is eligible to receive his pension even under the circumstances applicable to his case. Further, upon reflection, I believe there was legislation introduced but not passed in the current session of Congress that would work a foreiture in future cases such as Mr. Cunningham’s, but would not apply to Sen. Stevens (even if it was law).
ANTI, I don’t know if Sen. Stevens will die before he is sentenced; he might well die before the appeals are exhausted.
avtolle, my point was simply that this will likely be resolved in the distant future.
“BlueJay
Posted October 28, 2008 at 2:09 pm | Permalink
It will be interesting and telling of the Alaska voters to see how they react to this. SURELY he would not win re election after this.”
You mean, like a Dead man was voted into office in Missourri? It certainly was telling of the Missourri voters.
OK, ANTI, guess I misinterpreted what you were saying. I agree that the final resolution of the case will happen in the future; don’t know about “distant”, but it will not occur within the next six months.
The Missouri election was a bit bizarre; the candidate dies before election day, but too late to change the ballot, combined with the public announcement that if the decedent won, his wife would be appointed to serve as his replacement. I took the whole thing as an election where there weren’t so many voting for the deceased as there were those voting against the other candidate.
avtolle-
Yes, I understand all that. And still, they voted for a dead man. WEll, it’s their vote. their right.
Still a ludacris idea. Just my opinion.
avtolle-
Yes, I understand all that. And still, they voted for a dead man. WEll, it’s their vote. their right.
Still a ludacris idea. Just my opinion.
I guess I would have to say it was even more ludacris that a man, because of his deceased status, was ineligible for office and was declared the winner.
LJ,
I don’t know, maybe it would improve the quality of government if being dead was a requirement for being elected, sorta like it’s a requirement for sainthood. Dead men need no pork, take no bribes and are exceedingly hard to lobby. Besides, their speeches wouldn’t be so long-winded.
Jed-
Perhaps you have a point.
Heard on the news that if he retires he’ll draw 120k a yr.
Let him serve from prison, be kind of hard for him to cast a vote, and bring Sarah any more infrastructure pork.
If he resigns, or get pushed out by the Senate, Sarah would probably appoint herself to finish out his term.
A “ludacris” idea, littlejohn?
How ’bout a “50 cent” or a “juvenile” idea?
Na, I don’t care for 50 cent.
When the choice was between John Ashcroft and a dead man. the voters found the dead guy more appealing
Where does the GOP go from here? And the televangelists? The Pentecostals? The neocons? The Operation Rescuers? The Country Club Republicans? Oh, and the folks who took the money and ran (that would be friends of Karl Rove and Tom DeLay, former Bush staffers, ‘Our Man Ailes’ and all his O’Seanesseys, et al.)
Talk about strange bedfellows.
Tom,
I have friends in southern Missouri who say that Ashcroft and his father were pretty much universally hated there. Might explain their votes for the dead guy.
When I uncovered Stevens, I saw quite an array of steamed veggies and noodles. So, therefore it is on Maria Bartiromo of a jury. It’s a much nicer way to travel than office.