Quantcast

Obama Administration Asks Federal Court To Overturn Republican Senator Ted Stevens Convictions. Should There Be A New Election For His Senate Seat

Kent the Roofer 2009/04/02 10:34:57
Yes. The election was tainted by the prosecution.
No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
Undecided
None of the above
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Citing grievous prosecutorial misconduct by Attorney's from the Bush Administration's "Justice Dept.", Attorney General Eric Holder has asked a federal judge to overturn the conviction of former Alaska Senator Ted Stevens (R) and dismiss the indictment. This effectively ends the corruption case against Stevens, the longest serving Republican in the Senate.
Should there be a new election for the Senate seat which he held since 1968?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h47fZRACOnh...
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • EDIE47 2009/04/08 23:26:06
    No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
    EDIE47
    +2
    OMFG!!! In Minnesota. AL Frankin has won and Coleman says NO! In comes the Judges, and Frankin got even more votes. Coleman says NO. So, Coleman appeals again, and it will be 2010, before Frankin gets to serve!!! It's up tp the people in Alaska, and if they say yes... god help them, because it's a long, tedious process. And three guesses who would want his seat? frankin serve tp people alaska god tedious process guesses seat
  • BHO (king) 2009/04/04 12:39:52
  • EEEE "Its not always a race... 2009/04/03 23:46:10
    No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
    EEEE "Its not always a race issue, sometimes its a people issue"
    +2
    They may have gone about it the wrong way, but I think enough evidence was shown for people to get smart enough to not vote for him....

    Maybe a new trial but don't waste the tax payers dollars on a new election....he most likely won't win anyway...
  • dick 2009/04/03 16:44:06
    No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
    dick
    +1
    you cant blame him he is just being a good repub and when your not watching thats what they do
  • N.D. Nile 2009/04/03 01:57:42
    None of the above
    N.D. Nile
    +2
    Election and his trial were 2 different things. No need for a new election. Sen. Stevens isn't the first politician who lost an election because of unproven accusations. If he isn't indicted again or retried, he can run for election next time. Personally, I think he needs to retire.

    Best news is that the Obama Administration saw a wrong and is trying to right it - even knowing that it might cause a call from the Republicans to negate the election and possibly remove the newly elected Democrat.
  • moomoof 2009/04/03 00:55:24
    None of the above
    moomoof
    +1
    i dont know i really dont know
    but if there is enough cause to have another election then yes
  • alonnastorm 2009/04/03 00:37:00
    No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
    alonnastorm
    +1
    Justice only works for some people....
  • Twobears Shunke Wakan 2009/04/02 22:25:27 (edited)
    No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
    Twobears Shunke Wakan
    +1
    The Law Is The Law
    Chuckle !!! No really though, The Law is The Law , RIGHT !!! GUILTY AS SIN
  • Lindy... 2009/04/02 20:12:42
    No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
    Lindy...
    +2
    He was found guilty because of a whole lot of evidence...not just this one contradiction.
    But...he is very old...and it's not worth the money to
    re-try him. Still...it seems to me that most
    politicians will go to any lenghts to
    excuse each others bad behavior.
  • USAmom 2009/04/02 18:25:35
    Yes. The election was tainted by the prosecution.
    USAmom
    +3
    I feel strongly about if you do the crime, you do the time. That guy deserves to still be sitting in jail. The creep needs to retire. We have had enough of unscrupulous low lifes like Ted Stevens.
  • Peggy 2009/04/02 17:32:31
    None of the above
    Peggy
    +3
    New trial, maybe. New election, NO
  • 477777 2009/04/02 17:20:44
    No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
    477777
    +4
    He is corrupt to the bone. That a$$hole is lucky he isn't someone Beotch in prison!
  • concerned 2009/04/02 17:11:49
    No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
    concerned
    +1
    They did not say he was not quilty they said the public defender did something wrong ..so the vote for senator stays as is
  • 519378 2009/04/02 17:10:52
    No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
    519378
    +4
    Re-try him.
    The prosecutors should have told the defense lawyers earlier what evidence they had as prove of Stevens guilt.
    Even a Republican should get a 'fair trial'.
    With a new trial, the defense can not claim that they did not know how guilty Stevens was before the trial began.
    Then put Stevens in jail for life after the new trial is completed.
  • Lindy... 519378 2009/04/02 20:20:17 (edited)
    Lindy...
    +3
    My head agrees with you (as usual) but my heart says "Let the 85 year old
    live out his last few months or years at home...in disgrace." (That darn bleeding heart of mine causes my thinking to get befuddled sometimes, yes?!)
  • 519378 Lindy... 2009/04/02 21:13:44
    519378
    +1
    The reason I said to put him in jail for life was because I doubt he would live out a 20 year sentence.
    And, to say that crimes by lawmakers are OK once they reach a certain age is to invite crimes by the elderly.
  • Lindy... 519378 2009/04/02 21:26:38
    Lindy...
    +2
    Great point...as always...AS I've said myself, so many times before...
    NO ONE is above the law.
  • Spizzzo... 519378 2009/04/05 20:56:23
    Spizzzo BN-0
    A purely legal point I wonder about: Is he re-tryable or not, because of potential double jeopardy? Why or why not?
  • Kent th... Spizzzo... 2009/04/05 23:31:05
    Kent the Roofer
    He could be retried but it would be dismissed due to previous misconduct by the prosecution. Our courts have found that where there is any misconduct by the prosecution, everything by it is now in question (fruit of the poison tree doctrine).
    This is a very generic blog that describes the nucleus of the doctrine:

    http://firedoglake.blogspot.c...
  • Spizzzo... Kent th... 2009/04/06 06:13:16
    Spizzzo BN-0
    +1
    Ah, OK.
  • 519378 Spizzzo... 2009/04/07 00:17:45
    519378
    +1
    If he had been found innocent, he could not be charged again with the same crime.
    In this case where errors were discovered in how the original trial proceeded that resulted in the guilty verdict, the prosecution could retry this case.
  • Spizzzo... 519378 2009/04/07 01:20:24
  • SABLE 2009/04/02 14:52:02
    No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
    SABLE
    +4
    He ran and lost. He's lucky not to be in jail.
  • KUDABUX 2009/04/02 14:20:52
    No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
    KUDABUX
    +4
    Ted Stevens is guilty. The conviction should not be overturned.
  • let's vote already 2009/04/02 13:50:07
    No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
    let's vote already
    +3
    The voters have spoken. Ted has earned this time to relax on his $80,000 deck.
  • None of the above
    Jerry (Iron Priest)☮ R ☮ P ☮ 201
    +1
    Whoever pays the Governor the most. Just like Illinios. jk
  • bob 2009/04/02 12:42:55
    None of the above
    bob
    +1
    Only if you can guaruntee a Dem. win.
  • Jerry (... bob 2009/04/02 13:04:09
    Jerry (Iron Priest)☮ R ☮ P ☮ 201
    +2
    not very American.
  • bob Jerry (... 2009/04/02 13:14:38
    bob
    +4
    It was obviously a sarcastic response...sorry. My 'real choie is A,
  • bob Jerry (... 2009/04/02 14:17:02
    bob
    +3
    TYVM for your acceptence.
  • Jerry (... bob 2009/04/02 14:45:06
    Jerry (Iron Priest)☮ R ☮ P ☮ 201
    +3
    No prob Bob! (Usually the person I direct that comment at is not named Bob.)
  • bob Jerry (... 2009/04/02 14:47:16
    bob
    +2
    It is poetic though. LOL
  • Bob™ the Union Ironworker 2009/04/02 12:40:05
    No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
    Bob™ the Union Ironworker
    +5
    the will of the majority spoke if not for prosecutor misconduct(republican appointed) his conviction would has stood. It sucks a scumbag like him walks but the rule of law had returned to the Justice department. I am upset but proud and relieved.
  • No TEA for Grae 2009/04/02 12:36:13
  • CJ ~ is Leaving SodaHead! 2009/04/02 11:45:36
    No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
    CJ ~ is Leaving SodaHead!
    +6
    Stevens would likely have lost regardless of the charges. He deserved to be voted out. Ironic though that Bush JD couldn't even follow the basic rules of prosecution. It seems the Justice Department was anything but JUST when the Bushies were running things.
  • Cal ~ Pegleg4570 ~ 2009/04/02 11:41:22
    No. Enough evidence of corruption was exposed to warrant his defeat.
    Cal ~ Pegleg4570 ~
    +11
    He is Guilty just move on.
  • Moderate - Whatever!!! Smil... 2009/04/02 11:20:29
  • bob Moderat... 2009/04/02 13:16:00
    bob
    +5
    Honest Rushublicant? LMAO!!!

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/07/24 05:55:55

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals