spitzer.thumbnail.jpg

Yesterday I went a little "I told you so" about USA SDNY Michael Garcia’s finally admitting he has squat against Eliot Spitzer and can’t prosecute him.

Folks in the comments were talking about how both Spitzer and former governor Don Siegelman were both the vicitms of manufactured "criminal" cases. Toss in former California Governor Gray Davis who was the victim of a manufactured energy crisis–compliments of Enron, no less and you start to see a pattern that is really disturbing.

I’m not sure that anything more can be done about Enron, especially with Ken Lay gone. However, I think that we should focus much more on the abuse of the prosecution function to subvert the right of the people to actually be governed by the people and the party they have elected.

Don’t forget, David Iglesius was fired for refusing to bring a bogus prosecution against a Democrat running for office.

I fear opening a can of worms by advocating review and investigation into these cases, because my limited suggestion may give birth to an even more disturbing new criminal defense tactic of calling for an investigation of the prosecutor every time he brings a novel or edgy case. Such a result would so totally not be my desire.

Nonetheless, the tactics employed in the Siegelman case bear scrutiny. Further, Spitzer was taken down by the leak of information that appears, from the outside, to be Grand Jury material. Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure forbids the leaking of Grand Jury information. it is meant to protect the "innocent accused".

That means people like Eliot Spitzer.

Related posts:

  1. Appeals Court Won’t Unseal Spitzer Wiretap Applications
  2. Executive Privilege and the Cheney Interview Documents
  3. Late Night: Who is Governor X?
  4. Breuer’s Claims about Future Investigations Undermined by Cheney’s Claims about the Past
  5. The SEC Civil Suit Against Countrywide’s Mozilo: Why You Need to Know About “Parallel Proceedings”