Local politcal races/issues.

[Freak Out]

Good old Daniel is always running for a house seat in the legislature or a senate seat when he isn't trying to claim Russian islands for the State of Alaska. I always look forward to his rants during a debate with his somewhat befuddled opponent.

This is his campaign website.

http://www.youtube.com/DanielDeNardo

Feel free to put your own local political outsider/wacko stories here for our viewing enjoyment.

[Freak Out]

The end of a politcal Era could be near at hand here in AK.....Uncle Ted and Don Young could both get the boot soon. The races are still tight but with the jury poised to throw a guilty verdict Stevens way and Young clouded in his own legal controversy we could two new representatives in Congress for the first time in 40 years. Of course Stevens still could get voted in even if found guilty...as long as he's not behind bars and the people vote him in there are no rules in the Senate that say a convicted felon can't serve as far as I know.

Fate of Sen. Stevens In the Jury's Hands
Gifts and Home Renovation at Issue

By Del Quentin Wilber
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 22, 2008; A03

A federal jury today will begin deliberating two conflicting views of Sen. Ted Stevens, the powerful Alaska Republican charged with lying on financial disclosure forms to hide more than $250,000 in gifts and renovations to the Alaska house he affectionately calls his "chalet."

Defense lawyers, backed by a string of character witnesses, have portrayed Stevens, 84, as an honest public servant who conscientiously paid his bills, never lied on the forms and is the victim of overzealous authorities.

Prosecutors have argued that the senator is a miser who went to extraordinary lengths to hide free remodeling work financed by Veco, a now-defunct Alaska oil services company, and its top executive.

"This trial has exposed the truth about one of the longest-serving senators, the gifts he received and what he tried to conceal and the lengths he would go to keep his secrets hidden," said prosecutor Brenda Morris of the Justice Department's public integrity section.

"He didn't want to be known as the senator with the house that Veco built," she told jurors in U.S. District Court in Washington.

Brendan Sullivan, Stevens's attorney, countered that the prosecutors view the world through a "dirty glass" that makes the "whole world look dirty."

"They are trying to convict an innocent man on the interpretation of evidence that is so far from real life that it would make you sick," he said.

Indicted in July, Stevens requested a speedy trial in the hopes of clearing his name before the November elections. He is seeking a seventh full term in office.

He testified in his defense, contending that some of the expensive items the government calls "gifts" were merely lent to him, such as a $2,700 Brookstone massage chair stored in his basement.

Prosecutor Joseph Bottini of the U.S. attorney's office in Alaska hammered away at Stevens's credibility, calling his explanations "nonsense."

Bottini said Stevens turned to Bill Allen, a close friend and former chief executive of Veco, for help with the remodeling work for a simple reason. "The price is always right when it's free," he said.

"He was happy with Veco doing this even though they were the most improbable home contractor around," Bottini said. "He knew Bill Allen was wealthy. He knew Bill Allen was generous."

Allen, the prosecution's key witness, and Veco workers testified in detail about the transformation of Stevens's home from 2000 to 2002. The rustic house got a new first floor, two wraparound decks and a garage.

E-mails introduced as evidence showed that Stevens monitored the work through a friend who lived in town.

In closing arguments, Sullivan repeatedly returned to a letter that Stevens wrote to Allen in 2002, thanking the executive for the renovations and requesting a bill. Stevens wrote it after learning that Allen had decided, on his own, to add the first-floor deck, Sullivan said.

Prosecutors contend that Stevens was simply creating a paper trail to protect himself.

Saying that Stevens paid every bill his family received for remodeling work, Sullivan noted that the senator and his wife wrote $162,000 in checks to contractors for renovations and later saw the expense validated when the tax value of the house rose by $104,000.

Sullivan reminded jurors that former secretary of state Colin L. Powell and Sen. Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii) testified to his integrity.

The defense lawyer also criticized Allen, who has pleaded guilty to federal bribery charges. But Bottini said Allen was believable.

Bottini and Morris also repeatedly needled Stevens for not removing alleged gifts, including the massage chair.

"Does anyone really believe he thought that chair was a loan?" Bottini asked. "What were the terms of this loan? Zero percent interest for 84 months?"

[HowardRoark]

San Francisco would become the first major U.S. city to decriminalize prostitution if voters next month approve Proposition K — a measure that forbids local authorities from arresting or prosecuting anyone for selling sex.

The ballot question technically would not legalize prostitution since state law still prohibits it, but the measure would eliminate the power of local law enforcement officials to go after prostitutes.

Proponents say the measure will free up $11 million the police spend each year arresting prostitutes and allow them to form collectives.

But even in tolerant San Francisco, the measure faces an uphill battle, with much of the political establishment opposing it.

The San Francisco Chronicle editorialized against the measure, saying it could make the city a magnet for prostitution.

[mraynrand]

I hear William Jefferson is going to get re-elected again. I guess if you're a Democrat you can delay action on an indictment indefinitely

[mraynrand]

San Francisco would become the first major U.S. city to decriminalize prostitution if voters next month approve Proposition K — a measure that forbids local authorities from arresting or prosecuting anyone for selling sex.

The ballot question technically would not legalize prostitution since state law still prohibits it, but the measure would eliminate the power of local law enforcement officials to go after prostitutes.

Proponents say the measure will free up $11 million the police spend each year arresting prostitutes and allow them to form collectives.

But even in tolerant San Francisco, the measure faces an uphill battle, with much of the political establishment opposing it.

The San Francisco Chronicle editorialized against the measure, saying it could make the city a magnet for prostitution.

Would you be able to drop trau and get it right on the street? Sounds convenient.

[mraynrand]

Sullivan reminded jurors that former secretary of state Colin L. Powell and Sen. Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii) testified to his integrity.

Did they have anything nice to say about his eloquence and rhetoric?

[Freak Out]

San Francisco would become the first major U.S. city to decriminalize prostitution if voters next month approve Proposition K — a measure that forbids local authorities from arresting or prosecuting anyone for selling sex.

The ballot question technically would not legalize prostitution since state law still prohibits it, but the measure would eliminate the power of local law enforcement officials to go after prostitutes.

Proponents say the measure will free up $11 million the police spend each year arresting prostitutes and allow them to form collectives.

But even in tolerant San Francisco, the measure faces an uphill battle, with much of the political establishment opposing it.

The San Francisco Chronicle editorialized against the measure, saying it could make the city a magnet for prostitution.

Would you be able to drop trau and get it right on the street? Sounds convenient.

The street people/homeless in San Fransisco harass enough people as it is for handouts...imagine how bad it would get if hookers were added to that mix. No more afternoon strolls through the tenderloin.......

[mraynrand]

San Francisco would become the first major U.S. city to decriminalize prostitution if voters next month approve Proposition K — a measure that forbids local authorities from arresting or prosecuting anyone for selling sex.

The ballot question technically would not legalize prostitution since state law still prohibits it, but the measure would eliminate the power of local law enforcement officials to go after prostitutes.

Proponents say the measure will free up $11 million the police spend each year arresting prostitutes and allow them to form collectives.

But even in tolerant San Francisco, the measure faces an uphill battle, with much of the political establishment opposing it.

The San Francisco Chronicle editorialized against the measure, saying it could make the city a magnet for prostitution.

Would you be able to drop trau and get it right on the street? Sounds convenient.

The street people/homeless in San Fransisco harass enough people as it is for handouts...imagine how bad it would get if hookers were added to that mix. No more afternoon strolls through the tenderloin.......

You're right. The kind of product that would be on the street would have more like sandpaperloin.

[HowardRoark]

Obama should take this over too and spread the wealth (such as it is) around a little.

Proponents say the measure will free up $11 million the police spend each year arresting prostitutes and allow them to form collectives.

[mraynrand]

Obama should take this over too and spread the wealth (such as it is) around a little.

Proponents say the measure will free up $11 million the police spend each year arresting prostitutes and allow them to form collectives.

You're off base, Howie. This collective cited here is a reference to group sex.

[Freak Out]

Looks like things are getting ugly. Foreman better take control.

Stevens juror called violent, could be dismissed

By MATT APUZZO and JESSE J. HOLLAND
The Associated Press
Thursday, October 23, 2008; 2:07 PM

WASHINGTON -- Jurors described a violent and hectic atmosphere in the jury room at Sen. Ted Stevens' corruption trial Thursday, chaos that threatened to derail the monthlong trial of the powerful Alaska lawmaker.

In a note to the judge, jurors asked that one of their panel be sent home. The note described the female juror as rude, disrespectful and unreasonable.

"She has had violent outbursts with other jurors, and that's not helping anyone," the note read, according to U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan.

The note arrived on the second day of deliberations in the senator's trial. Hours into deliberations Wednesday, jurors told the judge that things had become stressful and asked to go home.

The latest note said "jurors are getting off course." Sullivan was weighing how to respond. He said he wanted to question the foreman about the claims of violence. Judges are loathe to interfere with jury deliberations, however, for fear it will steer jurors to one outcome.

Stevens, the longest-serving Senate Republican, is charged with lying for years on Senate financial disclosure documents to conceal $250,000 in home renovations and other gifts he received from his friend, millionaire oil contractor Bill Allen.

Tension in the jury room is normally viewed as good for a defendant, as it increases the likelihood that jurors won't get reach the unanimous decision needed for a verdict. Without a unanimous vote, a trial ends in a mistrial and prosecutors must decide whether to start over.

Defense attorney Robert Cary urged Sullivan to proceed slowly and not overreact.

"It cannot be the law that 11 people on a jury can ask that one person be removed," Cary said.

"If they're being violent they can," Sullivan responded.
© 2008 The Associated Press

[HowardRoark]

MN:

[Freak Out]

Uncle Teddy goes down. But he's not out yet.
This was one way to get Begich the fuck out of town if he can win. Can you imagine losing to a convicted felon? Ha ha.....

Sen. Ted Stevens Convicted of All Charges in Corruption Case
Despite Guilty Verdict, Alaska Lawmaker Remains on Ballot for Reelection

By Del Quentin Wilber
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, October 27, 2008; 5:05 PM

Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens was convicted today of lying on financial disclosure forms to hide tens of thousands of dollars in gifts and renovations to his Alaska home that were financed mostly by a powerful business executive and his oil services company.

The verdict was announced just after 4 p.m. in a packed courtroom in U.S. District Court in Washington. Stevens (R) sat quietly as the jury foreman said the panel had reached a unanimous decision and found Stevens guilty on all seven counts of filing false financial disclosure forms.

Jurors, who re-started their deliberations at 9:30 a.m. today when a juror was replaced by an alternate, were somber as they walked into the courtroom to deliver the verdict and did not look at Stevens. No sentencing date has been set, and Stevens' lawyers are expected to file motions seeking to have the verdict set aside.

Despite the guilty verdict, Stevens remains on the ballot in Alaska, where he is locked in a tight race with Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich.

If he can pull off an upset victory, Stevens could remain in the Senate for months, if not longer, if he chose to appeal the verdict. Tradition allows him to exhaust his appeals before the ethics committee begins expulsion hearings, according to the Historical Office of the Senate.

Harrison Williams (D-N.J.), the last senator found guilty of a felony while in office, was convicted of one count of conspiracy and two counts of bribery on May 1, 1981, part of the FBI's Abscam scandal. Williams remained in the Senate for almost 10 months before resigning on March 11, 1982, after the ethics committee had recommended to the full chamber that he be expelled.

It takes 67 votes to expel a senator.

Patti Higgins, chairwoman of the Alaska Democratic Party released a statement calling on Stevens to "immediately resign" his Senate seat.

"He knew what he was doing was wrong, but he did it anyway and lied to Alaskans about it. Alaskans deserve better from their public officials. It's time for us to elect an ethical and honest Senator who will move this state forward," Higgins said.

Stevens, who did not comment after the verdict, said in the weeks before the trial that he would not step down if convicted.

Prosecutors alleged throughout the month-long trial that Stevens, one of the most influential Republicans in the Senate, was a miser who approached a close friend to help him remodel his home in Girdwood, Alaska. That friend, Bill Allen, chief executive of the defunct oil services company Veco, testified that his company financed extensive renovations to the house from 2000 through 2002.

Veco workers testified in great detail that they helped jack up the house on stilts to transform the rustic cabin, adding a new first floor, a garage and two wrap-around decks.

In extensive e-mail traffic during that period, Stevens was kept abreast of the work by a neighbor, who lauded the work of Allen and two Veco employees.

Stevens contended that Veco played no role in the renovations, that Allen was only providing workers and that he had actually been paying the firm's moonlighting employees. He and his wife, Catherine, testified they thought a residential contractor had been in charge of the remodeling work. They paid that firm about $132,000 in 2000 and 2001 and paid other workers about $30,000.

Stevens's lawyers argued that the couple believed they had paid fair-market value for all of the work.

Prosecutors hammered Stevens in closing arguments, demanding to know why he had not refused gifts from Allen and others. Sevens said he was not aware that Veco had financed the addition of a deck in 2002 or that it was even being built until a neighbor sent him an email about it.

On the stand, he contended that he thought the residential contractor had done the job and sent Allen two notes requesting bills for the work. Stevens' lawyers had painted those requests for bills as an earnest attempt by the senator to settle any debts. But prosecutors said the letters showed on that Stevens was trying to create a paper trail.

Stevens was also accused of accepting other gifts, ranging from a $2,700 massage chair to a sled dog. Prosecutors said Stevens received the dog from a friend who bought it from a non-profit at a 2003 auction for $1,000. Stevens reported the value of the dog, Kiely, as $250 -- the price he paid for another puppy -- and said it had been given to him by the non-profit, not his friend.

"He worked so hard to hide a dog's true value," said prosecutor Brenda Morris of the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section, adding that Stevens' other alleged misdeeds were easy to believe if he went to "those lengths for a dog, to not provide the truth when he knew full-well what the truth was."

"The little things prove the big things," Morris said.

In the case of the chair, a friend testified he gave the Brookstone lounger to Stevens as a gift. But the senator sent him an email at the time saying the chair was just a loan. Stevens asserted on the witness stand that the lounger was only a loan, even though it has been in his basement for seven years.

Staff Writer Paul Kane contributed to this report.

[MJZiggy]

San Francisco would become the first major U.S. city to decriminalize prostitution if voters next month approve Proposition K — a measure that forbids local authorities from arresting or prosecuting anyone for selling sex.

The ballot question technically would not legalize prostitution since state law still prohibits it, but the measure would eliminate the power of local law enforcement officials to go after prostitutes.

Proponents say the measure will free up $11 million the police spend each year arresting prostitutes and allow them to form collectives.

But even in tolerant San Francisco, the measure faces an uphill battle, with much of the political establishment opposing it.

The San Francisco Chronicle editorialized against the measure, saying it could make the city a magnet for prostitution.

How do they prosecute human trafficking then?

[Freak Out]

Funny stuff.

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/

Is Palin setting herself up to take Ted Stevens’ Senate seat?

By Tony Hopfinger

Governor Sarah Palin just issued an updated statement on Sen. Ted Stevens’ guilty verdict, saying “the time has come for him to step aside.” But what stands out most is the next sentence in her statement. “Even if elected on Tuesday,” Palin says, “Senator Stevens should step aside to allow a special election to give Alaskans a real choice of who will serve them in Congress.”

Should Stevens emerge the winner next Tuesday and then resign, guess who might get to appoint his temporary replacement?

Governor Palin.

Alaskans are already tired of the corruption, the Palin circus, the national media, Troopergate, and the overall embarrassment their leaders have brought to the state. Stevens winning the election, resigning, and giving Palin the opportunity to appoint his replacement may just well push sourdoughs over the edge.

As of today, polls show McCain and Palin are closing in on Obama and Biden, so Palin may still end up vice president. But in the weeks before she would take the oath, Palin would possibly have the chance to appoint a temporary Senate replacement until a special election could be held, provided Stevens promptly resigned. Changes to the law by voters and the Alaska Legislature several years ago left it murky on just how a governor might go about appointing a replacement, if at all.

On the other hand, if she returns to Alaska, Palin could pursue appointing herself. Another scenario would be Palin filling Stevens’ post with a Republican seat-warmer, then running for senator in the special election. (It’d already been speculated in political circles that Palin, the self-proclaimed maverick, might consider slipping into Stevens’ seat. But this was before the trial and her joining the presidential race.)

All of this reminds Alaskans about a controversial chapter in state history, one that helped Palin politically.

When Frank Murkowski left the Senate and won the governorship in 2002, he promptly appointed his own daughter, Lisa Murkowski, as his Senate replacement. Back then, the state law allowed Alaska’s governor to make appointments without holding special elections. (That’s how Ted Stevens landed in the Senate; Governor Wally Hickel appointed him in 1968.) When Palin ran for governor against Murkowski in the Republican primary in 2006, she criticized him for appointing his daughter, even handing out flyers that said, "Who's Your Daddy?"

In 2004, Alaskans voted to change the law, calling for a special election. The Alaska Legislature also passed a law requiring a special election. The laws conflict, however, over whether the governor is allowed to appoint a temporary replacement.

Given all of this, it seems there's still wiggle room within the law for Palin to plot a course, should the stars suddenly align--as they so often do for Sarah Palin.