The Liberal Take Down of “Big Bill” – Part V

Share

NM Dem blogger Joe Monahan has some interesting information about the investigation of “Big Bill”.  He is under the opinion that the investigation is more a fishing expedition without actual evidence.  If this is true, that odor of a dead rat gets a bit stronger.

I’m beginning to really have my doubts about what is going on here in NM.

What if the problems here were magnified to detract from what is going on in Illinois and in Chicago? I think we need to learn with James Earl Obama that he will do anything to anyone so he can stay in power.  I think the hunt for Big Bill is just the latest example of it.

The really interesting part of this is how the liberal world turned on Big Bill, as if on cue, thereby ignoring the very real Democratic scandals facing James Earl Obama.

Who set up Big Bill?

“…But do we have a fishing expedition here or the real deal? Pay to play cases are usually decided with wiretaps and paper trails. That’s what happened when the Feds prosecuted the Metro Courthouse corruption case that snared Dem politico Manny Aragon as well as the corruption case against State Treasurer Vigil who was caught on tape.

Questions for this one: Were the feds wiretapping someone back in 2004 when the bond deal was being made? That seems unlikely. Did they suit someone up with a wiretap months or years after the fact and get a Big Bill aide to record the Governor admitting he was in on the deal? That seems far out. Did one of the Governor’s aides outline the pay to play deal to CDR in an e-mail? That sounds pretty stupid. If someone came forward recently and testified that he took part in a pay to play scheme with the Guv, is there any hard evidence to back that up?

Yes, the Governor is a big legal target, but not an easy one to hit. Politically, the harpooners had an easier time as the Guv withdrew his nomination to be the president’s commerce secretary because of the grand jury probe.

No one is going to underestimate the investigative prowess of the feds. They have two big notches under their belt here, but it’s important to point out amid the frenzy that an indictment only requires probable cause that a crime was committed; a conviction requires evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. The old saw about a prosecutor being able to indict a ham sandwich is still true….”

Dan Thomasson, typical liberal MSM, has a major hit piece out on Bill Richardson.  One paragraph interested me.

“…Richardson’s super ambition and his indisputable hunger for the national spotlight have caused him to make decisions detrimental to his political health. There seems little doubt about that. He clearly “dissed” the Clintons, refusing their entreaties to remain neutral during the primaries despite the fact he was appointed to two important positions in the Clinton administration. The what-goes-around-comes-around aspect of the State department post going to Hillary Clinton was certainly not lost on him or anyone else for that matter.

Whether Richardson can bounce back from this, of course, will depend on the outcome of the inquiry. If, as he contends, neither he nor anyone in his administration had done anything wrong, he might still win a new trip to Washington in another role. Obama graciously accepted his decision. But it should be noted that he did nothing to dissuade him, which should tell us something….”

Trackposted to Nuke’s, , Rosemary’s Thoughts, Allie is Wired, third world county, Political Byline, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, DragonLady’s World, Rosemary’s News and Ideas, A Newt One/ American Truth Warriors, and Leaning Straight Up, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Share

One thought on “The Liberal Take Down of “Big Bill” – Part V

Comments are closed.