Legal Schnauzer (friend of Gov. Don Siegelman) FINALLY gets noticed by The New York Times

[Octafish]

Better Late Than Never

By James Huang
WhoWhatWhy.com, Jan. 13, 2014

Applause for The New York Times , which has finally caught up to WhoWhatWhy’s reporting on the disturbing case of Roger Shuler. The Alabama journalist and blogger sits in jail as of this writing, where he has been locked up for the last 80 days, in a case vital to anyone who cares about a free press. You can read our original story here and hear from the man himself.

Shuler, a controversial figure for sure, blogged about allegations of a sordid affair between a powerful Republican scion and a lobbyist. A judge ordered the posts be removed from the Internet and Shuler has refused, citing free speech. He’s behind bars now for “contempt.”

The New York Times rightly points out that Shuler is the only person in the Western Hemisphere to join a list of imprisoned journalists, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. The list includes reporters held around the world, in places like China, Egypt and Iran.

Our question to The Times: He’s been in jail for 80 days. What took you so long?

SOURCE w mo' links: http://whowhatwhy.com/2014/01/13/better-late-than-never/

DUers have been on the case, too. Keep spreading the word. Generations to come will thank us for it.

[Blue Owl]

1. K&R

[Octafish]

3. Notice NYT did not mention Gov. Don Siegelman...

The guy was targeted by Karl Rove and his Alabama GOP Machine.

His case would go down the Memory Hole without people giving a damn. Thanks, Blue Owl!

[Blue Owl]

5. Musta got Ham Rove's faxed talking points

[sabrina 1]

11. Thanks Octafish. The Siegelman case is a travesty, of justice, but of much, much more than that.

Watching the Christie situation too is about much, much more than what we already know about how our system works, the lack of will on the part of Democrats to STAND UP against bullying, against corruption, as in the Siegelman case and in the case of ACORN. The complicity of OUR party, their willingness to quickly abandon their own GOOD Dems, and Siegelman is one of the good guys, has disgusted many people over the past decade or so.

THAT is what needs to be fixed so that we have no more Siegelmans, no more Dems supporting bullies and right wingers like Christie, no more jailing of bloggers who actually have the guts to stand up for people like Siegelman when his own party is too frightened to do so.

What ARE they afraid of? If there is some kind of coercion going on then they NEED TO TELL THE PEOPLE.

And look what happens when someone actually does stand up to them, as in the case of the Fort Lee Mayor while most of his own party were bowing down in front of Christie. THE TRUTH emerges because bullies cannot take anyone standing up them and when someone does, they reveal themselves.

So sick of being on the losing side of issues that we SHOULD be on the winning side of. But that would take guts and REAL Dems and we seem to be in short supply of both on our side of the aisle.

I was thinking about Siegelman today. Being targeted by Rove and his criminal cohorts is bad, but imagine how he must feel about the abandonment of his own party?

ACORN expressed how they felt when the party for whom they signed up over one million voters in 2008 so quickly threw them by the wayside: 'It hurt'! Yes, it did, badly. As did Dems supporting Christie and Dems abandoning Siegelman, and Dems supporting Bush's wars etc etc.

[pscot]

15. K&R this!

[Mnemosyne]

2. K&R for more visibility. nt

[Octafish]

4. If not us, Who?

DU and the Internet have helped keep this important story alive. Thank you for remembering Gov. Donald Siegelman and Roger "The Legal Schnauzer" Shuler, Mnemosyne!

[hootinholler]

6. " Generations to come will thank us for it."

If and only if they hear about it.

[Octafish]

32. That's why DU and the Internets are important.

Last edited Thu Jan 16, 2014, 07:48 PM - Edit history (1)

This is why I think the world of real journalism: Justice, Democracy and Liberty (for starters) depend on it.

Mind The Credibility Gap: Syria And The History Of US War Disinformation

By James Henry
WhoWhatWhy.com on Sep 30, 2013

Americans—and others—are in heated discussion these days over whether an attack on Syria might be justified by alleged use of chemical weapons. But no such discussion is complete without consideration of a long history of disinformation disseminated in order to drum up support for overseas wars.

SNIP...

Skunks, Bogies, Silent Hounds, and the Flying Fish

Was this just a small mistake? To quote a recently declassified NSA internal history titled, Skunks, Bogies, Silent Hounds, and the Flying Fish:

“… it is not simply that there is a different story as to what happened; it is that no attack happened that night [emphasis original].”

Even more troubling, subsequent inquiries revealed that the Navy, the intelligence establishment, and the Johnson administration all knew the attack claim was a calculated lie, part of a deliberate strategy of justifying a widened conflict. In point of fact, the CIA had been orchestrating the shelling of the North Vietnamese coast, and the Maddox had been sailing provocatively close to shore–in North Vietnamese waters.

When North Vietnamese patrol boats approached, the Maddox fired on them first. This was not a case of North Vietnamese aggression. Yet, this story became the justification for a war that cost the lives of 58,220 Americans and well over a million Vietnamese, Laotians and Cambodians, plus hundreds of thousands of wounded on all sides.

War with Iraq: Part One

Then came a few small wars based on big lies: the invasion of Grenada, the invasion of Panama, and the proxy war in Nicaragua among them. But the Vietnam disaster had turned so many Americans against large-scale military commitments abroad that it wasn’t until 1990 that the US public came to support another big war-–this time following Saddam Hussein’s invasion of the oil-rich kingdom of Kuwait.

As usual, Americans were presented with a context-free story of what supposedly happened – a story that contained no hint of behind-the-scenes diplomatic machinations encouraging Hussein to think the US would not oppose his marching into Kuwait. And this simplistic black-and-white tale was bolstered with emotionally charged imagery of dead babies – a staple of war propagandists going back to World War I and before.

Saddam the Baby Killer

Remember Nayirah, the young Kuwaiti girl who testified before Congress? She said she saw Iraqi soldiers storm the hospital where she worked, and dump newborn babies out of their incubators, leaving them on the cold floor to die.

It was all an elaborate fraud. Soon after the war ended, a New York Times article outed the outrageously brazen trick being played on the American people by its own government. Nayirah, it turned out, was no ordinary Kuwaiti—she was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States. And her testimony about dead preemies “was arranged by the big public relations firm of Hill & Knowlton on behalf of a client, the Kuwaiti-sponsored Citizens for a Free Kuwait, which was then pressing Congress for military intervention.” In short, the “atrocity” never happened.

CONTINUED...

http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/09/30/mind-the-credibility-gap-syria-and-the-history-of-us-war-disinformation/

Now, the same folks 'n' forces want to make Iran glow -- just for the OIL (as Ray McGovern succinctly and acronymically reminds us).

Gates Conceals Real Story of "Gaming" Obama on Afghan War

By Gareth Porter
Monday, 13 January 2014 09:31, IPS News | Report

Criticism in the memoirs of former secretary of defence Robert M. Gates of President Barack Obama’s lack of commitment to the Afghan War strategy of his administration has generated a Washington debate about whether Obama was sufficiently supportive of the war.

But the Gates account omits two crucial historical facts necessary to understanding the issue. The first is that Obama agreed to the escalation only under strong pressure from his top national security officials and with very explicit reservations. The second is that Gen. David Petraeus reneged on his previous commitment to support Obama’s 2009 decision that troop withdrawal would begin by mid-2011.

Gates makes only the most glancing reference in the newly published “Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary of War” to the issue of the beginning of troop withdrawal from Afghanistan.

The former defence secretary refers to “suspicion and distrust of senior military officers” by both Obama and vice president Joe Biden. And he describes a Mar. 3, 2011 National Security Council meeting in the White House situation room which Obama opened by criticising the military for “popping off in the press” and vowing to push back against any military delay in beginning the withdrawal.

Gates quotes Obama as saying, “ If I believe I am being gamed . . .” and says he left the sentence “hanging there with the clear implication the consequences would be dire.”

Gates writes that he was “pretty upset,” because he thought “implicitly accusing Petraeus” of “gaming” him at a big meeting in the Situation Room was “inappropriate, not to mention highly disrespectful of Petraeus.”

“As I sat there,” Gates recalls, “I thought: the president doesn’t trust his commander, can’t stand [Afghanistan President Hamid] Karzai, doesn’t believe in his own strategy, and doesn’t consider the war to be his. For him, it’s all about getting out.”

CONTINUED...

http://truth-out.org/news/item/21181-gates-conceals-real-story-of-gaming-obama-on-afghan-war

Without people who give a damn -- and bother to read, let alone research and write -- we are up the War Party's creek without a paddle or a light, let alone a dry match. Thank Moon for DU.

[sabrina 1]

40. Great post, Octafish. Thanks, and you are so right. More free press and more sunshine on those who

prefer to operate in the dark, means more Democracy.

[Octafish]

46. D'oh! Forgot the link...

http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/09/30/mind-the-credibility-gap-syria-and-the-history-of-us-war-disinformation/

Most important: Thank you for the kind words, sabrina 1! The Founders named only one business in the entire Constitution: the press, and made it a citizen's right to think and say and print in freedom. Even with all their wealth and power, how sad and small are those who work to hide truth and shut down discusdion. Going by what I'm hearing, their reign is soon ending.

[antigop]

7. K&R. nt

[druidity33]

8. I sent Gov. Siegelman a dozen cool blank notecards...

and a letter of support while he was in jail. Got a nice letter back, he really appreciated getting the cards. Maybe i'll send some cards to Shuler... hopefully he won't be there too long.

K&R

[sabrina 1]

12. Thank you for doing that. His case needs to be kept in the news until the REAL Criminals who

railroaded him are brought to justice and he has re-established his political career.

[OnyxCollie]

9. K&R. nt

[octoberlib]

10. K&R

[madfloridian]

13. Thanks so much for this post.

A very very small sign of recognition of an overwhelmingly big problem.

[msanthrope]

14. Excellent...now he's gotta retain an attorney. nt

[Coyotl]

16. K&R

Would be good if they did more than pick up the story.

[rhett o rick]

17. So what has the current Democratic Administration done to right this wrong?

In my opinion, one of the deals with the devil that Obama made to become president was to let Gov Siegleman rot in jail and pardon the Bush War Criminals.

[sabrina 1]

18. I don't think there has ever been a case where corruption was so clear and proven, yet Democrats

chose to look the other way. It is sickening. Republicans stood up for Siegelman more courageously than our own party.

They should understand one thing, when you don't stand up against such egregious injustice when you have a chance to do so, you may very well be next and who will stand up for you?

The Christie situation is a perfect example. All those Dems who supported Christie now look like the cowards they are and I hope every last one of them is challenged in a primary and loses, they don't belong in public office. BUT the Democrat who refused to bow down to the Republican Bully and who DID suffer the consequences, for a short time, exposed the whole corrupt Christie operation simply by doing the right thing.

I am disgusted by the cowardice, the collaboration of our own party with some of the worst, most evil right wing bullies, not just Christie, but Bush/Cheney et al, ever.

We never had a chance of changing anything because those we supported were not willing to stand up and fight for what was right. The Democratic Leadership who abandoned their own candidate in NJ in favor of the Republican should now have to answer for that betrayal. There is more to explain than what Christie's administration did. WE as Democrats including Buono and the few who refused to go along with the Dem position on supporting a Republican, Right Wing Bully.

We need answers now as to why the Democratic Candidate was left to fend for herself. Because there is an election coming up, and this was not the first time the Dem Leadership abandoned the Dem Candidate in favor of the Republican.

[rhett o rick]

19. The simple minded among us have decided that all Democrats are good. If you try to tell them

otherwise, they put their fingers in their ears and close their eyes and start the mantra, "Democrats can do no wrong". They are ignorant cowards.

I support a strong healthy Democratic Party, free from the conservatives that have taken over.

[Recursion]

20. Siegelman wasn't in prison for basically all of Obama's first term

He was released on bail in 2008 and didn't lose his appeal until the spring of 2012.

[sabrina 1]

21. He is in prison now and as even many Republicans have stated, he DOESN'T BELONG there. There is more

than enough evidence to prove this man is INNOCENT and even more that proves that he was Politically targeted by Karl Rove and his minions, including WITNESSES, REPUBLICAN witnesses who had a conscience and revealed what they knew about the plot to 'punish' him.

Any decent AG would have opened an investigation of this case. That same AG did exactly for Ted Stevens who actually DID what he was accused of but because of a tainted prosecution, right had a reversal of his conviction.

Explain please why the Republican was treated so differently from the Democrat by this DOJ?? A lot of people have been asking that question.

[Recursion]

24. Huh? Did he not take the money, or did he not appoint Scrushy to the board?

I've seen arguments that that "shouldn't be considered really illegal", but I haven't seen any arguments that he didn't actually do it.

He took half a million dollars "for his campaign" in return for putting a corrupt Republican health insurance executive on the state hospital board. Yeah, why would that possibly be bad?

[sabrina 1]

25. What do you mean 'did HE not take the money'? No, HE did not profit in any way if that is your

question. You don't seem to be acquainted with the facts of this case and more than willing to spread the Karl Rove version. How sad.

[Recursion]

26. "a campaign" or "a foundation" or "a charity" is how pols take bribes

So, he took the money and appointed a corrupt republican health insurance executive to the state hospital board.

The prosecution was screwed up 7 ways to Sunday, and that might be grounds for a pardon, but "he's innocent" certainly isn't.

[ljm2002]

35. He RE-appointed Scrushy to that board...

...the same one he'd been appointed to before by other pols including Republicans.

There was never shown to be any quid pro quo here. Nothing he did, NOTHING, was other than standard practice among not only Alabama politicians, but politicians all over the country. Basically if what Siegelman did was illegal, then every single politician in the country should be in jail because they ALL ask for donations to various causes and they ALL appoint people to various boards -- and sometimes the appointees are the same people who have made donations. Think about, for example, ambassadorships at the federal level. Everyone knows those are patronage jobs: they go to people who have made political donations. So which of our last, say, 20 Presidents should have gone to prison over that?

So no, Siegelman did not take a bribe. He did not "take the money". There is no way in hell he should be in prison and no way in hell that Rove should be out of prison.

BTW you should look into the case in more detail before spouting off. It reminds me of that lady who got scalded with McDonald's coffee -- everyone and their brother suddenly "knew" what happened and how stupid she was for driving while spilling coffee on herself and then trying to blame someone else. Except that what everyone "knew" was wrong, based on a carefully crafted campaign by McDonald's public relations people. Similarly, people like you spout nonsense about the Siegelman case, based on sound bites you've read in the MSM, as put out there by Rove and his minions, but without any understanding of the case. Really I urge you to read more on this case, including the letter from 200 attorneys including many state AGs, before you continue spreading a version of the story that is basically wrong.

[sabrina 1]

41. Thank you, inconvenient facts to some. For whatever reason.

Excellent post btw.

[rhett o rick]

22. I guess I dont understand your point. If you are trying to say that Pres Obama has no responsibility

here, you are delusional. He didnt even fire the US Attorney that was guilty of railroading the Governor. And his DoJ fought to make the Governor's sentence longer. Now he is replacing the corrupt US Attorney with one equally rotten.

Some here seem to be able to rationalize that it's cool for Obama to let Gov Siegelman rot in jail while Bush and Cheney walk free. And when Obama pardons Bush and Cheney, his fan club will gladly kiss their (Bush and Cheney) feet.

I say let Bush and Cheney rot in hell along with anyone that pardons them and along with those that condone such actions.

[Recursion]

23. I'm saying he would not pardon him while he wasn't in prison

Now that he is, he may pardon him at the end of his term, but by that point he'll have something like a year left anyways.

Incidentally, I haven't seen any evidence that Siegleman didn't in fact take money in exchange for giving a corrupt health insurance executive a seat on the state's hospital board. In fact, I've seen some pretty convincing arguments that that is what actually happened.

[sabrina 1]

28. He should not be pardoned. The conviction should be overturned, tainted as it was. The same WAY TED

STEVENS' was overturned. Why was it so easy for the DOJ to overturn the Republican's conviction, rightly imo as there was evidence of corruption by the prosecution, although the crime itself was not in question, unlike in Siegelman's case where there was no crime. Unless EVERYONE who ever did what he did is guilty of a crime.

What was the difference to the DOJ between these cases where both had evidence of corruption in the prosecutorial process? Guilty or not, I agreed with the overturning of Ted Stevens' conviction and fully expected the same treatment for the even more egregious corruption in Siegelman's case.

But then, we expected a lot which never happened. War Criminals, Wall St. Criminals, the restoration of the rule of law, 'no one is above the law', right? What a joke it all is. And to see ANYONE here try to justify what happened to Siegelman makes me sick, frankly.

This is NOT about Obama. To some it appears that EVERYTHING is about Obama. It is about a GOOD DEMOCRAT railroaded by one of the most evil people, hell even Bush Sr. hated him, to ever appear on the political scene in this country. Siegelman is not the first of his victims. And we thought at one time that something might finally be done about Karl Rove. And here on DU we are now seeing actual defenses of that criminal. Maybe we should just accept it, the coup has been completed and we ALL should just get on board. After all, too many already have.

[Recursion]

29. I agree it probably should; the prosecution was compromised from day 1

And Canary should have been forced to recuse herself. I also think Don was corrupt and AL voters unceremoniously dumped him for a reason.

[sabrina 1]

30. Don Siegelman was not corrupt. Far from it as even former Republican adversies have stated.

If he was then there is not a single politician in this country who is not corrupt. Siegelman was one of the good politicians. He QUESTIONED the 2000 election results and that put him on Karl Rove's hit list. They never stopped trying to 'get him'. Just like Christie and his gang of Republican thugs went after Democrats who refused to endorse him. I see all the outrage over what Christie's people did. But what they did pales to what Rove did to Siegleman, even YOU fell for it apparently. I remember when Siegelman had the courage to speak out about the 2000 election when he was elected as Governor. It gave me hope at the time, that a Democrat was not afraid of Bush et al. How naive we were back then, actually believing that Dems would be the ones to end the REAL corruption, the War Crimes, the lies the secret governments etc.

I still remember Siegelman at that time and how popular he was among Democrats for his courage and decency compared to the dark, corrupt administration that had grabbed power. How quickly we forget. Some of us do not though.

A man has lost his freedom for ONE REASON, he crossed Karl Rove.

Rove will never be held accountable for his crimes because there are not many like Siegelman or the Mayor of Fort Lee who have the guts to speak out when it is needed. Most cave and collaborate and that is why people have given up hope for this country.

[red dog 1]

38. "AL voters unceremonously dumped him for a reason"?

I don't think so.

"Siegelman lost reelection in 2002 to Republican Bob Riley after a few thousand votes from a small rural county mysteriously were discovered in a polling place vacated by Democratic poll-watchers after polls closed."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bennet-l-gershman/why-is-don-siegelman_b_3094147.html/

[zappaman]

27. "when Obama pardons Bush and Cheney"

Bookmarking your reply for future laughter.

[sabrina 1]

31. I hope you're laughing at the idea that the Rule of Law will ever be applied to War Criminals in

this country, the rest of the world is, though it is not exactly happy laughter, just 'are you kidding' kind of laughter.

[rhett o rick]

45. Looks like the "dont commit" strategy.

When asked if they would support the President if he cut SS and or Medicare, or when he sign "indefinite detention" into law, or the fast-track of TPP, or further investigations of the NSA, the response, some here wont answer directly but scoff and hide behind ridicule.

I will not support a decision by the President to pardon the Bush War Criminals. Is that so hard to say?

[rhett o rick]

36. So I take it you would not support such pardons? nm

[Dr. Strange]

33. “Idiocy is not a zero-sum game.”

This is my favorite quote for the next week.

[Octafish]

34. It is a great quote. Then the NYT article ends by saying Shuler is his own worst enemy...

...leaving readers with the impression that is so.

The real enemy is Karl Rove and his bosses in the BFEE -- they're the ones who field an army of crooked lawyers, judges and badges to lock up a journalist without trial and to frame and imprison Gov. Don Siegelman.

The only bigger shame is that Bush, Riley, Fuller and the rest remain free, unpunished for their various acts of treason.

[rhett o rick]

37. I am thinking that the real enemy are those that pretend to be Democrats that will not

prosecute. We know Rove, Bush and Cheney are rotten. But those that allow them freedom must share the rot.

Someone scoffed at my suggestion that Pres Obama might pardon the Bush Gang. I think it's a real possibility in the name of healing an open wound. If we arent going to prosecute then why not pardon?

[sabrina 1]

42. In a way, he has already pardoned, or exonerated or forgiven them. So why the scoffing? Have they

forgotten 'we are going to move on' from all those war crimes? I took THAT as an exoneration so nothing to scoff at in the suggestion at all Rhett. It has already been done.

[rhett o rick]

44. I understand but when Sen Warren is elected president, she may not be so accommodating.

just sayin.

[red dog 1]

39. UPDATE; Thursday, Jan. 16..."Robert Shuler Was Victim of Gross Police Brutality"

(Thanks to Octafish for starting this thread)


January 16, 2014
EVIDENCE REVEALS ROGER SHULER WAS VICTIM OF GROSS POLICE BRUTALITY, BUT NO EVIDENCE OF ARREST WARRANT

This is Carol, Roger's wife...An Alabama deputy shoved Legal Schnauzer publisher Roger Shuler to a concrete floor three times and maced him before ever stating that he was inside the Shuler home to make an arrest.

That was one of several stunning revelations during Shuler's resisting arrest trial in Shelby County Tuesday
Much of the evidence was produced from a stream from a video that was generated by a camera in the vehicle of Deputy Chris Blevins.

"In the audio you can hear Deputy Blevins assaulting me three times and spraying me with mace before he ever said that he was on the premises to conduct an arrest," Shuler said.
"The evidence showed that I was defending myself with the only physical act that I did according to Blevins' own words was raising my arms in a defensive posture, and I was defending myself against a grotesque example of police brutality and excessive force."
Evidence showed that Blevins probably had no warrant given that the prosecution could produce no warrant at the trial.
"The notion that a journalist or any other citizen could be arrested and beaten up in their own home without a warrant should be a cause of great concern for all citizens."

Assistant District Attorney Tonya Willingham prosecuted the case and when forced to turn over copies of any warrants, she said she did not have one.
How can a resisting arrest case be prosecuted when there are no warrants in evidence?
That's one of many disturbing questions raised by Tuesday's trial.

Read more:
http://www.legalschnauzer.blogspot.com/

[sabrina 1]

43. Shameful but all too familiar abuse of power for political purposes. These people NEED our support

right now. The scumbags responsible for him being in jail are counting on no one knowing what they are doing.

Thanks for the link. Does he need financial help, an attorney?

I used to follow his blog on the Siegelman case back when people on our side actually cared about such corruption. He deserves support for never giving up on telling the truth when others were too afraid to do so.