76 Responses

1. Does anyone know if Mr Finally watched porn backwards so he could see the prostitute pay the guy?

2. Noting what I summarized infra [August 26, 2015 at 2:25 pm] and notwithstanding the detritus constantly sprinkled upon us all by DD, I maintain the key-issues continue to be the following:

   [1]–the fact that the case is going to trial was predictable because, at a preliminary hearing level, the protestations of the defense-attorney (e.g., whining “we didn’t have sufficient time”) fail.

   [2]–AG-Kane inexplicably back-tracked on her claim to want to release the “porn” e-mails, and continues to do so.

   [3]–no one has addressed the potential culpability of Baldwin.

   [4]–someone should ask Corbett of his perception of FF.

   [5]–AG-Kane continues to diminish [both substantively and visually].

3. @ DD:

   Consider this cogent assessment of both the e-mails and their jammed-gun impact:

   “Revealing emails released, AG-Kane defense less revealing”

   …Now those emails are out there. Kane promised that when they were released the story would be clearer and she’d answer any and all questions from the media. Neither has happened.

   “While the Supreme Court released everything that the Supreme Court had, there are other courts involved and there is other material involved that still needs to come out,” OAG spokesman Chuck Ardo said Wednesday afternoon. “That is part of her continuing effort to clear herself.”

   Naked pictures are plentiful, but the naked truth is still elusive in this saga. She’s charged with leaking secret grand jury information and lying about it under oath. Kane’s attorney, Gerald Shargel, was asked point-blank Monday following Kane’s preliminary hearing, “What do porn emails have to do with accusations that Kane lied to a grand jury?”

   Shargel’s answer was not nearly as revealing as the attachments.

   “This is a very involved, very complicated storyline,” Shargel began, but was interrupted by the reporter who said it’s a simple question.

   “It is a simple question, but I’m not going to be answering it here before you,” Shargel said to the assembled media.

   abc27.com/2015/08/26/revealing-emails-released-ag-kane-defense-less-revealing/

4. @ DD:

   The linkage of AG-Kane and Hillary extends to Lois Lerner…

   foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/25/irs-reveals-existence-another-lois-lerner-email-account/

   …and, although it’s true that they share the same sex, their dominant overlap is their arrogance and elitism, characteristics of Dems that you consistently exhibit on this website.

   *

   Furthermore, your latest rationalization [“if she used her personal email to send to a staffer’s work account, there would be a record of the email exchange on the staffer’s account of both sides of the communication”] is patently false if both sender/recipient employ the same private server which its owner subsequently wipes-clean [“you mean with a cloth?”].

   *

   You then advise that AG-Kane could “update her early “misstatements”,” a procedure that you certainly would have condemned if Scooter Libby had attempted it [in a far less volatile situation, particularly when the prosecutor already knew his boss Cheney hadn’t been the leaker].

   “O, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive!”

   brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/walterscot118003.html#pkpWG64UdorG4x2U.99″

   AG-Kane has lied so often and with such aplomb that she would have to shed her entire paradigm [and shred your myriad rationalizations in the process, publicly] were she to attempt to reconstruct a cogent defense @ this late date.

   Indeed, your advice [“just maintain that she has a different recollection/memory of events, or corner some witnesses in cross-examination into a contradiction. Kane, being a party to the conversations, can easily provide information/insight that the DA “neglected” to mention”] would fit the mold of a Hillary who was scampering for cover in the former Yugoslavia, years ago], but wouldn’t square with her numerous public [strident] utterances.

   *

   Such fantasy leads to your already-rebutted endpoint-desire [“Kane could hang a jury unwilling to see her take a fall after exposing the scandalous behavior that preceded her tenure”], if for no other reason than others [including Larry] have clearly articulated; the jurors are given a checklist that precludes incorporation of potentially-mitigating circumstances related to alleged-motive.

   *

   You really should work on maintaining a longer attention-span when contending with cogent comments uploaded by everyone else on this website, for your tendency to rebut the most recent entry presupposes that the reader shares your selective-amnesia for your prior assertions.

5. Okay let’s be honest here it don’t take a rocket scientist to figure this out she is an evil bitch who is going after 2 guys I’m sure everyone here on this forum is smart enough to know they weren’t just sending the emails back and forth to each other’s email so who else has to fall if one goes they all go and do we know for a fact that the emails were sent fro. Them becuase I’m sure there job if they recieved an email they would have to open it becuase they get info I’m sure thru email. This lady is just plain nuts. She is so corrupt that she is trying to cover her ass anyway she can. How come her sister hasn’t been brought up on any charges yet. How many cars did she wreck that have been pushed under the carpet this case is total bullshit

6. rsklaroff-

   You linked Kane and Clinton because they both have v@ginas, and that scares you. Pretty much everybody mixes business/work and personal emails. Coworkers with both will use either. Depending upon what device you have in your hand, you could wind up replying from either account.

   It’s not a big deal, because if she used her personal email to send to a staffer’s work account, there would be a record of the email exchange on the staffer’s account of both sides of the communication.

   That’s what everybody conveniently forgets: an email is not like a written letter. With an email, BOTH parties have a copy (one in sent folder and one in inbox folder).

   Nothing to rationalize away. The Trib’s timeline makes a compelling case for abuse of the legal system by Fina (and Carpenter complicit).

   The perjury charge will be the easiest one to beat. She can do what Morrow did and update her early “misstatements”, or just maintain that she has a different recollection/memory of events, or corner some witnesses in cross-examination into a contradiction. Kane, being a party to the conversations, can easily provide information/insight that the DA “neglected” to mention.

   “In a new appearance six weeks later, Morrow changed his story substantially, according to a filing by a special prosecutor in the case. Morrow wanted to “correct some previous misstatements he made concerning Adrian King,” the filing said.”

   But, given the opportunity to put Fina (and maybe even Carpenter) on the stand, Kane could hang a jury unwilling to see her take a fall after exposing the scandalous behavior that preceded her tenure.

7. @ DD:

   You really have lotsa stuff to rationalize-away, starting from the multiple challenges that I imported from other pages…

   [vide infra]

   …to an Inqy article…

   philly.com/philly/news/politics/20150827_As_prosecutors_investigated_Kane__they_honed_in_on_her_private_email.html

   …to allegations summarized on another page @ this site…

   https://www.politicspa.com/kane-frequently-used-private-email-account/68730/#comments

   …with the latter providing a loop back to my prescient linkage of AG-Kane with Hillary.

8. Hey Candy Cane show me a Lawyer that does not Lie in Court and I will show you someone who is not a Lawyer

9. OK Larry they made her lie under oath.

10. Porno Dave for PRESIDENT.

11. The State Supreme Court should assume Jurisdiction on this case as it is a Matter of great public importence . Judge Carpenter , Fina , Constanzo and others should share a Jail Cell for their Involment in a Fraud Upon The Courts and Abuse of The Grant Jury for Personal Porposes . Fina through his E Mails has proven himself to be a disgusting person and anyone who he has Prosecutedor Helped to Prosecute should be set Free . Why Is Kane going through this when the Point about Mondasire is a MOOT Point as he was not Prosecuted Grand Jury Secrecy in Pennsylvania Is The biggest Joke in The World they might as well be Help in Open Court . FREE KATHY KANE NOW or Republicans will Lose Many Elections at The Ballot Box Besides Montgomery County is solidly Democrat Now No Democrat will ever Vote to Convict The First Democrat Elected to AG and The First Woman to be elected AG They do not have a Prayer

12. CandyCane-

    Porno Dave should do a film series: Fina’s Fantasies

    It can be a multi-film project highlighting different areas of Fina’s sexual depravity, based on his emails.

13. Porno Dave for AG.

14. CandyCane-

    It’s also completely inappropriate in an AG office that’s supposed to be going after sexual predators, not sympathizing with them.

15. Porn is cool and LEGAL.

16. The Trib article contains a VERY interesting timeline that appears to support Kane’s allegations against Fina, and special treatment of Fina by Carpenter:

    triblive.com/mobile/8975265-96/court-emails-kane

17. If I got called for jury duty: Frank Fina / Guilty ; Josh Morrow / Guilty; Adrian King / Guilty , Judge Carpenter/ Guilty, Kathleen Kane / Not Guilty by reason of mental defect.

18. Are these are best and brightest?

19. Well a quick review of the emails I saw the name Rob Soup who I still believes works there. Also, a lot of emails originated from Lawrence Gerrard who may be retired. But was he retired when he sent them. If so does that have any impact on his pension.

20. Given the reaction female jurors would likely have to Fina’s emails:

    1) What are the prosecution’s chances of getting an all-male jury?

    2) How many women would need to be on the jury to get a hung jury or jury nullification by at least one woman wanting to see Kane go free for exposing these guys (and believing they abused the grand jury system to create the case against her in the first place)?

21. Here is a fact u losers fail to understand … KK is toast and will be lucky to survive her term … But so are the people who took her out … In my opinion that’s a win for her because Fina tried to use his knowledge of the GJ process to protect his own interests.

    Fina played Judge Carpenter for fool and with the FBI now involved the Supreme Court decided to come clean. This is only the beginning, porn emails is the least of Fina’s worries, just wait.

22. I look at porn every day I make movies and stars. So Kathy Kakes says a couple of guys looked at porn. So she’s innocent of leaking grand jury testimony? Makes a lot of sense. To a liberal I guess.

23. lary you and davis daino says cathlen kain posed newd for porno sights but you aint got no way to proof it, the genral attney aint never be the kinda girl to pose for pleyboye or enny udder magzne, qwit sayn she in to porno,

24. The entire AG staff (past and present) sound like hideously despicable persons and the taint of judicial machinations to oppose rivals or support their friends is unworthy of their positions of trust. This extends to DA offices and their “new” (re-cycled) staffers. They should all resign and clean out the stables of PA govt. Frankly, I am not really surprised by much of this. DA’s, the OAG, and courts from top to bottom in PA have been unethical almost forever. So when does somebody tie the PA State Police and their legal staff into this chain of porn emails?

25. Larry

    If everyone else is driving at 70, you are safer also driving at 70, than 50, creating traffic problems with a 20 mph speed differential.

    But if the cop is corrupt, out goes his testimony.

26. However, if I am on the jury and I am presented with both sets of facts — the driver was speeding AND was pulled over by a racist officer with a history of pulling over only minority drivers, I would never convict. I say if this be nullification, let us make the most of it.

27. DD, agreed, but it would not be a defense if the driver is in fact speeding or otherwise violating the law.

28. Larry

    If the cops are pulling over only black people, or cars of specific makes or only women, then that is a problem.

29. Peggy, when you get pulled over for speeding, do you say to the state trooper, “but other drivers were speeding too!”? If so, how’d that work out for you?

30. Larry

    You are assuming that the jury understands and follows those instructions, ignoring any gut feelings and motives.

    Half the country doesn’t even believe in evolution.

31. There were so many links in bonusgate that a plumber was needed and couldn’t plug all the holes! How come no one was charged with those leaks? Why weren’t the leaks investigated with another grand jury?

32. Larry

    You keep saying she lied under oath. But, you haven’t cross examined the witnesses, or challenged their interpretation of events, or seen if they have errors/inconsistencies with other testimony.

    You don’t actually know that she lied. Also, isn’t it knowingly lied? If she believes what she is saying, it’s not perjury.

    Note: plenty of people here are claiming she’s delusional. Well, that cuts against the perjury charge if she deluded herself into thinking people agreed with her that didn’t, or supported her interpretations.

    I see that with my boss all the time after a meeting thinking the staff agrees with him, when none do.

33. David, you’re just plain wrong that “Motive is a necessary element for people to be feel it’s proven”, unless you’re talking about the court of public opinion. The judge gives instructions to the jury and lays out exactly what the elements of each offense are. The jury must go through and say yes or no to the elements of each offense. Motive is never one of those elements. It helps with the story-telling to the jury, but it’s not one of the elements.

34. Larry

    No. They spent a lot of time delving into her motives.

    For example, let’s say she exclaimed: “Gee, I wish public knew about this so Fina would get his comeuppance.”

    Coloring that with motive, and subjective testimony, can paint her idle wish into an order and a conspiracy plot.

    Motive is a necessary element for people to be feel it’s proven.

    Example two: Two people accuse Trump of robbing $100 from a liquor store and identify him in a line up. What twelve people are going to believe he needs $100 so badly that he has to rob a store?

    Now, if he was caught on tape, and you had fingerprints, you might have a case. But, he’d just pay the store owner a million to drop the charges anyway.

35. David, that would be outrageous if Carpenter “helped” Fina do anything. But lying to a grand jury is lying to a grand jury. Kane is claiming that her enemies “corruptly manufactured” an investigation into her, but she chose to lie under oath. They couldn’t make her do that.

36. Larry

    If Carpenter acted to help Fina, then the grand jury is absolutely compromised. He made regular decisions about what was allowed into evidence and testimony that a fair/unbiased judge may not have.

    Should a person be subject to a perjury charge against hearsay testimony that should not have been allowed?

    I would hope not, but the law is very corruptly managed and interpreted.

37. David,

    You said, “the DA’s case relies on Kane’s motives to connect unrelated dots to fit their narrative.” No, it does not. The DA only has to prove that she released the Mondesire documents, not why she did that. I explained the concept of mens rea to you before. As for the lying to a grand jury, Kane made clear statements that are either true or they are not. She didn’t say “I don’t remember.”

38. DelcoDemWoman-

    I’m sure he’ll continue to pull stuff from dead PoliticsPA threads. He can’t stay on topic of the current thread.

    Larry
    Well, the main one of them got a plea deal for immunity for his own actions. Pretty much everything claiming Kane is lying is he-said-she-said hearsay, and can be chalked up to different perceptions of what each party interpreted or different recollections as to the order of events or simply poor memory. That doesn’t even go into potential motivations to lie.

    I don’t see a jury convicting and sending Kane to jail for thinking she lied about crimes that wouldn’t even have a jail sentence.

    But, as to motives/timeline, I question the narrative that puts the leak before the emails. While the public may not have known about Fina’s pornographic predispositions, Kane had to have known it a year before during her Sandusky investigation.

    So, why would she need to hurt him with the leak, when the porn emails were far more devastating? The motive is critical, because the DA’s case relies on Kane’s motives to connect unrelated dots to fit their narrative.

    It’s like: you wanted to kill him and used a fork to stab him (non-fatally), even though you had a gun in the other hand that you didn’t use.

39. MontcoPA Dem, so your last question (and the answer to it) suggest that you’re okay with jury nullification. Figures.

40. If Kane said something possibly untrue to the Grand Jury, but she believed it to be true — is that perjury? If Kane’s recollection of an event is different from others who also were present — is that perjury? If Kane broke the law so that she could stop the actions of a runaway corrupt public official, would a jury convict her?

    I believe the answers to all of the above would be no.

41. Tim, would those alleged leaks in any way excuse Kane’s leaking of Mondesire documents and lying under oath to a grand jury?

42. Leaks seem to follow whereever Fina goes. Maybe the man can get work as a plumber after he’s disbarred.

43. Is it too late to investigate the grand jury leaks of the bonusgate grand jury to Dennis Roddy of the Post-Gazette while Tom Corbett was AG and Fina was prosecuting public officials on their email correspondence? No one was trying to embarrass the AG back then, so no one cared.

44. This is indicative of the RAPE CULTURE we live in … Fina should never be in a position of public trust ever again!

    Maybe this is why Fina showed an inexcusable lack of urgency in charging and stopping serial sexual predator Jerry Sandusky. Fina would never be able to take the recommendation of a female subordinate prosecutor Jonelle Eshbach seriously because his view of women is so twisted.

    If I were a women that worked for him in the OAG I would be filing a sexual harassment claim against Fina and every attorney general that allowed Fina to run amok!

    Seth “the Balla” your up!

45. DelcoDemWoman, as far as I can tell, Kane is claiming that she lied to a grand jury, but it’s okay because that grand jury should never have been established in the first place. And the leaked documents were not confidential grand jury materials (despite every one of her attorneys telling her that they were). Neither of these defenses will work, but that seems to be what she’s saying.

46. Thats exactly what I want to know Larry. I totally agree Montco PA Dem. And Rsklaroff can you repeat that one more time, I got lost somewhere in that webbed maze.

47. “@dgambacorta is digging”. I hope that’s not a euphemism.

    Or as David would say:

    This is all Joe Sestak’s fault.

48. @ DD:

    This is drawn from postings to which you didn’t reply on a prior page [and its predecessor] on this website; Larry’s query seems to say-it-all, and the goal is to ensure that the threads backward your to key-admissions have been preserved.

    politicspa.com /breaking-kathleen-kane-going-to-trial/68659/#comments

    You claim the perjury charge is bogus by conjuring an alternative narrative that is in keeping with your penchant for historical revisionism; as noted earlier, she failed to heed Nixon’s warning against hating your enemies…and is now suffering [justifiably and mightily] for this abuse-of-power.

    Perhaps I can more easily articulate this view because, unlike Guzzardi, I’m not constantly reliving a personal series of political errors; just as does Trump [when he doubles-down inappropriately, as he did yesterday regarding Megyn Kelly], Guzzardi’s prior support for AG-Kane was predictably unjustified [for he was channeling his personal anti-Establishment chops] and it now boomerangs to haunt him.

    This metaphor is directed @ those who would be tempted to trust DD’s unlimited capacity to traumatize truth [as Guzzardi seems sadly to be becoming enticed]; after having finally admitted she’s damaged [political] goods [for whatever reason(s)], continuing to challenge his assumptions may help him enter the 21st Century of irrefutable/instant-knowledge [even if he lags by 15 years behind most everyone else].

    *

    Nothing seems to have progressed during the 24-hours following my posting yesterday {“The threads of the substantive colloquy, from my perspective, were as follows: [1]–yesterday’s judicial decision was predictable, [2]–AG-Kane inexplicably back-tracked on her claim to want to release the “porn” e-mails, [3]–no one has addressed the potential culpability of Baldwin, [4]–someone should ask Corbett of his perception of FF, and [5]–AG-Kane continues to diminish [both substantively and visually].”}.

    The only new “spin” is the concept that AG-Kane prompted an underling to take the GJ-testimony and to disseminate it under her auspices; no motive, no means, no rationale, no data…NOTHING supports this [desperate] faux-narrative.

    DD is following Hillary to oblivion.

    *

    The below hyperlinks provide grist for those who would challenge this summary, taking also into account documentation of DD’s perfidy, anti-Semitism, [creative-writing capacity], and admitted-perspective that posting on PoliticsPa is merely “sport.”

    politicspa.com /kane-flip-flops-wont-release-emails/68598/comment-page-2/#comments

    politicspa.com /judge-responds-to-kanes-porn-email-request/68405/#comments

49. The clock is ticking, Seth. Why is Fina still collecting a paycheck from taxpayers in Philadelphia? There is no longer any doubt that he is unfit for public service.

50. How did Fina get Kane’s hand-chosen advisors to testify that Kane leaked confidential Mondesire documents and then lied under oath to a grand jury?