Could Kathleen Kane Be Removed from Office?

Kane-sadThe biggest question of the year has been whether, and potentially when, Attorney General Kathleen Kane will be indicted.

So far, Kane has maintained that if she is brought up on grand jury charges she will not resign but remain in office and run for re-election.

According to Brad Bumsted of the Tribune-Review, though, there may be a way for the State Supreme Court to remove Kane.

Pennsylvania attorneys are subject to rules that allow for the suspension of the law license of any lawyer suspected of “egregious conduct”. This determination is left up to the State Supreme Court.

It’s unclear, though, if the judiciary would be willing to intervene in Kane’s case. After the scandals and feuds of last year, the Court may be hesitant to get involved in a politically charged situation.

Still, if officials are concerned about the AG this remains an intriguing possibility in the weeks and months ahead.

66 Responses

  1. Reading the comments is educational. EVERYONE IS NEGLECTING TO RECOGNIZE THAT KATHLEEN KANE HAS A LEGAL OBLIGATION OF CONFIDENTIALITY FOR HER CLIENTS, they include the Governor, state agencies, OAG staff, herself, etc…

    So when she is not explaining it is because she cannot.

    When others are throwing their misinformation and horseshit, they are permitted to do so. The lawyers are not violating confidentiality when they make stuff up.

    WHEN NORRISTOWN RECOGNIZED THAT Rule 1.6 Confidentiality did not mandate nondisclosure when the lawyer is defending themselves in court… THEY THREW IT TO RISA FERMAN.

    THE TRUE UNDERLYING CASES are Healy v Healy, Healy v Miller, and the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6

    While these cases should have been resolved by the courts with the unconstitutional law being exposed, Kathleen Kane was ‘secretly ordered by unidentified courts’ to neglect her duties and take no action. Those secret orders too an unconstitutional law and recaste it into a corrupt and unconscionable order which was also withheld from the litigants.

    So it is necessary to recognize the clients of the AG and the mandate of Confidentiality… It collaterally causes denial of constitutional rights and prevents protection under the law.

    Yes, the cases alleged against Kathleen Kane are false. Once she recognized the unconstitutionality of Confidentiality, she too lost her rights and the protection of the law. It’s why their arguments are nonsense and horseshit.

    Risa Ferman won’t prosecute Kathleen Kane because she must prevent Americans from finding out how American Injustice is ignored.

    The ABA did it. Deliberately removing the fraud provisions from Rule 1.6 made confidentiality unethical, immoral and illegal. When THE JUDICIARY made it LAW, they made their own corruption CONFIDENTIAL and prevent all law enforcement professionals from revealing it. Even to the point where their fraudulent efforts are permitted – and confidential if done to prevent revealing the loss of judicial independence, and the corruption of the Judicial branch in every state… All obstructed by lawyers in bar associations which exist in every jurisdiction.

  2. Busta,

    I made a similar statement on the other blog-post. If I am the MontCo District Attorney, I don’t want to ruin my reputation by getting in bed with those folks.

    If the DA in MontCo thinks that Kane committed a crime, it would be irresponsible to wait this long … as the criminal is still in office.

  3. Poor shill-boy bungy … up after midnight trolling … looking for a chance to stick up for his man-crush ….LOL … now I am laughing too …

  4. According to his buddies here, Fina is “still laughing.” I wonder if the children raped by Sandusky while he watched “granny porn” are laughing.

    I wonder if the folks that ran the non-profit that Mr. Ali stole $400,000 from is laughing. Fina let Mr. Ali skate – dropping all the pending charges against Mr. Ali. Allegedly (though it seems hard to believe), Fina let him keep the money he stole too.

    I wonder if Fina’s secretary is laughing … knowing that he was in his office looking at images that showed women in mock motivational posters, with slogans such as “Devotion” and “Willingness,” showing them performing sex acts on their male “bosses.”

    I wonder if the families of folks Fina & The Corbett Pervs prosecuted are laughing … knowing that they were so close to the Judges they appeared in front of that they felt comfortable sending them e-mails containing bestiality porn.

    My bet is that many Pennsylvanians aren’t laughing. Especially when you look at the fact that they used their State computers while they were at work .. on the taxpayers’ dime.

  5. Correct David. In fact, the Clown Car abandoned their “contempt hearing” when it became obvious that AG Kane was going to defend herself in court.

    Court is the LAST PLACE the Clown Car wants these issues to be. They prefer to have Craig & Angela help them with their smear campaign.

    Anyone know when the Grand Jury is being sworn in to investigate the illegal leaks from the Clown Car’s “investigation” of AG Kane?

  6. No charge was issued. There was a hearing scheduled that never happened and the “issue” (not charge) was referred to the Montco DA, who hasn’t said anything about it.

  7. @ Reasonable Rep:

    Presumably, any indictment would incorporate awareness of both the burden-of-proof and the anticipated-rationalization; nevertheless, one would think there is prima facie justification for issuing the charge.

  8. bungy-

    I’m sure he isn’t crazy about me. I sent out a scathing email to my political list critiquing his attempts to play the race card against Wolf last year.

    But, fortunately, I deal only in providing voter data and advice, and not in government affairs, awarding contracts, hiring, etc. So, I never have to worry who’s wearing a wire. 🙂

  9. bungy-

    You “hear” a lot of things. Voices in your head? It could be a mental disorder.

  10. I hear McCord is getting his REVENGE against any and all who did not back him for Gov.

  11. rsklaroff:

    At trial, the prosecution will bear the burden of proving each element of indirect criminal contempt beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Initially, the supervising judge of the grand jury – who issued the protective order – scheduled a hearing to determine whether Kane violated this order in firing Baker. However, at the request of both the Special Prosecutor who led the grand jury investigation and Kane’s defense attorney, the hearing was delayed.

    The supervising judge and his colleagues subsequently referred the matter to the MontCo DA – who of course was already building a case against Kane following the grand jury indictment.

  12. @ DD:

    You claim “So, burden of proof starts BEFORE Kane with explanation of the motivation of why firing was allegedly retaliation. Otherwise, she couldn’t make normal personal changes or restructuring.”

    Doesn’t she have the responsibility to justify the timing of the event, regardless of what had previously transpired?

  13. Busta Perv / Corbet Perv / Peter Williams / Truth is my friend / Hate the game –

    First, I’m glad to see that you’ve uncovered ANOTHER segment of the population that’s in on this Kane conspiracy – rural Pennsylvanians, lol.

    Second, if you’re going to use different alias to deflect attention from Kane’s crimes, don’t insult our intelligence. At least make it interesting and change up your writing style.

    Third, clearly neither you nor the amateur lawyer understand how criminal trials work. At Kane’s trial, exactly how would Fina’s deeds come up either in the prosecution’s case in chief or in her defense? (Answer: It wouldn’t)

    Fourth, to answer your question, it’s “just you.” An elected official – the Attorney General no less – has demonstrably broken the law and subsequently gotten caught in a pathetic cover up attempt. That she faces scrutiny is about as far from “non-sense” as you can get.

    Fifth, no reasonable people believe this is worthy of a criminal prosecution? I guess that could be true – but only if you exclude the PA Supreme Court, the grand jury supervising judge, the employees in the OAG, the criminal defense bar, the press, the majority of polled Pennsylvanians … so on and so forth.

Comments are closed.

Email:
  • Best Cheesesteak in Philly


    • They Ain't Listed Here (33%)
    • Dalessandro’s Steaks and Hoagies (29%)
    • Pat's King of Steaks (9%)
    • John's Roast Pork (9%)
    • Steve's Prince of Steaks (9%)
    • Tony Luke's (6%)
    • Geno's Steaks (4%)

    Total Voters: 232

    Loading ... Loading ...
Continue to Browser

PoliticsPA

To install tap and choose
Add to Home Screen