Investigators Were Looking for Kane’s Secrecy Oath

kane-sad2Yesterday, detectives searched Attorney General Kathleen Kane’s office for a third time since the beginning of her legal trouble.

At first it was unclear what they were looking for but now there are indications that it was a document that could prove Kane violated her duties and lied under oath.

According to Angela Couloumbis and Craig R. McCoy of the Inquirer, the investigators were looking for an oath of secrecy document.

The oath would require that Kane keep secret all information from grand jury investigations since 1980, including the 2009 Mondesire investigation.

This is important because Kane testified that she has only signed oaths for grand juries that began after she was inaugurated in 2013.

“We don’t go back and sign [oaths for] every grand jury from the beginning of time,” she testified on Nov. 17th before the new grand jury investigating her. “You can’t do that.”

The oath of secrecy, however, which Kane would have signed early in her tenure, would cover all thirty-two grand jury investigations over the past 35 years.

One of the charges against Kane is perjury.

Kane’s lawyer declined to comment to the Inquirer.

“I can’t confirm that is what the search warrant was after, or that there is such a document,” her spokesman Chuck Ardo stated.

September 18th, 2015 | Posted in Front Page Stories, Harrisburg, Top Stories | 75 Comments

75 thoughts on “Investigators Were Looking for Kane’s Secrecy Oath”

  1. HaHaHa aka Busta aka where is Kane's driver says:

    HaHaHaHa — You’ve kept this alias for a longer period than you typically do. I’m impressed!

    In any case, who’s going to be more butt hurt tomorrow? You or your butt buddy DD?

  2. Pat Unger says:

    There have been several here who have questioned the Press’ involvement in this whole affair. I am starting to agree that there is something inappropriate going on.

    Craig McCoy has again printed information illegally leaked to him. If there are law enforcement people that are improperly and unethically taking advantage of the Shield laws to taint Kane’s jury pool (or worse), they should be investigated, prosecuted and dis-barred.

    People here like “Rocco” who say they were at Strawberry Square are obviously plants for the team of Republicans that have been trying to take Kane down ahead of her trial. Kane’s lawyers ave called for a full inquiry into the leaks. This should call attention to the apparent double-standard. And, best case scenario, someone fair actually takes action.

  3. HaHaHa says:

    Looks like the shills are back … PRAYING that there won’t be a trial. LOL. Can’t blame them, though. They know they can’t afford having the truth come out.

    All you cowards (like kanesdriver) typing DD’s name constantly are pathetic groupies.

  4. Larry says:

    Yo jake Wilkerson and SpongBob … You losers can disagree with me all you want but Adrien King is a lawyer and had the same obligation not to leak grand jury information as Kane. I see how u bozo’s roll … As long as King agrees to point the finger at Kane you really don’t care if he violated his own legal duty. You nufftin but two bit hack losers. Smarten up!

  5. HaHaHa aka Busta aka where is Kane's driver says:

    DD — You mad, bro?

  6. Rocco Reese says:

    HaHaHa aka Busta aka where is Kane’s driver says,

    Check out Twitter around 4:00. That’s the normal release time of those things.

  7. HaHaHa aka Busta aka where is Kane's driver says:

    Sir Rocco of Dunmore — You put the news release at 4p tomorrow?

    I may take the under…

  8. Rocco Reese says:

    DD,

    You reference an article that quoted Shargel’so letter. I was in Strawberry Square that day. No reporter was waiting for the Detectives.

  9. FFisFSKW says:

    DD — Have to agree with those on here who posit that you’re reading comprehension skills are lacking.

    No where does that statement from KK say that the reporters were there BEFORE the agents. You’re reading it how you want it to read.

    Think about it: If indeed the reporters were there before the agents, KK’s statement would made that assertion in explicit, non-ambiguous fashion. But it didn’t, did it?

    The reporters were not there before the agents. As Rocco Reese of Dunmore aptly stated, you’re lying.

  10. David Diano says:

    Rocco-

    http://www.pennlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/09/kathleen_kanes_attorney_calls.html

    “”Yesterday, a supposedly “sealed” search warrant was executed at the Office of Attorney General. Yet there were reporters waiting in the lobby of the Office for that search to be executed. And those reporters immediately knew the substance of the warrant, and the substance of the documents that were taken from the Office of Attorney General.

    “This is prejudicial misconduct of the highest order, threatening the constitutional rights of an elected official and a citizen of this Commonwealth.

    “It also highlights the utter hypocrisy of this investigation. The District Attorney’s Office alleges that Attorney General Kane leaked information about a five-year-old investigation where no charges would or could be brought. Now, there are regular and unconscionable leaks of confidential information in this case.”

  11. Rocco Reese says:

    DD,

    You’re lying. The reporters were not there prior to the detectives showing up. Stop lying.

  12. David Diano says:

    HaHaHa aka Busta aka where is Kane’s driver-

    The way I heard it, the reporters where there BEFORE the agents showed up. So, LEAK!

  13. Rocco Reese says:

    HaHaHa aka Busta aka where is Kane’s driver says,

    Are you suggesting that I should be watching my Twitter feed at around…say 4:00 PM? Could something interesting be Tweeted around that time?

  14. HaHaHa aka Busta aka where is Kane's driver says:

    Kane didn’t know because Kane wasn’t there. As always. More, Kane the press knew before Kane did because the moment the agents arrived, OAG employees started dialing Brad, Angela, Craig and every other Capitol beat reporter.

    Keep trying, DD. Cannot wait to see how unhinged you’re going to be when Monday’s news drops.

  15. Rocco Reese says:

    DD,

    No they didn’t. You realize that the vast majority of press people have offices 100 yards from Strawberry Square don’t you?

  16. David Diano says:

    The press knew about this search warrant before Kane did. This means the prosecution is leaking. The people running this case belong in jail.

  17. HaHaHa aka Busta aka where is Kane's driver says:

    DD — Your comprehension deficet is other-worldly.

    The current perjury charge she faces stems from her testimony related to having not seen the Piefer-authored case memo–not her testimony that she didn’t swear an oath. Ergo, expect a NEW perjury count to be added.

    You’re so f’ing stupid.

  18. Haha Was Platinum says:

    HAHA,
    Save the popcorn. Kane will be working a plea bargain before October turns on the calendar.

  19. HaHaHa says:

    If Craig and Angela reported on this, then the “detectives” are leaking things too … or they are working hand in hand w/ Craig and Angela’s go-to leakers …

    And the fact that they are still trying to build their case is embarrassing. They know their case is garbage.

    Can’t wait for the trial. POPCORN will be ready

  20. Rocco Reese says:

    DD,
    Then you simply don’t understand the role that the attorney general plays. This doesn’t surprise me considering that you don’t have the basic understanding of criminal procedures.

    Have a nice weekend.

  21. David Diano says:

    Rocco Reese-

    I don’t believe ANY executive reads 10% of what’s put in front of them. That includes every president, governor and CEO in country.

  22. Rocco Reese says:

    DD,

    If you believe that the Pennsylvania Attorney General reads only 10% of what is put in front of them then you are delusional.

    This signed oath, the one that she says she never signed is the proverbial nail in her coffin. The plea agreement talks are going to start very soon.

  23. David Diano says:

    I don’t think any executives read 90% of the stuff their staff hands them as it’s mostly pro forma. I certainly wouldn’t expect any of them to remember such documents.

    So, if that’s the basis for a perjury charge it’s complete bullsh*t. And, if such a document never existed, or she didn’t sign it, would they be dropping the charges against her?

  24. HaHaHa aka Busta aka where is Kane's driver says:

    DD — the grand jury secrecy oath – Apple user ID agreement has to be the STUPIEST analogy that I’ve ever heard.

    Are you brain-dead?

  25. kanetruth says:

    4 detectives raid oag for 5 docs? 21 raids over 16 months and no one thought to look for secrecy oaths? rvf is putting the keystone back in keystone cops

  26. Tired says:

    DD – there’s a big difference between the average citizen signing an Apple user agreement and the Attorney General signing a secrecy oath or, for that matter, any other document. Let’s see, could it be that not everyone is the Attorney General? In that office, signing documents without reading them can mean criminals getting off, lives being ruined, etc. That counts for the AG and every other prosecutor in the office. Of course, when you are a partisan devotee none of that matters; just keep defending the indefensible.

  27. Lotto Fever says:

    Leave Kathy Kane alone she is about to Bust some very very Powerfull People in Pennsylvania You High Power people better start shaking in your Boots cause Kathy is coming for you .

  28. David Diano says:

    Kane’s attorney calls for investigation into leaks.

    http://www.pennlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/09/kathleen_kanes_attorney_calls.html

    “Yesterday, a supposedly “sealed” search warrant was executed at the Office of Attorney General. Yet there were reporters waiting in the lobby of the Office for that search to be executed. And those reporters immediately knew the substance of the warrant, and the substance of the documents that were taken from the Office of Attorney General.”

  29. Jack Wilkerson says:

    Gotta Agree with SpongeBob on this one

  30. SpongeBob says:

    Larry, if I say go stab that person over there and I hand you the knife….Am I innocent of a crime? How about if I send you illegal drugs via UPS. Is the UPS driver guilty of a crime?

  31. Larry says:

    This is a joke … who cares if she signed some bullshit oath along with a bunch of other documents … she never leaked the information she is accused of leaking … Adrian King leaked it and when he got caught he pointed the finger at Kane. If anyone believes that Adrian King would blindly deliver a blank envelope to a reporter without knowing exactly what was inside of the envelope, your either stupid, gullible, or both. Adrian King is an operator. I wonder if Risa gave Adrian King complete immunity for fingering Kane?

  32. rsklaroff says:

    @ DD:

    As noted repeatedly, previously, the resemblance between your defense of AG-Kane and Hillary’s defense of her pre-Benghazi [mis-]conduct is uncanny.

  33. Multi-Tasker General says:

    Diano, that’s a nice general statement, but you already committed to the specific idea that Kane wouldn’t remember signing a secrecy oath because she signs so many documents. That just doesn’t make sense. There aren’t that many grand juries, and when they happen they are at the top of the AG’s priority list. She understands the importance of grand jury secrecy — after all she’s “been in this business a long time.” She can’t claim not to remember signing a secrecy oath.

  34. SpongeBob says:

    Ruh Roh….It looks like something I said 2 months ago has finally made it’s appearance. To say she had to sign hundreds of things and how would she remember shows how little you know about working with Law Enforcement and being in the Law. This isn’t a document sitting in a pile of stuff. It is witnessed, notarized and since it carries significant legal bearing a competent attorney would understand what they were signing. to suggest otherwise would suggest wild incompetence. Which I guess yeah also makes sense too….

  35. David Diano says:

    Multi-Tasker

    My opposition is to how the legal system is run, manipulated and abused as a “gotcha” system, while real criminal behavior is ignored.

  36. Multi-Tasker General says:

    David, you’re seriously arguing that the secrecy oath that goes along with a grand jury is like an Apple user agreement? Why do you insist on showing how little you know about legal practice? Why do you demand to be seen as a complete joke?

  37. David Diano says:

    Tired-

    Out of the millions who signed, how many read their Apple agreements, and remember what’s in them?

    My point is that to claim that she’d be expected to remember signing this document is bogus. It was probably some routine document in a pile of hundreds she was handed to sign when she took office.

  38. HaHaHa aka Busta aka where is Kane's driver says:

    *operative word

  39. Tired says:

    David Diano – if the AG of one of the nation’s largest states can’t remember that she signed an Oath to hold past secrets secret, she isn’t competent to be AG and shouldn’t be. If as an attorney she didn’t read documents they were asking her to sign — particularly an Oath — she is incompetent as an attorney and shouldn’t be AG. I guess some can admire your unrelenting devotion to partisanship regardless of the facts, but I can’t. It’s partisanship like yours that is what’s wrong with so much in our country today.

  40. HaHaHa aka Busta aka where is Kane's driver says:

    Oath is the operative, you two-bit hack.

  41. Observer says:

    Once again – how did this get out, what they were looking for? Another leak? You don’t really have to be a a reporter in Harrisburg – you just have to hang around and the Leakers tell you everything they know, for nothing! If Kane’s defense team introduces the Leak Culture into evidence, no jury in the state would convict her.

  42. David Diano says:

    Obscure document, “oath” is just a modifier. There must be thousands of documents that she signed that her staff handed her. If they are relying on her remembering this one, they are grasping at straws.

  43. HaHaHa aka Busta aka where is Kane's driver says:

    Obscure oath. LOL. I’m certain the word obscure has never before been used to modify the word oath.

    You’re a TRUE hack, DD. I’m ashamed we’re members of the same political party.

  44. David Diano says:

    This is beyond fishing. She must have signed thousands of documents as routine matters. No way would she even know/remember if some obscure “oath” document was among them. They are really grasping at straws here.

  45. Multi-Tasker General says:

    That’s okay, she’s a multi-tasker!

  46. rsklaroff says:

    As I predicted on the 17th, the goal of the search was to amplify rather than to fish.

    http://www.politicspa.com/breaking-kanes-office-searched-by-detectives/69217/comment-page-1/#comment-1036124

  47. Larry says:

    gulag, they already had enough evidence to charge her. It is not uncommon for new evidence to come to light to make the case even more solid. Stop being an amateur cop or lawyer. You don’t know what you’re talking about. Kane is toast.

  48. gulagPittsburgh says:

    After they accuse her of a crime, then they start to look for evidence to prove it? WOW, that’s assbackward.

  49. Larry says:

    The FBI is looking into Risa, Seth and the PA Supreme Court … this whole conspiracy is going to fall … Popcorn anyone?

  50. Senator Rutherford B. Cattywampus says:

    Yeah, you’d think maybe they would have wanted to know if that document existed before they charged her. But hey, charge then investigate has become the normal modus operandi of law enforcement.

Comments are closed.