Kane: “No, I Won’t Resign” (VIDEO)

Court documents confirm that a statewide grand jury recommended charges against PA’s Attorney General, but Kane remains steadfast in her assertion that she did not do anything wrong.

According to Brad Bumsted of the Tribune-Review, newly released court documents confirm the Inquirer’s report that the grand jury recommended charges of “perjury, false swearing, official oppression and obstruction.”

This investigation stems from a case in which Kane and her office leaked grand jury evidence from another case to the Philadelphia Daily News last June.

Despite the fact that she may be indicted, the Attorney General insists she did nothing wrong.

“No, I won’t resign,” she said during a short press conference.

Kane accused her opponents of trying to overturn her election through the courts.

“I’m not giving up,” Kane said. “But I’m not in this just for me. I’m in it for everybody and quite honestly if they can do it to me, they can do it to anyone else.”

“The truth is the truth. That’s what it is,” she responded when asked about a possible perjury charge. “There was no crime committed. There were no documents that were grand jury materials leaked.”

“I told the truth every single time,” she concluded.

Update: Marc Levy of the Associated Press is reporting that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will hear Attorney General Kathleen Kane’s case that the special prosecutor chosen to investigate her was appointed illegally.

59 Responses

  1. Bungy-
    1) Did attorney dump her, or she dumped attorney? She seems to like her current representation.

    2) Considering all the corrupt Republicans out to get Kane, this hardly seems a surprise prediction. They were talking about impeaching her for not defending the bigoted/discriminatory gay marriage ban.

    3) The grand jury returned multiple charges? Wow. That almost never happens (only 99.9% of the time) BUT.. the contempt charge wasn’t one of them.

  2. 1.Kane’s 1st attorney(Dick Sprague) dumps Her.2.Kane under G.J. investigation.3.G.J. votes to charge Kane on multiple counts. Had them all before anybody.

  3. Bungy

    Name three non-obvious predictions of yours that you claim came true (wins by sport teams don’t count).

  4. Bonor, every so called prediction I have made in the last year has come true. No wishes here, only truths.

  5. Bungy
    I cut/pasted the quote as written.

    Robert-
    No. It’s YOU who has to show that it was deliberate. Kane has already stated it was not. You have no evidence to contradict her claim.

    Without the contempt charge, Ferman isn’t going to want to pursue this.

  6. I did the math, bungy, – 3 out of five is an unquestionable majority. I am not begging either despite your protestations to the contrary, but stating the facts. You are just spouting wishes.

  7. Do the math Boner 3R 2D, quit begging She’s finished. Wait until the good stuff come’s out. Bungy and J.C. know all.

  8. @ DD:

    Earlier, I wrote a prescient point: “One un-discussed issue that must be raised is how DA-Ferman will be perceived in November [she’s running for judge, while Castor seeks to flip back into the DA-job] when she decides whether to indict AG-Kane. For example, will she announce that she’s self-imposing a delay in her decision pending the ruling by the SCOPA regarding the constitutional justification for this entire inquiry to have been conducted?”

    Also, provide a cite for your claim that “The leaks were without her deliberate authorization/knowledge/approval.”

  9. The State Supreme Court controlled by a majority of Republicans just issued an order staying action against Attorney General Kane while it reviews the question of the special prosecutor’s appointment in her case. Interesting that the General Assembly failed to reenact the special prosecutor law when it expired. Wonder where Frank Fina and Daryl Metcalfe plan on doing now that they’ve hit a massive roadblock in their crusade to get Kane. The lack of contempt charges in the grand jury presentment blows massive holes in the case.

  10. Robert-

    I am absolutely separating her from the office regarding leaks. The leaks were without her deliberate authorization/knowledge/approval.

    BREAKING NEWS:
    abc27.com/2015/01/22/pennsylvania-court-halts-any-action-against-ag-kane/

    “The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is stopping a prosecutor from taking action on a grand jury recommendation that the attorney general be charged criminally in an investigation into allegations her office leaked secret investigative material.”

  11. @ DD:

    The lede contradicts you: “Kane’s office ‘improperly and unlawfully’ leaked grand jury materials.”

    Are you trying to differentiate her “office” from her “self”?

    This is a distinction without a true difference, for she admitted this transpired; she never stated publicly that she blocked it for, instead, she defended the leak by claiming that whatever had been released wasn’t somehow designated previously to have been kept secret.

  12. Robert-
    The inky does not list “leaking” among the recommended charges. You are filling things in.

  13. @ DD:

    You claim you asserted “no leak by her and not in the recommended (bogus) charges against her.”

    Read the Inqy article and rectify your comment accordingly; then accept the fact that you are filling-in info that isn’t in any citation in the Internet.

  14. Dr., The people who created the Casablanca blog are most likely friends and family of the bonusgate convicted criminals. As well as some of the convicted criminals themselves. They were prosecuted By Fina and his DREAM TEAM.

  15. She has NOT been charged with leaking. I didn’t say there wasn’t a leak (accidentally), but rather no leak by her and not in the recommended (bogus) charges against her.

  16. @ DD:

    At the risk of diluting the simple-elegance of the prior posting, it’s simply desirable to note how you fill key-uncertainties with conjecture that hasn’t been revealed by AG-Kane [or, for that matter, by anyone else] and about which the Grand Jury presumably queried and found the explanations wanting.

    Examples:

    “Booker and Morris, who say they are still Next Generation board members, are now asking a Common Pleas judge to force Mondesire to show them the nonprofit’s financial records. As a judge considers that request, Kane’s staff is reviewing what became of the 2009 Mondesire probe.”

    [It’s one thing to respond to a formal legal request; it’s quite another to leak info to the press that is presumed to have carried political import that had nothing to do with the furtherance of justice.]

    The other information released was accidental, and no charges against Kane for it. If it was not legitimate, there would be charges. However, it’s not MY job to prove it’s legitimate, but rather a prosecutor’s job to prove it was not. So, you are trying to conjure something here where you “think” it wasn’t legitimate to release. But, you don’t know sh*t about sh*t, as usual.

    [Your logic and conclusion — including the ad-hominem — are totally undermined by the documents released today.]

    Kane didn’t create a back-dated memo. A new document was created to preserve information/recollections from the time. It still represents an affidavit of the information/knowledge by the author. The original memo may have been hand-written notes, instead of an officially saved document, or simply lost. Creating a new document to replace lost/missing one isn’t a crime. The information may still exist in some document but just wasn’t correctly found/identified in the document search. It’s not even slightly relevant. No one is going to jail over a misplaced memo.

    [She said the document existed, but couldn’t produce it … and hasn’t produced it, since then.]

    Policy wasn’t followed with Ali as he gave some of the “bribe” money to some girl, unrelated to the case.

    [This is tangential to what actually occurred.]

    Also, the taped statements have both Ali and the one of the targets both saying that there is no quid-pro-quo.

    [The behavior speaks for itself; it would then be the Legislators’ responsibility to explain to the public why the $ had been accepted.]

    Finally, Ali’s crimes were far worse than anything the sting alleges and he never should have been let off the hook and involved in the sting in the first place.

    [Ali didn’t violate the public-trust, the Legislators did; thus, as usual “you don’t know sh*t about sh*t, as usual.”]

  17. @ DD:

    It seems our postings “crossed in the [ethernet] mail”!

    You wrote: “If it was not legitimate, there would be charges.”

    There have been charges….oops!

  18. Robert-

    “can you conjure a legitimate reason for her to have approved the release of ANYTHING, pursuant to her occupational responsibilities”

    Yes. From your own link: “Booker and Morris, who say they are still Next Generation board members, are now asking a Common Pleas judge to force Mondesire to show them the nonprofit’s financial records. As a judge considers that request, Kane’s staff is reviewing what became of the 2009 Mondesire probe.”

    So, the case was legitimately reopened/reviewed. The information authorized for release was legal/appropriate and at the A.G.’s discretion. The other information released was accidental, and no charges against Kane for it. If it was not legitimate, there would be charges. However, it’s not MY job to prove it’s legitimate, but rather a prosecutor’s job to prove it was not. So, you are trying to conjure something here where you “think” it wasn’t legitimate to release. But, you don’t know sh*t about sh*t, as usual.

    Kane didn’t create a back-dated memo. A new document was created to preserve information/recollections from the time. It still represents an affidavit of the information/knowledge by the author. The original memo may have been hand-written notes, instead of an officially saved document, or simply lost. Creating a new document to replace lost/missing one isn’t a crime. The information may still exist in some document but just wasn’t correctly found/identified in the document search. It’s not even slightly relevant. No one is going to jail over a misplaced memo.

    Policy wasn’t followed with Ali as he gave some of the “bribe” money to some girl, unrelated to the case. Also, the taped statements have both Ali and the one of the targets both saying that there is no quid-pro-quo. Finally, Ali’s crimes were far worse than anything the sting alleges and he never should have been let off the hook and involved in the sting in the first place.

  19. @ DD:

    Documents released Thursday show that a statewide grand jury concluded that Attorney General Kathleen G. Kane’s office “improperly and unlawfully” leaked grand jury materials – a finding that contradicts Kane’s assertion that the panel found that she had not leaked information.

    philly.com/philly/news/20150123_Newly_disclosed_grand_jury_document_contradicts_AG_Kane_on_leak.html#TjzjCrYeGX8l2APs.99″

  20. AG Kane is the instrument of her own demise. Dr Sclaroff has detailed the content and timeline of the discussion here @PoliticsPa.

    The Philadelphia Inquirer deserves credit for investigating this matter and for publishing a brilliant, cogent Op Ed by the Philadelphia DA who IS one of the persons Attorney General Kane threatened. He asked for the cases she refused to prosecute.

    Her reaction to this was to “lawyer up” to protect herself.

    That, more than anything up to that time, caught and kept the attention of Pennsylvanians statewide.

    The moniker “One Term Kane” was first given to the AG by an attorney who self-identified as a registered liberal Democrat.

    She stated that she won’t quit during the time of Governor Wolf’s Inaugeral Events. At minimum, she was thoughtlessly self-absorbed.

  21. @ DD:

    I broke-up the forwarded notes to spoon-feed you but, here, I’ll synthesize them; also, you have again ignored the reasonable request that you please provide citations to support your assertions because they do not comport with the chronology that has repeatedly been appearing in the media.

    The back-dating point was related to how you had rationalized-away the charge that AG-Kane allegedly created a document after she had claimed it existed; your defense of this behavior therefore has been self-vacated so you are invited to try-again.

    I transformed each of the aforementioned queries from the context in which they had emerged … to a more succinct set of queries; also know that your rhetorical-query [“A perjury charge where there was no leak/crime by her?”] is refuted by simply citing what happened to Scooter Libby {en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scooter_Libby}.

    [For the benefit of others, your fundamental rationalization for AG-Kane’s selective release of Grand Jury data to the press has been restated: “She was reviewing the past investigation and how it was (mis)handled. This is legitimate function of government and A.G.’s office, especially when there is a claim that ‘criminal activity was just ignored’.”]

    *

    When did AG-Kane issue a report regarding conclusions as to how anything was “(mis)handled”? Second, when did she say this was her rationale for leaking the info to the press? Third, what could be a justification for releasing these data via a press-leak rather than in a public setting?

    How can you discount the claim that Ali followed established social and political paths when the case against the [Black, Democrat] State Legislators was being developed?

    What justification can you conjure that would suggest that releasing any facet of the Grand Jury data [whether legal or illegal] served to fulfill the allegedly desirable goal of “policing” her AG-office?

    *

    You claim “My understanding is that the release of the non porn-related information was completely unintentional and accidentally included in other valid information. Kane was either unaware it was in the material she approved for release or it was added in after her approval.”

    She has said publicly that nothing was unintentional, and she claims she had every right to approve releasing it [regardless of what “it” is].

    Thus, again, can you conjure a legitimate reason for her to have approved the release of ANYTHING, pursuant to her occupational responsibilities?

    *

    Your lame attempts to defend AG-Kane should be ignored, recalling the documentation of your lack of credibility, compiled following a series of e-mail exchanges [extending over multiple sites] that led painstakingly to establishing the following:

    “You have advocated the overthrow of the Israeli government throughout Israel’s entire lifetime … explaining why you have endorsed the behavior of Hamas [which the USA has designated as a terrorist organization] that is, itself, promoting policies that are consonant with those of the Islamic State.”

    politicspa.com/kathleen-kane-tells-cnn-pornographic-emails-included-pictures-of-children/61928/comment-page-2/#comment-925106

  22. Robert-
    You have compiled an unreadable and incoherent pile of sh*t that isn’t worth the electrons to display it.

    The leak investigation turned up no leak charges against her. The rest of it is all subjective nonsense that will not stick.

    A perjury charge where there was no leak/crime by her? Oppression? Obstruction? These are all matters of opinion and interpretation. It’s not perjury if you believe what you are saying. Kane made no direct threats to anyone (and any intimidating statements by her underlings were not only subjective, but can’t be proven to be authorized by her). As for obstruction, Kane will rely upon some legal opinion/interpretation of her duties and her required level of cooperation with a bogus investigation/witch-hunt.

    Without the big charge, there isn’t any point in pursuing this.

    BTW, since you are so fixated on it, my boss doesn’t date his memos to us in the first place, so nothing to backdate.

  23. @ DD:

    You persist in opining, despite my having compiled numerous loose-ends that you have failed to tie; you cannot be trusted and, thus, your opinions are bogus.

  24. No leaking in the charges. So, the entire premise of the investigation was a bogus fishing expedition.

  25. She will have to re-color her hair blond and do the stamps.com commercials again. “can you do just stamps, no”

  26. Kane screwed up, either leaking the documents or having the leaks occur on her watch. Does this rise to the level of criminal prosecution? Hell, no. Did Castille overreach? Yep. Now that he is gone, watch his former “colleagues” on the Supreme Court rip him a new one. Kane is a one-term wonder, a minor leaguer who isn’t up to this statewide job, but she’s not evil incarnate.

  27. correction:

    In the “7:17” posting infra, the separating “*” should have been placed before the 5th ‘graph [starting with “You”] rather than after it; the goal was to draw upon prior postings that had been left to dangle.

    elaboration:

    In the past, DD has been known to rationalize a self-imposed silence [which has sometimes become manifest on other web-pages, as well] when boxed-in, by claiming that he need not reply to comments that were no longer on the “Front Page” of PoliticsPA.

    Granted, he violated his own [absurd] “rule” on multiple occasions, but he can’t invoke it here; each of the recapitulated points [1]–Was well documented when the thread of the discourse has been followed on prior pages, and [2]–related to the overall context in which AG-Kane has issued her counter-attack.

    *

    One un-discussed issue that must be raised is how DA-Ferman will be perceived in November [she’s running for judge, while Castor seeks to flip back into the DA-job] when she decides whether to indict AG-Kane. For example, will she announce that she’s self-imposing a delay in her decision pending the ruling by the SCOPA regarding the constitutional justification for this entire inquiry to have been conducted?

    Another un-discussed issue is how Rep. Daryl Metcalf will approach his intent to hold impeachment-hearings [taking into account the multiple facets of his concerns]. For example, will he subpoena her to elaborate upon the “leak” charge [that, as noted elsewhere, has a geneology that may require clarification]?

    *

    Note that “In one of the unsealed filings, Carluccio wrote to the high court Jan. 7 that both Kane and her office have effectively admitted the disclosure of investigative materials came from within the office, “and perhaps from the attorney general herself.”

    And note that “Though the court released a Dec. 30 opinion by Montgomery County Judge William Carpenter, the details behind the recommended charges are unknown because the grand jury’s report remains under court seal.”

    And, finally, note that AG-Kane’s crisis-manager “Davis conceded that since he does not have a copy of the presentment, it could recommend civil contempt. He called that an ‘open question’.”

    triblive.com/politics/politicalheadlines/7609857-74/charges-kane-attorney#ixzz3PYS5Kg7p

    *

    disclaimer:

    It should be recognized that these postings are not based upon having read [or heard] anything beyond what is in the public domain; they are intended to dig-down [and to debunk hypocrites in the process] and, in this instance, to draw upon credible data when defining key-concerns.

    opinion:

    Although it has been claimed that the Dems who have challenged her may have designs upon her position, the disinterested observer must conclude that the effort against her “achievements” is bipartisan and potent.

    Further, neither Lanny Davis [her spin-artist] nor AG-Kane have refuted specifics, and one would think that this would be perceived as a high-priority [if not the “highest”] of the highest-ranking law-enforcement public-official in PA.

    Finally, my bottom-line concern is that she invoked racism to discount “The Tale of the Tapes” that the [Black Democrat] State Legislators must confront; they, too, have failed to refute the charges against their integrity; remember how former-Sen. Leanna Washington was slapped-on-the-wrist by AG-Kane [a fellow-Dem], and then recognize that it is AG-Kane who has politicized her position.

    *

    For those who claim a political pedigree, perhaps they would want to cite a precedent for an embattled politician to have sequentially disclaimed political-ambition [for the U.S. Senate] while pledging to seek re-election [after less than two years of her term-of-office had transpired]; to the unbiased observer, her “hold-the-fort” claims [including that issued in Philly, yesterday] reflect her inner-awareness that she has spilled lotsa “blood-in-the-water” around her position.

  28. The archive of admittedly “ad-hominem” concerns with posters @ this website was [partially] updated, lest anyone believe what these poseurs have argued; the exception may be Bungy, who may harbor inside-info that he is now nudged to share.

    Unlike DD, who had written that he is bemused by serious comments uploaded by others and – therefore – feels he has license to type whatever crosses his mind, I take this level of colloquy seriously.

    If he cannot transcend charging “Politics!” instead of dealing with specifics, then all will witness how his credibility has sunk from the gutter, to the sewer, and now into the inflow of the sewage-treatment-plant.

  29. @ DD:

    Your lame attempts to defend AG-Kane should be ignored, recalling the documentation of your lack of credibility, compiled following a series of e-mail exchanges [extending over multiple sites] that led painstakingly to establishing the following:

    “You have advocated the overthrow of the Israeli government throughout Israel’s entire lifetime … explaining why you have endorsed the behavior of Hamas [which the USA has designated as a terrorist organization] that is, itself, promoting policies that are consonant with those of the Islamic State.”

    politicspa.com/kathleen-kane-tells-cnn-pornographic-emails-included-pictures-of-children/61928/comment-page-2/#comment-925106

  30. @ DD & elroy:

    On December 23, 2014 at 6:09 am, I asked you to “discount the claim that Ali followed established social and political paths” when the case against the [Black, Democrat] State Legislators was being developed.

    You failed to do so.

    politicspa.com/kanes-racial-claims-a-complete-lie/62568/comment-page-1/#comments

  31. @ Bungy:

    On December 23, 2014 at 11:47 am, I requested that you elaborate on your claim that “Elroy Hirsch[Brett] and the people who created Casablanca, are bitter criminals that were put in prison by Fina.”

    politicspa.com/kanes-racial-claims-a-complete-lie/62568/comment-page-1/#comments

    You failed to do so.

  32. @ DD:

    On two prior pages of PoliticsPA, I posed queries that, alas, you have failed [as usual] to address.

    politicspa.com/kane-denies-wrongdoing-pledges-to-serve-entire-term/62966/#comments

    politicspa.com/report-grand-jury-recommends-criminal-charges-against-kane/62806/#comments

    What sort of “an independent study [could be] used to investigate the situation regarding the alleged leaked press leaks [that she thinks] would reveal she had done nothing wrong” does she have in mind?

    You rationalized AG-Kane’s selective release of Grand Jury data to the press “Because she was reviewing the past investigation and how it was (mis)handled. This is legitimate function of government and A.G.’s office, especially when there is a claim that ‘criminal activity was just ignored’.”

    *

    First, when did she issue a report regarding conclusions as to how anything was “(mis)handled”?

    Second, when did she say this was her rationale for doing so?

    Third, what was the justification for releasing these data via a press-leak rather than in a public setting?

    When you have admitted you must go “0 for 3″ when addressing these simple/logical outgrowths of your conjured-rationalizations, you may be forced to admit that she has painted herself into a corner from which she will not be able to escape.

    *

    Please provide citations to support your assertions because they do not comport with the chronology that has repeatedly been appearing in the media.

    *

    You can “run,” but you cannot hide.

    Her defense recalls that of Hillary [when she falsely charged, almost two decades ago, that claims of her husband’s womanizing were bogus due to politics].

    wikipedia.org/wiki/Vast_right-wing_conspiracy

  33. The attack on Attorney General Kane is pure politics. In the General Election of 2012, AG Kane won the election and ended a 32-year rule of male Republican elected AG’s. She won the election and even out polled the incumbent President of the United States. Republican Voters helped elect her.

    The Republican political leaders must destroy Kane before the 2016 Presidential Election. They fear she could carry a Democrat into the White House.

  34. It’s the Jane Orie defense: I didn’t do it, everyone does it, and an unspecified “they” are out to get me. Worked well for Jane, so why not use it again?

  35. Davey Boy, Wait until the Fake car accident stuff breaks. The BIG Boys got that one. By the way, stop blaming the big bad Republican Men, Her own Democrat compadres and Herself are the one’s that doomed Her.

  36. LauraV-

    She’s being viciously attacked by politically motivated individuals trying to overturn an election, and stop her probes into years of corruption.

  37. This story was covered on KYW news radio. They pointed out that Kane is NOT being charged with leaking the 2009 grand jury information (which was the BIG charge that everyone’s been accusing her of here) that the investigation stems from.

    This other stuff is bogus crap by the prosecutor who couldn’t make his “leak” case against her, and is just trying to find something to pin on her, because their premise didn’t stick.

  38. Why does Kathleen Kane need all these men to defend her? Lanny Davis? Her dude attorneys, her new spokesman…

  39. The fatal flaw in this whole monkey trial/grand jury proceeding, was that it was empaneled, not by a prosecutor, but by a Judge! Chip-on-his-shoulder Castille, of all people! Criminal investigations, under PA law and constitution, canNOT be instituted by any member of the judiciary! That is black letter law. Of course, that is the same simple-minded judge who thought it was within his power to suspend McCaffrey, when by LAW, it is only the Judicial Conduct Board that can do that. In his senility, he seems to think he was prosecutor, judge and jury all in one. And it’s the fatal flaw in the Kane case – the dunce at the top. Legal scholars laugh out loud at Pennsylvania’s judges – most of whom could not win a law school Moot Court competition. Oh, Judge Musmanno – where are you when we need you??

  40. Using those agents or whatever they are as props is wrong. Is that a Lanny Davis suggestion? This is her problem, not hard working law enforcement professionals. She is gone

  41. Hey johnny, they were singing ding dong the Witch is dead at all A.G. office’s around the state two weeks ago. Her own people can’t wait to get rid of Her.

  42. Ah, yes, the nebulous “they”, always conspiring, always plotting and scheming.

    It’s always the same with this moron…”they” are bad, nefarious. She is the good guy, a knight in shining armor, selfless and courageous.

  43. Keep fighting Kathleen!! Pennsylvanians are behind you and we stand with you. We are proud of the work you are doing to clean up Harrisburg and fix the A.G. office which has been ineffective and broken for years. Keep fighting the Republican old boys club!! These men are clearly threatened by you, a successful woman, and they are going to do whatever it takes to try to bring you down. Don’t let them! Give ’em hell Kathleen and crush ’em!!

Comments are closed.

Email:
  • Reader Poll: Have You Requested a Mail-In Ballot?


    • Yes. I enjoy mail-in voting. (50%)
    • No. I am going to the poll. (50%)

    Total Voters: 121

    Loading ... Loading ...
Continue to Browser

PoliticsPA

To install tap and choose
Add to Home Screen