Attorney General Kathleen Kane will be facing even more criminal charges.
In a preliminary hearing before Magisterial District Judge Cathleen Kelly Rebar, three additional counts were added to the already existing charges Kane will face at trial.
These new developments involve a felony count of perjury and two misdemeanors, false swearing and obstruction.
They stem from Kane’s insistence during testimony that she had not signed an oath to never reveal grand jury information from any case since the current system was set up in 1980. Agents found the signed oath in her office last September.
Kane’s lawyer Gerald Shargel asserts that the AG simply doesn’t remember signing the document.
“Everything she did suggested that she forgot she signed it,” he said. “This was an honest mistake.”
“We are very, very optimistic about this,” Shargel concluded. “The fight goes on.”
In total, Kane now faces two felony counts of perjury as well as ten misdemeanors: three counts of official oppression, three counts of conspiracy, two counts of false swearing and two counts of obstruction.
1)I am not implying her husband found value. I am saying at the time given prior contracts for him he likely thought it would be a good investment of his money. Since they are getting Divorced, I am thinking he has a different opinion now.
2)There was a very detailed article which I know you responded to on this site that called into question this very process. Please don’t make me be like others with link after link for you to follow. You already commented on this topic but it does not change facts.
3) Sure the frat boy emails are having an impact but its not like she found people, you know taking bribes to conduct business or anything….oh wait….
4) Her hand picked attack dog did not find any meaningful delays in the case. And oh by the way since you play amateur lawyer, do you have any idea the magnitude of a case that will garner national attention, is highly complex to navigate considering the privacy process that has to be in place etc… That does not happen overnight. And also you cannot rush to judgement and can’t put together a case that leaves any items open for interpretation. The put the guy away for the balance of his life. I say successful prosecution. Are you asking me to cite specific cases that they have lost or the number of successful prosecutions before KK became AG? This section here is a dangerous game for her because I am not sure how much has come out about their losses in this area. I am surprised at the lack of reporting on it actually.
5) For someone who should be above reproach how do so many missteps or accidents happen. It’s funny how you defend those but deep down you have to know that the volume of her mistakes demonstrates her being unfit to lead. And how about putting people into roles they are not qualified for? Cmon man, you can’t be that dense?
6) Are you listening to those who are shunning her? They are not all after her job. She is the gift that keeps on giving to the republican party. She is making it impossible on serious dems because she is such a damn punchline for dem politics.
7) I am just a citizen of the commonwealth man. Someone who pays his taxes and expects good government. And at the end of the day what’s wrong with that?
David the worst part is in the big leagues, you don’t pick sides when you want to win. It doesn’t matter which dinner I attend. As long as I get that Good Government I need.
1) What value has her husband’s business found? You are implying he’s done something wrong that requires his wife to be AG. I call bullsh*t.
2) You seem to be making a lot of generalizations about who is on the payroll. Given all the old-boy-network of people trying to keep the status quo and stab her in the back, she kept on too many people she should have replaced with loyalists.
3) “What corruption is she weeding out?” I can’t even believe you are saying that will all the revelations, including at least two Supreme court judges (one that quit and an other that had a friend with a conflict of interest reviewing him). Fina and pals seem to be behind a lot of shady goings on and leaks.
4) Corbett’s team sat on Sandusky case. Didn’t seem very aggressive. You are going to have to cite some specific OFFICIAL numbers to back up your assertions.
5) Misstating my argument, does not win you yours. I very clearly stated that leaks about how the prosecutors behaved/handled the cases and their jobs are legitimate public information. I said that the release of Montdesire’s name was wrong, but an accidental clerical error in failing to redact it. That leak was not an attempt to sully him, but rather show that Fina wasn’t doing his job. The recent leaks have been to damage Kane, who should have been protected as the subject of the grand jury, as should the witness testimony.
You know perfectly well that by “selective targeting” I mean going after Kane but not anyone who leaked from the grand-jury against her.
6) Those “members of her party” want her gone because they either want her job, or to put in someone they can control, or keep their own dirty laundry from coming out. It’s a disgrace that they are going along with GOP efforts to railroad her without a trial.
7) Now you are claiming to be someone of influence at rubber chicken dinners? Also, that you can get people do things you want, but not if they know who you are from posting here? What kind of poor reputation do you have that you can’t be associated with your own opinions?
As mentioned before, it’s not my contradiction when you misstate my position.
BTW, whose chicken dinners are you attending, the Dems or the Reps, where you wield such nebulous influence?
Montco – that means you need to also stop reading “Jessica Myers,” “Multi tasked General,” “Larry” and several others … who are all the same person.
Has Eakin resigned yet?
This “Spongebob” character sounds like a disgruntled leftover from the Corbett dog pound. I’ve stopped reading him/her, along with the rantings of Doc Sklaroff. Looks like the Philly Daily News is the only outlet doing real reporting on this story these days.
who are you kidding, Spongebob? we all know you are “Jessica Myers”
1)Her husband bankrolled a large chunk but so did special interests. You don’t think that the business her husband owns found value in having a spouse as AG?
2)I think she has spent so much time making a mockery of herself and the office you might be right for the most part….Oh wait except for the fact that it seems that every son, daughter, niece and nephew of hers or supporters is on the payroll. And don’t come back with big deal because you can’t rail against the Good Ole boys network while creating your own filled with less than qualified people. Let’s not forget her assigning people into prominent roles. How about magically promoting someone who violated policy by writing to the Pittsburgh paper to leave the AG alone. She gets an unheard of increase and promotion based on office hr history and of course that’s not her selling out right?
3)What corruption is she weeding out? She is not even close to a whistleblower. This is why I love when you comment. hundreds of people RECEIVED emails that had content not relevant to their day to day. Others Forwarded those messages and those people should be penalized. Except even there she was heavy handed with a few, and continues to bemoan the existence of those emails but how many people has she promoted, retained who not only received but forwarded those messages? More than just a few including some important supervisor roles and even her own sister. Come on man, she won’t release all the emails because it will hurt her slightly less than it hurts the people she hates. That’s why its a little here and a little there.
4) I will say Murphy would have been awful as well but Kane is worse. She acts and operates like someone who barely knows the law. As for going after Child predators and such. sure awesome, except wait. Did you know that for the first time since the office has been going after Child Predators (the first Task force was created in 1995 but really became a dedicated role in 2005) the AG’s office is losing cases. LOSING. Up to and including for AG Kelly the office had never had a case end up with out a plead of Guilt or a verdict of guilty. Under this AG there are people who have walked because of inefficiencies in the case. Surely that’s who you should be supporting. I guess all of those arrested under Fisher, Pappert, Corbett and Kelly just got lucky that people took a break from all the inappropriate emails right?
5)Really? Her opponents have been breaking the law? According to you the leaks shouldn’t even be a crime. Selective prosecutions? The same guy who took down key republicans (who is a registered democrat from what I understand) targeted people who ironically said yes to bribes. If by selective you mean targeting people suspected of being criminal politicians then ok I can live with that. You and others are pissed because they got caught and it hurts the image of the party. Conflicts of interest? Really this from a person who makes her own sister head of the Child Predator unit who has zero experience in winning those cases and who has never, ever won a predator case? That’s an example of why this AG is totally unqualified for the job. In the past there never would be a lawyer running that unit who themselves had not fought and won those types of cases.
Kane is no underdog. She is an in over her head now non lawyer who had her husband buy her a political office. She is not capable of being the Commonwealth’s Attorney General. She has positioned herself this way and at every turn its someone else’s fault. How many important position players have come and gone. Ardo just got thrown under the bus and you know damn well he said exactly what she was thinking.
6)Her own party wants her gone. Her own party man. The difference between the abuses you allege and even the conflicts (which I agree are an absolute disgrace) don’t change the fact one admittedly broke the law. The others, not so much…at least not with proof yet.
7)I am using the SpongeBob name because I don’t need people to recognize me every time I step into a rubber chicken dinner. I just need them to do the things I want them to.
Oh and Jessica was right. Like it or not YOU make it easy when you contradict yourself about what you believe and why. Me thinks that I just owned you, once again.
Notwithstanding your typically-misleading selective-quotations, note the unanimity expressed in the the damning letters and then the reason[s] for such expressed anguish; the multiple unprecedented aberrations are evidence of the dysfunction that the senate undoubtedly will “capture and release”:
HARRISBURG — Attorney General Kathleen Kane blamed her press secretary for comments about a potential leak of grand jury material when she testified in private before a judge last week.
A transcript of the closed court session includes a brief discussion between Kane and Judge John Cleland about her suspended law license, a situation with “certainly problematic” implications, the judge said.
Kane blamed spokesman Chuck Ardo for comments that she suspected prosecutors from a prior administration leaked information about the Jerry Sandusky sex abuse case.
Asked whether the conversation angers or disappoints him, Ardo said, “I think it exposes the challenge of speaking for the Attorney General’s Office at this point in time.”
Ardo is under contract with Kane. He is her seventh spokesman.
Cleland, a senior judge from McKean County who is handling Sandusky’s appeal, ordered Kane to explain to him and defense attorney Al Lindsay her comments implying that prosecutors or a former grand jury judge leaked information about the former Penn State assistant football coach before his conviction on child molestation charges in 2012.
Cleland asked Kane about a Sept. 30 article by The Associated Press that Lindsay referenced in a court filing. The story quoted Ardo as saying Kane “has strong suspicions that the leaks came from people associated with this office.”
“Well, judge, those words were the words of Chuck Ardo. Those weren’t my words,” Kane testified.
Ardo in late September first told reporters there were no concerns about leaks by prosecutors. He said he based that on a statement provided to him by one of Kane’s top aides. But he said several of her aides told him later to correct his statement, so he did.
“I spoke to several people. I don’t know which one told me to change it,” Ardo said.
He said he spoke with Kane. “She had heard I’d made the comment. I believe she told me she’d get back to me.” But he said Kane didn’t call back.
“Those were impressions given to him without authorization by me,” said Kane, who faces 12 criminal charges in Montgomery County stemming from a leak of grand jury material from a 2009 case to a Philadelphia newspaper.
“I don’t have any emails or communications to suggest there was anything going on between Judge (Barry) Feudale and (Office of the Attorney General) attorneys,” Kane said. “I can’t speak to why (Ardo) said that.”
Kane had intimated that Feudale and former state prosecutor Frank Fina were too close and had shared information by email. She successfully petitioned the state Supreme Court to remove Feudale as a grand jury judge in 2013, not long after she took office. Feudale last week accused Kane of being behind a theft of documents from his chambers and having unauthorized access to his emails.
Cleland presided over Sandusky’s trial. Sandusky is serving a 30- to 60-year prison term for molesting 10 boys.
Concern about the Sandusky case leak stemmed from a March 2011 story in the Harrisburg Patriot-News that said Sandusky was under investigation for child molestation by a statewide grand jury.
“It could have been the defense attorneys,” Kane said. “It could have been Penn State. It could have been Sandusky himself.”
In the exchange about her law license, which the Supreme Court suspended effective Oct. 22, Cleland told Kane: “I’m aware of your statements yesterday and otherwise that your law license is in a state of suspension.”
“Uh-huh,” she answered.
“The intricacies and the implications of that in-limbo status elude me,” Cleland said.
“Me, as well, judge,” Kane said.
“And are certainly problematic,” the judge said. “But I assume you continue to be an officer of the court, at least by virtue of you being the attorney general of Pennsylvania.”
From the article:
the judge said. “But I assume you continue to be an officer of the court, at least by virtue of you being the attorney general of Pennsylvania
… so much for her suspension preventing her from doing her job
As for Ardo comments:
“The story quoted Ardo as saying Kane “has strong suspicions that the leaks came from people associated with this office.”
I would suspect that “strong suspicions” is an understatement and Ardo sugarcoated it. The original statement was probably more like: “I’m sure it was one of those pr*cks. We just need to figure out which one.”
More problems for AG-Kane:
Kane blames press secretary for comment about Sandusky leak
1) Paying for her own campaign made her independent of the forces I oppose.
2) I haven’t seen any indication of her selling out her office for money/donations.
3) She is doing what we elected her to do: weed out corruption (and she found a lot of it) So, she’s a whistleblower and getting hit by the those forces I don’t like for exposing them.
4) Pat Murphy struck me as the least qualified. So, I don’t agree with your assertion. Also, I spoke to Murphy supporters who were disappointed that Murphy was only interested in AG as a stepping stone for Gov and couldn’t give an adequate explanation for his being AG. He struck me as a bullsh*t artist who was more image than substance in his campaign approach. Kane struck me as someone who actually wanted to be AG, and go after child predators, fraud, etc. (which she has done).
5) One of the other reasons I support Kane, is that her opponents have been breaking the law left-and-right with leaks, selective prosecutions, failures to disclose conflicts of interests, and revelation of racist/bigoted/misogynistic behavior/attitude in conflict with their duties.
Kane’s the underdog here against a rigged and entrenched political and judicial system fighting to keep her from exposing them.
6) Even if she was guilty of every single thing she was accused of.. all of it put together is NOTHING compared to the prosecutorial abuses against her and the attempts by the Senate to remove her without a trial. Look at the recently exposed conflict of interest with the Judge Eakin.
7) As long as you use the handle “Spongebob”, you are in the little leagues.
No. He completely misrepresented my position.
Montco, what does that have to do with Kane committing felony perjury?
Well, this promises to be something special:http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20151111_Councilwomen_to_stand_against_city_prosecutors_tied_to_Porngate_scandal.html
“District Attorney Seth Williams is likely to have a crummy morning.
“Same goes for three city prosecutors – Frank Fina, Marc Costanzo and Pat Blessington – who are at the center of the Porngate email scandal.
“For the first time since the scandal broke earlier this year, the women of City Council plan to hold a news conference Thursday morning to “denounce the demeaning, misogynistic and racist emails sent on state-owned computers by prosecutors currently employed” by Williams, according to a news release put out by the Philadelphia chapter of the National Organization for Women.”