Politically Uncorrected: Kane in Sharp Relief

Kane-sadThe breathtakingly rapid rise and agonizingly slow decline of Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane mercifully ended Wednesday August 17th with her resignation one day after her conviction on nine criminal counts, including perjury for leaking grand jury information. Her departure dropped the curtain on the last two-and-a-half years of turmoil and dysfunction in the state’s top law enforcement department.

Kane’s conviction appeared inevitable ever since the Montgomery County District Attorney criminally charged her last year after one former top aide and a political consultant testified against her.  Her political fate was perhaps inevitable. She was a political novice who created a long running and self-destructive feud with other prosecutors and law enforcement officials.

Kane’s resignation had to be a relief – if not to her, then to the voters of Pennsylvania, the attorney general’s employees, and to most of the state’s elected officials who dealt with her. Her tenure in office was a disaster.

Recently, the state legislature twice moved unsuccessfully to oust her from office while Governor Tom Wolf and multiple Republican and Democratic lawmakers repeatedly called for her resignation. Last year the state Supreme Court indefinitely suspended her law license while she continued to remain in office.

This brief synopsis of the Kane ordeal recapitulates only the “what” of Kane’s spectacular fall; the “why” seems more important if we are to learn from this sordid chapter of state history.

Pennsylvania’s long and notorious history of graft and corruption stretching back to Civil War days provide no perspective on Kathleen Kane. She was not corrupt as that term is usually understood nor does she stand accused of graft or bribery. Her crimes were personal and political, not economic or financial.

She saw enemies everywhere and to be fair some were even real. The act that first unhorsed her – leaking grand jury testimony – is not that uncommon and rarely prosecuted.

Moreover, Kane believed the state’s male-dominated political establishment was threatened by her historic victory as the first elected woman attorney general in the state. She railed against this “old boy’s network” throughout her tenure.

But her response to her enemies – real and imagined – was grotesquely distorted, unbalanced and frenzied.  American political scientist Richard Hofstadter famously described the “paranoid style” in American politics; he could have been describing Kathleen Kane.

Kane often seemed to lack the temperament needed to fulfill the duties of a statewide elected official. Her much-documented quarrels with senior aides illustrated this: she had eight spokespersons in less than four years as well as a veritable revolving door of top deputies and other senior aides.

Probably most reflective of her lack of professionalism was a long running feud with Frank Fina, the prosecutor who headed the case against the former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky case who went to prison for sexually abusing children sexually. Many of Kane’s problems were directly linked to attempts to discredit Fina who she blamed for trying to discredit her. The impulse for revenge and retaliation seemed to obsess her.

It was more than political paranoia that felled a politician who many believed – before her troubles began – was on a career trajectory that would land her in the governor’s office or higher.

Kane’s inexperience in high office hobbled her from the beginning. Typically, statewide office in Pennsylvania is only achieved after years of experience in elected positions in local government or the legislature.  Previous attorneys’ general had been elected district attorneys or had extensive experience as federal prosecutors. Yet, Kane had never run for any office or served in any capacity at the state level before her election.

Many of her early problems can be traced to that very lack of experience.  Prior to her 2012 election, she worked as an assistant district attorney in Lackawanna County.  But she lacked managerial skills in running a large, complex department, or in the hiring and organizing of a large high-level staff.

Equally fatal was her lack of political judgment. Sound political judgment is perhaps thesine qua non of the successful statewide politician. Kane exhibited poor political judgment almost from the beginning, early on shutting down a promising corruption investigation, awkwardly threatening to sue a Philadelphia newspaper for printing unflattering stories about her, and ignoring staff advice again and again.

Her stunning refusal to prosecute a sting operation involving four Philadelphia lawmakers and a traffic court judge – four of whom were successfully prosecuted by the Philadelphia district attorney – left the impression she was both politically motivated and lacked prosecutorial integrity.

The appearance of blatant partisanship was even more evident in her handling of the pornographic email scandal that engulfed her office – initially releasing only the names of individuals with ties to Frank Fina and former Attorney General and Gov. Tom Corbett. The litany of political miscues, wrongheaded decisions and self-inflicted wounds continued throughout her time in office.

Some have likened Kane’s political demise to a classic Greek tragedy. She was cut down by character flaws she neither recognized nor controlled. Politically paranoid, she lacked experience in high office, frequently used bad judgment, was temperamentally ill suited for state politics, and tended to make enemies rather than allies.  She was routinely motivated by the need to seek revenge or recrimination.

And like a classic Greek tragedy, it is hard to see how her story could have turned out differently. That is her tragedy – and it was ours.

August 18th, 2016 | Posted in Features, Front Page Stories, Harrisburg, Top Stories | 161 Comments

161 thoughts on “Politically Uncorrected: Kane in Sharp Relief”

  1. David Diano says:

    Two quotes from the always quotable Chuck Pascal last week on the verdict:

    1) “When the court’s pretrial rulings don’t allow you to put on your motivation defense, this becomes the inevitable outcome.”

    2) “Now that the Kane trial is over, establishing that indeed people can be convicted of leaking grand jury information in Pennsylvania (who knew??) is ANYONE going to investigate the leaks of grand jury information by Seth Williams in the Louise Bishop case? Or the leaks of info from the grand jury that investigated Kane? Or the leaks from the Sandusky grand jury? Or the Bonusgate grand jury?
    Nah…why investigate Williams, Fina or Carluccio? Nothing to see here. Move along”

    Of course, since Chuck’s a Dem, the R-holes here will dismiss his insights.

  2. Unsanctioned R says:

    See Doctor, like that. Just feed him the rope.

  3. rsklaroff says:

    @ Legal Intern:

    Once an individual has adopted a nihilist posture, he/she has self-erected a barrier between him-/her-self and any ability to “pass” the psychiatrist’s reality-testing.

    Thus, in the interest in achieving “maximal social-media efficiency” [and in demonstrating how to deal with d4 in the future], consider this structural prediction of what d4 might compose in response to your cogent queries.

    *

    “I saw your post and was wondering if you could identify the lawyers who said the prosecution had not made their case. it would be interesting to know why they thought that and could that be something Kane’s lawyer could appeal on.”

    No, they would want me to maintain their confidentiality.

    “Also, I’m interested in your last comment referencing kangaroo courts. Was not Kane tried and convicted by a jury of her peers. A jury she would have help to select?”

    The prosecution’s unfair origins tainted everything that followed.

    “Finally, your comment about selective prosecution is also unique as I don’t recall or perhaps didn’t see any prior mention of that. I’m curious if you could cite examples of that here in Pennsylvania and why a person indicted by a Grand Jury was not prosecuted by a District Attorney or other legal enforcement agency.”

    Asked and answered, happens all of the time.

    *

    Compare/contrast what I predicted and what d4 ultimately posted, and you will recognize homology; instead, he unjustifiably attacks Ted Cruz [off-topic, of course] and mushes-on.

    His credibility is shot and, sadly, he knows it; what we witness is the twitching of the dying body, desperate for a pathway towards [secular] reincarnation.

  4. David Diano says:

    Unsanctioned R-

    As a member of Kane’s jury, I wouldn’t have had the full story and awareness of selective prosecution, so I wouldn’t have realized the moral bankruptcy of the case.

    The evidence of selective prosecution is what is voluminous and the failure to pursue the leaks of the grand jury against Kane.

    The case was NEVER about whether she “did” it, but rather, could they “get” her on something/anything while ignoring everyone else who did worse. The goal was to remove her from office because she exposed the dirty underbelly and broke the code of silence on the pervasive corruption/unfairness/bias in the judicial system from racist/sexist judges and prosecutors to their cozy ex-parte relationships.

    It wouldn’t matter if she filmed herself stuffing the documents in the envelope and posting it on YouTube. What she was really guilty of was being singled out and made an example of.

  5. Unsanctioned R says:

    And yet you’re the one who’s DQ’d from serving on a jury and would have hung Kane’s jury, disagreeing with all of them…who found the evidence against her voluminous. I never said you weren’t a thinker, David. But, your compass is off with a very small minority.

  6. David Diano says:

    Unsanctioned R-

    The quack supports the fringe that is Ted Cruz, who wants a Christian theocratic government (and whose main interest in Israel is setting of Armageddon for the Second Coming).

  7. The Truth says:

    COTT…You chose to give a smart ass comment to some person who was interested in a post made by another. In your post you mentioned making $160. Now was that you or were any of the family there helping out so your electricity dosent get shut off. When the lights go out it can get really dark.

    Anyway in another post again when you used a different name I believe you referred to me as a pussy. Please allow me to repost my reply here as well. My apology to rsklaroff who wants to bring sanity back to this blog. My response when you posted as Aaron calling me a pussy..

    Aaron really Brett COTT are you talking about your pussy, your wife’s pussy. Who’s pussy? Please don’t say mine for Unlike you I have not had the benefit of going to a prison ( a nutty one at that) where the male orifice is called a pussy. Did the inmates have a name for your pussy maybe troll boy or did a group of them say they wanted to jump in your clown car.?

  8. Unsanctioned R says:

    Doctor, keep targeting the solid majority thinking, non-atheist crowd. And keep exposing the atheists and non-thinkers.

  9. David Diano says:

    Legal intern-

    Some of the lawyers in my FB feed had commented on the case and speculated on whether there would be a conviction and the separate question on whether the prosecution had made the case. The gist of it was that the evidence was circumstantial, and the key witnesses serial liars, but the jury (untrained in the law) couldn’t be counted on to see through it. Also, the selective nature of the prosecution was slammed after the verdict with sarcasm that jury leaks were suddenly a crime in PA.

    The kangaroo court I was mostly referring to was the grand jury that brought the case in the first place, and then the subsequent judicial decisions to allow it to proceed, and finally the judge disallowing Kane’s defense arguments. Also, the use of immunity in this case by the prosecution to get the story they wanted.

    SpongeBob-

    You’re in the party of Trump, so I’ll stay in my party. But, I’ve fought/complained to weed out the corrupt elements in the Democratic party. I’m looking forward to the fall Seth Williams. I abandoned McCord when he played the race card during the primaries (long before the revelations of his illegal abuse of office). I’m thrilled to see Johnny Doc under investigation and side-lined from politics for hopefully a long time, and I hope Johnny Doc rolls over on Bob Brady.
    I’ve been fighting within my party to bring in better candidates to challenge/replace incumbents who aren’t to be trusted. So, my conscience is clear.
    Everything Kane is accused of, if true, amounts to nothing, compared with the real corruption, bribery and graft going on. As far as I can tell, Kane was for sale and the powers-that-be couldn’t deal with her independence and exposing them.

    rsklaroff-

    I saw you posted a lot of nonsense, and I didn’t even bother reading it.

    Smokescreens can’t last forever-
    It sounds like one group went rogue. If this were a movie plot, I would think there were 8 boxes of money, and not the 7 they reported, and what is being held is evidence while the rogue group is under investigation. But, the Feds and DEA are part of this, so you should ask them.

  10. Legal Retard says:

    On another note — I made $160 at the rest-stop last night!!!!

  11. Smokescreens can't last forever says:

    On another note, the public is still waiting for an explanation as to why Kathleen Kane’s office seized $1.77 million in drug money….and then, didn’t report it for two years.

    No explanation either about where the money was kept.

    http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/Kathleen_Kanes_office_waits_nearly_two_years_to_disclose_177_million_seizure.html

  12. rsklaroff says:

    @ Legal Intern:

    You’re welcome.

    Perhaps by nipping-in-the-bud anything he writes, the vile exchanges that he engenders will also diminish in frequency and intensity.

    Hope springs eternal.

  13. rsklaroff says:

    I can’t pledge to police this website comprehensibly for uploads of the poisonous writings of d4, but I’ll try to ensure that any future unsuspecting victims I encounter will be suitably warned.

    They will merely be directed [for documentation] to the “Harrisburg” button, from which they can scroll-down to any of the pages containing lotsa comments [although this search will become increasingly laborious as more relevant news buries KK’s existence].

    It will then be possible to interact with people who wish to share the truths they feel they have unearthed, absent the distractions and venom [and %^&*%&%-lingo] manifest consistently by d4.

  14. Legal Intern says:

    rsklaroff., thank you for your reply. I think I understand where you are coming from. It’s a shame in today’s time one cannot engage in intelligent dialogue with another not even the person you asked with out being attacked. I had occasion to review other posts made by both of these individuals and understand the problem. I appreciate you taking the time to respond to me in the manner that you did. Have a great day.

  15. rsklaroff says:

    @ Legal Intern:

    Once an individual has adopted a nihilist posture, he/she has self-erected a barrier between him-/her-self and any ability to “pass” the psychiatrist’s reality-testing.

    Thus, in the interest in achieving “maximal social-media efficiency” [and in demonstrating how to deal with d4 in the future], consider this structural prediction of what d4 might compose in response to your cogent queries.

    *

    “I saw your post and was wondering if you could identify the lawyers who said the prosecution had not made their case. it would be interesting to know why they thought that and could that be something Kane’s lawyer could appeal on.”

    No, they would want me to maintain their confidentiality.

    “Also, I’m interested in your last comment referencing kangaroo courts. Was not Kane tried and convicted by a jury of her peers. A jury she would have help to select?”

    The prosecution’s unfair origins tainted everything that followed.

    “Finally, your comment about selective prosecution is also unique as I don’t recall or perhaps didn’t see any prior mention of that. I’m curious if you could cite examples of that here in Pennsylvania and why a person indicted by a Grand Jury was not prosecuted by a District Attorney or other legal enforcement agency.”

    Asked and answered, happens all of the time.

    *

    Remember, his outrageousness was manifest when he admitted [following careful x-examination that was painstakingly maintained through a series of web-pages, for he ran but couldn’t hide] that he feels the re-establishment of the State of Israel was a “catastrophe.”

    When such a reprehensible core-value is extant, all other manifestations of his brand of “evil” are predictably false.

    No matter how tempting a Siren he repeatedly attempts to be [e.g., basically asserting “Dems are infallible” incessantly, absent discernment], we must remain resolute and resist playing into [thereby enhancing the expression of] his pathology.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siren_(mythology)

  16. HaHaHa says:

    Oh …. You are already alone. That much is certain. BTW – bungy claims to be banging your ex-wife.

  17. rsklaroff says:

    @ non-d4 posters, who have long since concluded contending with d4 has lost any educational/entertainment value:

    The [Lawrence] Weed System of [Psychiatric] Documentation will be invoked to succinctly summarize the salient features of the conduct exhibited by d4 [David “Demented/Discredited” Diano].

    {https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOAP_note}

    Subjective: “persistent incongruous writings, colorfully composed”

    Objective: “pattern of inability to confront reality”

    Dx – “programmed inanities”

    Rx – “behavioral excommunication”

  18. Legal Intern says:

    HaHaHa why would you attack me for merely asking a question made by another poster. The post was not directed to you. Since Mr. Diano posted the statement I merely asked him what lawyers that’s all. Can not Mr. Diano respond to his own pasts? Are you his designated surrogate. I find your response immature and sophomoric. If Mr. Diano cares to reply to a post directed to him that would be great in the meantime please leave me alone.

  19. rsklaroff says:

    @ d4:

    I had also raised the concern that your attention-seeking behavior might only be “answered” definitively by ignoring it, and I believe I have reached a key-diagnosis and can propose a focused-remedy.

    This proposal [far from asking SS to “ban” you] is akin to excommunication, lest your respondents unjustifiably risk suffering the frustrating fate of Sisyphus while harboring the futile hope you might demonstrate the capacity to “grow” beyond disputational infancy.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisyphus

    For example, when confronted with the fact that KK had repeatedly clamored for the ability to speak-out in her defense [in any venue, before/during/after trial], you ultimately [essentially] predictably cited what we all know as adopting a 5th Amendment type posture, namely, not being subject to legal penalty for having remained mute at-trial.

    Your postings constitute a multifaceted Turing Test, whereby you merely [blindly] rephrase each attack within a mindless context, thereby precluding any self-assessment capacity [for you eschew dealing with shared-specifics].

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test

    The entertainment value when functioning on this side of your polemics on PoliticsPa has long since dissipated, and it will merely be necessary [as pledged earlier] that your pedigree merely be cited if/when you post on any other topic [just as I did when noting your anti-Semitism…which consumed considerable energies until it was extracted, and then confessed in full-form].

    It’s no longer fun to deal with your antics – and you interfere with otherwise potentially-educational interactions – so I may be writing for the group-of-us when trying to pledge that playing the “psychiatrist” role [within your personal dramas, no matter how often they are sprinkled with “f*ck”] will be eschewed.

  20. Nine Eleven Truther says:

    The Kathleen Kane saga is the biggest conspiracy ever.

  21. HaHaHa says:

    Oh look!! The pathetic troll is so desperate for DD’s attention. Poor thing! No friends. No brain. Does he really think “Legal Intern” is going to fool anyone? I love the part where he says that having names of lawyers would help in an appeal. Classic!!

    Time for him to go back to “The Tuth” …. LOL

  22. Legal intern says:

    David Diano
    I saw your post and was wondering if you could identify the lawyers who said the prosecution had not made their case. it would be interesting to know why they thought that and could that be something Kane’s lawyer could appeal on.

    Also, I’m interested in your last comment referencing kangaroo courts. Was not Kane tried and convicted by a jury of her peers. A jury she would have help to select. .

    Finally, your comment about selective prosecution is also unique as I don’t recall or perhaps didn’t see any prior mention of that. I’m curious if you could cite examples of that here in Pennsylvania and why a person indicted by a Grand Jury was not prosecuted by a District Attorney or other legal enforcement agency.

    Thank you

  23. SpongeBob says:

    David, every time you post I am reminded of on of my favorite Mark Twains quotes

    “Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.”

    You are a fraud, a sham. Someone who blindly believes and mixes hate for hate sake. A sad human being honestly. Your arguments lack total merit and can only be topped with the because I said so arguments we had as children. When you rise every day and can barely count the people that care for your very existence outside of your immediate family, I wonder if you think to yourself I still have time to change. The only Kudos you get is posting under your real name. That takes balls Too bad you joining Brett at his level often in argument has left you as a political punchline. The sad part is I argue with idiots like you for fun, a stress release but, for you this is what you live for. To put on a little show no matter how wrong you are and then exclaim well at least I posted under my real name. Face it David, you fight for a party where recently at least is littered with criminals and malfeasance in Pennsylvania. You fight for criminals.

  24. David Diano says:

    Smokescreens can’t last forever-

    So, she deserves to go to jail for NOT discussing her charges outside a courtroom? Is that that new legal standard for guilt?

    Are you aware that the judge made a point of explaining to the jury that Kane’s decision not to put on a defense case should not be taken as an indication of guilt?

    Kane’s team argued that the prosecution had not made it’s case, and quite a few lawyers suggested the same, and were surprised by the verdict.

    You fail to comprehend that a kangaroo court system, that engages in selective prosecution, does not have the moral authority to convict anyone of crimes they ignore (especially ones in their own grand juries).

  25. rsklaroff says:

    @ Smokescreens can’t last forever:

    “Touché!”

  26. Smokescreens can't last forever says:

    Another point of contemplation:

    From the time Kane was indicted by the DA, did she ever answer specific questions about the charges against her at press conferences?

    The answer is NO.

    At her trial, when Kane was given the opportunity to defend herself on the witness stand, did Kane give any testimony?

    The answer is NO.

    Again, Kane deserves to go to jail.

  27. David Diano says:

    Smokescreens can’t last forever-

    Did anybody else leak grand jury information specifically to attack/target/damage the duly elected AG and interfere with the operations of her office?

    Yes or No?
    The answer is YES.

    Did anyone bother to investigate or attempt to prosecute any of those leaks?

    Yes or No?
    The answer is NO.

    Does this selective prosecute invalidate the system and the verdict?

    Yes or No?
    The answer is YES.

    Unsanctioned R-

    I hope you someday face a jury of people who think like you so you’ll understand how wrong/corrupt the system is, particularly the DA’s who care more about their score card than even-handed justice.

  28. Unsanctioned R says:

    David, I understand your world view and agree with you that you’re unfit to serve on a jury.

  29. bungy says:

    She will be sentenced to at least 36 months in prison.

  30. Smokescreens can't last forever says:

    Did Kathleen Kane leak secret grand jury information?

    Yes or No?

    The answer is YES.

    Did Kathleen Kane commit perjury on the witness stand?

    Yes or No?

    The answer is YES.

    Kathleen Kane deserved those multiple guilty verdicts.

    She also deserves to go to jail.

  31. David Diano says:

    Unsanctioned R-

    The jurors only got a small piece of the puzzle. It would be difficult for them to arrive a good verdict. But, the more pressing issue is that no jury heard anything about the other leakers, because the selective prosecutors didn’t consider those leaks to be crimes.

    Atheists aren’t typically Biblical scholars, unless they are fans of religious fiction like Harry Potter fans are of magical fiction.

  32. Unsanctioned R says:

    “I’m hardly a Biblical scholar” Let’s leave it at that.

    All the jurors disagree with you.

  33. David Diano says:

    Unsanctioned R-

    I’m just bringing in a famous quote. Your quote (which you didn’t even bother to copy) advocates for a double-standard (and among teachers or those who anoint themselves). The Jesus quote directly opposed a double-standard, particularly by those trying to sit in judgment of others. Now, I’m hardly a Biblical scholar, but I’m pretty confident that Jesus quotes override other quotes.

    It’s only a crime if you prosecute (or attempt to investigate/prosecute) everyone else who commits the same crime, otherwise it’s merely an excuse to persecute someone. (which is what it was in this case)

  34. SpongeBob says:

    David,
    Now you quote the bible in response to Kanes guilt? I love how you constantly defend Kane yet you have no explanation for her selective release of emails, mishandling of office matters, being sued by her own sister. Ignorance of these actions is pretty interesting.

  35. bungy says:

    Fake bungy alert at 7:31. The real bungy is still running victory laps.

  36. SpongeBob says:

    Not me at 9:21. Nice try Brett.

  37. Unsanctioned R says:

    David, you wanted to bring the Bible into this. James 3:1 comes to mind.

    NO REGRETS speaks for itself. According to her jurors, the amount of evidence against her was unreal.

    I could quote Kathleen Kane explaining why leaking grand jury testimony is a crime. But, I don’t think you care.

  38. SpongeBob says:

    Diano….Shut up, I’ll post under whatever name I want just like you and if you don’t like it go somewhere else. Fact is your mommys boy she takes care of your bills you’re a loser. If you’re so great why live with mommy. You’re still sucking off the teat. Kids in the basement you deny wonder what others in your neighborhood will say. Oh yeah the last time this was bought out you asked to have the posts deleted. Wonder why you loser. You’re biggest claim to stupidity is defending a person who wanted to frame and
    Put into prison an innocent man. Only a loser like you thinks like that.

    Pat Unger……COTT shut up no one cares why you hear or anything about lawyers ok. The only kind of lawyers he knows are defense lawyers oh maybe with one exception. So COTT pick some more girls name and post crap under there. You’re a nobody, a theif who was sent to the nut prison and obsessed with giving blowjobs at rest stops. You don’t scare anyone bulbous head.

  39. David Diano says:

    Unsanctioned R-

    I completely disagree. By your logic, she should be judged more harshly for jaywalking as well or running a stop sign.

    The actual/correct standard is (or supposed to be) “equal under the law”. That’s why this selective prosecution is cancerous to the entire judicial system.

    The stand you proposed is certainly (and wrongly) flipped when police shoot unarmed victims or people die in custody, and the DA’s don’t convene grand juries or make any real effort to convict, where any normal citizen would be subject to a serious murder investigation.

    Actually, I said it was a mistake not to redact Mondesire. I didn’t specify that she leaked nor that it was her mistake. But, if she had leaked, the failure to redact should have been a fine.

    Her “no regrets” answer was CLEARLY interpreted and answered as “Do you regret being Attorney General?” Did you watch the tape, or just read the transcript? From the tape, it was very clear that she was referring to the pride she took in the job she did to help people.

    The Truther-

    When you say: “the fact is”, you are supposed to follow with a fact, not more made up BS.

  40. Unsanctioned R says:

    David,
    No double standard here. Leaders are judged more harshly, commensurate with their trust.

    If you say Kane’s mistake was not redacting her victim’s name, how can you also claim she didn’t leak the GJ rpt?

    And your interpretation of her “no regrets” comment…you actually think she was answering a rhetorical question like, “Do you regret all the good things you did?” Give me a break.

  41. The Truth says:

    Diano….Shut up, I’ll post under whatever name I want just like you and if you don’t like it go somewhere else. Fact is your mommys boy she takes care of your bills you’re a loser. If you’re so great why live with mommy. You’re still sucking off the teat. Kids in the basement you deny wonder what others in your neighborhood will say. Oh yeah the last time this was bought out you asked to have the posts deleted. Wonder why you loser. You’re biggest claim to stupidity is defending a person who wanted to frame and
    Put into prison an innocent man. Only a loser like you thinks like that.

    Pat Unger……COTT shut up no one cares why you hear or anything about lawyers ok. The only kind of lawyers he knows are defense lawyers oh maybe with one exception. So COTT pick some more girls name and post crap under there. You’re a nobody, a theif who was sent to the nut prison and obsessed with giving blowjobs at rest stops. You don’t scare anyone bulbous head.

  42. David Diano says:

    Pat Unger-

    That would be too good to be true. Who was the first to start claiming Brett was a poster here? I think it might have been SpongeBob, but I’m not sure with all his difference aliases. He certainly seems to be a persistent “handle” to keep making such references.

  43. Pat Unger says:

    My understanding is that the real Brett Cott has attorneys working on a lawsuit against the “commenter” who has said untrue things about Cott. we may all know his/her real name soon.

  44. David Diano says:

    The Truther-

    Where do you get your information? How could I “admit” to living in my mom’s basement, when her place doesn’t even have a basement? For someone who claims to know so much (and so creepy), I’m surprised you don’t have photos and architectural blueprints that you could have checked.

    I’ve got my main job, which covers the bills, and my side-gig providing high quality voter data at affordable prices, to many happen candidates and committee people.

    Maybe you have more “pleased” customers at the truck stop. If so, congratulations.

    Anytime you are ready to post under your real name, bring it on, coward.

  45. The Truth says:

    Diano….. Got it all right. You live in the basement of your moms house. You’ve admitted that already. You have a buisness that’s a joke. Your buddy is COTT. We all know about him. Kids in the basement? You’re a loser who can’t find a woman oh yeah there’s COTT same thing. You may want to call him Bungy another sissy name. COTT does your wife your have all these sissy girlie names.

    Bungy……COTT, you are not man enough to shut me up besides I wouldn’t want to oppose a guy dressed in his wife’s clothes. Now what were those guys names you shared cells with? I guess you could say they’re nuts just like you since you were in the nutty prison. Now here’s where you turn into Aaron the Hispanic and threaten me with broken English talk like last time. Oh that’s right you only favor one minority not all of them. . So shut up girlie boy. You don’t scare anyone you goofball. Remember BLM and I got the pictures to prove it.

  46. David Diano says:

    The Truther-

    That’s amazing. You posted all that and didn’t get a single thing right. You should work for Trump.

  47. bungy says:

    Yo RETARD. You need to shut the fuck up. You are coming unglued again.

  48. The Truth says:

    Diano….. I don’t know maybe you can call upstairs from your basement bedroom and ask your mom to explain it. It’s funny about multiple personalities. Did someone a relative perhaps in your family suffer from that. Is that why you’re the derelict you are. No job lives with mom. Best friends with a guy who loves posing as a girl, obsesses over gay sex at rest stops. Likes accusing people they don’t know about liking kids. When was the last time you had a kid in your basement? Yeah Diano when it comes to spelling mistakes your the best when it comes to being a racist your the best. Mommy is calling it’s bath time.

  49. David Diano says:

    The “Truth” is an “r” but the “Tuth” isn’t ?

    Is that how multiple personality ( or posterality) works?

  50. The Truth says:

    COTT….you may think I’m “r” but we know you are. You got sent to the nut prison. You couldn’t go to a normal school. All you do is pose as females, talk about rest stop gay sex, and other peoples wives. Wonder how you’re family paid the bills while you were in the nut prison. How about your wife Brett? Tell us what she does? Remember BLM and I got the pics to prove it.

Comments are closed.