Senate Committee Begins Kane Hearings

Kane-ConferenceIt begins.

Last month, the State Senate created a committee to determine whether Attorney General Kathleen Kane should be removed from office.

While Kane questions the authority of such a committee, they are nonetheless proceeding with their first hearing today.

According to Brad Bumsted of the Tribune-Review, the first witnesses will be representatives from the Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association.

“The question before our committee is whether or not an attorney general can fulfill the duties of that office with a suspended law license. I am keen to find out what the district attorneys have to say on this question,” said Sen. Art Haywood.

Kane’s law license was suspended by the State Supreme Court in September.

Meanwhile, the committee has subpoenaed Kane for documents but she is refusing.

“Because she believes the Senate acted unlawfully, she does not believe they have the authority to issue a subpoena,” her spokesman Chuck Ardo stated.

60 Responses

  1. I don’t know anything about the law and I’m a Democrat so I govern by feelings. That’s why I rely on the ramblings of Kiesling.

  2. 22 states do not require their attorneys general to be licensed members of the bar. Nor is the U.S. attorney general, or justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, required to be members of a state bar.

    // Slams mic //

  3. I recognize that “mental capacity” is nowhere to be found in the constitutional provision being used by the Senate. But I will defend Kane under any circumstances, even if she is caught on tape killing puppies. Therefore, I conclude that this senate proceeding is fraudulent because it is not focusing on Kane’s mental capacity.

  4. ]
    @ elroy:

    Your false assertion [“Certainly a Pennsylvania DA would never admit in a Senate ‘hearing’ that one could perform their (sic) county responsibilities without a Law License”] is undermined by a simple-fact: unlike AG-Kane, the three-of-them wouldn’t lie under oath.

  5. AG Kane is operating under duress. Certainly a Pennsylvania DA would never admit in a Senate “hearing” that one could perform their county responsibilities without a Law License.

    The Supreme Court will be held accountable for their actions.

  6. Sorry – but this does seem to be a witch-hunt. Can’t say I am rooting for Kane. But I am definitely rooting against the Harrisburg establishment that seems to be intent on destroying her.

  7. Looks like Troll-Boy Larry is back – pretending to be his HERO, Ha3. That pathetic troll must enjoy getting OWNED.

    When is the Senate going to hear proof of Kane’s “mental incapacity”??? because that is the only way they would have the power to remove Kane from Office.

    Maybe they will call Frank Fina to testify about how she removed his hard-drive on her first day of work. LOL. He must have had a lot of sleepless nights. After all, this is a sample of the material he would e-mail around to his white buddies:

  8. Senate committee = Democratic District Attorneys testifying to what is common sense — you need an active license to practice law to be a top prosecutor. Fina.

    Senate committee = this stuff is so obvious that left-leaning editorial boards around the state have already written the same things and asked Kane to resign. Repervlicans.

    Senate committee = It’s right there in the constitution, but I keep calling it a kangaroo court because I love Kathleen Kane so much. Corbett Pervs.

  9. It has been reported that Frank Fina used the FOIA to get all his vile disgusting e-mails – and then proceeded to introduce them into evidence in a grand jury proceeding so that they would be “protected” and Fina could continue to hide the truth.
    Add “devious” and “corrupt” to the list of adjectives for Fina. “Racist” would have to be another.

    When does the Senate – or anyone – begin investigating the MANY leaks from the Kane investigation? It’s strange, huh? Just like inall of Fina’s other “big” cases, there were TONS OF LEAKS from the Kane Grand Jury. Yet no one is doing anything about it. Wonder why ….


  10. Senate committee = Kangaroo Court

    Senate committee = Senior, experienced Repervlicans and Junior Democrats (one of whom has already expressed her anti-Kane feelings).

    Senate committee = a group of people with no authority acting on Press clippings

    Senate committee = the entity that is helping the Clown Car do an end-around on the Constitution

    Senate committee = lying about meaning of “competence” in the “removal” law.

  11. The beginning of the end? Special Senate panel begins considering fate of embattled AG Kathleen Kane

    After “a trio of county district attorneys testified that their licenses to practice law were essential to their official duties,” no contrary data were acquired…as had been predicted; this presages the findings, as AG-Kane continues her boycott of these proceedings.

  12. Who do you think you are kidding, @kanesdriver.

    Christmas 2015? Because Republicans have been coming here waving around their Press clippings for a long time. Maybe you meant Christmas 2016?

    Right, @kanesdriver? You can run, but you can’t hide!! Did they fire you yet?

  13. So I see that HaHaHa has hijacked my name.

    In any case, KK will be removed by Christmas.

    Very soon, a significant lawsuit will be filed against her.

    Popcorn is ready.

  14. Larry – why did the leakers of protected material from the Kane grand jury do what they did? Because Kand was “mean” to them? Do you know how stupid you sound?

    My understanding is that a person in the US has a right to a trial before we can decide whether he or she, in fact, broke the law.

    The rush to get rid of Kane smells political. The PA legal and justice system is not looking very good (Kane included). Most of us just want the process to be a fair one; and to make sure that all involved in wrongdoing are held accountable.

    Is it true that the Judge that green-lighted the investigation is the guy who wants to run for AG as a Republican?

  15. Jessica, so Kane broke the law to get back at people who were being mean to her? Yeah, the prosecutors have been onto that from the beginning too!

  16. I can’t believe I didn’t notice earlier that “Jessica Myers” is one of the H3/Unger screen names. Usually he uses Unger to say H3 was “spot on from the beginning.” Same language here, but now under the name of Myers. You clever dog, you. Kane is paying you well.

  17. Ha3 has had a lot to say, actually. And he has been spot-on since the beginning. He said that there were powerful people attacking Kane for selfish reasons. And now we have seen their reasons. It’s because they are racists, mysoginists and bigots. Kane had/has the proof.

  18. Below, another Republican (sklaroff) is still hoping against hope that Kane will “just go away.” But she won’t. PROVE IT IN COURT OR SHUT UP.

  19. Speaking of “unglued,” it seems like Fake Ha3 is coming unglued. He probably has a Ha3 poster over his bed (in his mother’s basement).

    He is probably just frustrated. Ha3 owned him
    AGAIN today.

  20. **. WARNING **

    sklaroff is a mental patient who appears to be coming unhinged. Delusional as well.

    He has met Ted Cruz THREE TIMES, though.

  21. Consider:

    I read-through these hyperlinks, and I believe there are key “distinctions with major differences” between the two situations, notwithstanding the fact that PA adopted a new Constitution in the interim [1968].

    It seems that the circumstances under which jurisdiction was denied in the old case [not choosing to be triers of fact] differ in the instant case [assessing ability to function without an active license]. Indeed, one could argue that the latter situation affords a level of “infirmity” that would comport with how to conjure the “original intent” of the clause.

    The key-discussion occurs on page 32 [page 34 of the hyperlink], noting the exclusion of “impeachable or indictable offences”; not being able to act as the AG [for whatever reason, including what the Supremes imposed] would seem to comport with empowering the Senate to act.

    Note that “incompetency” is included, a “reasonable” cause that could relate directly to the job-requirements of the AG; furthermore, this would correlate with concern that the internal turmoil therein would have been triggered and then could impede the AG’s office from administering justice.

    Therefore, it would seem that the Senate could act summarily, after having afforded the due process requirements [in a hearing] that would be delimited by whether she could faithfully discharge her duties; the Supremes wouldn’t harbor any “fingerprints” in this regard, even if the proceedings are perceived as having been triggered by their disciplinary activity.

    I would think that some elements of what transpired legally [in the MontCo indictment, which BTW would survive any electoral results] could bleed into the proceedings noting, for example, her having signed-off on maintaining ALL Grand-Jury secrets [and not just those impaneled during her reign] despite what she swore thereafter.

    It would be intriguing were she to “plead the 5th” under such circumstances for, surely, she’d be desirous of defending herself against losing her job; perhaps this enhanced pressure would yield her resignation, recalling how RMN was encouraged by Kissinger/AuH20/Scott/Rhodes to hang-it-up just before the Senate was to tackle this “crook.”

    Regardless, despite aggressive attacks from AG-Kane’s defenders, I’ve argued for months [@ PoliticsPa] that the Commonwealth [and both political parties] would benefit by her earliest possible exit [mediated perhaps by Metcalfe]; this pathway would appear to be the least painful and, further, it seems the idea has caught-on [finally!] and will be tackled ASAP.

  22. I posted a summary of the comments on this case [provided on this website] to two cited websites–

    –and directed the reader [with appropriate warnings] back to PoliticsPa for elaborative analysis.

  23. Larry: should I service you first, Mr. Fina? Or Mr. Costanzo today?

    Fina: let Marc go first this time; his small penis needs some lovin’. I have this video of a 100 year old woman having sex. That will keep me happy for a week!

    Costanzo: Thanks Frank (under his breath: your wife doesn’t think it’s small …)

    Fina: And don’t forget to go on and type “Kalamity Kane” ten times.

    Costanzo: Yeah — and bring up her divorce … and the paranoid Judge in MontCo that thinks Kane has black helicopters following him.

    Fina: And don’t forget you have to go smoke Craig McCoy’s pole on Thursday. I promised him you would be there at 7:00,

    Larry: Yes, Mr. Fina. Yes, Mr. Costanzo / you know it is my pleasure.

  24. Larry: Not sure how I can call crap in newspaper articles “facts” now but BS when it comes to Cardon I know !! I’m voting for Trump!

    Larry posing as another commenter: Trump is the best choice.

    Larry: should I pose as Ha3 or Pat today? Hold on … I am getting confused … Why aren’t they just impeaching Kane again?

    Larry posing as another commenter: it doesn’t matter. Just keep calling racist images “pornography.” And ignore the sexual images of children, for God’s sake.

    Larry: BENGHAZI !!!!

  25. Larry: Hey Kane Supporters, look at every Democrat in the state asking Kane to resign and Democratic DAs saying that Kane is disrupting their prosecutions. Also, look at the constitution, which allows the Senate to hold this proceeding.

    H3/Unger/aaron (same person) and Diano: Shillboy, Repervlican, Clown Car, Corbett Pervs!!

    Larry: Um, okay. Thanks for the intelligent response!

  26. Buzzards indeed!! And some vultures … and a few jack-asses as well.

    But the truth stands still. And the truth is that the buzzards and jack-asses are going to have to PROVE IT IN COURT OR SHUT UP.


  27. Groupie Troll Larry – you will get no explanation and like it. Now go back and masturbate to your Trump poster (again). Then you’ll be ready to pretend you are Ha3 (again). When you are done with that, call your bosses and tell them more e-mails are coming soon. I just hope this batch contains the bestiality that Fina & The Corbett Pervs watched on their taxpayer-owned computers.

  28. Larry is loopy. This article is about the Senate and it’s BS Kangaroo Court. They know they can’t impeach Kane, so they are trying to be sneaky. Good thing She has REALLY GOOD LAWYERS.

  29. Pat Unger, as chair of the Kathleen Kane Defense Team, can you explain how emails will have anything to do with the charges that Kane turned over confidential materials to the media and then lied under oath about it? Your team’s amateur legal counsel, David Diano, simply responds that it “shouldn’t be illegal.” But it is. And she was caught red-handed. So, how do emails sent long before she took office defend her from conduct she took while in office?

  30. Larry the Groupie Troll is still pretending that the DP and PASC shenanigans were not a set-up to get to this point – where they could again try an end-around on due process — an end-around on the Constitution — an end-around on justice.

    It’s not going to work.

    And guess what — More e-mails are coming boys !!!

  31. Uh oh! Democratic DAs: no top prosecutor can perform the job without an active law license. They describe a litany of job duties that require a law license.

    I assume that these are Repervlicans in disguise, put up to these remarks by Frank Fina and the Corbett Pervs.

  32. Why can’t AG Kane just “go away”???? WHY ??!!??!!??!

    We did everything right. We got reporters from the INKY to help us. Then we illegally leaked negative information. She walked right into our perjury trap. And yet – she is still the AG? Despite all those bad headlines. It’s quite the head-scratcher. It’s as if she doesn’t back down from corrupt bullies. It’s as if she wants to expose us for the perverts and racists and woman-haters that we are. My head is spinning. Usually – these people just fold and we never have to prove anything in Court. This sucks. BENGHAZI …….

  33. Oh look … My Groupie Troll is back … pretending to be me again. I am so happy to have reached the point where a Repervlican troll pretends to be me. It is a true honor.

    Speaking of who is a lawyer and who is not. Kane is still a lawyer!! And I remember when Frank Fina was blathering on about how he “is a lawyer” and therefore “didn’t need a lawyer.” Guess what – Fina now has a lawyer. And I don’t blame him!! He needs one …

    Just like just about everything else the Clown Car has botched, this attempt to do an end-around on the law will fail. Maybe by sometime in 2016, they will finally be right when they say “her days are numbered.”

    To the Repervlican lynch-mob: Prove it in Court or SHUT UP. Impeach her. Take the trumped-up nonsense criminal case to court and win. Until then, the duly elected Ag is going to be lobbing bombs at you. Take cover!!! Call your lawyers!!!!!!!

  34. Diano, two Democrat DAs are currently noting the very real problems that Kane is causing for their investigations and prosecutions. Should we add them to the long list of Democrats who will get a primary challenge simply because they recognize how incompetent Kane is?

  35. As we have seen with the Republican presidential candidates for the past 8 years, ignorance of History is not just a common feature, but a celebrated asset. Scarnati may be displaying his presidential ambitions through this uneducated gambit.

  36. Since Nick Field only re-posts the Anti-Kane garbage put out by Craig & Angela at the Inquirer, I thought it would be appropriate to post this excerpt from a recent article:

    For months Kane’s political opponents have bandied about this “direct address” removal clause as a means to quickly remove the attorney general from office.

    Political observers have suspected that Kane’s law license suspension and the resulting crisis appear to have been manufactured from the start by Kane’s opponents as a deliberate means to invoke the little-used removal clause.
    Trouble is, Kane’s opponents strangely never bothered to investigate the historical use of the clause, nor its intended purpose.

    For months, for example, Kane’s opponents said the clause had never been used before.
    Until I pointed out, in an article I wrote this September, that a “direct removal” attempt had occurred — and failed — in 1891.

    “The procedure is so rare that reporters, lawyers and political commentators thought it had never been used,” wrote the Allentown Morning Call. “But Harrisburg-area author Bill Keisling found a record of its use in a Senate journal from 1891 and blogged about it.”

    In fact, the “direct removal” procedure was not used only once, but three times in the state’s history — all in the 19th century, and within a few years of the clause’s placement into the constitution.

    In addition to the 1891 failed attempt to remove the state treasurer and auditor general for alleged financial chicanery, use of the clause on two other occasions is mentioned in passing in the book, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (Roger Foster, Boston Book Company, 1895).
    Both of these uses of the clause to remove state office holders were for its intended purpose: “mental incapacity,” or senility.

    “The senate of Pennsylvania has also addressed the governor for the removal of Edward Rowan, high sheriff of Philadelphia, and Judge John M. Kirkpatrick of Pittburg — the later in 1885, both for physical and mental incapacity,” reports Foster in his 1895 book.

    The glaring fact that Kane’s political opponents — judges, lawyers and state senators who supposedly place great importance on words, precedent and intent — haven’t done their homework or due diligence raises as many if not more questions about them, and their own “competency,” as it does about AG Kane.

  37. Has Eakin resigned yet? Been removed for cause? How many negative INKY articles does it take to get removed for cause? Does it matter if the authors of those articles have been co-conspirators to many illegal leaks of protected GJ material?

  38. The self-appointed paragons of virtue (the gang of 6) need to mind their own business and pass a budget. What a waste of time. All political grandstanding.

Comments are closed.

  • 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


To install tap and choose
Add to Home Screen