Without a doubt the worst DOJ in modern times.

And remember this all happened before January 20th. It might take years to fix the damage that politicization has done to many govt departments. Not only has it caused criminals to go free on a technicality as in this instance but many many bad guys went unprosecuted.

How do you figure it let a criminal go free? What I read, Steven's claims of withholding important information to exonerate him were substantiated.

Sound like a witch hunt by the left that got shown up for what it was. Nice to see justice done for once.

Uhm... Bunny I tried to warn you off with the date.

This was George Bush's Justice Department prosecuting a fellow Republican. The only thing left or Democrat was the incoming Attourney General deciding the whole prosecution was so botched the whole conviction needed to be thrown out. Even though he'd already been convicted.

The judge in the case said that even though he had the greatest confidence in the new AJ to run a thourough investigation the JD can't investigate itself and hence the special prosecutor.

I think they withheld information that might have helped his case, and perhaps helped him win in court. I haven't heard anyone suggest the thousands of dollars in home improvements weren't done. Criminal might be the wrong word. Let's just say Stevens is a long way from being pronouced innocent. If you take a huge bribe but don't get convicted it's still a bribe. Maybe he should run for governor.

Think of Ayers who also got off.

I do like our system much better than many many others.

Also think of the saved tax dollars in pork. Stevens was the king. Bigger than Murtha.

Couric interviews AG Holder about the case.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/07/holder-no-one-will-be-fir_n_184...

Civet, you forget that I live in Alaska and had a front-row seat to the political hatchet job done on Stevens -- long before it made it onto your radar screen. It may have been "Bush's" justice department, but it was painfully obvious from the start that the case was on Democrat railroad tracks. From the way the evidence was being manipulated to the way the prosecution played to the press and timed releases of information to coincide with campaign milestones, it was like watching a political version of the Duke LaCrosse case.

It was classic scandal politics -- generate a scandal, whip up the outrage, and get the election over with before the courts can disprove the allegations.

The whole thing was doomed months ago after the election when it became apparent the prosecution had been corrupt. We've known this in Alaska for months. This was going to be overturned on appeal, and that would've flagged the case as a political axe murder. Holder jumped in just before the judge threw it out in order to try to take credit for it and avoid political damage to the Democrats.

If there's one thing Alaskans dislike, it's people from Outside manipulating and misusing them. Ted Stevens is an Alaska legend, and although Alaskans may have differences, they protect their own. Alaskans aren't keen on being hoodwinked -- especially when it costs them someone of Stevens' stature in the Senate.

Now now expatriate, I know you Alaskans like your government checks and all but isn't it time to stop feeding at the pork barrel trough? Socialism, socialism, government checks.

Didn't you hear? Alaska is cleaning up. There's now an independent press.

http://www.themudflats.net/2009/04/07/stevens-rises-from-the-ashes/

Even if it is just electrons.

As soon as you figure out how a Republican Justice Department prosecuting a Republican senator involves Democrats let me know, I'd love to figure it out.

Time to get off welfare and get a job.

If and when you ever get an actual clue about Alaska and its politics, by all means contribute. But until then, wipe the froth off your chin and try to post something intelligent.

Believe it or not, the entire justice department doesn't change over when a new administration comes on board, nor do we change out all the judges. You freaked out over Bush firing some federal prosecutors (which he had the right to do, by the way), and now you're insinuating that the entire organization flips political leanings after an election? Some leadership posts change, but the bulk of DOJ remains unchanged.

Winger wrote,

Funny how when he can't debate the issue he does a 180 and starts in on something designed to divert attention away from the issue. The issue was Stevens and his unwarranted prosecution at an amazingly convenient time for the Dems.

Still waiting for an answer.

How do you figure a Republican Department of Justice investigating and prosecuting a Republican Senator has anything to do with the Democrats.

The only thing Democratic is when we take over and recognise the Mayberry Machiavellis have srewed up again we do the right thing and let the judge know.

Expatriate you and I have been over the DOJ scandal before. Either you are willfully ignorant or intentionaly misleading, but TPM a liberal blog recieved a Polk award for, an achiement Fox with it's millions hasn't been able to match. Everyone knows the DOJ scandal was a huge nail in the coffin of the Bush cabal.

http://www.cyberjournalist.net/blogger-wins-major-journalism-award/

I didn't say they were Democrats. But the case was on rails that served a Democrat agenda. Do you honestly expect me to believe that in the face of the 08 election, conservatives were out to get one of the most senior Republicans in the Senate? That's laughable.

The lead FBI investigator was having a sexual relationship with the prosecution's star witness. The FBI and prosecutors hid evidence that would've been beneficial to Stevens. One of the jurors lied and said she had to go see her terminally ill father, and then admitted later that it was all a ruse so she could go see a horse race in California

Then there was the drama associated with the FBI "raid" on Steven's home. They could've got a key from his staff, but instead they took the media with them in order to get press coverage of a locksmith breaking into the house.

You didn't see the Democrat campaign literature distributed up here. You didn't see the media circus, or the way political ads aligned with releases of information about the case. You didn't hear the campaign ads against Stevens on the radio, or see them on TV. Why, I ask you, would investigators release evidence in a criminal case to the media and the opposing campaign prior to trial? Hmmm?

What was done to Stevens has been done to Republicans in key states across the country -- always at a point where they could derail the campaign, and always timed so that the case couldn't finish its legal course before the election.