Kevin Tarr wrote: > > At 02:06 AM 3/11/2004, you wrote: > > >Kevin Tarr wrote: > > > > > > http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/valleyindependent/news/s_183239.html > > > > > > State lawmaker accused of drunken driving > > > > > > Friday, March 05, 2004 > > > By Ed Blazina, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette > > > > > > State Rep. David Levdansky, D-Forward, is scheduled for a hearing next > > > month on drunken driving and other charges as the result of an incident > > > over the weekend in Rostraver. > > > > > > The criminal complaint stated Levdansky's blood-alcohol content registered > > > at 0.16 percent. A person is considered legally drunk in Pennsylvania > > at 0.08. > > > > > > <snipped lawyer talk> "David stands by his vote of reducing the > > > blood-alcohol content (in the state) to 0.08. > > > > > > > > >You left out the VERY NEXT PARAGRAPH where it says > >that he's not trying to weaasel out of anything: > > > > "David's not going to stand for being treated any more > > or any less than any citizen would be treated in the > > courtroom. He's going to stand tall. He has no record. > > We'll stand tall and walk through this." > > > > > >So he voted to make more restrictive laws, > >so he got caught breaking those same laws. He's > >showing every sign of being a responsible adult, > >not being hypocritical, and will face whatever > >punishment is deemed appropriate after due process. > > > >If only all politicians would be so honest. > > > >-- Matt > > I'd be foolish if I tried to misrepresent a story in this fashion. > > I also left out the PROCEEDING SENTENCE "I want to examine the evidence. > It's raised some questions in my mind," LoPresti said. The law maker said > nothing, his lawyer made the statements. > > Maybe you are foolish to expect his lawyer to come out and say "We are > fight this every way we can; the evidence clearly shows that David did > nothing wrong and we expect him to be found innocent of all charges."
> For a law maker to break any law should be enough for him to be removed > from office. Maybe he'll go for the democrat daily double and lie under oath. His lawyer has the job of defending him in court, he HAS to question the evidence. I doubt that the defense will be very successful, but they have to try. The congressman has probably been advised not to talk with the press until the trial is over, since the first question they'll ask is "are you guilty?", after which he'll either make a statement condeming himself, or have to say something to the effect of "no comment". As for getting thrown out of office, that has to wait until after a guilty verdict, now doesn't it? The fact is, he hasn't gotten away with anything yet. He's still presumed innocent, there has been no guitly verdict, no sentencing, etc. If you want to moan about Democrats shirking the penalties for their crimes, use examples that have actually happened, not hypothetical ones. -- Matt _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
