A jury does not find an accused innocent, that is what is assumed. The role of the jury is to determine if the prosecution has proven guilt, and of what charge. If the case has not been proven, the verdict is not quilty. If stupidity or bad judgement were a crime, then it would make sense to build jails for those who have never been charged, they would be in the minority. Guilt by association does not work in that case, although..... conspiracy is an entirely a different matter.No doubt in my life, I might be frightened by some of the criminals that I had dealings with, and was unaware,
On Oct 9, 4:30 am, "[ a patriotic Republican ]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > just as William Ayers is innocent of being a terrorist ! > thank you for admitting the truth of the matter . > On Oct 9, 4:21 am, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > In THIS Country, oh so ignorant one, we are considered INNOCENT until > > PROVEN Guilty. > > > Regardless of your ignorance on the matter. > > > And since you, or no one else has proven him Guilty, that makes him > > innocent by default. > > > On Oct 9, 1:10 am, "[ a patriotic Republican ]" > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > [ The Senate Ethics Committee did not pursue, for lack of > > > jurisdiction, > > > any possible ethics breaches in McCain's delayed reimbursements to > > > Keating for trips at the latter's expense, because they occurred > > > while > > > McCain was in the House.[49] The House Committee on Standards of > > > Official Conduct said that it too lacked jurisdiction, because McCain > > > was no longer in the House.[53] It said it did not require that > > > McCain > > > amend his existing financial disclosure forms for his House years, on > > > the grounds that McCain had now fully reimbursed Keating's company. > > > [53] ] > > > > nice try sunshine oh so close but you still missed it . McCain was not > > > found innocent ! as stated above they chose not to prosecute not that > > > he was innocent . > > > > On Oct 9, 4:03 am, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > For those who c`an't read I post this AGAIN in this Thread... > > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_Five > > > > > Glenn and McCain: cleared of impropriety but criticized for poor > > > > judgment > > > > The Senate Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of Glenn in > > > > the > > > > scheme was minimal, and the charges against him were dropped.[47] He > > > > was only criticized by the Committee for "poor judgment."[50] > > > > > The Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of McCain in the > > > > scheme was also minimal, and he too was cleared of all charges > > > > against > > > > him.[48][47] McCain was criticized by the Committee for exercising > > > > "poor judgment" when he met with the federal regulators on Keating's > > > > behalf.[7] The report also said that McCain's "actions were not > > > > improper nor attended with gross negligence and did not reach the > > > > level of requiring institutional action against him....Senator McCain > > > > has violated no law of the United States or specific Rule of the > > > > United States Senate."[51] On his Keating Five experience, McCain has > > > > said: "The appearance of it was wrong. It's a wrong appearance when a > > > > group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators, > > > > because it conveys the impression of undue and improper influence. > > > > And > > > > it was the wrong thing to do."[7] > > > > > Regardless of the level of their involvement, both senators were > > > > greatly affected by it. McCain would write in 2002 that attending the > > > > two April 1987 meetings was "the worst mistake of my life".[52] Glenn > > > > has described the Senate Ethics Committee investigation as the low > > > > point of his life.[8] > > > > > The Senate Ethics Committee did not pursue, for lack of jurisdiction, > > > > any possible ethics breaches in McCain's delayed reimbursements to > > > > Keating for trips at the latter's expense, because they occurred > > > > while > > > > McCain was in the House.[49] The House Committee on Standards of > > > > Official Conduct said that it too lacked jurisdiction, because McCain > > > > was no longer in the House.[53] It said it did not require that > > > > McCain > > > > amend his existing financial disclosure forms for his House years, on > > > > the grounds that McCain had now fully reimbursed Keating's company. > > > > [53] > > > > > On Oct 9, 12:33 am, "[ a patriotic Republican ]" > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > post any proof you have that mcCain was not involved in the this > > > > > crime . > > > > > > On Oct 8, 8:37 am, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > On Oct 8, 12:17 am, "[ a patriotic Republican ]" > > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > sorry lew but that isn't true mccain was not found inocent ! > > > > > > > Yes he was. > > > > > > > Your ignorance on the matter notwithstanding.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
