BREAKING NEWS GOV RICK PERRY INDICTED

maybe him can room with blaggo for iillinois in prison

We'll if you can indict a ham sammich... Why not Rick Perry???

This already blowing up in the Dim's faces.

Btw....Rob Ford has all the qualifications to be a great democrat.
Hell he ain't born I'm this country either!!!

Obutthurt's revenge... LMAO

Everybody sing along...

DO yOu have any idea what this thread is abOut, SlObbrin?

NOt Obama, Ofuckface!

drOOling mOrOn!

Your pathetic and moronic attempt to lyingly denigrate our fine Governor has been totally discredited, you lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM. Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

Is that you, IBIdiot?

DO yOu have any idea what this thread is abOut, ..... ! Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news...3554830.735461

You can probably pick up one down at the Nau's Drug outside of Clarksville.

http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/def...larksville.pdf

For those who CAN READ MAPS .. Nau's Drug is on West Lynn.

Hey dipshit....the thread is about Perry, not Obama. Originally Posted by WTF

Actually, whether you "like it or not," this is about ...

.... an executive elected official exercising his veto power in order to affect the activities of a government official ...


"The 2 charges

• Abuse of official capacity: “A public servant commits this offense if, with the intent to obtain a benefit or with the intent to harm or defraud another … he intentionally or knowingly misuses government property, services, personnel or any other thing of value belonging to the government.”

A first-degree felony, punishable by up to 99 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.

• Coercion of a public servant: “A person commits this offense if … he influences or attempts to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of official power or a specific performance of official duty.”

A third-degree felony, punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a $10,000 fine."

If you can actually read and comprehend, here is a legal evaluation:

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news...3554830.735461

Think .... Martin and Zimmerman .. when you open your worthless mouth.

If this IS ABOUT PERRY ... then he won't be FINALLY convicted.

And that would be an appropriate result. If it is about "THE LAW," then prosecuting Obaminable for the same thing IS APPROPRIATE.

The special prosecutor in the case was a Republican.

Say good night, MOFO!

Pity they didn't nail him sooner.

But maybe now the wheels will come off the Abbott train. He's already losing ground to Davis. His mentor getting busted for serious cluelessness and wanton abuse of power (take note all you Obama haters) is going to trickle down... His leg.

Perry messed with Texas. Fuck him.

BTW -- I'd much rather have a DWI on my record than two felony counts. Say what you want... Rosemary comes out of this vindicated. Sure, with her record she'll never get a job as a bus driver, but Perry might. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

i am no fan of Rick Perry and he deserves what he gets but you would really would support a knowingly alcoholic DA who drives drunk and risks lives?? I feel sorry for you if you simply ignore law breaker due to you Democratic stance??

And that would be an appropriate result. If it is about "THE LAW," then prosecuting Obaminable for the same thing IS APPROPRIATE. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Focus Mr. Hypocrite.

Please show me where in the OP there was any mention about Obama.

Now if you are starting to talk about something other than the OP topic....then please tell us what Moynihan meant when you quoted him in another thread.

BREAKING NEWS GOV RICK PERRY INDICTED


way to go rick you dumb ass
http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2014/08/15/governor-perry-indicted-for-coercion-for-veto-threat/ Originally Posted by skirtchaser79411

i am no fan of Rick Perry and he deserves what he gets but you would really would support a knowingly alcoholic DA who drives drunk and risks lives?? I feel sorry for you if you simply ignore law breaker due to you Democratic stance?? Originally Posted by RALPHEY BOY

For the most part, I agree! While I do not have any idea what the Republican prosecutor's game plan will be going forward, my common sense tells me that Perry will not be convicted. By the same token, I did not believe Tom DeLay would be convicted either. And we all know how that turned out!

With that said, there was obviously enough evidence for an indictment but I do not feel there will be enough evidence for a conviction. However, I do believe the trial will be extremely entertaining. Once the trial begins, there should be enough twists and turns to keep us all on the edge of our seats.

As for Perry's 2016 Presidential chances, I felt he was a 2nd tier Republican candidate before the indictment and that has not changed. Even if Goodhair prevails, I do not feel America is ready for another mouthy, Texas Republican Governor occupying the White House. One, was one too many!

This is a bad trend. Andrew Johnson was impeached but not convicted in a similar way. You shouldn't impeach or indict because you disagree with the politics of someone. It isn't really a problem. Perry could never be elected President and he will only be governor for a few more months. The legal system moves very slowly. This is a new tactic for democrats with a small d. In Alaska they indicted their Senator just before an election. That was very convenient wasn't it. No one leads a life so perfect that they can't be indicted for something. This is just a smear campaign. Both sides have done it. Does anyone remember Bill Clinton? Travis County should be investigated for its abuse of power both in the Delay case and in this. I can't wait until 2016. It is going to be a mean competition. Maybe, that is why people want less government. This is about Obama and Perry and Delay and the Travis county D.A. It looks like political differences won't end anytime soon. Hopefully, there won't be a civil war. Some leader needs to pull the country together. Perry will survive and if he doesn't, he won't be the first governor to spend some time in jail. Personally, I think we can all do better. We can start by talking about the issues and not name calling. F___tard isn't a term intelligent people who desire to be heard use.

Indicting Perry is NOT the same as supporting Lehmberg. I agree she's got to go. But trying to push out the duly elected official by defunding the ONE public integrity unit in the State of Texas with police power over the State Government is a totally different issue.

In his "response" yesterday (in which he tried to sound like a Presidential candidate again, ahem), Perry was arrogant, defiant and said that he would veto funds for any state agency if he fled it was not being led properly. In other words, he admitted having a hard-on for Lehmberg, so he did what he could to hurt her. (While fucking the people of Travis County and Texas.). It was partisan bullying, plain and simple. and he admitted as much.

Had he simply vetoed the funding people would have been pissed, but it would never have been investigated. But noooo, he had to grandstand the issue and figured he could get a Republican DA in there who would drop the DeLay case and others (including potential investigations into Perry's staff and associates.). He gambled and lost. Political Fuckup on the highest degree.

Now he's trying to IBIdiot his way out of it by using the five D's of Dipshittery.

Perry will never go to jail, but he should.

Perry will never go to jail, but he should. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

I agree....in this case it is the ride that will derail his 2016 hopes. Not that he had much of a chance anyway.

Indictment of Rick Perry uniting unlikely allies against prosecutorial abuse... Nice try, OZOMBIES... LMAO

http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/08...se/#more-96524


Posted by William A. Jacobson Sunday, August 17, 2014 at 12:02pm

This contrived indictment may be the best political thing that’s ever happened to Rick Perry.

The prosecutors in Austin, Texas thought they had one over on Texas Governor Rick Perry when they convinced a grand jury to issue an indictment accusing Perry of abusing his veto power. A copy of the indictment is here.

That alleged criminal abuse of power related to Perry’s threat to issue a budget veto regarding a unit of the prosecutor’s office if Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg did not resign after a DWI conviction.

Not just any conviction, Lehmberg was videotaped attempting to pull rank over the booking officers by mentioning they needed to make sure the Sheriff was aware of her predicament. It’s not hard to see what she was doing — hoping the Sheriff would intervene on her behalf.

Her field sobriety test is here, and she again kept mentioning her political career. She was abusive and violent in the police station:

Yet she got away with a mere 45-day sentence, of which she served about half.

For all that, Perry sought to protect the public from this prosecutor by demanding she step down, or risk a veto of part of her budget. Perry followed through on the threat and issued the veto.

Law Professor Jonathan Turley has a legal analysis of the indictment. Short version, it’s hard to understand how there is a crime here, unless one considers the “threat” of a veto to be the crime, since exercising the veto clearly was lawful. Turley writes:

From what I can see, these provisions are rarely used and prosecutors have waited for the strongest possible grounds for such charges. Indeed, such laws are written broadly in reliance on prosecutorial discretion. In this case, the special prosecutor seemed to pound hard to get these square facts into these round holes. A bit too hard for such a case.

Indeed, Governors in Texas have a long history of issuing vetoes, so it’s hard to see how telling people in advance you will issue the veto is a crime.

The concept that threatening a veto is a crime is novel. The law is vague on the issue, perhaps because no one ever thought that threatening to do something you lawfully could do would be a crime.

It’s also important that the criminal inquiry was initiated following a complaint from a liberal group, Texans for Public Justice, in what clearly was a political move.

The prosecutors, having the Grand Jury all to themselves without the benefit of a counterveiling argument, secured the indictment.

As Professor Glenn Reynolds has pointed out, the ease with which prosecutors can obtain indictments of just about anyone on just about anything, requires the cautious exercise of prosecutorial discretion.

In a politicized case involving a political battle, that discretion must be exercised even more cautiously.

Yet the interview given by the special prosecutor demonstrated that this was a reach, and how the indictment merely means there was “probable cause to believe [Perry] committed two felony crimes.” Very low bar. The prosecutor acts as if he’s a mere bystander to the indictment, insisting that since “the Grand Jury has spoken” he will follow up. But the only reason the “Grand Jury has spoken” is that the prosecutor, in complete control of the process, convinced the Grand Jury to so speak.