Senator Ted Stevens: Were His Civil Rights Violated? Should He Be Able to Sue President Bush for Taking Away His Senate Seat?

You wonder if former Senator Ted Stevens has a claim against the Federal Government for violating his civil rights.


My understanding is that the Justice Department, under present Democratic Attorney General Eric Holder, is dropping the criminal case against Stevens because of severe problems with the validity of his conviction. You will remember that Senator Stevens barely lost his Senate seat in Nob ember. That leaves the probability that he would have WON the Senate race if not for the TAINTED conviction (prosecutorial misconduct, witness problems, and who knows what else).


Now you might think that the Republican Party did not need Ted Stevens to be one of the "faces" of the Republican Party, but that is looking at it differently that Democrats look att hese things. Senator Stevens was OLD. It was likely that his seat would have ended up passing to Sarah Palin, or some other young Republican, which would have been very good for Republicans in the Senate.


Now if this had happened to a Democrat, it would be a major scandal (the taking away of the Senate seat because of a tainted criminal conviction). It is not like these problems were not obvious at the time of Senator Stevens original conviction. They were. It was reported then that the case might get thrown out.


I have previously described President Bush as a saboteur of the Republican Party in his last term, and this appears to be another example. Republicans simply have no courage. Why could not the REPUBLICAN Attorney General have done the right thing, and dropped the case before Senator Stevens lost his Senate seat (apparently because of the tainted criminal conviction). It appears to have been the right thing to do, just like pardoning those two border control agents (or not prosecuting them so hard in the first place) was the right thing to do. But Republicans are so worried about the mainstream media and the Democrats that they refuse to do the right thing, even when it is to their political advantage. If I were Senator Stevens, I would be livid about this.


Am I calling Republican politicians cowards? Darn right. Now I am not an admirer of Senator Stevens, but aspects of the prosecution against him stink to high heaven. Why else would a DEMOCRATIC Attorney General drop the criminal charges against him?


Now some of you cynics out there might suggest that the Democrats had already gotten what they wanted when a Democrat defeated Senator Stevens, with the aid of the criminal conviction. In other words, leftists were able to use their moles in the Bush Administration, inclluding the Attorney General and President himself (lol, but true), to advance their power agenda. Letting Senator Stevens off of the hook NOW might actually help Democratic politicians in trouble--now or in the future. That is how a cynic might look at this. A cynic might conclude that Senator Stevens was merely a pawn being manipulated by forces bigger than he was. By the way, Henry Paulson was definitely a leftist mole in the Bush Administration, again in conjunction with the President himself, in bringing economic fascism/socialism to this country. Nope. I have not forgiven President Bush for his last four years, and never will.


Whatever you think of the case for the cynical view, I prefer to think that Attorney General Holder did the right thing. That means that the Bush Administration did the WRONG thing by depriving Senator Stevens of both his Senate seat and--probably--his civiil rights to due process of law. Do you still doubt that Republicans are COWARDS?


Isn't it amazing just how badly the Bush Administration served Republicans, and conservative causes, during those last four years. I have no sympathy for them (or most Republicans). I actually do have some sympathy for Senator Stevens. Does he get to go back and have theat election again? Obviously not. Too bad, Senator. You were just in the wrong party.