The New Exchange

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



4/02/2015 11:28 am  #11


Re: Supreme Court rules against AG Kathleen Kane; leaves open possibility

Thing the gender thing is always there, especially when one gender has been in positions of power for a long time.

Well to be fair, a woman has been Attorney General going back to 2011 (Linda Kelly, who preceded Kane, was appointed by former Gov Corbett)

So the AG's office has been occupied and represented by a woman for the last four years. 


I think you're going to see a lot of different United States of America over the next three, four, or eight years. - President Donald J. Trump
 

4/02/2015 12:44 pm  #12


Re: Supreme Court rules against AG Kathleen Kane; leaves open possibility

I should have worded it generally speaking and across all occupations and positions.  Can you believe in the year 2015, women (generally speaking) still don't make as much as a man for the same job?  Things have gotten better over the years, but they still need to improve.

LOL, I remember in the 70's I asked my boss for a raise.  He said no, I was a ''girl'' and I'd only buy clothes with it.  I asked if the men were getting raises.  He said of course they were.  Men have important stuff to spend their money on.  I remember that every time I hear of legislators voting down equal pay legislation.

Sorry I got sidetracked.....

 

4/02/2015 4:31 pm  #13


Re: Supreme Court rules against AG Kathleen Kane; leaves open possibility

florentine wrote:

I should have worded it generally speaking and across all occupations and positions. Can you believe in the year 2015, women (generally speaking) still don't make as much as a man for the same job? Things have gotten better over the years, but they still need to improve.

LOL, I remember in the 70's I asked my boss for a raise. He said no, I was a ''girl'' and I'd only buy clothes with it. I asked if the men were getting raises. He said of course they were. Men have important stuff to spend their money on. I remember that every time I hear of legislators voting down equal pay legislation.

Sorry I got sidetracked.....

Florentine, I'm sorry you had a scumbag for a boss back then. People like that make me sick. 

 

4/03/2015 1:28 pm  #14


Re: Supreme Court rules against AG Kathleen Kane; leaves open possibility

Kane's chief of staff quits
http://www.ydr.com/politics/ci_27840804/kanes-chief-staff-quits

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) - The top aide to Pennsylvania's attorney general is leaving after just four months on the job to join a Philadelphia law firm. Blake Rutherford told agency employees Friday that it was his last day as chief of staff to Attorney General Kathleen Kane. Rutherford starts work next month at Cozen O'Connor and the law firm's governmental relations operation.

Last edited by Common Sense (4/03/2015 1:28 pm)


 “We hold these truths to be self-evident,”  former vice president Biden said during a campaign event in Texas on Monday. "All men and women created by — you know, you know, the thing.”

 
     Thread Starter
 

4/03/2015 1:47 pm  #15


Re: Supreme Court rules against AG Kathleen Kane; leaves open possibility

Common Sense wrote:

Kane's chief of staff quits
http://www.ydr.com/politics/ci_27840804/kanes-chief-staff-quits

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) - The top aide to Pennsylvania's attorney general is leaving after just four months on the job to join a Philadelphia law firm. Blake Rutherford told agency employees Friday that it was his last day as chief of staff to Attorney General Kathleen Kane. Rutherford starts work next month at Cozen O'Connor and the law firm's governmental relations operation.

They say that rats jump ship before a shipwreck.....
 


Life is an Orthros.
 

4/03/2015 4:33 pm  #16


Re: Supreme Court rules against AG Kathleen Kane; leaves open possibility

And still more......Kane should step downInquirer Editorial Board
Read the full Editorial here:
http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/20150403_Kane_should_step_down.html

Pennsylvania's self-destructing attorney general, Kathleen Kane, should resign. This week alone, The Inquirer has reported that she disrupted a second political corruption case, while the Supreme Court upheld a probe into her dissemination of grand jury information that could yield criminal charges.It's now clear that since her early days in office, Kane's attempts to protect legitimate law enforcement targets and smear rivals have been at odds with the public interest.The latest revelation is that Kane undermined a 2013 investigation of a former state gambling regulator with ties to Louis DeNaples, a politically connected Scranton millionaire accused of dealings with mob figures, The Inquirer's Craig R. McCoy and Angela Couloumbis reported. Kane told aides that a prosecutor had been "overly aggressive" and unfair to DeNaples and his associate William Conaboy, another powerful political figure, both of whom were witnesses in the case.Five months after Kane revoked subpoenas issued to the pair, a DeNaples business donated $25,000 to her campaign fund. She eventually returned the money.

AND.......
Attorney General Kathleen Kane should resign: Editorial
http://www.pennlive.com/opinion/2015/04/pennsylvania_attorney_general.html

Attorney General Kathleen Kane has become so embroiled in controversy, and has raised so many questions about her judgment, with the almost certain prospect of more legal problems to come, that the best way she can serve the citizens of the Commonwealth is to resign. The state's chief law enforcement officer needs to be laser-focused on enforcing the law. Kane cannot help but be hopelessly distracted as she tries to fend off those criminal charges and defend her questionable overall record in the court of public opinion.Given the turmoil at the top, it's fair to wonder how the attorney general's office can get any significant work done on high-level matters.

Last edited by Common Sense (4/03/2015 4:35 pm)


 “We hold these truths to be self-evident,”  former vice president Biden said during a campaign event in Texas on Monday. "All men and women created by — you know, you know, the thing.”

 
     Thread Starter
 

4/03/2015 4:36 pm  #17


Re: Supreme Court rules against AG Kathleen Kane; leaves open possibility

So much for the idea of innocent until proven guilty


We live in a time in which decent and otherwise sensible people are surrendering too easily to the hectoring of morons or extremists. 
 

4/03/2015 4:45 pm  #18


Re: Supreme Court rules against AG Kathleen Kane; leaves open possibility

From Philly.com:

"The Editorial Board endorsed Kane's candidacy partly because of her seeming promise as a reformer and professional prosecutor. But she has demonstrated that she is not up to the task. Given her repeated unspooling of corruption investigations and the looming possibility that she will be prosecuted herself, it is difficult to see how Kane can continue to serve as Pennsylvania's top law enforcement official."

 


 “We hold these truths to be self-evident,”  former vice president Biden said during a campaign event in Texas on Monday. "All men and women created by — you know, you know, the thing.”

 
     Thread Starter
 

4/03/2015 4:49 pm  #19


Re: Supreme Court rules against AG Kathleen Kane; leaves open possibility

Perhaps David Vitter should have resigned because he was distracted by the DC Madam scandal.
Or, maybe Obama should have resigned over allegations that he was born in Kenya.

I just don't buy the "you should resign merely because defending yourself is a distraction" argument of the Penn Live editorial. This is a slippery slope argument that could be applied to nearly any public figure accused of nearly anything.
If Kane were a republican, you'd feel the same way. 


We live in a time in which decent and otherwise sensible people are surrendering too easily to the hectoring of morons or extremists. 
 

4/03/2015 5:04 pm  #20


Re: Supreme Court rules against AG Kathleen Kane; leaves open possibility

Goose wrote:

So much for the idea of innocent until proven guilty

 
That's just the nature of the beast for a public figure though.  Hell, we still all say O.J. is guilty of murder, even though he was found not guilty.  Politicians have a proven shady reputation, so people are going to assume guilt when guilt is alleged.  Whether that is right or wrong, it is what it is, and it's been earned by politicians as a whole.

 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum