There's something fishy about this story, but given the dude's apparently otherwise clean record, 30 years for bouncing two checks totaling $23,500 seems a tad excessive. I mean...like people get less time than that for freaking murders.

Spending $23K for a burglar alarm system for a house that you don't even own is distinctly odd. What residential burglar alarm system costs $23K? You cover the windows and doors with some hall-effect sensors, maybe some ultrasonic or IR sensors, an entryway camera and you should still be well under $15K including installation. Something not quite right there.

...Last month, in Baltimore County Circuit Court, Judge Patrick Cavanaugh listened to the reading of a brief statement of facts about FisherÂ’s finances. Then, clearly believing there was more to this case than inadvertently bounced checks, he sentenced him to prison.

For 30 years...

Posted by: Purple Avenger at 08:14 PM | Comments (13)
Post contains 155 words, total size 1 kb.

I just wanted to post a link to this comment at Sadly, Blow! to prove a point.

My home blog uses WordPress, so does Sadly, Blow! Not my fault you got the automatic pingback.

Now get your faces out of the patchouli bowl and get a life.

Posted by: Open Blog at 07:45 PM | Comments (17)
Post contains 59 words, total size 1 kb.

It’s the kind of thing you can’t make up because no one would believe you.

Stewart will be a panelist at Hofstra Law School’s Sixth Biannual Legal Ethics Conference "Lawyering at the Edge: Unpopular Clients, Difficult Cases, Zealous Advocates"

The participant list blandly describes Stewart as someone who, “has defended many unpopular clients over the years”. A more colorful and accurate description might include the fact that she is a felon who was convicted of aiding blind cleric Omar Abdel Rahman pass messages to his followers from his jail cell. Stewart had unsuccessfully defended Rahman against charges that he was part of a plot to blow up several targets in New York City.

Stewart was not “Lawyering at the Edge” or simply representing an unsavory client, she was an active and willing participant in a scheme to assist a convicted terrorist further his murderous plots. The idea that she is someone a respectable law school would want anywhere near its campus is unimaginable. One can only deduce Hofstra Law School is not a respectable institution.

Stop The ACLU has more and says Stewart is apparently out on bail while appealing her conviction.

H/t: A friend who has no idea I have access to this moron blog and saw it at Michele Malkin’s.

Posted by: DrewM. at 07:42 PM | Comments (10)
Post contains 228 words, total size 2 kb.

ItÂ’s the kind of thing you canÂ’t make up because no one would believe you.

Stewart will be a panelist at Hofstra Law SchoolÂ’s Sixth Biannual Legal Ethics Conference "Lawyering at the Edge: Unpopular Clients, Difficult Cases, Zealous Advocates"

The participant list blandly describes Stewart as someone who, “has defended many unpopular clients over the years”. A more colorful and accurate description might include the fact that she is a felon who was convicted of aiding blind cleric Omar Abdel Rahman pass messages to his followers from his jail cell. Stewart had unsuccessfully defended Rahman against charges that he was part of a plot to blow up several targets in New York City.

Stewart was not “Lawyering at the Edge” or simply representing an unsavory client, she was an active and willing participant in a scheme to assist a convicted terrorist further his murderous plots. The idea that she is someone a respectable law school would want anywhere near its campus is unimaginable. One can only deduce Hofstra Law School is not a respectable institution.

Stop The ACLU has more and says Stewart is apparently out on bail while appealing her conviction.

H/t: A friend who has no idea I have access to this moron blog and saw it at Michele MalkinÂ’s.

Posted by: DrewM at 07:42 PM | Comments (14)
Post contains 244 words, total size 2 kb.

It’s disgusting that President Mahmoud “Stumpy” Ahmadinejad was invited to speak at Columbia University at the same time that he is sending troops and arms into Iraq to fight and kill American troops. It’s even worse because Columbia doesn’t want ROTC and recruiters from the United States military on their campus. Apparently, if your policy is “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” then Columbia thinks it’s too dangerous to allow the students to be exposed to your wild and crazy point of view.* However, if you engage in the torture and public execution of homosexuals, then you’re welcome to stop by anytime.

Still, I was mildly pleased that Columbia’s president didn’t exactly get his knees dirty welcoming Stumpy to campus. In fact, he laced his introduction and questions with insults. Among other things, he called Stumpy a “petty and cruel dictator” and said the speech was an opportunity for Columbia’s students to “confront the mind of evil.”

"Today I feel all the weight of the modern civilized world yearning to express the revulsion at what you stand for," Mr. Bollinger told Mr. Ahmadinejad. "I only wish I could do better."

The auditorium erupted in thunderous applause.

Posted by: Open Blog at 05:25 PM | Comments (33)
Post contains 356 words, total size 3 kb.

Not sure if this is verified, and even if it is, if it has anything to do with her husband's work-in-progress Mindthoughts: A Diaryjournal of a Warsoldier.

Posted by: Ace at 02:38 PM | Comments (34)
Post contains 41 words, total size 1 kb.

They're not just biased. They've literally swallowed the irreality of the Bizzaro Liberal Community-Based Reality wholesale.

And yes, they are The Deciders.

Posted by: Ace at 02:22 PM | Comments (40)
Post contains 50 words, total size 1 kb.

As usual, I have to say this is Ron Paul's supporters who endorse these odd theories. Ron Paul claims to not believe any of this rot, and yet his supporters keep getting the idea that he does. How that happens I do not know.

Via The Corner:

...[Ron] Paul's supporters taunted former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani for alleged complicity in the attacks..

...According to one eyewitness, [Rudy] Giuliani was beset by dozens of Paul enthusiasts as he was leaving the island, some of whom shouted taunts about 9/11, including: “9/11 was an inside job” and “Rudy, Rudy, what did you do with the gold?” — an apparent reference to rumors about $200 million in gold alleged to have disappeared in the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.

Ed Wyszynski, a longtime party activist from Eagle, said the Paul supporters threatened to throw Giuliani overboard and harrassed him as he took shelter in the ferryÂ’s pilothouse for the 15-minute journey back to Mackinaw City.

“It was awful,” said Wyszynski, who supports Mitt Romney for the GOP presidential nomination.

“I was embarrassed to be a Republican. Never, ever, have I seen such a disgraceful performance.”

Conspiring to destroy the WTC and steal $200 mil in gold. Like he's a lisping Italian Auric Goldfinger.

Nuckin' futs. I do not like these people. I grow tired of their claims that they're the "REAL Republicans." They're friggin' mental patients.

Posted by: Ace at 02:15 PM | Comments (52)
Post contains 265 words, total size 2 kb.

Joke ripped off from Fark.

The prosecutor who handled the disorderly conduct case against Sen. Larry Craig says the Idaho Republican was calm and methodical as they discussed Craig entering a guilty plea.

Sen. Larry Craig is seeking to overturn his guilty plea stemming from an airport bathroom sex sting.

Craig also was warned that his case would be a matter of public record, said prosecutor Christopher Renz.

Renz's version of events contradicts claims the senator makes in his petition to vacate his guilty plea. The petition states Craig was in a state of panic over the allegations becoming public, and was driven to accept a guilty plea without seeking legal advice.

The petition also says Craig had been assured by the arresting officer that the matter would remain private.

Craig was arrested June 11 during a police sting in an airport men's room for allegedly making sexual overtures to an undercover male police officer. He entered a written guilty plea to a disorderly conduct charge in August.

In an affidavit filed Monday in Hennepin County District Court in Minnesota, Renz said he advised Craig to consult an attorney before entering a written guilty plea -- advice the senator did not take.

Renz said Craig, during a telephone conversation, questioned him about who would have access to his plea petition. Renz stated, "I explained that the plea petition would be filed with the court and the petition and convictions would be a matter of public record."

Renz said he had three phone conversations with Craig between the time of his arrest and his entering a guilty plea, all initiated by Craig. The senator "seemed calm, intelligent and methodical in his questions," Renz said in his affidavit.

On June 25 -- two weeks after Craig's arrest -- Renz said Craig left a voice mail message for him, wanting to talk about the case and asking that Renz return the call to Craig's personal cell phone.

...

"At no time during the conversations did the defendant appear to have a tone or sense of urgency, panic or overt emotion," Renz said.

But note that's just the prosecutor objecting to vacating the plea, which is to be expected.

I have a pretty strong hunch this plea will be vacated. Obviously Craig was more afraid of publc exposure than actual prosecution, so he was under more duress than many people might be. (Though I doubt anyone would be comfortable with a gay cruise sex charge on their record, save a male prostitute.)

Plus, the actual charge is, as others have pointed out, a bit sketchy.

Plus, and this is the killer: Imagine you're a liberal judge. You have the chance to both vacate a plea based on an ambiguous charge and sheer fear of exposure and possibly put a Republican held senate seat into tumult, maybe getting a Democrat elected in reddest of red Idaho.

Put yourself in the mind of a liberal judge: Is it even a difficult call to grant Craig's motion?

I don't think so. I think it's the easiest "So ordered" in legal history.

Oh, and I don't give a fig about the "manifest injustice" or whatever the standard is. The standard is whatever the judge reviewing the case thinks it is.

Posted by: Ace at 01:50 PM | Comments (20)
Post contains 570 words, total size 3 kb.

Alice Walker, a female of African descent, who records show has never been the property of a white plantation owner, and furthermore is educated to the point where she can read and write and on top of that is not a member of the Anglican Church and in addition was once part of an "inter-racial" marriage to a Jewish man no less, was allowed to address a school room of children, some of whom were rumored to be female, not white and not Anglican. Her message was "Why War Is Never a Good Idea."

King George III could not be reached for comment but a palace spokesperson said "All in all, we have to agree".

H/T Sytman and Boze

Posted by: Open Blog at 12:30 PM | Comments (45)
Post contains 147 words, total size 1 kb.