Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SentToStud
They were after Balco. And they got Victor Conti who served a whole 4 months.
Of course there is no downside for the prosecutor. Especially when he has political aspirations and unlimited access to public funds to make a name for himself "trying" the case.
If I were a US Attorney and wanted to run for office and had free and unfettered access to as much of the public purse as I wanted in order to get exposure, I'd probably do the same thing.
I remember reading they wanted to cut Bonds a deal where he'd cop to one count of perjury and get 3 months suspended.
Now, it's worth $10,000,000+ to get to what is likely to be the same result?
|
"Of course there is no downside for the prosecutor. Especially when he has political aspirations and unlimited access to public funds to make a name for himself "trying" the case.
If I were a US Attorney and wanted to run for office and had free and unfettered access to as much of the public purse as I wanted in order to get exposure, I'd probably do the same thing."
does he have political aspirations? or are you just seeing what sticks to the wall?
i wonder how a bush appointed federal prosecuter will do in san francisco politics.
btw: you're also wrong about us attorney's having unlimited access to funds. their offices operate on a budget like every other federal agency.