February 4, 2013 | 3 comments
November 7, 2012 | 13 comments
September 26, 2012 | 6 comments
September 3, 2012 | 7 comments
August 20, 2012 | 3 comments
Ever since February, when Judge Reggie Walton and his old friend Ken Griffey Sr. had a controversial, off-the-record discussion about what a “good guy” Roger Clemens really is, insiders have been speculating as to when and how Walton will end the case in Clemens’ favor. Now we have our answer (and it only took him a couple days.)
ESPN is reporting that Walton today declared a mistrial in USA vs. Clemens on the grounds that prosecutors showed inadmissable evidence to the newly-minted jury. Apparently, prosecutors showed a video of Clemens’ 2008 testimony, in which a congressman on the tape referred to some inadmissable statements made by Andy Pettite. “I think a first-year law student would know that you can’t bolster the credibility of one witness with clearly inadmissable evidence” Walton was quoted as saying.
Clemens’ attorney Rusty Hardin will argue for the case’s complete dismissal at a double-jeopardy hearing on September 2. In the meantime, Roger can breathe easy. I imagine he and wife Debbie will be enjoying a nice dinner with good ol’ Rusty this evening somewhere in Washington, D.C.
Prosecutor Steven Durham can catch the next train to Pawtucket.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
H/T to National Review Online