ANOTHER OPINION: Life After Kathleen Kane

Filed under: Featured News,Opinion,Politics,Subject Categories |


Now that KATHLEEN KANE has been convicted of perjury in state court, she has chosen to resign. The Senate Republican majority attempted to remove her through a constitutional procedure last fall but was unsuccessful. The House started the impeachment proceedings; but now those proceedings are moot.

A more-interesting question now is if her resignation is in the Republicans’ best interest. A vacancy has been created. Temporarily, the AG’s SOLICITOR GENERAL BRUCE CASTOR, a Republican, fills this vacancy. This might revive the fortunes of a once-rising political star. It also allows him to run the same office he lost to TOM CORBETT in the 2004 election. That’s when his star fell precipitously. Castor had campaigned against Corbett on the issue of Corbett’s accepting large sums of campaign cash from Republican magnate BOB ASHER. Asher had been convicted of a crime and served state time. Castor attacked Corbett for accepting money from a convicted felon. This apparently enraged Asher and many mainstream Republicans who support Asher.

Asher has maintained a prominent position in Republican circles of Pennsylvania and continues to be an advisor to many influential people. Asher would not be happy if Castor was able to make a comeback through the office he was denied through the electoral process.

To throw another spanner into the works: Would GOV. TOM WOLF like to appoint his friend and Attorney General candidate JOSH SHAPIRO? If he did, Shapiro would then be the incumbent and perhaps have an advantage in the election. His Republican opponent, STATE SEN. JOHN RAFFERTY from Montgomery County would truly not like this situation. Perhaps, on the other hand, Bob Asher would….

If Shapiro is an incumbent, Rafferty could then continue to campaign against Democratic corruption and disgrace, tarring Shapiro with Kane’s record and bolstering the argument for his own election. But if Castor is an incumbent, would that muddy the waters for the Republican campaign? The possibilities are tantalizing and potentially endless.

The whole thing is crazy because Kane was such a promising figure. It appears to be a mistake not to present defense witnesses to rebut the prosecution’s case. In any event, that’s one case down, with many other potential investigations brewing in Pennsylvania.

HILLARY CLINTON came back to her old stomping grounds in the Scranton area, joined by native son VP JOE BIDEN. She was also in Philadelphia for a voter-registration drive conducted by well-respected COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL. Joining her were congressional candidate STATE REP. DWIGHT EVANS, STATE SEN. VINCE HUGHES and MARIAN TASCO.

Join over 3.000 visitors who are receiving our newsletter and learn how to optimize your blog for search engines, find free traffic, and monetize your website.
We hate spam. Your email address will not be sold or shared with anyone else.
Share    Send article as PDF   

One Response to ANOTHER OPINION: Life After Kathleen Kane

  1. Starting with the easy stuff. Your post has several errors. Wolf nominated Beemer, not Shapiro. The defense was prevented from presenting witnesses or evidence — especially if it was in email format.

    Kane didn’t do it.

    Beemer, King and Morrow admitted to the leak at the hearings. And their testimony reads like the script followed by the DA — exactly the same order.

    And the same script was used for the judges’ instructions to the jury … which neglected anyway to find Kane innocent. Where even if it was proven that she didn’t do the crime, if you believe that she knew the ones who leaked, then find her guilty as an accomplice.


    Imagine that.

    Funny that you failed to mention her successful prosecution of over 500 predators.

    And the prior administration only prosecuting 40 in the 2 years before Kane. Now what if those guys who stalled the Sandusky case, were actually running the predator syndicate from the OAG? The AG must protect the OAG staff – attorney-client privilege prevents exposure and prosecution. BUT, THE AG COULD FIRE THEM. And that’s what Kane did to alot of people. Hmmmm?

    And when they sued her for firing them, Kane would not be able to expose their misdeeds until defending at a hearing. Fed Judge threw out the cases before any hearings. Imagine if they felt so secure to run a predator syndicate from the OAG and even exchanged emails about it.

    A review of the emails BY AN INVESTIGATOR WITHOUT a requiirement to conceal the crimes (because he has no privileged relationships with the OAG while working for the Commonwealth). Those emails would certainly make it easy to find, arrest and prosecute over 500 predators. Yea… I think that’s what happened.

    And the writing on the stall walls in the SEPTA Building in Philly confirm there was something pervy about Fina – the guy who slowed the Sandusky case for years. Hmmmm.

    That Sandusky Report failed to include the disclaimer that THE AG CANNOT EXPOSE THE CRIMES OF THEIR STAFF or THEIR OFFICE. An improperly enacted and unconstitutional Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information prevents it.

    Terance Healy
    August 20, 2016 at 3:09 pm

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *