> > Appears the Governor of Florida thinks so...
> >
> but it wasn't the governor alone in this decision.
> From the story:
> "The decision by the clemency board, which is made
> up of the governor and his
> Cabinet,..."

Picky, picky, picky... The commentary in the story was
from the Governor however:

"It's a fascinating story," Bush said after listening
to Kahoe. "He admitted his wrongdoing, which is
important. He served his time, he paid his debts. He
participated in something that he regretted and I was
happy to be a part of giving him a chance to have his
rights restored."

While the Guberner is correct in the assertion that he
served his time, it was to a plea bargained sentence
of "obstruction of justice" as the original charge was

> nor were his full rights reinstated from the same
> story;
> "allows Kahoe to vote but does not restore his right
> to own, possess or use a
> gun."

And while he isn't allowed to "own a gun", I think
this states that he was MORE THAN FAIRLY treated:

"Kahoe served one year, 20 days in federal prison and
completed two years probation in a plea agreement that
allowed him to retire with the FBI."

44 USC 3105 and 3106 don't seem to think this is a
"minor offense" and the fact that he was allowed to
bargain it down to obstruction of justice should have
been considered "adequate restoration" in my mind.

Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 101, Section 2071 (a) (b)
would call for imprisnment of not nore than 3 years
and would disallow reinstatement, which should include
forefiture of his retirement.

About the only thing I can agree with about what
happened here is the Guberner's asserting that this is
 a "fascinating story".

If the Government is not going to enforce the rule of
law on it's own employees, then how can they expect to
enforce it on corporate criminals?


List archives at
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance