OT: does obama bring change?

[1bad65]

Tough titty said the kitty! If the government is footing the bill they will build whatever they tell them to build.

Ford hasn't taken a dime. And CAFE standards are the government telling private business what they can and cannot produce.

[1bad65]

Guess I shouldn't hold my breath for this answer.

I've already answered it. Just because you are too stupid to find it does not equate to anyone refusing to answer it.

[1bad65]

Speaking of the Senate:

I'm waiting for you libs to apologize to Ted Stevens.

[GLW]

What is the apology for?

The prosecution screwed up with evidence. However, this does not mean that Stevens was innocent.

"On April 1, NPR's Nina Totenberg, citing sources close to the case, reported that Attorney General Eric Holder has decided to drop the government's opposition to the motion for a new trial and will dismiss the indictment. Holder was reportedly very angry at the prosecutors' apparent withholding of exculpatory evidence, and wanted to send a message that prosecutorial misconduct would not be tolerated under his watch. He'd replaced the entire trial team, including top officials at the public integrity section. However, Totenberg reported, the misconduct, Stevens' age and the fact he was no longer in office prompted him to drop all charges against Stevens--effectively vacating the guilty verdict.[3]The Associated Press subsequently confirmed NPR's report.[98]"

Holder decided that a guilty verdict and the cost of a trial against an 86 year old man was simply not worth the people's money.

I find it reprehensible that ANY prosecutor would violate the rule of law or ethics to get a conviction. I would personally like to see Holder bring charges against the prosecutors who did so in all cases. Sending a message like "You work for the side that is supposed to enforce the rules. If you can't also follow them, then you will lose your license to work and maybe also your freedom."

[1bad65]

However, this does not mean that Stevens was innocent.

"On April 1, NPR's Nina Totenberg, citing sources close to the case, reported that Attorney General Eric Holder has decided to drop the government's opposition to the motion for a new trial and will dismiss the indictment. Holder was reportedly very angry at the prosecutors' apparent withholding of exculpatory evidence, and wanted to send a message that prosecutorial misconduct would not be tolerated under his watch.

Which one is it?

I find it reprehensible that ANY prosecutor would violate the rule of law or ethics to get a conviction. I would personally like to see Holder bring charges against the prosecutors who did so in all cases. Sending a message like "You work for the side that is supposed to enforce the rules. If you can't also follow them, then you will lose your license to work and maybe also your freedom."

I do, however, agree 100% with this. But we all know the prosecutors won't ever face any charges/sanctions/fines etc.

[BoulderDawg]

All of this is news to me so I don't really know the facts of the case.

That said I'm wondering who gave the AG pardon power. Mr. Stevens has already been convicted. I say let him partition for a new trial just like anyone else.

Anyway I'm expecting the AG to do the same thing in dozens of cases where government misconduct is suspected.

[BoulderDawg]

Quote:
Originally Posted by GLW
However, this does not mean that Stevens was innocent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GLW
"On April 1, NPR's Nina Totenberg, citing sources close to the case, reported that Attorney General Eric Holder has decided to drop the government's opposition to the motion for a new trial and will dismiss the indictment. Holder was reportedly very angry at the prosecutors' apparent withholding of exculpatory evidence, and wanted to send a message that prosecutorial misconduct would not be tolerated under his watch.



Which one is it?

What do you mean "Which one is it?"

The fact that Holder is speaking about "prosecutorial misconduct" has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of Stevens.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Ford's U.S. sales drop 41 per cent in March



DETROIT - Ford Motor Co.'s U.S. sales fell nearly 41 per cent in March, as low consumer confidence and job uncertainty continued to keep buyers away from showrooms.

The Dearborn, Mich.-based automaker (NYSE:F) said Wednesday it sold 131,102 cars and light trucks last month, compared with 221,642 in March 2008.

Other automakers plan to report their results later Wednesday.

Ford's March sales did improve 32 per cent from February, when the automaker sold 99,060 vehicles and the U.S. sales overall hit their lowest point in more than 27 years.

Sales are generally better in March as warmer temperatures help drive people to showrooms, but analysts expect to see little improvement from February industrywide. That's despite a record level of incentive spending by automakers last month, according to Edmunds.com.

The average incentive on vehicles sold last month was $3,169, up 30 per cent from a year earlier, the car buying Web site said. General Motors Corp. (NYSE:B) and Hyundai Motor Co. spent more on incentives than they ever have.

In a further effort to boost sales, Ford announced its "Advantage Program" Monday. It will pay customers' monthly payments - up to $700 - for a year if they lose their jobs.

Ford said sales of its Focus compact car fell 42 per cent, and sales of its top seller, the F-series pickups fell 40 per cent. Sales of the Expedition and Explorer sport utility vehicles plummeted 73 per cent.

Lincoln brand sales fell 33 per cent, with a sharp decline of 79 per cent in Navigator sales. Mercury brand sales fell 42 per cent.

The Associated Press reports unadjusted auto sales figures, calculating the percentage change in the total number of vehicles sold in one month compared with the same month a year earlier. Some automakers report percentages adjusted for sales days. There were 25 sales days last month, one less than in March 2008.

Shares of Ford fell five cents to US$2.58 in Tuesday trading on the New York Stock Exchange.



BUT, Ford is taking a step in the right direction:
" In a further effort to boost sales, Ford announced its "Advantage Program" Monday. It will pay customers' monthly payments - up to $700 - for a year if they lose their jobs. "

That is the way, MOTIVATE buyers to BUY, that is who you increase sales.
Next step:
Eliminate the middle man and sell directly to the public.

[Baqualin]

Ford's U.S. sales drop 41 per cent in March



DETROIT - Ford Motor Co.'s U.S. sales fell nearly 41 per cent in March, as low consumer confidence and job uncertainty continued to keep buyers away from showrooms.

The Dearborn, Mich.-based automaker (NYSE:F) said Wednesday it sold 131,102 cars and light trucks last month, compared with 221,642 in March 2008.

Other automakers plan to report their results later Wednesday.

Ford's March sales did improve 32 per cent from February, when the automaker sold 99,060 vehicles and the U.S. sales overall hit their lowest point in more than 27 years.

Sales are generally better in March as warmer temperatures help drive people to showrooms, but analysts expect to see little improvement from February industrywide. That's despite a record level of incentive spending by automakers last month, according to Edmunds.com.

The average incentive on vehicles sold last month was $3,169, up 30 per cent from a year earlier, the car buying Web site said. General Motors Corp. (NYSE:B) and Hyundai Motor Co. spent more on incentives than they ever have.

In a further effort to boost sales, Ford announced its "Advantage Program" Monday. It will pay customers' monthly payments - up to $700 - for a year if they lose their jobs.

Ford said sales of its Focus compact car fell 42 per cent, and sales of its top seller, the F-series pickups fell 40 per cent. Sales of the Expedition and Explorer sport utility vehicles plummeted 73 per cent.

Lincoln brand sales fell 33 per cent, with a sharp decline of 79 per cent in Navigator sales. Mercury brand sales fell 42 per cent.

The Associated Press reports unadjusted auto sales figures, calculating the percentage change in the total number of vehicles sold in one month compared with the same month a year earlier. Some automakers report percentages adjusted for sales days. There were 25 sales days last month, one less than in March 2008.

Shares of Ford fell five cents to US$2.58 in Tuesday trading on the New York Stock Exchange.



BUT, Ford is taking a step in the right direction:
" In a further effort to boost sales, Ford announced its "Advantage Program" Monday. It will pay customers' monthly payments - up to $700 - for a year if they lose their jobs. "

That is the way, MOTIVATE buyers to BUY, that is who you increase sales.
Next step:
Eliminate the middle man and sell directly to the public.

I'm proud to drive a ford!

[sanjuro_ronin]

I'm proud to drive a ford!

I new a girl named Ford ( Actually it was Alaforda) and I was proud to drive her too.

[GLW]

Bady, you need to come up to speed on the world. It is not nor never has been a black or white endeavor. Even Ansel Adams had at least 7 zones of gray in his photographs.

Did you ever look at the preponderance of evidence for Stevens. The trick on his trial was first that it was a criminal trial so the burden on the prosecution was "beyond a reasonable doubt" as opposed to a civil case where the burden would be "preponderance of evidence"

Stevens case, for anyone who viewed the publicly available evidence, was definitely within the "preponderance of evidence" area.

Exculpatory evidence is basically evidence that is favorable to the defense. So, the prosecutor was accused of not providing evidence to Stevens defense that would have allowed him to mount a stronger defense. Often, exculpatory evidence can be that which proves innocence, but it does not have to. It can simply be evidence that some other aspect of the case that is detrimental to the defense is incorrect.

Without knowing exactly what the evidence was, for anyone to say that there was evidence that cleared him is jumping to a major conclusion.

Basically, the prosecution is required to provide all of its evidence to the defense. The defense, however, is not burdened with the same requirement.

Holder's approach was :
(1) there WAS wrongdoing on the part of the prosecution. He was sending a message that such actions will not be tolerated in any form.
(2) given the age of the defendant, Holder was choosing to NOT pursue a re-trial (trials cost money and take time...and the end result is being weighed against the public good - obviously, Holder found the scale tipped in favor of saving the taxpayers' time and money.
(3) since the crime Stevens was accused of is one of official corruption to do with his political office and since Stevens was no longer in office and also not very likely to ever be elected again, he was no longer in a position to continue to commit the crime.

Now, COULD Stevens be Not Guilty...sure...and so could OJ Simpson.

Is it likely? From what most independent reporters have seen (in and out of the US), not really.

So, there is NO contradiction here...merely a reading comprehension problem on your part.

[1bad65]

That said I'm wondering who gave the AG pardon power. Mr. Stevens has already been convicted. I say let him partition for a new trial just like anyone else.

Your ignorance knows no bounds.

It's not a pardon. There is a motion for a new trial due to prosecutorial misconduct. Holder is not going to fight the motion (thus allowing for a new trial) and then dismiss the indictment.

[1bad65]

What do you mean "Which one is it?"

The fact that Holder is speaking about "prosecutorial misconduct" has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of Stevens.

You apparently missed the "exculpatory evidence" part.

[1bad65]

That is the way, MOTIVATE buyers to BUY, that is who you increase sales.
Next step:
Eliminate the middle man and sell directly to the public.

Considering the middle man is the dealerships, that's next to impossible. Dealerships are where service and maintenance are done. Americans are just to used to 'one stop shopping' for cars.

[1bad65]

GLW,

Your last post makes alot of sense. The only problem is that prosecutorial misconduct is very serious. It deprives a man of his Constitutional rights (namely the 5th and 6th Amendments). Even the Founding Fathers said it is better for a guilty man to go free than an innocent man to be convicted.

One more thing: Thanks for being rational and civil in the discussion.