Regardless of what Gayle and the Eagles Forum say, we need to get Swallow out.
If he won't do it then we must impeach him.
The entire criminal justice system is on the line. A system based on the law or
the good old ultra conservative buddy contribution system?
I am shocked at how much we allow our public officials get away with these days.
The trickle down theory is all about stink. All our elected officials think
they are in an elite club of untouchables. They are smarter and know
Does it take to much effort to do the right thing? Why do all our elected
officials get a free pass? The problem is they get caught doing business as
usual and then try to explain how wrong doing is only a little wrong. It is
like being a little pregnant. We were going to impeach Nixon for a break in
coverup. It seems kinda silly compared to everything else that is going on in
Government. Swallow should step down..
Could we see a West Valley Police/ Lisa Steed scenario with the AG'S
office? The last two AGs could lose a ton of cases because of this. We deserve
The Salt Lake Tribune reported that Swallow said, "It is difficult for me to
understand how I ended up in this perfect storm of media frenzy fueled by
desperate people hoping to avoid the consequences for their actions."It is difficult for me to understand how John Swallow cannot see that he is
hoping to avoid the consequences of his very poor choices. I don't know if
he has committed any crimes, but he has destroyed the credibility of the office
of Attorney General. Apparently he is too arrogant to understand that his
actions caused "this perfect storm."
Swallow's campaign was funded by companies under investigation by the
AG's office. It's a matter of record. This is now past being funny
interpretations of recorded conversations. This man is NOT the man we want for
our top law enforcement officer. Please, Mr. Swallow, step down now. We
don't want one cent of our taxes spent on a trial to force you out, much
less millions of dollars.
I would be stunned if the Republicans open (at least their initial) meetings
about impeaching Swallow to the Democrats or to the public.Without a
doubt there are Republicans in the Legislature who probably think this is all a
power play by the Tribune to persecute good, faithful public servants, and
somehow the Deseret News got pulled into this vortex of unrighteous dominion.If we see Swallow defenders here as commentators, you can bet your sweet
bippy that at least a third of the Republicans in the Legislature think Swallow
has done nothing wrong, or that before they can proceed they'll want to see
the paper original copy of Obama's birth certificate, etc.There's just no way the Republican leadership can have an open meeting
right off the bat, not before they tell their array of wingnuts to not say a
word if they're in the minority about proceeding with the Impeachment
process. People are really paying attention, this time.
Your concerns are most hypocritical. It is the news media which is fanning the
flames for ousting Swallow. People selling soap spend millions on
advertising, because it works. In this case, million in free adverse
"news" publicity have also worked, and John Swallow is now considered
some sort of criminal, even though actual investigations (the first requested by
Swallow himself) have not yet reported a single fact in this case."With each passing day, it seems, the cloud over Utah Attorney General
John Swallow becomes darker." True, because YOUR paper, and that other rag
I won't mention, have been hyping this on a daily basis, then after
poisoning the minds of the public, proceed to trumpet the shocking(!)
announcement that a poll shows people think Swallow might be some sort of bad
guy.Media bias is alive and well, and especially eager to attack any
conservative politician.Whatever happened to "innocent until
Why put people under oath and record their testimony? Let's just convict
people based on news articles and political polls! That sounds like a good
legal system to me!
DN Subscriber 2-It's obvious that you just don't get it.
You are on these forums day after day, ardently defending the AG, but all this
ends up showing is YOUR bias.As I pointed out to you and a couple of
others in these forums in the last couple of days, there are more than enough
facts, facts which have been admitted to by Swallow, facts which have been
recorded, or facts that are on paper, to make a sensible, reasonable and
intelligent person seriously question the ethics of the AG. It is the job of
the fourth estate to report on these kinds of things- yet you castigate them for
doing so.Granted, there are a lot of unanswered questions, and
several investigations looking into possible criminal wrongdoing. But with just
the hard facts (not accusations made by Jensen and Johnson), there is more than
enough to have deteriorated the trust in the office to warrant an impeachment
investigation."innocent until proven guilty" as you have
been told again and again in these forums, applies to criminal law, the
stripping of constitutional rights. Impeachment is a political process which
helps to protect the integrity of an office.
@2BitsThat's what an impeachment trial is for. To get the facts and
determine if the official should stay in office. @DN subscriber 2That's right, the "liberal media" in Salt Lake City(first, which
is the Salt Lake Tribune and X96, and..... well that's pretty much it)
routinely take down conservatives. I mean, we can't go 6 months without a
scandal of this nature....... Or, at least as far as I remember, in the last 15
or so years two politicians in Utah have been taken down by the media. Nancy
Workman, and John Swallow. You know why they were taken down? Because they were
corrupt and broke the rules. I'm sure they would take down Democrats if
they were doing the same thing. But first a democrat would have to win an
Noodlekaboodle,So... what's the charge going to be? So far they
haven't come up with something to charge him with! At least
Clinton had been charged with something. He was impeached on 2 criminal
charges "Obstruction of Justice", and "Purgery", for lying under
oath to Congress trying to mislead the investigation when he testified that he
had no sexual relations with Lewinsky, but later DNA evidence proved that
statement was a lie. What has Swallow been charged with? You
need charges to start the impeachment process!If taking campaign
contributions is a crime then every politician is guilty. If trying to help a
constituent with a legal problem and putting him in contact with someone else is
a crime... all public officials can be thrown from office. You can
say that the news said he did something "unethical", but if the news
saying a politician did something unethical is grounds for impeachment
proceedings... Then the nuts who say Obama should be impeached may have a case.
But they don't. There has to be a charge first. That's why the
investigation. The investigation will decide what he can be charged with.
I agree that investigations take time but there are some serious questions with
regard to why is Mr. Swallow even in the same neighborhood with these shysters
in the first place. It appears to me that he is blinded by the glitter of
politics and as it takes money to be a candidate he flew too close the to
Money/Sun and his wings are melting.The Republican party needs a
good house cleaning. People knew what was going on, and said nothing.I still think testimony under oath is required in the investigation, and it
need not be a federal matter. State the allegations, call a grand jury to get
testimony under oath and see where the trail goes. I feel that Republicans wrap
themselves too much in the Church and flag and refuse to recognize or act on
wrong doing by one of their own.
Strider303,If we throw out every politician who's affected by the
glitter of politics... who would be left?I have to admit that from
what I know of Swallow, he is the poster-boy for being blinded by the glitter of
politics. But that's not an impeachable offense. He will
get what he deserves eventually. If it has to wait for an election... he
won't win. If we let the investigation continue... I think they will find
something to charge him with. I just don't like the precedent we seem so
anxious to set of impeachment without investigation, any testimony under oath,
or charges, just a news article or a poll that shows some of his colleagues want
him out. Democrats need to remember before they start down this path of
impeachment without charges... you reap what you sow. What you do to them they
will inevitably do to you down the road. If you start impeachment without
investigation or charges... don't be surprised when it happens to a
Democrat.And how did "the Church" get dragged into this?
What did THEY do?
@2BitsThat isn't what impeachment is for. You don't have to be
convicted of a crime. Being charged with a crime would be the "smoking
gun" as a case for impeachment, however, impeachment doesn't mean
removal from office. It is the way that the legislator investigates(that's
what you want right?) if an elected official has done something, criminal or
not, that keeps them from doing their job correctly or causes such public
mistrust that they can't do their job effectively. I don't know all
the facts, but between things Mr. Swallow has admitted, and recordings taken by
other people involved with him there are serious questions about him being able
to do his job properly, and the legislator should consider his removal from
Noodlekaboodle,I know you don't have to be convicted to be impeached.
But there does have to be a charge.With Clinton they did an
investigation first (remember Kenneth Star being appointed as the Special
Prosecuter and that whole long process)? Did you want to just jump straight to
impeachment BEFORE the investigation in that case? Didn't think so. And
yet at the end of the investigation charges WERE made, and he WAS impeached.
That's the way it's supposed to work. 1-Investigate, 2-Bring
charges... then hold the impeachment based on the charges. Not the other way
around... impeach him and HOPE you can find something to charge him with.The investigation in the Clinton matter wasn't even about Lewinski.
It was an investigation into the suicide death of deputy White House counsel
Vince Foster and Clinton's Whitewater real estate investments. The
problem is they asked some questions when he was under oath, and he lied. Or
there would have been no impeachment.This impeachment should be the
same. Investigate. See if there's anything to charge him with. Impeach
him on those charges. Not Impeach and hope.
Most of the letter writers have already convicted John Swallow. It seems anyone
with an axe to grind could allege abuse and get a representative impeached. The
Deseret News goes to great lengths to publish the allegations which fuels the
fires of impeachment. Let the abuses be proven before Swallow is removed.
Innocent until proven guilty.
Ah. . . 2bit, you don't know what you are talking about.
People in this state are bloodthirsty. They hear something or read it and
automatically believe that it is true. They mention witnesses, but
shouldn't they know who these people are by now! Shouldn't there be
evidence that is stronger than what they have! Most of it is hearsay. We are
talking about the life of this man. It could destroy his entire life! People
don't think it is important to have better evidence than a bunch of
criminal testimonies? These power hungry people want impeachment because it has
never been done and , Wow! They will get to do it!25 years ago, somebody
started some really bad rumors about me, including lies that I had stepped out
on my wife. It got bigger and bigger! None of it was true! None of it, but, I am
sure some people still think I did all those things! It destroyed relationships.
It went through the Church and I left. I have never went back. It changed my
whole life! I think it has been exaggerated. People like scandal. So far, their
evidence is nothing! They want to impeach! Are we not innocent until proven
Rflash, just what Swallow has admitted to is enough for him to be removed from
office. Just that, nothing else has to be proven, and it is enough, by far, to
remove him from office. The fact, as he has admitted to, that he met these
people for lunches and that he accepted comped rooms at a resort is enough for
him to be removed, just that and nothing else is more then enough. You do realize that Swallow is a law enforcement officer, right? And that his
office was bringing charges against these people in court. Meeting them for
private lunches is highly unacceptable. Any meetings should have taken place in
his office and on a profesional level. And accepting anything from anyone, let
alone someone you are prosecuting, as an official of the court? Right there is
more then enough reason to resign, and if not for removal through the
impeachment process. Just in what he has admitted.