I believe it IS felony range, Alan. But ANY proven corruption is grounds for removal at least, some jail time at best. Minimizing Biernat's willingness to trade his power-brokering for personal profit does nothing to advance the cause of ethics in governance.
Andy Driscoll Saint Paul ------ "Action may not always bring happiness, but there is no happiness without action." - Benjamin Disraeli > From: Alan Shilepsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 14:06:31 -0500 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Mpls] Biernat case. Where's the beef? > > Speaking as one who did not support Joe Biernat for reelection, I have > not been overly impressed so far by the seriousness of the charges > against Joe Biernat. $2,700 in free services? Let's see, some stores > triple the cost of the products they sell. If such a markup prevailed > here it would be $900 of service, marked up to retail value of $2,700. > $900. Is this in the felony range? (I'm asking. I don't know.) > > And then the article in the Stribe today talks about mail fraud, because > a union official sent a false invoice through the mails. (Memo to > padded-billers: use FedEx.) Seems like a stretch to me, like making a > robbery a federal case if Tom Thumb robber fled on federal highway > I-35. (Hummm. Maybe if US currency is involved in a payoff then it is > automatically a federal case. Memo to politicians--take payoffs in > liras or fracs.) > > Anyway, this case, at least as it pertains to Joe Biernat, hasn't seemed > too strong. Can they show the appointment to the Examining Board was a > quid pro quo? It's probably as likely Joe was pro-union and felt this > guy fit the bill for the Board job. Did Joe know anyone was being paid > for the work done on his house--or could it have been friends helping > friends, or doing each other favors. > > I know people who help each other out, giving services at cost or for > free. For free I helped a friend two days ago explore job postings on > the Internet, and I raked my wife's aunt's front yard a couple weeks ago > in Superior. I know of people with trucks who plow their neighbors' > drives every time it snows. I hate to see the criminalization of > friends helping friends (and acquientances). I prefer to presume > innocence instead of guilt in an ambigious case. > > Maybe the feds have more on Joe than I am aware of. But this case seems > to be limping. > > I don't like it when the state has so many laws governing so many facets > of our lives that, in effect, all of us are guilty of something or > other, so it becomes the perogative of the people in power to decide who > they will prosecute and who they will leave alone (for now). > > Alan Shilepsky > Downtown > libertarian statement--a country with too many laws is like a country > with no laws--in both cases those in power can decide the rules. > _______________________________________ > Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy > Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: > http://e-democracy.org/mpls > _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
