<p>interesting that the one segment of 60 minutes that was about Alabama and their ex-governer, gee, was blacked out due to “techinical difficulties” in parts of Alabama</p>
<p>another “mistake” i guess…even those that don’t believe in conspiracies have to admit this is just too much to believe it was just an “accident”</p>
<p>Yeah. If it’s true. WHNT in Northern Alabama reported that their network receiver was down for part of 60 Minutes last night. They are airing that part of the show tonight (actually, since it’s 8pm in Alabama already, it has already been aired). Not much of a conspiracy, really, although that one station has an active Republican owner and the 60 Minutes hit-piece was alleging that Democrat Seligman lost his job more to political machinations than the crimes of which he was convicted.</p>
<p>The 60 Minute piece was excellent. I wouldn’t call it a “hit piece”, but rather
an expose- interviews with witnesses (Republican)and attorneys (Republican) who laid out the way that the Justice Department was used by the administration to target Democrats. Used by Karl Rove, specifically.</p>
<p>Oh, wait. My bad. Rove was on Fox today saying that the people were liars and that he is innocent. 
</p>
<p>It’s unfortunate that the piece was aired opposite he Academy Awards.</p>
<p>“Oh, wait. My bad. Rove was on Fox today saying that the people were liars and that he is innocent”</p>
<p>I wonder why he wasn’t given a chance to comment. The whole thing makes no sense. How can a man be “Bush’s brain” on the one hand and simultaneously stupid enough to do something so out there – for a purpose that likely wasn’t even on his radar. Quite a guy that Rove. I bet he’s hiding under your bed watch out!!!</p>
<p>I need to apologize for the term “hit piece.” I haven’t seen the segment, nor have I watched 60 Minutes for at least ten years. Their journalism, and I use that term very loosely, had become rubbish long before that. I was simply assuming that nothing had changed, but I could be wrong. Even a blind pig finds an acorn once in a while.</p>
<p>Harper’s has a piece on it.</p>
<p>[“CBS:</a> More Prosecutorial Misconduct in Siegelman Case” by Scott Horton (Harper’s Magazine)](<a href=“http://harpers.org/archive/2008/02/hbc-90002487]"CBS:”>Page not found | Harper's Magazine)</p>
<p>It truly was an excellent piece. I thought that I had passed the point of ever being surprised at what this administration is capable of doing. I was wrong. It is absolutely abominable what they have done to this man, and I hope that Grant Woods pursues this to a positive conclusion, which would include Rove’s prosecution. What a despicable individual Rove is.</p>
<p>“. What a despicable individual Rove is.”</p>
<p>He may very well be, but it is very likely that Mr. Rove didn’t do that which he is accused of.</p>
<p>now for despicable invdividuals, I give you Scott Horton. I feel physically ill that he would be linked here. No Comment is also a blog which is supposedly against TOS.</p>
<p>I’m not sure why you think that is very likely, zoosermom. Did you see the 60 Minutes piece? I don’t know enough about Scott Horton to know whether or not he’s despicable, let alone enough to be physically ill because of a link. In any case, the information which is contained in that link via Harper’s seems to accurately reflect the segment which was shown on Sunday night. What do you think of the actual case?</p>
<p>"Did you see the 60 Minutes piece? I don’t know enough about Scott Horton to know whether or not he’s despicable, let alone enough to be physically "</p>
<p>I have the misfortune to know him personally and I wasn’t kidding that I now feel ill. I think it’s always questionable when a story (a) doesn’t make sense from a practical standpoint and (b) the target is not allowed to comment. That’s just me. I’ve read about this case from other sources and I dont think Karl Rove is guilty of this, but I’m not a fan of his to take his side either way. I just think that 60 Minutes, along with the NY Times, is guilty of poor journalistic practices. By the way, if anything Scott HOrton writes accurately reflects something else, you should assume that the other has no basis in fact.</p>
<p>So you didn’t see the segment? Would you also feel that the segment has no basis in fact if supported by 52 former attorneys general, including Republicans, from 40 of the 50 states who have called for a Congressional probe? I wasn’t aware that Karl Rove wasn’t asked to comment. I actually find that doubtful, even though it is almost certain that, had he been asked, he would have refused, just as the many at the DOJ did.</p>
<p>“So you didn’t see the segment”</p>
<p>Yes I did. Please accept my apology for not answering that directly. I am deeply upset by the link to Scott Horton and have been thrown for a bit of a loop. No intent to sidestep your question. I don’t believe that Mr. Rove was given the opportunity to comment. This has been out and about for weeks, so I’m basing my opinion on information that’s been publicly available, too. I would welcome a congressional probe. I’m not sure how that would imply anyone’s guilt.</p>
<p>Sounds like Nixon.</p>
<p>First of all, Northern Alabama is the most liberal part of the state. So there is no reason to believe that stations would block out the episode while the more conservative areas to the south had no issues of airing the segment.
Second, this was not about someone accepting money from an individual and then being appointed to an honorary position (eg: Ambassador to France). This was about an individual who accepted money, appointed that person to the Certificate of Need Board for Hospitals for the State of Alabama, while that person was the CEO of a hospital. Court records will show that this particular CEO then used that position on the Cert. of Need Board to fill his pockets monetarily–including tinkering with company stock. And, by the way, this particular individual is in Federal Prison for his crimes as well. I would not be quite so quick to believe everything you watch on TV and CBS!</p>
<p>notre dame AL, Scrushy’s illegal activities started long before he contributed to Don Siegelman’s campaign. He was accused of a $2.7 billion fraud, all of which occurred prior to the indictment on the charges which eventually sent him to prison. The fact that a conviction was not forthcoming under Sarbanes-Oxley is more than likely what led to Rove, the DOJ, and others targetting Siegelman and his relationship with Scrushy. Siegelman’s mistake was getting involved in any way with Scrushy. Please don’t think that I’m naive enough to believe everything I watch on tv. I doubt that those 52 former Attorneys General are naive either.</p>
<p>I certainly hope not–a lot of people have lost a lot of money in Alabama with regard to all of this. People who believed they would have a pension to retire with. Yes, it is too bad that Siegelman got involved with the wrong people–happens a lot to politicians. But, I cannot believe that Don Siegelman was not aware of who Richard Scrushy is. Don Siegelman was, after all, the governor of the State of Alabama and Richard Scrushy did not happen to just walk in off the street. Just wished 60 minutes would have dug a little deeper to reveal “ALL” sides!</p>
<p>PS-let’s hope that 60 minutes will air another follow-up segment to this issue. And, if there is indeed another blackout in North Alabama–then I will believe that something fishy is occuring!</p>
<p>I understand that Scrushy’s actions have been the cause of much heartache to the people in Alabama and elsewhere. However, that is a separate issue. As I said, that fraud largely occurred long before his association with Siegelman, which is the topic at hand.</p>
<p>And, I believe that Siegelman knew who Scrushy was. He could have chosen to not meet with him–that was his choice! Perhaps he was targeted by the DOJ–perhaps not. Again, I hope there will be a follow-up segment and as the OP mentioned, I also hope there will not be any “black-outs”!</p>