It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Massachusetts Democrat Official BUSTED FOR EXTORTION

page: 1
25
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+8 more 
posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:01 PM
link   
The Federal Justice Department has secured an indictment of a Boston official for extortion.

Boston's director of tourism, sports, and entertainment (allegedly) held up a permit for a music event until everybody was "union".

Big no-no even for a Liberal City I guess.

Wonder what this fumble-flop has gotten away with in the past?

Massach usetts Democrat Official BUSTED FOR EXTORTION


A top official in Boston Mayor Martin Walsh’s administration pleaded not guilty on Thursday to a corruption charge that could lead to a maximum of 20 years in prison.

Kenneth Brissette, the city’s director of tourism, sports, and entertainment, was arrested for allegedly withholding city permits from a music festival until union workers were hired to staff the event in 2014.

A federal indictment released Thursday outlined allegations that Brissette had engaged in union-related extortion.


Now he will pay HIS dues







posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Home sweat home. More of the same.




posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Just because he is 86 and behind bars doesn't mean James "Whitey" Bulger doesn't still have "wants" (pun intended)

The tap stays open.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:18 PM
link   
another one down, god only knows how many more to go??
wish there was a way we could clean house with one giant non-partisan sweep!



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:35 PM
link   
At least he didn't store classified emails on his personal server.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 01:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
At least he didn't store classified emails on his personal server.


Or "lost/misplaced" $6B while the Head of the State Dep't. and then accept $2B from the Saudi Royals..



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 04:04 PM
link   
I don't believe it!

Everyone knows Democrats are pure as the undriven snow


No worries people he will still be able to vote since felons get that 'right' restored.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 04:27 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen
So is "charged" and "busted" the same thing? NO



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Is he be a super delegate?



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 04:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: xuenchen
So is "charged" and "busted" the same thing? NO


Busted = arrested.

He is pleading not guilty, so that means he was arrested, thus "busted".

And as a rule, indictments mean compelling evidence was presented to a grand jury.

Most indictments yield a conviction.




posted on May, 22 2016 @ 04:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: xuenchen
So is "charged" and "busted" the same thing? NO


Busted = arrested.

He is pleading not guilty, so that means he was arrested, thus "busted".

And as a rule, indictments mean compelling evidence was presented to a grand jury.

Most indictments yield a conviction.



He is not Busted yet, please contain your Partisan Exuberance. Hysteria.

Here, this should give you that feel good, feeling.
www.thegailygrind.com...
edit on 22-5-2016 by ugmold because: addition



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

No worries people he will still be able to vote since felons get that 'right' restored.


Once you've done the time for a crime and released again you should be restored to a normal citizen again. That is the whole point.

If they aren't going to be restored like normal again then all you're doing is making them a prisoner on the outside too.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 05:00 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm




Once you've done the time for a crime and released again you should be restored to a normal citizen again. That is the whole point.


Tell that to them if they wanted to own a gun.

Funny how it doesn't apply then,.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

That's not right either and should be changed.

The fact is that once you're released and have paid back for your crime you should be completely restored to normal. There shouldn't be anything trailing you around or stopping you from being a normal citizen again.

The fact that we don't do that is wrong.

So we are on the same side on this. They should have a right to a gun, to vote, etc. Just like anyone else. Otherwise what that means is that they are still considered a criminal and under the control of the State which if they are released they shouldn't be.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Yepper.

The 8th amendment specifically states that.

Glad we can agree.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: neo96

That's not right either and should be changed.

The fact is that once you're released and have paid back for your crime you should be completely restored to normal. There shouldn't be anything trailing you around or stopping you from being a normal citizen again.

The fact that we don't do that is wrong.

So we are on the same side on this. They should have a right to a gun, to vote, etc. Just like anyone else. Otherwise what that means is that they are still considered a criminal and under the control of the State which if they are released they shouldn't be.


But not if someone was released after being imprisoned for being a rapist or child molester.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 05:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT

But not if someone was released after being imprisoned for being a rapist or child molester.


If you release them then yes, even them. Otherwise you shouldn't be releasing them.

By releasing someone back in to society and back to their freedom you are restoring them to normal status again. If you can't because you don't trust them to be a normal citizen again then they shouldn't be released. Otherwise what you're saying is that you're knowingly putting a dangerous person back on the streets.

That doesn't mean you can't have them on probation or parole though. The can be put on that status on the outside to keep an eye on them for a while. But under that condition it needs to work both ways. Being that they aren't actually a free person yet they should have certain resources from the system to rely on until they are. So if you're out but not free then the system also has to provide you with some help while they keep you under watch.
edit on 22-5-2016 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: ugmold

a vicious lump of stereotyping !!!




posted on May, 22 2016 @ 05:22 PM
link   
My goodness, this is the bread and butter for the majority of politicians - you act like Republicans are so honest.

He was probably one of the few comfortable or stupid enough to explicitly say it on wire taps.



posted on May, 22 2016 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

So Megan's Law is unfair to sex offenders who served their time?



new topics

top topics



 
25
<<   2 >>

log in

join