Recap, Kevin Cullen of The Globe has been detailing the Justice Department’s version of events of the Whitey Bulger et al. story for years.
He has detailed much fiction over time but his comic strip can be summed up in two undeniable facts.
1. John Connolly was charged with tipping off wiseguys (Bulger and Flemmi) about other wise guys informing. This according to Cullen and the Feds were death sentences on the wiseguy rats. And no person has the moral or legal right to effectuate another’s death in such a way. Society has rules for such things.
2. Well before Whitey Bulger was indicted and still to be found at Castle Island Cullen and The Globe wrote that he was an informant for the F.B.I. The few times Globies were questioned about a moral dilemma they basically laughed at the notion. Never entered their mind.
3. Today Cullen is kicking the crap out of a fine lawyer and governor’s council member by the name of Terry Kennedy because Kennedy has concerns about a judicial appointment before the council. The nominee is a former federal prosecutor who unethically IMHO went after a top notch criminal defense lawyer (you could say mob lawyer in the best sense if there is one) by the name of Joe Balliro.
A former U.S. Attorney by the name of Edward Harrington was the trial judge. He directed it out. That is a judge’s way of saying “How dare you bring this piece of shit to my court room!”. The facts of that case were ridiculous. Balliro was targeted because he was very good at what he did and became personal within the U.S. Attorneys Office and everyone knew it.
Really people, these people at the Joe Moakley Employment Center for the Mentally Deranged and Socially Retarded have zero oversight. Niltch, Nada.
And our elected officials are letting it happen. Can you blame them? Look what happened to Ted Stevens.
I want Steve Lynch going after them from the Senate just like Liz Warren is going after the banks. Fucking Batman and Wonder Woman team up to save the good ole U.S. of A. (If Ed Markey said he was going after them he would have my vote and full support)
—–
BTW I have a plan to to put big money in the state’s checking account so our worries will be over.
I say we put the White Man on public display down there in Plymouth. Twenty bucks to take a 3 minute gander. Another ten bucks to heckle him and for fifty you can poke him with a stick.
They’ll come from all over. You can also rent the place with him in it for weddings and bar mitzvahs. Not too mention corporate outings, retirement parties. Goodness the list is endless.
I find only microscopic substance, overwhelmed by unfunny snark.
It is easy to do:
http://wordpress.com/#!/read/fresh/
More generally, why tear people down. I find this interesting and entertaining, both. If you don’t, scroll right on down. It’s a free country and there is plenty of other gripping reading on BMG.
…is an odd defense of Ernie.
It’s Ernietown.
A+ work sco
n/t
to the Bulger brothers back in the ’80’s. There was a long stretch where they ran stories about William Bulger and about Whitey Bulger, but they never, ever mentioned that the two were related, let alone brothers.
Maybe Kevin Cullen and Shelly Murphy should write anonymously. That way EB3 would have to guess whether there was a conflict of interest.
By the way, who is Catherine Grieg protecting? She has to know that what she testifies to won’t affect the case against Whitey. And, obviously, she isn’t trying to protect the crooked justice department. So who stands to lose if she testifies? Any guesses?
First, I doubt that the Globe never mentioned the two were brothers in the 80s, it’s just more likely that they didn’t feel the need to mention it in every story about one or the other…. since, you know, one didn’t have much if anything to do with the other, beyond sharing a few strands of DNA.
Beyond that, though, let’s say they did include that in every article about one or the other. Would that be good journalism, or bad? Given that they don’t have anything to do with one another, I’d say always mentioning the two would be an example of guilt by association, ipso facto a fallacy.
Personally, I don’t think newspapers should be in the business of fallacious arguments. They tend to be examples of sensationalizing stories, not reporting them.
The nominee has a name: Robert Ullmann. I know him well. He is an accomplished attorney and would make a fine judge. To call him “unethical” is simply wrong.
The man may have been just following orders but where have we heard that before?