Please purchase "Trump the Press" through Create Space.

The book is on Kindle. Order here.

Thursday, October 08, 2015

Give Blankenship the presumption of innocence



Liberals are ghouls. They pounce on and exploit any tragedy to further their agenda, which is government control of everything, and liberals in control of the government. Thus no one should be surprised that liberals jumped on the April 5, 2010, methane gas explosion at the Upper Big Branch Mine in Raleigh County, West Virginia, which killed 29 men. The mine was owned by Massey Energy, which was run by Don Blankenship, who for 30 years fought the unions and other liberals in West Virginia.

He now is in federal court answering charges of conspiracy to violate mandatory federal mine safety and health standards, conspiracy to impede federal mine safety officials, making false statements to the Securities and Exchange Commission, as well as securities fraud.

Sounds bad, except when you consider this: Federal mine inspectors were at the site on April 5, 2010. Even these government experts failed to detect the danger and stop the tragedy. But as unaware of the methane danger as they were, the inspectors issued a couple of citations anyway.

The Democratic Party in West Virginia is trying to milk the Blankenship trial for all it is worth.

Democrats are in tatters after eight decades of pursuing policies that made the poor wards of the state, the rich richer, and the middle class move to North Carolina and other Right To Work states.

Fat-cat trial lawyer Chris Regan, vice chairman of the state Democratic Party, tried desperately to smear Republicans by going after Blankenship, writing in the Wheeling Intelligencer: "Whatever happens at his trial, the hard truth is we are living in Don Blankenship's West Virginia. The billionaire coal baron may have landed himself in the dock, but along the way, he landed an avalanche of politicians in our capitol. The policies, and the politicos, that Blankenship groomed for a decade finally broke through in 2014 and they are busily turning our state into one big Massey enterprise."

The Obama administration is delivering the head of Blankenship to West Virginia Democrats with this bizarre trial for charges that have nothing to do with the deaths of 29 men. The press led by the Gazette has pushed the liberal line. A citation is now a violation. A charge is now a conviction. A death on the job is now a murder. The presumption of innocence has no place in newspaper stories in Charleston.

Meanwhile, 29 men are dead despite the presence of federal mine inspectors. I would rather spend the time and effort invested in getting Don Blankenship on fixing the federal mine inspection program -- you know the one that is supposed to be so important that we are having this trial.

UPDATE: Just to clarify what I am saying, based on one commenter's comments: How is this trial holding anyone accountable for Upper Big Branch? The allegation of security fraud and the allegation of dodging inspectors did not cause the explosion. Methane did. And the vaunted inspectors, who issued two citations (accusations) that day did not detect it.

11 comments:

  1. Obvious you did not read the "Gazette-Mail" article which noted the defense lawyer's argument for Blakenship in the lead no less and later expanded on it in great detail. So many overlooks on your part, such as ... "Sounds bad, except when you consider this: Federal mine inspectors were at the site on April 5, 2010. " Did you not read where prosecutors will introduce evidence that the foremen there had a system to regularly cover up their violations once inspectors were found to be on site?
    Love this knee-slapper: "The Obama administration is delivering the head of Blankenship to West Virginia Democrats with this bizarre trial." The only thing bizarre is the statement itself. Please elaborate on this. I would love to learn how the Obama administration has anything to do with this trial and the state Democratic Party.
    Don, while you wish to move on and not worry about any accountability for the deaths of 29 miners, I think this country needs to move on from Hillary's so-called e-mail scandal. Did that last sentence just repulse you? How do you think the families of 29 miners feel about this bizarre post?

    ReplyDelete
  2. hey Anonymous, above: if you can't sign your name, your comment is worthless and you are a coward.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How about if I use a moniker like "thorny"? What's the difference?

      Delete
    2. Click on "thorny". Then click on "Bio" and you'll see everything you want to know about Thorney. He's not hiding.

      Delete
    3. I guess I will go with Evie then. No info there. As for thorney - I like your coal miner photo pics. I'm part of a coal miner family too. What's your take that Surber thinks it's a waste of time that no one is held accountable in the deaths of 29 West Virginia coal miners?

      Delete
    4. How is this trial holding anyone accountable for Upper Big Branch? The allegation of security fraud and the allegation of dodging inspectors did not cause the explosion. Methane did. And the vaunted inspectors, who issued two citations (accusations) that day did not detect it.

      Delete
    5. Yep, methane caused the deaths just like a firearm killed the Oregon students; cars - not drunk drivers - kill innocent people; and computers - not Hillary's emails - had nothing to do with our American servicemen. Yep, your right Don, no human element involved at all with the deaths at UBB.

      Delete
    6. Shifting the argument to Oregon shows desperation. And you blew it. The Oregon gunman killed them with bullets. Don Blankenship was not at the site when the methane killed the men. He did not fire the methane at them. Holding him "accountable" is nonsense. I am sick of liberal opportunism. I wish more people were fed up with it.

      Delete
    7. More people are not fed up with liberal opportunism because your version of it - at least as demonstrated by this post - is well beyond left field. Talk about a desperate statement. You nailed it with "Don Blankenship was not at the site when the methane killed the men." By same logic, no need to get made at Hillary Clinton because she wasn't in Benghazi." The judge made it clear, Blankenship is not on trial for 29 deaths. He is on trial - among other things - that he knowlingly allowed his mine (buck stops with him) to be operated in an unsafe manner in violation of numerous safety laws leading up to the deaths of 29 miners. If you truly think there is a real-world difference in holding him accountable, I will personally drive you at my expense to Raleigh County so you can explain in person, to those 29 families, that Blankenship is really a misunderstood and blameless man in that tragedy. BTW, you can thank me for chopping you up again. Once again you reached a whole 10 comments on one of your posts. A near record.

      Delete
    8. I agree with Judge Berger. I said the charges themselves have nothing to do with the deaths. So how is this holding him accountable? That's my point. They cannot charge him for the deaths because he had nothing to do with those deaths.

      Delete
  3. If the Federal mine inspectors did not notice that there was a problem, that would appear to be a mitigating item.

    ReplyDelete