Inter Akyson
Chinatown gangsters, gun-smuggling, Muslim rebels in the Philippines and a shady character called "Shrimp Boy."
Oh, and envelopes full of cash from mobsters.
It may sound like the plot of a cable television mini-series, but FBI agents say it's the real tale of a California state senator willing to do nearly anything for campaign cash.
Appearing in a San Francisco federal courthouse on Tuesday, now-suspended senator Leland Yee pleaded not guilty to bribery and gun-running charges that could land him behind bars for life.
Yee is the highest-profile of 29 defendants ensnared in an FBI sting that initially targeted the gang underworld of San Francisco's Chinatown before taking a surprising detour into political corruption.
In addition to being accused of accepting cash for political favors, Yee -- a Democrat and a gun-control advocate -- is charged with plotting to smuggle guns from the Philippines.
A 137-page arrest warrant affidavit portrays Yee as desperate to pay down campaign debt.
That desperation allegedly led him to approach a man he believed to be a mafia member -- actually an undercover FBI agent -- with a surprising proposal: He could get the mobster guns from overseas.
At first Yee said the weapons would probably come from Russia, though he noted "the Muslim countries" were also a possible source, according to the FBI.
"Do I think we can make some money? I think we can make some money," he is quoted as telling the fake mafioso over coffee. "Do I think we can get the goods? I think we can get the goods."
Do I think he's dirty. I think he's dirty.
But what I object to is the hypocritical pro-gun folks who adamantly defend gun misuse when committed by one of their own but were jubilant in condemning Senator Yee from the very moment the story broke. For this guy, there was no "innocent until proven guilty."
He's innocent until proven guilty, but you have to admit that this is delicious irony. He's one of the prime enemies of rights, and he's being hoisted on his own petard.
ReplyDeleteYes, irony and hypocrisy - him and you.
DeleteI may be many things, but a hypocrite is not one of them.
DeleteHypocrite is exactly what you are GC, and I have proven it over and over again.
DeleteGreg, I wish I had a buck for every time I've point out your hypocrisy. We could start out with the one instance above where you reveled in Yee's fall from grace BEFORE he was convicted of a thing. There would be nothing wrong with that except that you never miss an opportunity to remind me that gun owners who fuck up with their weapons are innocent until proven guilty. That's hypocrisy.
DeleteYee's "fall from grace" (if being a hardcore abuser of fundamental human rights can be called "grace") is worth celebrating whether or not he is guilty of the current charges. He has been removed as a force of oppression. There are many more in California to pick up his slack, of course, but at least he is done.
DeleteJust because I'm not sure what you're talking about with "gun misuse" that is defended by pro-gun folks, I'll bite. What is an example of gun misuse that you've seen defended by the pro-gunners?
ReplyDeleteWho are you? Are you a long time lurker who's just now piping up? Or are you a fly by? If the first, you already know the answer. If the second, stick around a while.
DeleteFor this guy, there was no "innocent until proven guilty."
ReplyDeleteThere is from me:
Yee, like anyone else accused of a crime, deserves the presumption of innocence pending proof of guilt. The FBI certainly seems to have a great deal on him, but until he is convicted or pleads guilty, the charges against him are alleged crimes.
Me too. I expressly used the word "allegedly" when talking about his crimes. So not Greg, Kurt, or me... who are your talking about then? Surely not Simon- I doubt he would have said such a thing either.
DeleteAlso, Mike, remember this:
Deletehttp://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2014/04/oregon-lawful-gun-owner-shoots-at.html
I was suggesting appropriate charges in that case. Doesn't change the fact that I think the guy's innocent until proven guilty.
Looked back at the post from week before last to see if I said anything. Basically, the only part of the thread I commented in was discussing whether the Yee situation was relevant because of his ties to and former status within the Gun Control movement.
DeleteIn case my silence on the topic is being taken the wrong way, of course these are Alleged crimes. I'm waiting to see what happens at trial. Right now, the irony here is delicious, but only if it turns out to be true.
Did I point and laugh? Sure--the arrest and charges alone are funny given his past. If he is found not guilty, I guess I'll have to eat some crow for the laughter.
As for the issue of punishment, I don't want to see anything done to the man until he's tried. Mike's called me an "other rights fanatic" before, and I'm not going to change that tune over politics. Fair trial, and all of that is a MUST. If he's convicted by due process, throw him in the deepest, darkest hole possible. And if the charges are fabricated, then charge those who fabricated them and throw them in the deep dark hole they wanted for him.
Mike, Due to a screw up in open windows, I think I submitted two comments at this point, and submitted them out of order. Flip em, please, if the software will allow it.
DeleteNo need to publish this comment.
Yeah, yeah, TS said "allegedly" and Kurt paid lip-service to the innocent until proven guilty idea in his JFPO article in which he "congratulated" Yee for being a gun runner. But the fact remains, you guys were practically whooping with joy when read and wrote about the accused Senator.
DeleteBut the fact remains, you guys were practically whooping with joy when read and wrote about the accused Senator.
DeleteWhat would you have us do, Mikeb? Should we know in our hearts that he is innocent, and being cruelly framed? Even you can't manage that.
As for "whooping with joy," he's the enemy. I happen to like it when my enemies go down in flames.
It's interesting to note that indications are that his defense will not be so much about whether or not he did what he is accused of, but about having been entrapped by the FBI, for a plot they mostly cooked up, and he went along with.
That gambit may actually work for him. The FBI does do that shit, and sometimes the accused can win because of it.
Even if that's successful, though, I suspect he's done in politics, which in the end is good enough for me.
I thought about the entrapment angle too, but in this case it was Yee who allegedly was arranging the deal. In the worst cases of FBI/ATF entrapment they are fishing for a buyer for fictitious weapons/drugs from a fictitious source.
DeleteTrue, TS. I don't think the entrapment defense is very likely to work, but it might be the best hope he has, which is bad news for him, and good news for the rest of us.
DeleteThis about win, or lose, not the right, or wrong of gun rights. That's evident in your pro gun readers comments everyday. It's their "side" mentality. That's why their responses are so irrational most of the time.
ReplyDeleteInteresting, Anonymous. Because it's always you and Mike wanting to divide people up in to sides and tell us who is on "Our Side."
DeleteOh, is that right, Simon. And the pro-gun guys don't do that?
DeleteMore of your BS lies Simon. I put "sides" in quotations because it is the pro gun people on this blog that always use the word "side" in their arguments. Your "side" won this issue, or that. Death is not a "side" issue and I find it dishonest in the extreme, not to mention showing a lack of concern for the loss of innocent human life. .
DeleteMy side supports rights. Your side, Anonymous, wishes to violate them.
DeleteMore irrational lies from GC.
DeleteBy the way, since I am not anti gun, it's not my side, bit I wouldn't expect someone as dense as you to understand that difference, and just lie.
Simon, another lie about me, thanks.
DeletePlease show where I am pitting "side" against "side."
Hey--waddya' know? Yet another rabidly anti-gun official arrested on suspicion of grotesque criminality.
ReplyDeletePrecisely what reasonable people have come to expect from the anti-rights zealots. If I were his attorney, that would be my defense strategy: "I'm a huge advocate of obscenely violating people's rights--as such, heinous violation of the public trust is what should be expected of me. I was only obeying my nature. It's really not my fault, but the fault of the idiots who elected me."
It's worth a try.