Hood really is a piece of work.

“There’s no statutory authority for any kind of special prosecutor,” he says.

Loosely translated . . . that means, “we can’t have a special prosecutor”.  Then in the next sentence . . .

“We don’t need it . . .

Huh?  I am no great legal mind, but what if, at some point, one of his campaign financiers violates a state law, but not a federal one?  It’s an entirely plausible scenario.  Suppose the net widens to other Hood campaign contributors that violate state laws . . . then what?  Right now, the press is still giving him a pass on this tack that he’s taken.

If Hood is taking these PR tips from someone, he needs to fire them.  If he is getting the advice I think he’s getting (which is “shut the hell up") and ignoring it, then they need to quit.

If we do not need “special prosecutor” then why do we need special assistant ags (or whatever Langston was called).  Oh yes one is to help his contributors and the other (special prosecutor) might hurt his contributors.

The man needs help. My goodness, the questions abound about what kind of “help” does he need. Legal, definely yes, medical, probably.

If there has ever been a more delusional person in the public in the near or distant past, I’m not aware of it. The whole affair cries out for someone, anyone, to address it in real time.

I’m not “for” or “against” him, but he defies reality in his quest to make himself blameless and above reproach. Dear God Jim GO HOME ! ! ! the gig is up. Jim, go to dictionary.com and type “narcisistic.”

Diagnostic criteria
At least five of the following are necessary for a diagnosis (as with many DSM diagnoses, they must form a pervasive pattern; for example, a person who shows these criteria only in one or two relationships or situations would not properly be diagnosed with NPD):

*has a grandiose sense of self-importance
*is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
*believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by other special people
*requires excessive admiration
*strong sense of entitlement
*takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
*lacks empathy
*is often envious or believes others are envious of him or her
arrogant behavior

(see also full list in DSM-IV-TR, p. 717)

Isn’t the “feds are doing a great job” argument what the state and local prosecutors said during the civil rights days?

I just wish a DA from Booneville or Oxford would stand up and say, “OK, I’ll take this case.  And I need 5 attorneys from the AG’s office”.  What’s Hood gonna say . . . no?

The ag’s office controls what they pursue and what they do not want to pursue, just as the SheriffS departments do. When you have people in power, they are put in situations to decide the fate of their friends, and maybe the friends of others, so it is much easier to turn the world upside down to a no name, or total stranger. The DA’s offices are also an office in control of themselves, just as the bar association. If more people would stand up and tell their stories, the public would find out, just how many crimes against them are actually happening from our professional community. Judges of course also control their court rooms. Who will go against these people. Attorney’s are afraid of retaliation from the bench, in some cases, because the judge, friends, and family may be envolved. This is why we allow these people to recuse themselves. The problem, is these people will be part of these cases, when they know they shouldn’t be. Here is a good example for you. Jones co. DA, hears a felony drug case, his own Attorney, (in the past, maybe present) hears the case. The person that is represented, is the future son-n-law of the Attorney at that time. This case was suspended. This is a very questionable case, as why a DA, would even hear this case. This Ex Da works in the AG office. Do you think anybody in the DA’s office would look into this case...I don’t think so. Do you think the Sheriff’s department would look into multiple thefts of multiple thousands of dollars, allow police reports to be filed? You would think...I know for a fact they didn’t...Do you think when the thefts continued, you could at least get a realistic report, maybe a phone call, an e-mail, or a return phone call, e-mail, or an appointment to discuss it? You would think, but I know for a fact it doesn’t happen. Do you think, if your neighbor called on his phone, and reported a stranger at your home, which resulted in finding out you were burglarized a couple of days later, and saw the police on your street, just after the call, on a country road, would have the call in the records department of the sheriff’s department. You would think, but I know better. If you contact your senators(more than one) do you think they might help you get an investigation? you would think, but it doesn’t always happen, I know this for a fact. All I can say, is the public that has courage and strength, keeps moving up the chain, untill they hit the office of our government, that serves the people. I hope also that somebody takes on the case you have mentioned. The more media attention, the more possibility that will happen.

Careful what you say ladies and gentlemen, or General Hood’s main cheerleader will accuse you of be “zealots”.  The man is amazing when it comes to what he says on the whole issue of the Scruggs mess.  Rossmiller had a good comment on one of his posts this morning about Hood’s comments of recent and that is the old analogy “It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.”