Let's wait and review the results of the investigation before we lynch him.
It would be best if he resigned but he isn't going to do that. He is
guilty of NO crimes (innocent until proven guilty) so I doubt there are any
grounds to impeach him. He did however make a few poor decisions but who of us
hasn't. Obama has done more to be impeached BY FAR and that isn't
going to happen. In the end I think this attempt to remove Swallow from office
will be a big waste of time and money and he will remain in office until the
next election. The one benefit this may produce is that Utah may better define
the impeachment process.
I don't have much confidence that the Legislature's investigation of
the AG will add any value. It will take them some time before they
start, since it will take some time to determine who will be on the committee
and they're already well behind the other investigations which started some
time ago. Seems more political, trying to appear like they're
doing something, when in fact, when the other investigations conclude, for good
or ill, it's likely the Legislature will conclude theirs without finishing,
after having spent time and money spinning their wheels. If they
want to add value, they should focus on applying pressure to conclude the
investigation that are already underway.The question the AG needs to
answer NOW is how the citizen of Utah can be confident that both he and his
office are able to continue to function in the best interest of the citizen of
Utah while he apparently spends the majority of his time on personal
matters--meeting with his personal attorneys and lobbying the legislature trying
to save his job. I am all ears Mr. Swallow, convince me.
TRUTH said: Dealing with swallow is like dealing with obamites.....and
Clinton's!or Cheney or Bush or Reagan or Nixon etc...should be
used to it by now!Ethics are not respecters of parties D or R
Enough of the partisan parlor games, let the facts begin.
So swallow attorneys point out that swallow cannot be impeached for being
unethical in his previous life......and if discovered that swallow was a crook
before he was elected what?Dealing with swallow is like dealing with
Either way his political career is over, there is 0 chance of him getting
reelected. He just wants to carry through his current term to give himself time
to get his MLM ready for when he doesn't get elected again.
We are learning everyday from this man that he doesn't know what an
Attorney General is responsible to do for the State of Utah. He has spent
almost all of his time trying to defend his actions while he was the
"Chief" Deputy Attorney General responsible for approximately for half
of the Attorney General's staff. He didn't do a great job defending
his own AG while campaigning for him by allegedly going to a criminals hideout
at a fancy place in California.The previous AG isn't out there
explaining to all the world why he was or wasn't doing something at the
California resort. This AG will use every guise available to him to
show he wasn't wearing the criminal gloves, only the unethical gloves that
he was allegedly wearing even though he is ethical in sheep's clothing.
He just needs to resign and let the chips fall where they may.It appears he will go down saying he didn't do anything wrong,
using his AG office and elected position to show the world he is cunning and
Unacceptable conduct in/out of a political position sends out a message about
the integrity of the person and most likely this position of trust has been
eroded and may be irreparable.
We the People demand that he step down!
"Impeachment is removal from office."Impeachment COULD
result in removal from office, but not necessarily. Remember,
Clinton was impeached.
"To our knowledge, there is not a single act that has been alleged or
rumored in the media that involves any conduct on the part of Attorney General
Swallow while serving as the attorney general,"I guess someone
isn't paying attention. Jan. 10, 2013, AG John Swallow signed a conflict of
interest form, and based on the advice of his attorney the previous March that
he didn't disclose P Solutions. The form is to protect him. I believe he
should have listed P Solutions, Jenson, Johnson, etc. that could mean he has
violated 76-8-109. Failure to disclose conflict of interest while in office. Two people have accused with a tape former AG Shurtleff of a $2 M deal.
If true, that would have likely been an impeachable offense. Jenson has accused
Swallow of knowing about the deal. Swallow says no. If he know, why didn't
he file charges in January against Shurtleff?Jenson has recently
been put in protective custody and has accused the entire AG office of not only
a conflict of interest but fear of his life and has filed for a protective
order. Shurtleff claims he filed a complaint on Swallow last
This seems to be a difficult course of reasoning. Swallow's
attorney's want us to believe that a man can lie, hide past crimes, and do
whatever is necessary to get himself into office. Once there, if his crimes or
misconduct is discovered, he cannot be impeached or removed from office for
those past crimes or misconduct?Ridiculous.Care must be
taken that as DN Subscriber 2 keeps warning about, a lynch mob mentality,
doesn't ride Swallow unjustifiably out of office. That is why an
investigation by the House should begin. If the House did not begin an
investigation, or impeachment proceedings, I believe House Republicans would be
in a difficult political position. If they didn't investigate it could
appear like they were neglecting their duty, perhaps to protect "one of
their own". If the investigations by the feds, the Lt Gov, and the SL &
Davis Co were to conclude upon Swallow's guilt, the House would look very
bad. They must impeach. They must begin this
investigation.DN Subscriber2 has been an steady Swallow supporter.
He/she shouldn't object to a House investigation that will either support
guilt or innocense, but protect the GOP.
Impeachment is nothing more or less than the official charging of one in
office.Say if impeachment can only happen for acts that happened
while in office, criminal charges can surely be brought to bear on him for acts
committed before...but wait...who would file said charges? The Attorney
General.Tell me there is no conflict of interest here.
Utah Dem- Repercussions vary with the offense and what laws apply.Impeachment is removal from office. If no longer in office, you cannot be
impeached.For criminal acts, it does not matter is the perp is in
office or not.Of course, in the court of public opinion, or for a
lynch mob, there are no rules, you just make them up as you go along.Meanwhile, innocent until proven guilty, and let real investigations run their
course and find out the facts. The charge and punish or acquit as a trial may
So, according to Swallow's thinking, if he is found to have committed
misconduct as the assistant AG (or whatever is title was) there should be no
Impeachment is a political question, not a criminal one. "High crimes and
misdemeanors" can be whatever the political body deems them to be, with or
without connection to their criminal connotations. The lawyers for the AG,
ironically, are on the wrong side of legal precedent. If the AG is
that concerned about it, he could save a whole lot of time and money and simply