Comments about ‘Letters: The Swallow case’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Sept. 26 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Ranch
Here, UT

I agree with you two. We definitely need to "clean house". Starting with Swallow.

Maudine
SLC, UT

Just because no federal laws were broken - which is what he was cleared of by the Feds - does not mean no state laws were broken.

isrred
South Jordan, UT

"He has been cleared by the federal investigation and from what we can observe, the so called remaining charges seem to be coming from those who have a political agenda for getting John Swallow out of office."

You do realize that just because federal laws weren't broken that it doesn't mean state laws weren't broken, right? It is letters like these that try to make it sound like Swallow was found factually innocent (which he wasn't) that have the true political agenda, not those who are trying to preserve the integrity of our political system.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

Some of these same posters have lectured us on the supremacy of federal law. They've tried to use their argument to promote same-sex marriage. They've tried to use their argument to have special penalties applied for certain types of crime. Why are they so inconsistant?

Charges were dropped against John Swallow. He didn't take a "plea bargain". The charges were dropped. Those who are vindictive will continue to demand that he be tarred and feathered because they think he is guilty. They believe only themselves, no matter the absence of proof of guilt. They want to overturn the will of the people of Utah who were very much aware of the allegations against John Swallow when they elected him to hold high office.

It's time for those who would stone John Swallow to look in the mirror and see if there is anything in their own lives that need correcting. If they put the same effort to improve themselves that they demand from John Swallow, they might find themselves losing their desire for vengeance.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

I agree with Ranch. Throw them out.... but wait for an election.

We aren't a banana republic, where you throw politicians out mid-term, without elections, without charges...

There will always be those who call passionately for Swallows head. But now that the Feds have said they wash their hands of this matter... WE should also re-evaluate our intentions and our motivations. And decide if we really have sufficient reason to give him the political death-penalty.

Usually in America we are believers in the "rule-of-law", and the concept that the accused needs to be told what he's being charged with (so far no charges), and that the accused is "Innocent" until proven guilty, and he gets a trial where he can face his accusers.

I think we are putting the cart before the horse when we try to throw him out first, and THEN see if you can come up with a charge that will stick, and THEN see if you can prove it. Because if you can't... the damage is already done and can't be undone

Wait for the election, not a lynching.

Maudine
SLC, UT

@ Mike Richards: Your inability to distinguish between circumstances lends no credibility to your argument.

Very few things in life are "either/or" and presenting a false dichotomy will not change that.

You yourself have stated on many occasions that the federal Constitution gives some laws and powers to the state and some laws and powers to the Federal Government. Are you now claiming that is no longer true?

Are you arguing a false dichotomy because you have no other grounds on which to defend Swallow?

stanfunky
Salt Lake City, UT

John Swallow has not been found guilty in a court of law.
Yet.
When the facts are presented, and a verdict reached, we will see if he is innocent or guilty. The day cannot come soon enough.

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

"Some of these same posters have lectured us on the supremacy of federal law." You mean like the ACA?
Do you allow your children to tell you a half truth?
The investigation was dropped by the feds Not charges, there a 3 other investigations currently going on.

"Do they know about the boat?" questioned the ethically void swallow at a secret meeting being recorded, because a criminal didn't trust this man either. But Utah should ignore that he was asking for money and favors from people whom he might charge with crimes, cause there's no way that could be construed as anything other than campaign contributions.

The head law enforcement officers, should demonstrate good ethical behavior above that of an 8 year old trying to find out how much his parents actually know before admitting anything, unless that good enough for partisan peers.

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

Just so I'm clear I'm not asking that he be removed from office, I'm asking John to have a shred of decency for the office and resign with some semblance of dignity.

Cincinnatus
Kearns, UT

Mike Richards,

Why do you continue to lecture us on how Mr. Swallow should be left alone? You brought this up the other day on a different letter to the editor about the same subject and your arguments were shown to be lacking.

First- NO charges were dropped! None had ever been filed. An investigation took place by the feds to determine IF charges should be filed. They determined that there wasn't anything wrong, OR there wasn't sufficient evidence to make a case in court. So saying charges were dropped is a falsehood.

Second, different entities are investigating DIFFERENT things. The legislature, the BAR association, and the Lt. Governor's office are INVESTIGATING possible wrongdoing. That is what happens.

I agreed with you the other day that he is innocent until proven guilty. But, to charge him formally or clear him of wrongdoing, a thorough INVESTIGATION needs to be done.

Saying everyone else had better look at themselves before they look at Mr. Swallow is disingenuous. If that's the case, maybe you should look at yourself before you continue lobbing similar accusations at the President.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

@Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

It's time for those who would stone {Pres. Obama] to look in the mirror and see if there is anything in their own lives that need correcting. If they put the same effort to improve themselves that they demand from [Pres. Obama], they might find themselves losing their desire for vengeance.

8:43 a.m. Sept. 26, 2013

=========

That's a little test of one's words for integrity...

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

I respectfully disagree with those who tell us that there are "shades of gray" in every circumstance. There is right and there is wrong. There is nothing in between. If something is right, it is 100% right. If something is wrong, whether is is slightly wrong or totally wrong, it is 100% wrong.

Those who refuse to look in the mirror when their whole purpose in life is to judge others know nothing about the person who heads their church. They may claim to "follow the brethren" but their hearts are far from "following". They judge their fellowmen, with every post, as they try to find a reason to lay a snare. Shame on them.

John Swallow has not been found guilty of any offense. Until he is, he is innocent, no matter who thinks otherwise. This is still America. We don't behead people just because a few vigilante's want to warm up the tar and empty the feather pillows. If you have proof, then go to the proper authorities and present that proof; otherwise, you are nothing more than the pharisees who wanted to stone the woman.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

LDS Liberal,
You keep insisting people want to stone Obama. You need to grow up. Nobody's said that.

It's OK to question our leaders. Heck... you probably were doing it just a few years ago.

We have a tradition of tolerating questioning our leaders in the United States. Obama is not getting any tougher handling than our last President.

Maudine
SLC, UT

@ Mike Richards: You are right - John Swallow is innocent until being proven guilty. But tell me, without an investigation how is anyone to determine if Swallow if the claims against Swallow are true or false? If I make a claim that a particular person robbed me should the police investigate that or should they just assume the person is innocent? If the crime was a state crime but not a federal crime does that lessen the need for the local police to investigate?

Cincinnatus
Kearns, UT

2 bits,

LDS Liberal is simply pointing out the double standard to which Mike Richards adheres: Mr. Swallow is innocent until proven guilty, and we should stop the investigations, vs. Obama is a condemned criminal before any investigation has concluded he is.

I like what you said- "It's OK to question our leaders." "We have a tradition of tolerating questioning our leaders in the United States." And Mr. Swallow is one of those leaders, an elected official. And we have the right, through the proper channels, which ARE being used (state legislature, Lt. Governor's office, and Utah BAR association), to ask those questions.

Yet, those of us who want the questions answered about Mr. Swallow through those investigations, who don't want to simply drop the other 3 investigations because the federal investigation has concluded, are "stone throwers." Not, "following the brethren." And, are "nothing more than Pharisees." At least according to Mike Richards.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

@Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

I respectfully disagree with those who tell us that there are "shades of gray" in every circumstance. There is right and there is wrong. There is nothing in between. If something is right, it is 100% right. If something is wrong, whether it is slightly wrong or totally wrong, it is 100% wrong.

=========

John Swallow is OBVIOUSLY in a Gray area Mike.
That is the dilemma.

And once again -- How dare you lecture any of us?
You use a double standard with John Swallow and President Obama daily.

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

Mike Richards says:
I respectfully disagree with those who tell us that there are "shades of gray" in every circumstance. There is right and there is wrong. There is nothing in between. If something is right, it is 100% right. If something is wrong, whether is is slightly wrong or totally wrong, it is 100% wrong.

By your same logic? If something is right, whether is is slightly right or totally right, it is 100% right.

Your gray area is showing.

This is how a computer thinks, My God gave me the ability to reason and make logical decisions, not a 1 bit brain.

Hemlock
Salt Lake City, UT

Heretic,
Your respect for the rule of law is commendable. Does that mean you also object to the president's politically motivated decision not to enforce our laws on immigration and the failure to implement all of the ACA?

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

@Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

I respectfully disagree with those who tell us that there are "shades of gray" in every circumstance. There is right and there is wrong. There is nothing in between. If something is right, it is 100% right. If something is wrong, whether is is slightly wrong or totally wrong, it is 100% wrong.

=======

I disagree Mike,
and here's why...

Why are there "3" degrees of Glory instead of just Heaven or Hell?
And why are there multiples degrees in each of those 3 degrees?

It appears your A or B - with nothing in between - isn't I harmony with LDS teachings.

It seems God has shades of gray throughout an eternal spectrum.

Sorry you can't see it.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments