« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Why Didn't DOJ Name Cheney in Stevens Filing?
We learned over the weekend, via Newsweek, that there's a Dick Cheney connection to the Ted Stevens case. But are federal prosecutors looking the other way?
In a phone conversation recorded by the FBI and included in a court filing by prosecutors, Sen. Stevens (R-AK) told oil-services executive Bill Allen that he would try to get some "bigwigs" from Washington to weigh in on a bill pending in the Alaska legislature, that would have given the go-ahead to a pipeline Allen wanted. Two days later, Newsweek notes, Cheney sent a letter to Alaska lawmakers urging them to pass the bill. Stevens told Newsweek that Cheney's letter had been sent at his urging.
But we were curious about one thing. Why didn't prosecutors mention Cheney's letter in their filing? Although technically Stevens is being prosecuted for giving false statements on disclosure forms, demonstrating that Stevens took action on Allen's behalf is still at the heart of the case.
And in citing another example of Stevens using his influence on Allen's behalf, prosecutors did include chapter and verse on the results Stevens got. Consider this passage from the filing:
Stevens added: "I'm going to try and see if I can get . . . the Secretary of Energy and also the head of, of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [("FERC")] up there to explain why it's necessary that they act before we act."On July 7, 2006, Senator Stevens traveled to Alaska and addressed the Alaska Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, urging it to cease infighting and pass the pipeline legislation before liquified natural gas monopolizes the marketplace. Three days later, on July 10, 2006, the FERC issued a report similar to the message delivered by Stevens.
But when it comes to Stevens calling on Cheney, the prosecutors -- who are from the Department of Justice's Public Integrity Section, and the U.S. attorney's office in Alaska -- go strangely silent.
One former government prosecutor we spoke to said he could see little reason why the link to Cheney wouldn't have been mentioned. The most charitable explanation, the ex-prosecutor said, is that the government thought that bringing in Cheney would unnecessarily bog the case down. The least charitable is that they were "trying to protect Cheney."
Another former federal corruption prosecutor agreed, writing in an email to TPMMuckraker:
"If the government has the evidence that Stevens asked Cheney's office to intervene/write a letter, I can see no strategic or tactical reason not to have cited that evidence in their motion. They specifically argue for the admission at trial of evidence regarding Stevens' attempts to influence the executive branch on behalf of VECO. Citing the Cheney evidence could only bolster that argument and help educate the judge on the extraordinary lengths Stevens was going to help out VECO, which just happened to be providing him with undisclosed personal benefits at the time.
The source cautioned, however, that prosecutors may not have had evidence that Stevens was behind Cheney's letter, before Stevens confirmed it to Newsweek.
A DOJ spokesperson did not immediately return a call for comment.
Josh
Zachary
Frankly, I'm shocked at the suggestion that shrub's DoJ would make a decision based on politics.
~
August 25, 2008 8:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
When President Obama takes office the first item of business for Vice President Biden - must be a full accounting of all the misdeeds done & crimes committed by "Darth Cheney " and the OVP miscreants - with all discovery being turned over to Special Prosecutor James Comey .
Hope all the Vulcans , Vulcanettes , and assorted intertwined aspen roots ( and you darn well know who you all are ) ,,get really good lawyers for the coming shyt storm that will herald the healing of These United States as our federal government in the words of one David Iglesias is returned to the rule of law ....once Obama takes over in 2009 ...
August 25, 2008 8:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope you're right Al, please tell me there's nothing Bush can do on the way out to prevent justice from incarcerating his ass?
August 25, 2008 9:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
All he has to do is pardon Cheney and everyone else, then resign and let Cheney pardon him.
We really need to amend the Constitution to prevent the President from pardoning members of his administration in the future.
August 26, 2008 3:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think he needs to resign or pardon himself. the same rationale that the Democrats used to avoid impeaching (that it would bog down congress and cause them to accomplish nothing) will apply triply under an Obama Administration, and cause risk averse dems from prosecuting.
In any case, I don't think we will see Bush pardoning anyone. A pardon strips the Fifth Amendment rights from a witness, and Bush wants his Admin to be beyond the event horizon of discovery. He will work variations on Libby's commutation to ensure that the Fifth Amendment applies to all.
And I am not sure that he cannot preemptively commute any sentence he might receive, himself. These commutations are new 'legal' territory for Constitutional scholars.
August 26, 2008 6:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why Didn't DOJ Name Cheney in Stevens Filing?
M U L - make up lie
K A S - keep a smile
E Y USA - evoke your unabashed support for America.
August 26, 2008 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent!
August 26, 2008 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
His name is MUKASEY.
August 26, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll bet you think Mickey's name is really Mickey too!
August 26, 2008 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Why Didn't DOJ Name Cheney in Stevens Filing?" (I'm assuming you meant the question to be rhetorical)
Ah, those nicknames for BushCo's DOJ.....
Dept. of InJustice
Dept. of "We Used To Count On It For" Justice
Dept of Just Us.
August 26, 2008 10:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why wait for Congress to impeach? Why don't you send your evidence to any bar association he is a member of and seek to have him disbarred for these crimes? You could get the ball rolling. Once a sitting federal judge is being investigated for war crimes by his bar association the story will get picked up and the msm will start investigating too.
August 26, 2008 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Q: Why Didn't DOJ Name Cheney in Stevens Filing?
A: The same reason Dick Cheney getting drunk and shooting somebody in the face doesn't get investigated: Dick Cheney is better than you or me, he is a superior lifeform to whom the laws do not apply. Oh yeah, and he's probably the one behind the anthrax - so I wouldn't fuck with Dick Cheney. Hell, if he shoots his friends in the face with a shotgun, what will he do to his enemies? He has a man size safe... that dude Dick Cheney scares me, that's all I'm sayin...
August 26, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are all kinds of stinky things in this kettle of salmon.
Dick and Uncle Ted manage quid pro quo in all sorts of ways.
I've mentioned the no bid contracts for Alaska Native companies in South America (food service) and in looking for a link to that info I've noticed they have been given multiple no-bids from the Department of Immigration and others, too.
http://liftwhileclimbing.wordpress.com/2007/02/28/immigration-detention-centers-privatize-food-ps-foods-top-reason-for-rioting/
Here's a stunner, Alaska Native Corporations were brought up to snuff by ops from a Halliburton subsidiary.
None of this crooked stuff will be rectified and nobody other than second fiddles will carry any accountability.
Pelosi took impeachment off of the table so that "government could function" and get on with business. Obama has taken prosecution of these people off the agenda, too; unless he sees evidence of something "egregious." (This suggests he hasn't seen anything egregious yet - only the rest of us dumb clucks have noticed.)
Please note that Cheney begins his letter to Alaska reps by telling them that "the Government" is requesting the pipeline. He's "the Government" as it's his letter.
So "business" as usual for we the people.
Yep, Nancy, it's like clockwork. Tick. Tick. Tick. There's "function" for you.
August 26, 2008 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
"When President Obama takes office the first item of business for Vice President Biden - must be a full accounting of all the misdeeds done & crimes committed by "Darth Cheney " and the OVP miscreants - with all discovery being turned over to Special Prosecutor James Comey ." Al in Austex.
I'm with you! I think a large majority of Americans agree the next administration and the DOJ should pursue and prosecute to the full extent of the law.
But, it's not going to happen.
Watch and see. The next administration is going to use the cover that
1)what has happened has happened;
2)it will take up too much time and energy to pursue anyone connected with White House crimes;
3)the country needs to look forward and not to look back;
4)we will pass laws to make certain these kinds of things do not happen again;
5)there are more important things to do, like fix social security, medicare, etc, etc, etc;
6)all other EXCUSES.
Personally, I have lost all confidence in both political partys and in the Congress itself.
August 26, 2008 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has already publicly stated your 1 - 6 options, dar.
August 26, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
dAR ,
I will respectfully disagree - why - because WE will keep the heat on to have a reckoning for all of this criminal crap .
I also believe that VP Biden will be a pleasent surprise to many cynics - the good Senator from Delaware does live and breath the US Constitution & the rule of law ...
"Pessimist may be right in the end , but the optimist has a better time getting there "
Samuel Clemons
August 26, 2008 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink