Here's video from yesterday's House Judiciary Committee hearing on selective prosecutions, where ex-Gov. Don Siegelman's (D-AL) was the marquee case:
As we reported yesterday, Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA) made a hard run at Jill Simpson, the Republican lawyer who's testified that Alabama Republicans often chattered about how the Justice Department and local U.S. attorneys would take Siegelman down. Rep. Artur Davis (D-AL) rose to her defense, and Doug Jones, a former U.S. attorney himself and lawyer for Siegelman, testified that the case took on a new life in 2005 after officials in Washington got involved.
You can see video of former attorney general Dick Thornburgh's testimony here.
Update: This post originally mistakenly identified Davis as a Republican.
A former lawyer for Don Siegelman (D-AL) told the House Judiciary Committee today that his client's case took a "180 degree" turn in 2004, after Justice Department officials in Washington told local prosecutors to take another look at the case -- from top to bottom.
According to former US attorney for Alabama Doug Jones, in the summer of 2004 prosecutors told him the case was going nowhere. By October 2004 the case against Siegelman had been dismissed. But one month later, in a surprising turn of events, Washington officials told local prosecutors to give it another shot, Jones testified today. By early 2005 it was as if the case was starting from scratch, Jones said, calling it "completely stunning" and a "complete reversal" from what the defense had been told just months before.
Jones is certain, he said, that Washington DOJ officials played an "integral" part in the renewed investigation. Jones represented Siegelman at the time, though he did not represent him at trial.
Many Democratic members deferred their time to Rep. Artur Davis (D-AL) during today's Judiciary Committee hearing on allegations of political prosecutions so that he could dig into the case of ex-Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL).
Davis, who is convinced that the system worked against Siegelman for political reasons, took a stand for Republican lawyer Dana Jill Simpson this afternoon, responding to Rep. Randy Forbes' (R-VA) assertion that the Department of Justice should investigate her. Davis argued that there is no evidence directly disproving testimony Simpson gave House investigators.
In fact, Davis points out, Simpson offered evidence that undermines the three affidavits Forbes produced this morning. In her original affidavit and in testimony to House investigators, Simpson claimed that she was on a call in 2002 where a local Republican operative, Bill Canary, said Rove had been in touch with the Justice Department about a Siegelman investigation. The three sworn statements from men who Simpson says were also on that call, the son of Gov. Bob Riley (R-AL), Riley's 2002 campaign lawyer and an Alabama Republican, Terry Butts, all claim that the call never happened. But Davis pointed to the phone record (available here) Simspon gave House investigators showing she had made an 11-minute call to Riley's law offices on the day she claims.
Six months ago, Davis said towards the end of the hearing, he had faith in the justice system. But following the revelations of the U.S. attorney scandal and those from the Siegelman case, he said he's no longer so sure politics didn't come to play an important role in prosecutorial decisions under former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
"I cannot sit here today and say to to you that I have confidence that the system worked in a fair and just manner in this case," Davis said.
This morning the House Judiciary Committee is taking a look at allegations of political prosecutions at the Department of Justice, including the case of former Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL), who has long claimed his party affiliation triggered the charges against him.
Noticeably absent today is the key witness, Dana Jill Simpson, who offered traction to Siegelman's claims that politics were behind his case. Simpson claimed in an affidavit that during a 2002 Gov. Bob Riley (R-AL) campaign phone call, she heard that Karl Rove had a hand in a Siegelman investigation. A few weeks ago, Simpson met with House investigators and offered more expansive testimony about her knowledge of the case.
Alabama Republicans, including Riley's son, Rob Riley, have attacked Simpson's character, particularly for saying more to investigators than she did in her affidavit. Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA) voiced the same complaint this morning during the judiciary hearing, accusing Simpson of "contradicting" herself during the interview with investigators. He went even further, saying that she'd "shredded" her credibility "beyond repair," called her allegations "fabrications" and said that the Justice Department should investigate her.
Update: An excerpt from Forbes' opening statement is below.
Tomorrow morning the House Judiciary Committee will hold a heading on whether politics spurred a series of prosecutions, focusing on the cases of Cyril Wecht and former Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL).
Unfortunately, Dana Jill Simpson, the Republican lawyer who has given sworn statements that implicate Karl Rove in the decision to prosecute Siegelman is not on the witness list.
Siegelman's legal team has long-maintained that the decision to prosecute the former Democratic governor was an assault from Republicans in the state with connections at the Department of Justice. One of Siegleman's former lawyers and former US attorney for Alabama, Doug Jones, is set to testify tomorrow. Jones already told House investigators that in 2004 lawyers in Montgomery mentioned that when the case against Siegelman stalled, they were told by Justice Department officials in Washington to "take another look at everything." Jones gave the same story to The New York Times last month.
Sen. Chuck Schumer's (D-NY) been paying attention to the Don Siegelman case, and today he asked Michael Mukasey to take a look at whether Karl Rove had been instrumental in kick-starting the prosecution.
Mukasey replied that those sorts of issues should be heard first on Siegelman's appeal, which is ongoing. So Schumer took the consolation prize of asking Mukasey to look into it after the appeal. Mukasey agreed.
Mukasey also agreed to look at a study by two university professors (first reported here, by the way) that found an overwhelming tendency for Bush's Justice Department to pursue Democrats over Republicans. (More on that here.) In early May, Democrats asked the Department's inspector general to investigate the study's findings; but there's been no indication such an analysis ever took place.
A House Judiciary panel plans to hold a hearing next Tuesday looking at allegations of politically-motivated prosecutions, including the case of former Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL) and likely the suspicious cases against a Wisconsin bureaucrat that an appeals court called "beyond thin," and against a Democratic coroner in Pennsylvania.
Siegelman's lawyers have long contended that the case stemmed from a political vendetta against the Democratic governor in a Republican-dominated state. Documents recently obtained by Time give traction to this claim, showing that investigators ignored allegations from a state lobbyist of wrongdoing by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and former state Attorney General William Pryor, but still initiated an investigation into Siegelman.
The Republican lawyer, Dana Jill Simpson, who first triggered the national coverage of the Siegelman case with her affidavit implicating Karl Rove in the prosecution, spoke with judiciary committee investigators earlier this month. According to the transcript, Simpson described a second instance that fingers Rove in the Siegelman prosecution. There is no word yet if she will testify at next week's hearing.
Republican lawyer Dana Jill Simpson's affidavit implicating Karl Rove in the decision to prosecute Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL) has taken center stage so far in the ongoing story. But now it looks like it might get some competition.
Son of Gov. Bob Riley (R-AL), Rob Riley, told the Times Daily he plans to sign his own sworn affidavit, countering Simpson's claims.
According to Simpson's sworn statement, Rob Riley participated in a 2002 campaign call where a local Republican operative, Bill Canary, said Rove had been in touch with the Justice Department about a Siegelman investigation. Simpson recently told House investigators that three years later Riley told her Rove had gone directly to DOJ's Public Integrity Section, presumably in 2004, in an effort to stymie Siegelman's 2005 campaign.
Dana Jill Simpson wasn't just worried about Rove's involvement in Gov. Don Siegelman's (D-AL) case. She also testified that she heard about a behind-the-scenes arrangement to ensure which judge would get the case -- a judge sure to "hang" Siegelman.
Simpson said that Gov. Bob Riley's (R) son, Rob Riley, told her in a 2005 conversation -- one where Riley also said that Rove was pushing to have the Justice Department investigate Siegelman -- that Judge Mark Fuller would get the case because Fuller, an active Republican, had a beef with Siegelman over an audit.
We've posted the portion of the interview where Simpson discusses Fuller here.
Q And did he talk to you about Mark Fuller's politics or political work?
In an interview she gave under oath to House investigators, Republican lawyer Dana Jill Simpson expanded on her previous statement about Karl Rove's role in the prosecution of Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL), implicating Rove in using the Justice Deparment to stymie Siegelman's campaigns in 2002 and again in 2005.
In the interview, first obtained by Time and released today by the committee, Simpson explains the context in which she knew what Alabama Republican operative William Canary meant on a campaign conference call in 2002 when he said "Karl" had gotten the Justice Department on Siegelman. Simpson told House investigators that the son of Gov. Bob Riley (R), Rob Riley, had told her about the conversations between Rove and Canary. From the transcript:
But I knew from conversations that I had had with Rob that Bill Canary was very connected to Karl Rove. Additionally, there was some talk -- and that's not in my affidavit -- about Karl had -- about Washington; that Karl had it taken care of in Washington.
Simpson also told investigators that three years later, during Bob Riley's 2005 campaign, Rob Riley told her that Rove had intervened again, this time going directly to the Public Integrity Section of the Department of Justice. The intervention came after the US Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama "messed up" a case against Siegelman to keep him from running, Simpson told investigators. According to the interview transcript, Simpson said Rove made sure all the bases were covered to properly prosecute Siegelman:
Q: Okay. And did Rob give you the name of the person at -- I'm just going to call it Public Integrity -- that he thought he understood Karl Rove had spoken to?
[Simpson]: No, he said it was the head guy there and he said that that guy had agreed to allocate whatever resources, so evidently the guy had the power to allocate resources, you know.
Q: To the Siegelman prosecution?
[Simpson] Yes. And that he'd allocate all resources necessary.
The Birmingham News has some new murky allegations about the lead up to the prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman (D).
Two Birmingham News reporters reviewed a transcript of a recent House Judiciary panel interview of the Republican lawyer, Dana Jill Simpson, who implicated Karl Rove in the prosecution of Siegelman. According to the document, Simpson recounted how the current Alabama governor's son told her about a plan to threaten Siegelman with a prosecution if he didn't back down from contesting the 2001 gubernatorial election.
Simpson also told investigators that her concerns about the impartiality of the judge assigned to Siegelman's case prompted her to write the affidavit implicating Rove.
The article paints Simpson's testimony as contradictory in light of her previous statements, but without reading the entire transcript of the interview, that is unclear. Simpson and Siegelman's lawyers were not quoted in the story. We'll update when we hear from them.
Democrats in Alabama want Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) out of any Judiciary Committee investigations or hearings dealing with the case of former Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL).
The Alabama Democratic Party called for Sessions' recusal today, pointing to a Time story that implicated the senator in an alleged political money laundering scheme that went uninvestigated by the office he used to head. The accusations came from a lobbyist who went on to become the key prosecution witness in the Siegelman case.
Responding to a Time story published last week which paints a murky picture of the lead-up to the prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman (D), Alabama Assistant US Attorney Steve Feaga tried to minimize secret testimony the magazine unearthed.
According to sensitive documents obtained by Time's Adam Zagorin, the Siegelman corruption investigation was sparked by statements made to federal agents by state lobbyist Lanny Young. The documents also revealed that the same lobbyist implicated two other powerful Alabama political figures in bribery schemes, both Republicans--Sen. Jeff Sessions and Session's successor as attorney general, William Pryor, who is now a federal judge--but no effort to investigate those claims was ever initiated.
Feaga, the prosecutor on Siegelman's case explained that Young's testimony was only relevant in Siegelman's case -- and not in the cases of the two Republicans -- because: "At the time Lanny was detailing having made contributions to other public officials, he characterized these contributions as legitimate. There was no understanding he would get something for them."
And what were these legitimate contributions? From Time:
Early in the investigation, in November 2001, Young announced that five years earlier, he "personally provided Sessions with cash campaign contributions," according to an FBI memo of the interview. Prosecutors didn't follow up that surprising statement with questions, but Young volunteered more. The memo adds that "on one occasion he [Young] provided Session [sic] with $5,000 to $7,000 using two intermediaries," one of whom held a senior position with Sessions' campaign. On another occasion, the FBI records show, Young talked about providing "$10,000 to $15,000 to Session [sic]. Young had his secretaries and friends write checks to the Sessions campaign and Young reimbursed the secretaries and friends for their contributions."
Sure, this isn't a cash-for-favor situation, but as Time notes, such an alleged arrangement could still be illegal political money laundering.
Substantive new evidence makes it look even more likely that politics played a role in the decision to prosecute Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL) on corruption charges.
Siegelman supporters have long claimed that Siegelman was targeted for being a successful Democrat in a largely Republican state.
According to documents obtained byTime, in 2002 a lobbyist and trash dump developer named Lanny Young told investigators, including representatives from the local US attorney's office, the Justice Department's public integrity unit and the Republican attorney general's office, that he'd given illegal gifts and contributions to Siegelman and a number of other powerful Alabama politicians. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Session's successor as attorney general and now federal judge William Pryor (R) were named.
One of Young's contracts with the state triggered the Siegelman investigation. Siegelman was acquitted on 25 of 32 counts, with about half of the charges stemming from Young's testimony.
Notably, none of the Republicans named by Young were ever investigated, reports Time's Adam Zagorin, let alone prosecuted. Zagorin also points out that "several of the lawyers involved in the Siegelman investigation were from Pryor's office and had worked for Sessions as well when he held the post." But instead of raising any issue of a possible conflict of interest, the investigators "chose not to recuse themselves but to simply ignore the allegations."
The documents obtained by Time are a sensitive portion of materials requested by the House Judiciary Committee -- but which have been so far withheld by the Department of Justice.
National coverage of the Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL) controversy has centered on Republican lawyer Dana Jill Simpson's affidavit, but today The New York Timesraises questions about another aspect of the case: the independence of prosecutor Lois V. Franklin.
Franklin took over the case after US attorney Leura Canary recused herself because of her husband's ties to the Republican Party and Karl Rove. Franklin has claimed a startling degree of independence from the Department of Justice and Canary.
The New York Times points to some unresolved issues there:
Yet questions about the Siegelman case persist, including about whether Mr. Franklin played the decisive role he says he did, and not just among the former governor’s supporters.
For one thing, the prosecution of a high official like a governor is nearly always undertaken under the watchful eye of Justice Department officials in Washington, former government lawyers say.
One of Mr. Siegelman’s former lawyers, G. Douglas Jones, former United States attorney in Birmingham, says that at a crucial moment in 2004, when the Siegelman investigation seemed to be flagging, he was told by government prosecutors in Montgomery that the “folks in Washington said, ‘Take another look at everything.’ ”
Referring to a unit of the Justice Department, Mr. Jones said, “There is no question but that the Public Integrity Section was intimately involved.”
The Justice Department doesn't think much of Dana Jill Simpson's affidavit implicating Karl Rove in the decision to prosecute former Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL), according to a letter Paul discussed yesterday. In the letter, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian Benczkowski took a number of swipes at Simpson's credibility.
Simpson, an Alabama native and Republican lawyer, signed a sworn statement this spring saying she was part of a Gov. Bob Riley (R-AL) campaign conference call in 2002 discussing how to get Siegelman to concede the close election. Simpson said that one caller, Bill Canary, offered that his "girls would take care of him" -- referring to his wife Leura Canary, a US attorney in Alabama, and her friend, another US attorney in the state. Canary also assured the group that he and Rove had previously discussed Siegelman and that Rove made sure the DoJ was pursuing the former governor.
Today The New York Times gives a rundown of the controversy surrounding ex-Gov. Don Siegelman's (D-AL) prosecution, with the Republican lawyer at the center of the controversy set to trek to Washington to meet with a House Judiciary panel Friday.
The Op-Ed draws a comparison between Siegelman's prosecution and the case against Georgia Thompson, a civil servant in Wisconsin whose corruption case was thrown out on appeal because the court found the evidence against her to be "beyond thin."
The Bush administration insists that the United States attorney scandal is a non-scandal. But the Siegelman and Thompson cases are a reminder that when the power of the state to imprison people is put in the wrong hands, lives can be ruined and democracy can be threatened. Since the Justice Department refuses to appoint an independent prosecutor to examine whether these and other cases were politicized, Congress must provide the scrutiny.
The Republican lawyer who implicated Karl Rove in the decision to prosecute former Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL) will speak privately -- and under oath -- with House Judiciary Committee staff next week about what she knows.
The lawyer, Dana Jill Simpson, gave support to Siegelman's argument that his prosecution and subsequent conviction stemmed from a political vendetta against him.
When assistant US attorney Steve Feaga tossed a cryptic obstruction of justice accusation at Gov. Don Siegelman (D) earlier this week, what was he talking about?
I spoke with Siegelman's lawyer Vince Kilborn this afternoon. He said he isn't sure what Feaga meant by the obstruction comment, but that prosecutors did approach him about six weeks ago with a reduced-sentence offer if Siegelman cooperated in another case (though, not several cases as Feaga insinuated). Siegelman decided not to testify against Tuscaloosa physician Phillip Bobo in a Medicaid fraud case, despite the "attractive" prospect of a reduced sentence. Bobo was acquitted by a jury on Aug. 20. Kilborn pointed out, however, that opting not to cooperate with prosecutors is not obstruction of justice. So the mystery continues.
Yesterday we promised to check out the obstruction of justice accusation a prosecutor launched at jailed former Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL).
It's a puzzling accusation, as the AP's report made clear. Was assistant US attorney Steve Feaga pointing to Siegelman's media campaign of claiming his case was politically motivated? Feaga said Siegelman and his co-defendant (who have both been convicted of corruption charges) are "reaching out from their jail cells" trying to sway events. When asked for specifics, Feaga said "it should be obvious to anyone who has been paying attention."
Randall Eliason, a former prosecutor for the US Attorney's office in Washington, DC, told me the obstruction of justice charge is probably not related to Siegelman's PR campaign. Eliason said a prosecutor must show there is a pending proceeding in order to establish obstruction.
"It's pretty unlikely that the allegation would be that they are obstructing their own case by talking to the media," Eliason told me. Siegelman is waiting on an appeal, but Eliason said the appeal proceedings will be based on the trial record, not subsequent media coverage.
Former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman (D) has already been convicted of a crime, and he and his co-defendant are in jail pending an appeal of their convictions. But according to a prosecutor on the case, Siegelman's efforts at getting his conviction overturned have crossed the line into obstruction of justice.
Speaking during a hearing for former Siegelman aide Nick Bailey, Assistant U.S. Attorney Steve Feaga said Siegelman and Scrushy had been doing things from behind bars to "manipulate events" - acts that could be considered a crime.
Feaga did not provide details to U.S. District Judge Mark Fuller, and he would not elaborate in an interview outside the courtroom.
"It should be obvious to anyone who has been paying attention" to what is going on, Feaga said, "and it will be more obvious in the coming months."
Siegelman, of course, has been arguing that the Republican U.S. attorney, at the prodding of Karl Rove, went to extraordinary lengths to secure a conviction against him, a popular Democratic former governor. Presumably Feaga is referencing the Siegelman legal team's attempts to drum up coverage of their claim that the original prosecution was politically motivated. But is that illegal? We'll have some perspective on that shortly.
Even though Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is moving on, Rep. Artur Davis (D-AL) will still push for a review of former Gov. Don Siegleman's (D-AL) case to investigate whether it was politically motivated, he told the Birmingham News:
"That fact that [Gonzales] is leaving should not deter Congress from continuing to dig into claims of selective prosecution or abuse of power," Davis said in an interview a few minutes after Gonzales announced his resignation.
Davis and three other members of the House Judiciary Committee have asked the agency to turn over records related to criminal cases brought against three people, including former Gov. Don Siegelman. Those documents have not yet been provided.
"The public still has a right to know just how politicized the Department of Justice became in the course of this presidency," Davis said.
Siegelman was sentenced to seven years in prison after a jury convicted him of granting a health care executive a seat on a public board in exchange for a contribution to an education lottery fund. Questions about the genesis of the case cropped up when a Republican lawyer signed a sworn affidavit implicating Karl Rove in the decision to prosecute the former Democratic governor.
Members of the House Judiciary Committee want the Justice Department to hand over documents, among them correspondence with the White House, related to three controversial prosecutions, including that of former Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL).
In a letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, three Democratic House Judiciary members, including chairman Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), voiced their concern that the Bush Administration's Justice Department has pursued and ignored prosecutions based on politics.
The letter names three specific cases they want to investigate. In addition to Siegelman's case, the other two are: former Wisconsin state procurement officer Georgia Thompson whose conviction was overturned by the Seventh Circuit and prominent Democrat and coroner Cyril Wecht who was accused of misusing his official staff (similar allegations against local Republicans were not investigated).
Siegelman's Lawyer: D.C. Justice Officials Played "Integral" Role in Prosecution
Davis: Phone Records Support GOP Lawyer's Story on Siegelman Case
Siegelman Prosecutor: Money Laundering Isn't a Crime
Siegelman Lawyer Stumped By Obstruction Charge
