Jury selection began today in the retrial of David Safavian, the Jack Abramoff crony who served as the top procurement official in the Bush White House.

Safavian was convicted in 2006 of obstructing justice and lying to investigators about his work with Abramoff, as well as concealing information about a golf junket he took to St. Andrews, Scotland with Abramoff and convicted former GOP congressman Bob Ney, among others. But that conviction was thrown out on appeal. He was then re-indicted in October, on charges of obstructing justice, lying on a financial disclosure form and providing false statements to various investigators.

The Washington Post reports that, in addition to the standard questions, the judge in the trial today asked potential jurors whether they played any golf. It's unclear whether that would increase or decrease their chances of being picked.

Regular readers may remember that Safavian's alleged love of golf was a major focus of the original trial.

The Abramoff corruption probe has already snared one GOP Congressman, Bob Ney, and implicated a few more, most prominently Rep. John Doolittle of California. But could there be another to add to the list: Rep. Heather Wilson of New Mexico?

An examination by TPMmuckraker of the indictment of former Jack Abramoff associate Kevin Ring, filed yesterday, suggests that Wilson's office was tied in to Abramoff's corruption network at a level not previously known. And John McCain's 2005 investigation into Abramoff's fleecing of Indian tribes, which McCain conducted as chair of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, made no mention of that fact.

The Ring indictment contains the following statements from prosecutors:

On or about January 30, 2003, a lobbyist at Firm B emailed a staffer for the New Mexico tribe's U.S. Representative, "Sorry I couldn't hangout last night. I greatly appreciate your taking the time to han[g]out with the [New Mexico tribe]. It meant a lot to [K]evin and I [sic]. BTW, you should be all set for the [Los Angeles] Clippers [basketball] game."

And:

On or about February 14, 2003, a lobbyist at Firm B forwarded an email from the staffer for the New Mexico tribe's U.S. Representative to defendant RING in which the staffer had written, "How did Kevin' s meetings with the [New Mexico tribe] go? If you guys lose that contract I would be disappointed."

And:

On or about March 4, 2003, a lobbyist at Firm B emailed defendant RING, "I'm going to kill [the New Mexico tribe] with [its U.S. Representative] if we don't get hired."

And:

On or about March 7, 2003, a lobbyist at Firm B emailed defendant RING, "[ The staffer for the New Mexico tribe' s U.S. Representative] is going to be in the meeting with [the New Mexico tribe] when they come to town. He's going to give the 'are you guys staying with [Firm B] this cycle? They did a great job on . . . legislation . . . and really cleared the path for you guys . . . . . yadda yadda.' He's gonna gather as much intel as possible for us."

It's clear from identifying details in the indictment -- which refers to a New Mexico Indian tribe that hired Abramoff's firm, Greenberg Traurig around March 2002 -- that the tribe is the Sandia Pueblo Indians, who are represented in Congress by Wilson. So in other words, a staffer for Wilson was actively involved in helping Ring and Greenberg Traurig (Firm B, where Ring worked at the time), retain their contract to represent the Sandia Indians. And Ring's Greenberg partner -- most likely Abramoff himself, but certainly a member of Abramoff's team at Greenberg -- believed he had the power to affect decisions made by Rep. Wilson concerning the tribe's interests.

A spokesman for Rep. Wilson declined to comment on the information in the indictment.

We already knew that Wilson had accepted political contributions from both Abramoff himself and David Safavian, a former Abramoff crony and Bush administration official convicted for obstruction of justice as part of the Abramoff probe. But the information in the indictment suggests that her office worked with Abramoff more closely that has yet been reported.

Wilson has been a stalwart supporter and prominent surrogate for John McCain, painting him as a crusader against Washington corruption. Just last night, she appeared on MSNBC's Hardball to make the case for him, and last week she told NPR: "John McCain has chosen a reformer ... to be his running mate and I think that's a perfect complement to who he is and what he's done in his life."

Wilson may have good reason to hold the GOP nominee in high regard. In his 2005 Senate investigation, McCain had access to the Greenberg Traurig email trove, presumably including the ones cited by prosecutors in the Ring indictment highlighted above. But his final report generally avoided focusing on members of Congress, and omitted any mention of Wilson.

In June, an appeals court granted Jack Abramoff crony David Safavian a new trial.

Safavian, the former chief of staff for the General Services Administration, was convicted and sentenced to 18 months in prison for lying to investigators about his relationship with Abramoff, but the sentence was put on hold while the appeal played out.

Today, he was given a new trial date, set for December.

From the Washington Post:

Former White House aide David H. Safavian, whose lying and obstruction convictions connected to the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal were tossed out by a three-judge panel in June, will go back to court in December for a new trial, according to court documents.

From the AP:

A federal appeals court has ordered a new trial for a former Bush administration official convicted in the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal.

David Safavian, former chief of staff for the General Services Administration, was convicted of lying to investigators about his relationship with Abramoff. He was sentenced to 18 months in prison but the sentence was put on hold while the appeal played out.

He did cry at his sentencing.

With a federal judge's order to serve 30 months in a minimum security prison, former Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH) has received the longest sentence to date in the Jack Abramoff scandal.

He doesn't face much competition -- yet. Only one other figure has been sent to do time, former White House official David Safavian. He was sentenced to 18 months for four counts relating to obstructing the Abramoff investigation. (He's currently living at home, pending appeals.) Roger Stillwell, a former Interior Department official, was recently sentenced to 24 months' probation for accepting illegal gifts from Abramoff.

Of course, Ney won't hold the record for long. When Abramoff and his key co-consipirators are sentenced, they will likely receive several years apiece. Their sentencings have been delayed because they have agreed to cooperate with prosecutors.

When he's told them everything, prosecutors are expected to recommend a sentence of between 9 1/2 and 11 years for the disgraced GOP superlobbyist himself. Abramoff business partner and confidante Michael Scanlon faces five years in prison and millions in fines once he tells all; former lobbyist (and onetime Ney chief of staff) Neil Volz could also face five years, though he'll likely get far less. Tony Rudy, another former Abramoff associate, will likely face a sentence of two to two-and-a-half years, depending on his cooperation.

A number of readers have sent in tips to help the folks at Powerline, who recently admitted to having trouble remembering administration officials (beyond Scooter Libby) who had been accused of corruption or resigned in the face of scandal.

How could you foresake us! cry our old pals Claude Allen, David Safavian, Brian Doyle. Who could forget former FDA commissioner, Lester Crawford? After the jump, you'll find our partial (but fast-growing) list. If we're missing a name, please send it along!

Read more »

Former White House official David Safavian, sentenced to 18 months in prison for crimes related to his relationship with Jack Abramoff, isn't headed to the pokey quite yet. A federal judge has decided to let him remain free until his appeals have been heard, GovExec.com reports:

Appeals can take several years, so Safavian's sentence of 18 months -- if upheld -- will not begin until after that ruling.

In his opinion granting the request, U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman cited the section of U.S. Code that says that if a person is not likely to flee, and the appeal raises a substantial question of law likely to result in a reversal, new trial or different sentence, then the judge can grant a request for release on bond.

David Safavian, the former White House official convicted for lying to ethics officials and Senate investigators about his ties to Jack Abramoff, is up for sentencing today.

Newsflash! He doesn't want to go to jail. He actually wept while he asked the judge for leniency.

The problem, as the judge sees it, is that despite being convicted, Safavian has refused to admit any responsibility for his actions. He's not really guilty. He was duped! Just like Bob Ney.

From the AP:

At sentencing Friday, Safavian apologized for giving the appearance of impropriety but said it was not fraudulent.

"Yes, Jack Abramoff was a friend but he wasn't my coconspirator and I wasn't his," Safavian said. "There was no conspiracy to defraud anyone, least of all the taxpayers."

Safavian didn't say, however, what U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman wanted to hear. Early in the hearing, Friedman told defense attorneys he was leaning toward a sentence of 15-21 months in prison and was not convinced Safavian had accepted responsibility for his crimes.

"Get up here and tell me, 'I agree I concealed. I agree I obstructed justice,'" Friedman said earlier in the day. "I don't believe he's done that."

Safavian's sentence should be in shortly.

Update: The sentence comes down: 18 months in prison.

Two sitting congressmen and an administration official close to President Bush were among those who recently penned letters in support of David Safavian, the former administration official recently convicted for lying to ethics officials and Senate investigators about his ties to Jack Abramoff.

As part of a defense motion seeking probation or house arrest instead of jail time, Safavian recently offered letters from family members, friends, and others testifying to his good character. Prosecutors have asked that Safavian be sentenced to three years in prison.

Rep. Chris Cannon (R-UT), for whom Safavian worked as chief of staff, wrote that Safavian had worked "tirelessly" for him, according to an excerpt from the letter in the defense motion. Cannon's spokesperson declined to release the entirety of the letter, saying that the excerpt "speaks for itself."

Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) offered a testimonial about Safavian's attention to the transfer of a lighthouse in Jones’ district during Safavian's term as chief of staff of the General Services Administration. Jones' spokeswoman said that Jones had been asked to write the account and offered the full text of the letter, which is after the jump.

Clay Johnson, the Deputy Director for Management at the Office of Management and Budget, and also one of President George W. Bush's oldest friends, described Safavian as a "real professional" who “recused himself at even the slightest possibility of the appearance of a conflict of interest.”

Read more »

Prosecutors have asked that David Safavian get three years in prison for lying to ethics and Senate investigators about his ties to Jack Abramoff.

Safavian, a former Bush administration appointee, was convicted back in June -- the first conviction in the Abramoff investigation. Safavian's lawyer has asked that he serve no prison time, arguing instead for home detention and/or community service. He's due to be sentenced October 27.

Government Executive's Kimberly Palmer reports that the former Abramoff golfing buddy could get a bad bump for "obstructing justice" during his trial:

David Safavian, the former head of the Office of Management and Budget's procurement policy shop convicted in June of obstructing justice and making false statements, has been granted a delay in his sentencing.

The sentencing was originally scheduled for Oct. 12, but will be moved to Oct. 27. Safavian was convicted on three counts of making false statements and one count of obstructing an investigation. The case revolved around his dealings with former lobbyist Jack Abramoff while Safavian was at the General Services Administration, where he served as chief of staff.

Prosecutors apparently are seeking a two-point sentence enhancement -- which would add to the recommended prison time -- by arguing that Safavian obstructed justice during his trial. Safavian testified at his trial that he did not lie, make false statements, or obstruct an investigation, but the jury found him guilty of doing those things.

A federal judge denied an appeal from former White House appointee David Safavian, who was convicted in June of four felony counts arising from the Jack Abramoff scandal.

"This Court concludes that there are no grounds for granting either defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal on any of the counts for which he was convicted," wrote Judge Paul Friedman, "or his motion for a new trial."

Safavian is scheduled for sentencing next month.

David Safavian, who was convicted for lying about his relationship with Jack Abramoff to ethics officials and Senate investigators, is appealing.

It's not every day that a former White House official is convicted on felony charges. But yesterday's verdict was far more significant than that.

For months, the Abramoff investigation has hummed quietly along, showing up in headlines only for the occasional occasional guilty plea from a former lobbyist and staffer. But bagging David Safavian is ample encouragement to put the pedal to the metal. We're talking Tokyo Drift, baby.

That's the consensus not only among legal experts, but also possible targets in the case. From The New York Times:

"Safavian was a little fish," said a lawyer for a former government official who has also become entangled in the investigations of Mr. Abramoff. The lawyer, who was granted anonymity to speak because he did not want to bring unnecessary attention to his client, added, "I think this makes it easier for the prosecutors to ask permission at the Justice Department to go for the bigger fish."

So who are those bigger fish?

Read more »

The jury in the Safavian trial woke up this morning and decided to make life hard for us reporters. And to send David Safavian to jail.

After five days of deliberations that seemed to be as stop-and-go as the Beltway during rush hour, the jury slipped a note to the judge this morning around 9:30 which said they had made up their minds.

I'm not sure a single reporter was there when the verdict -- guilty on four of five counts, generally following expectations -- was read. It was sent to reporters via email, and we clambered to the courthouse to get a few questions to the lawyers and jury before they disappeared.

I may have been the last on the scene. By the time I made it to the sixth floor of the courthouse annex, where the trial had been held, a clutch of reporters was waiting. Moments later, Safavian's defense attorney, Barbara Van Gelder, emerged from the courtroom. TV and radio reporters asked her if she'd take questions in front of the building -- where they had their mics and cameras set up -- and she agreed.

The clutch followed her to the bank of elevators, politely asking Van Gelder questions about the trial. An elevator arrived and she got in. The clutch followed, wedging themselves en masse into the car. Not being a big fan of crowded elevators, I let them go without me and waited for another one.

As the next elevator arrived, who came around the corner but Safavian himself, with his wife, members of his defense team and a couple others I didn't recognize. In his by-now-trademark sober suit, he looked miserable. I had heard through the grapevine that he had privately been preparing himself for a guilty verdict, but in the courtroom he usually looked upbeat -- smiling, making friendly jokes, even breaking out into a small dance at one point.

He wasn't smiling or joking anymore. He had deep circles under his eyes. He looked me in the face as he got on the elevator. I realized it had been less than an hour since he learned he was facing a fate he had spent months of his life and many thousands of dollars trying to avoid.

Read more »

There's one simple thing to take away from the verdict against David Safavian: for a player in Washington, gullibility is no defense. It's Washington; savviness is the name of the game. Safavian tried wide-eyed innocence -- let's call it the Forest Gump defense -- and it didn't fly.

Safavian swore under oath that Abramoff had flown him to Scotland on a golf junket as a buddy, essentially, and not as his inside man, his "champion" at the General Services Administration. And when Abramoff told him that his share of the lavish, week-long trip amounted to $3,100, he didn't think anything of it, because Abramoff was his pal.

Naivete didn't play well for Safavian, a former lobbyist and high-ranking official. The heart of the trial was his cross-examiniation, when prosecutors vividly illustrated the delusion necessary to construe a lobbyist's gifts as anything other than a bid for influence and access. Safavian testified that he just didn't see it that way. And the jury didn't believe him.

That has to be bad news for future targets of the Abramoff investigation, such as Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH), who will eventually find himself, most likely, attempting to explain to a jury how he, in Forest Gump style, just happened to wander his way into a relationship with Abramoff.

Finally, the jury reached a verdict on David Safavian - guilty on four of the five counts.

From the AP:

Safavian was charged with two counts of obstructing justice during investigations into the Scotland trip by the GSA inspector general and the Senate Indian Affairs Committee. He also was charged with three counts of making false statements or concealing information from GSA ethics officials, a GSA inspector general investigator and a Senate investigator.

The jury found Safavian guilty of obstructing the work of the GSA inspector general and of lying to a GSA ethics official. It also convicted him of lying to the GSA's Office of Inspector General and of making a false statement to the Senate Indian Affairs Committee. He was acquitted of a charge of obstructing the committee's investigation.

Update: Justin is down at the courthouse and will be posting later on what he saw and heard.

By the looks of this AP report, it looks like the Safavian jurors have decided on three counts, and are still debating two:

The judge provided jurors with guidance on how to weigh a key piece of evidence in the last two of five criminal charges against Safavian, the former chief of staff at the General Services Administration. His trial is the first to arise in the Abramoff influence peddling scandal.

The jury in the David Safavian trial can't decide if he's guilty or innocent, but they are good at getting on each other's nerves.

In notes from jurors to the judge, one complains that Juror Number Three has admitted to having outside conversations about the trial.

Juror Number Three, meanwhile, complains to the judge that other jurors are making annoying cell phone calls during deliberations.

Settling both scores in a single stroke, the judge dismissed Juror Number Three.

Read the notes here. (Thanks to Reader DK.)

Another day closes, and the jury in the trial of former GSA official and Abramoff golf-buddy David Safavian has not have reached a verdict. They've got to decide on five counts of obstruction of justice and making false statements to investigators. Conventional wisdom has it that a long deliberation is a sign that the jury will acquit. But still, five counts -- can't be easy. Maybe they're just being very thorough.

OK, no more golf references, I promise.

But after day one of the jury's deliberations, we still have no verdict.

That overzealous juror has been sent home, and the jury in the David Safavian trial has gone back to deliberating his fate.

No verdict today, ladies and gentlemen. No -- it seems that one of the jurors had been discussing the case outside the courtroom, a big no-no, and now the two sides are in a fight over whether to toss her.

From the AP:

Prosecutors argued that a female juror should be dismissed because she disregarded the judge's instructions on several occasions and told other jurors Tuesday she had discussed the costs of a golf trip to Scotland with her father. Safavian's expenses for the August 2002 trip arranged by Abramoff have been an issue in trial testimony.

The defense opposed replacing the juror with an alternate and said U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman should just give jurors a stiff warning to stop all outside discussions.

U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman, who questioned the juror, decided he wanted to study similar cases before ruling on the government's dismissal motion. He said he would rule Tuesday morning, and asked the jury to return then.