Don Siegelman

In Testimony, Rove Hedged On Role In Siegelman Prosecution

Zachary Roth | August 13, 2009, 4:50PM

Hat tip to Roger Shuler at the Legal Schnauzer blog for this one...

It didn't get much attention, but the testimony from Karl Rove that was released this week concerned not just the U.S. attorney firings, but also another alleged instance of politicization of the Justice Department: the Don Siegelman prosecution.

Read more »

Harriet Miers

Rove Testifies, But Next Steps In Probe Remain Murky

Zachary Roth | July 8, 2009, 12:36PM

The news that Karl Rove has finally testified before lawyers for the House Judiciary committee about his role in the US Attorney firings and the prosecution of Don Siegelman represents, in one sense, the culmination of years-long battle. That fight has pitted Congress, determined to get to the bottom of the firings, against the Bush White House, which has dragged its feet at virtually every stage. And yet, the path from here to a full public accounting of what happened remains unclear at best.

Rove's deposition put a cap on a protracted legal standoff between the committee, chaired by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) and the Bush White House. Conyers, investigating the late 2006 firing of nine US Attorneys, had first subpoenaed Rove in 2007. Citing executive privilege, the White House refused to let Rove testify. That eventually prompted Congress to hold Rove in contempt, and ultimately to file a lawsuit seeking to compel Rove to testify. A district court ruled in Congress's favor last year, but the White House appealed that ruling, and Rove continued to be a no-show at several committee hearings to which he had been called to testify. Eventually, in March, lawyers for President Bush reached an agreement with the committee, securing Rove's and Harriet Miers' testimony. Even since then, though, it's taken over four months to arrange for Rove's sit-down. (Miers had hers last month.)

Read more »

Karl Rove

Rove Lawyer: Likely Early June For US Attorneys Testimony

Zachary Roth | May 7, 2009, 9:08AM

Karl Rove's long-awaited testimony before Congress about the US Attorney firings will likely occur around early June, according to Rove's lawyer.

Robert Luskin told TPMmuckraker that the Obama White House has been painstakingly sorting through the documents related to the firings, and is providing them to Rove and to the House Judiciary committee simultaneously. It's that process, said Luskin, that's driving the scheduling of Rove's testimony. Luskin stressed that the discussions have been cordial on all sides.

Read more »

Don Siegelman

Seventy-Five Ex-AGs To Holder: Review Siegelman Case

Zachary Roth | April 22, 2009, 5:29PM

Former Alabama governor Don Siegelman is stepping up his campaign to persuade Attorney General Eric Holder to take another look at his case.

Seventy-five former state attorneys general, including ten Republicans, have sent a letter to Holder saying that Siegelman's defense lawyers have raised "gravely troublesome facts" about whether he got a fair trial, reports the New York Times. The letter cites Holder's recent decision to ask that the charges against Ted Stevens be dropped, thanks to prosecutors' failure to turn over evidence to the defense, as required. It argues that there is evidence of similar misconduct in Siegelman's case, and that the charges should similarly be dropped if that's borne out in an investigation.

Read more »

Alaska

Keying Off Stevens Decision, Siegelman Steps Up Push To Have His Own Charges Dropped

Zachary Roth | April 7, 2009, 2:23PM

In the wake of the charges being dropped agaisnt Ted Stevens, is pressure building on the Justice Department to make a similar decision on behalf of Don Siegelman?

A lawyer for the former Alabama governor -- who last week told TPMmuckraker that the misconduct in his own case "dwarf[s]" that in Stevens' -- sent a letter Friday to Attorney General Eric Holder, asking that Holder review the evidence of "serious and pervasive" prosecutorial misconduct in Siegelman's case.

Read more »

Alaska

Siegelman: Stevens Case Is Dropped, So Why Not Mine?

Zachary Roth | April 1, 2009, 7:04PM

For Don Siegelman, DOJ's decision on Ted Stevens just adds insult to injury.

"There seems to be substantial evidence of prosecutorial and other misconduct in my case, that would dwarf the allegations in the Stevens case," the former Alabama governor told TPMmuckraker in an interview moments ago.

Read more »

Don Siegelman

Rove On Siegelman Answers: Check My Website

Zachary Roth | March 9, 2009, 12:31PM

Over the weekend, Karl Rove talked a little more with Fox News about his impending testimony on the US Attorney firings and the Don Siegelman case.

He denied, as he has before, that there had been inappropriate political involvement in the firings. And he even appeared to suggest that, particularly in regard to the Siegelman matter, there was less need for his testimony because he has already responded to questions on his website, Rove.com.

Here's the video:

Don Siegelman

Siegelman: "The Fight Will Continue"

Zachary Roth | March 6, 2009, 3:53PM

Don Siegelman has responded to the appeals court ruling earlier today that upheld most of the charges of which he was convicted.

In a blast email message to supporters, Siegelman wrote:

I am disappointed, but not discouraged. The fight will continue.

He added:

My family and I are deeply appreciative of the outpouring of support and prayers. Your words and actions keep our spirits lifted and our resolve strong. We will get through this, and we will win.

Don Siegelman

Court: No Jury Misconduct In Siegelman Case

Zachary Roth | March 6, 2009, 1:51PM

So what's the significance of the court ruling upholding most of the bribery and corruption charges on which former Alabama governor Don Siegelman was convicted?

Siegelman's appeal wasn't primarily focused on the allegations that his prosecution was politically motivated. (Bill Canary, the husband of Leura Canary, the US Attorney on the case, was a state GOP operative and close associate of Karl Rove, who had run the campaign of Siegelman's gubernatorial opponent.)

Still, today's ruling did touch tangentially on that set of issues. One of Siegelman's arguments on appeal was that there had been inappropriate contacts between jurors and prosecutors during the trial. That claim was of a piece with several allegations of prosecutorial misconduct detailed in an internal DOJ report -- including evidence that Leura Canary kept advising junior prosecutors on the case, even after recusing herself.

But the court appears to have rejected that claim, upholding a district court's opinion that no significant misconduct occurred.

As for Rove's alleged ties to the prosecution -- a witness has given sworn testimony that Rove was involved -- we'll hear his side of the story in the coming weeks, when he sits down with the House Judiciary committee to talk about both Siegelman and the US Attorney firings.

Don Siegelman

Siegelman Appeal: Court Reverses Two Counts, But Upholds Others

Zachary Roth | March 6, 2009, 1:12PM

The court that's hearing Don Siegelman's appeal of his conviction on bribery charges has reversed two of the counts of which the former Alabama governor was found guilty -- but upheld several others.

In an order issued today, a US appeals court reversed two counts related to Richard Scrushy's activities while on the state board to which Siegelman appointed him.

However, it upheld the several charges related to Siegelman's appointment of Scrushy to the board in the first place, which was found to have come in exchange for campaign contributions -- the heart of the case against Siegelman.

The court also ordered a new sentencing hearing, in light of the reversal of the two counts. It's unclear as yet how those reversals will affect Siegelman's sentencing.

We've put in calls to Siegelman and his lawyers, and will be back with more soon.

Don Siegelman

Results Of DOJ Probe Into Siegelman Prosecution To Be Released In 'Near Future'

Justin Elliott | December 23, 2008, 6:04PM

We may be getting some answers in the saga of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman sooner rather than later.

DOJ's Office Of Professional Responsibility expects "in the near future" to complete its probe into allegations of politicized prosecution in the Siegelman case, according to a letter from the DOJ sent to Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) yesterday. The letter also reveals that the OPR is looking into the allegations of improper communications between jurors and members of the prosecution team during Siegelman's trial.

At issue are charges made by a whistle-blower, who worked in the U.S. Attorney's office in Alabama, that were first publicly reported in November after Conyers sent a letter to the DOJ about the matter.

Emails provided by the whistle-blower suggested that U.S. Attorney Leura Canary -- whose husband was a top GOP operative and Karl Rove associate -- continued to be involved in the case after recusing herself. Other emails suggested inappropriate contact between jurors and the prosecution, including expressions of romantic interest by jurors in an FBI agent on the prosecution team.

In an interview with TPMmuckraker last month, an outraged Siegelman called it "astounding" that the alleged impropriety involving the jury had not been revealed to the judge and the defense. There has long been evidence that Siegelman's prosecution on corruption charges was politically motivated.

It was back in July that the DOJ publicly acknowledged the existence of an OPR investigation into whether the prosecution was "selective and politically motivated."

The letter sent to Conyers yesterday gives us a fuller picture of the OPR probe.

Read more »

Don Siegelman

Siegelman Lawyers Make Oral Arguments In Appeal Of Conviction

Zachary Roth | December 9, 2008, 3:37PM

Lawyers for Don Siegelman -- the former Alabama governor who was convicted in 2006 on corruption chrages, despite evidence that the prosecution was politically motivated -- have made their first oral arguments in their appeal.

The Associated Press reports that the the defense lawyers are leading with a different argument, that the conviction should be overturned "partly because jurors communicated with each other during the trial."

It continues:

Siegelman attorney Sam Heldman also told the panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta that prosecutors did not prove Siegelman had a "quid pro quo" agreement to appoint [HealthSouth CEO Richard] Scrushy to a hospital board in exchange for contributions to a state lottery campaign.

As we've told you before, the US Attorney in the case continued to advise prosecutors even after formally recusing herself becasue her husband is a GOP operative and Karl Rove ally.

Don Siegelman

Justice Reopened Probe Of Siegelman Trial

Zachary Roth | December 4, 2008, 5:08PM

The Department of Justice has reopened an investigation into crucial allegations made by a whistleblower in the Don Siegelman trial, according to documents submitted last week by prosecutors in the case.

Siegelman, the Democratic former governor of Alabama, was convicted in 2006 on corruption charges. (He is appealing the conviction). The whistleblower, who works in the US Attorney's office in Alabama, has claimed that, during his trial, there were inappropriate contacts between members of the jury and the prosecution, including messages passed by jurors revealing that some jury members had developed a romantic interest in an FBI agent attached to the prosecution team.

A DOJ investigation of the claims, launched after the whistleblower came forward and carried out by two US Attorneys, concluded that no such contacts had occurred. But in a letter to Attorney General Michael Mukasey last month, Rep. John Conyers, whose judiciary committee has been looking into the issue, questioned the thoroughness of that probe, noting that investigators had not contacted the jurors themselves, or the federal marshals who allegedly passed notes between the jurors and the prosecution team.

In the recent court filing -- which responds to a filing made previously by Siegelman's defense lawyers in connection with his appeal -- prosecutors referred to that DOJ investigation, then added in a footnote:

Out of an abundance of caution, the Department of Justice recently reopened the investigation into this matter in response to concerns raised about the completeness of the investigation ... It remains the case that we are not aware of any improper contacts.

In other words, DOJ appears to agree that Conyers' concerns have merit, and has reopened the investigation into whether inappropriate contacts between jurors and the prosecution team did indeed occur. That could be good news for Siegelman as his lawyers seek to have his conviction thrown out on appeal.

Almost from the start, there has been evidence that the prosecution of Siegelman was politically motivated. Among other things, documents recently surfaced showing that the US Attorney on the case, Leura Canary -- who had recused herself because her husband is a GOP operative and Karl Rove associate who ran the campaign of Siegelman's opponent for governor -- continued to advise prosecutors on the case. DOJ has been notably unwilling to aggressively look into this and other evidence of politicization.

In a recent interview with TPMmuckraker, Siegelman accused Canary of "outrageous criminal conduct."

Don Siegelman

Whistleblower: Aide Reported On Siegelman Case To "Recused" U.S. Attorney "Every Day"

Zachary Roth | November 21, 2008, 6:13PM

The New York Times has more details about the possible continued involvement of the U.S. Attorney in the prosecution of former Alabama Democratic governor Don Siegleman, even after she had formally recused herslef form ghe case because her husband was a GOP operative who had run the gubernatorial campaign of Siegelman's opponent.

The paper reports allegations made in a sworn affidavit by a whistleblower in the office, Tamarah Grimes, about the involvement of U.S. Attorney Leura Canary. Time had reported similar claims earlier this month -- in response to which Siegelman expressed outrage in an interview with TPMmuckraker.

Says the Times:

[I]n her complaint, the Justice Department employee, Tamarah T. Grimes, cited several instances suggesting Ms. Canary maintained a close watch on the case. Ms. Grimes said a legal aide in the office reported on Mr. Siegelman's trial to Ms. Canary or her top deputy "every day, sometimes several times per day by telephone." Once, she observed Ms. Canary "frantically pacing in the executive suite" after a courtroom blowup, "pleading with someone" to get on the phone to "tell Louis he has to control his temper."

Ms. Grimes also disclosed an e-mail message written by Ms. Canary commenting on legal strategy in the case and suggesting to aides that Mr. Siegelman not be allowed to "comment on court activities in the media." Ms. Grimes, who is also in an dispute with the department related to her allegations that the Siegelman prosecution team had harrassed her, cited the affidavit of a former legal aide in the Montgomery office, Elizabeth Jane Crooks, who wrote that "the morning that the trial started, the U.S. attorney herself carried food and beverage over to the courthouse to support the 'Trial Team.' "

The Times also reports that lawyers for Siegelman, whose appeal begins next month in Atlanta court, have made new filings based on Grimes' claims.

John Conyers

Denying Congress Siegelman Docs, DOJ Gets Rumsfeldian

Zachary Roth | November 17, 2008, 5:08PM

The Justice Department is denying a subpoena from House Judiciary chair John Conyers for documents relating to the prosecution of former Alabama governor Don Siegelman.

Conyers is investigating whether the 2006 prosecution on corruption charges of Siegelman, a Democrat, was politically motivated.

In a letter sent Friday to Conyers, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Keith Nelson writes that DOJ won't produce the documents in question, consistent with a department policy of not providing internal prosecution materials to Congress. Nelson makes the contorted argument that even though such documents in fact have been given to Congress in the past, that would not affect the decision on the Siegelman documents, because of supposed uncertainty about the facts of the other cases:

We do not believe that a possible departure from those policies in any given matter, the details of which may not be known or knowable at this point, requires us to set them aside in any other matter.

In response, a Judiciary Committee aide told TPMmuckraker:

Not sure when DOJ starting getting Donald Rumsfeld to write their letters, but I don't think the Committee's subpoena can be put off by some Justice Department Uncertainty Principle that refuses to answer Congressional oversight based on the unknowable nature of facts. In the end, this wrangling over oversight precedent misses the important point here - the Department's reputation is at a low ebb, and they should be working to clear away the clouds over the Siegelman case, not hunkering down and hoping they'll blow over.

At a 2002 press conference, Rumseld famously told reporters, in regard to whether Saddam Hussein had tried to pass weapons of mass destruction to terrorists:

[A]s we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.

Last week, we reported on new documents that have surfaced in the Siegelman case, showing, among other things, that the U.S. Attorney on the case -- who had recused herself because her husband is a top GOP operative who had run the gubernatorial campaign of Siegelman's GOP opponent -- continued to advise prosecutors.

In an interview with TPMmuckraker, Siegelman lamented what he called "outrageous criminal conduct" on the part of the US Attorney's office and main DOJ.

Don Siegelman

Siegelman: New Revelations "More Frightening Than Anything That Came Before."

Zachary Roth | November 14, 2008, 11:34AM

Former Alabama governor Don Siegelman says that new revelations about his prosecution amount to "outrageous criminal conduct in the US Attorney's office and the Department of Justice," and are "more frightening than anything that has come before." And he believes that his case is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of politicized prosecutions by DOJ.

Siegelman was reacting in an interview with TPMmuckraker to the news, first reported this morning by Time, that the US Attorney on his case, who had recused herself because her husband was a top GOP operative who had worked closely with Karl Rove -- and even run the 2002 campaign of Siegelman's gubernatorial opponent -- continued to advise prosecutors on the case.

At times while speaking to TPMmuckraker, Siegelman appeared to have trouble maintaining his composure. He called the news -- which came from a whistleblower in the US Attorney's office who passed on emails and other information to the House Judiciary Commitee -- "another shocking revelation in the misconduct of the US attorneys offices and the DOJ."

The news appears to contradict previous statements from DOJ on the matter. When Congress investigated the affair earlier this year, DOJ had said that the US Attorney, Leura Canary, had recused herself "before any significant decisions ... were made."

Siegelman continued: "If what [the whistleblower] says is true, it's one issue. But the fact that it was never disclosed to the defense or the judge, and then was covered up by DOJ, is a crime, even if what she said wasn't true."

He added: "At every stage of this investigation, either by lawyers or the House Judiciary Committee, DOJ has refused to turn over documents" or otherwise cooperate.

The authenticity of the key emails provided by the whistleblower has not been questioned, according to Time.

Siegelman also said he was shocked by other revelations from the whistleblower, including that one of the jurors had expressed romantic interest in an FBI agent working with prosecutors. He called it "astounding" that this hadn't been revealed to the judge and the defense.

And Siegelman, a Democrat, left no doubt that he believes that the apparent politicization of his prosecution was just one example of many such cases. "If this were isolated to just the middle district of Alabama, it would be shocking enough. But I guarantee this kind of misbehavior has been going on all over the country."

He added: "Whoever is the new Attorney General has to be strong enough to weed out the Karl Rove clones who have been embedded in US Attorneys' offices throughout the United States. If not, it is going to eat at our system for years to come."

At one point, Siegelman turned philosophical: "If I've been put through this for a reason, it's to expose the fact that this is not an isolated incident. I am prayerful that Congress will dig in and demand the truth. These folks have got to be weeded out."

Don Siegelman

Recused US Attorney Kept Advising Siegelman Prosecutors, New Docs Show

Zachary Roth | November 14, 2008, 10:46AM

New documents relating to the prosecution of former Alabama governor Don Siegelman suggest misconduct by the US attorney in the case, and appear to contradict previous statements from the Department of Justice about the matter.

The new revelations, reported by Time, are contained in a letter sent last week by House Judiciary chair John Conyers to Attorney General Michael Mukasey, based on information provided to the committee by a legal aide in the US Attorney's office in Alabama. That information includes emails written by the US Attorney, Leura Canary, showing that she continued to advise prosecutors on the case even after having recused herself because her husband was a top Alabama GOP operative who had worked closely with Karl Rove.

Here's the key excerpt from Time:

In one of Canary's e-mails, dated September 19, 2005, she forwards senior prosecutors on the Siegelman case a three-page political commentary by Siegelman. Canary highlighted a single passage which, she told her subordinates, "Ya'll need to read, because he refers to a 'survey' which allegedly shows that 67% of Alabamans believe the investigation of him to be politically motivated." Canary then suggests: "Perhaps [this is] grounds not to let [Siegelman] discuss court activities in the media!"

Prosecutors in the case seem to have followed Canary's advice. A few months later they petitioned the court to prevent Siegelman from arguing that politics had any bearing on the case against him. After trial, they persuaded the judge to use Siegelman's public statements about political bias -- like the one Canary had flagged in her e-mail -- as grounds for increasing his prison sentence. The judge's action is now one target of next month's appeal.

When Conyers' committee investigated the Siegelman matter earlier this year, DOJ had said that Canary's 2002 recusal had come "before any significant decisions ... were made."

DOJ has already conducted its own inquiry into some of the claims contained in the letter sent by Conyers, and produced a report dismissing them as inconsequential.

Siegelman's supporters and congressional Democrats have long raised suspicions that DOJ's prosecution of Siegelman, a red-state Democrat, was an example of the inappropriate politicization of the department.

Siegelman's appeal of his conviction is set to begin next month in a federal court in Atlanta.

Karl Rove

In Contempt Vote on Karl Rove, the Ayes Have It

Kate Klonick | July 30, 2008, 10:50AM

The House Judiciary Committee has just voted to hold Karl Rove in contempt for failing to respond to a subpoena to face questioning from the Committee on the prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman.

The final vote was 20 ayes and 14 nays. With Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) voting "absolutely, 100% aye."

In a memo on the Full Committee meeting, Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) summarized the facts surrounding Rove's refusal to even appear before the committee and assert executive privilege:

Mr. Rove has refused even to appear before the Committee and assert whatever privileges that he believes may apply to his testimony, relying on excessively broad and legally insufficient claims of "absolute immunity" - never recognized by any court - in declining to appear.

Karl Rove

EXCLUSIVE: Karl Rove Issues New Denials in Gov. Siegelman Prosecution in Written Answers to HJC

Kate Klonick | July 23, 2008, 2:08PM

Karl Rove has categorically denied any involvement whatsoever, either directly or indirectly, in the prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman, in written responses to questions from the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, entered into the Congressional record today and obtained this afternoon by TPMmuckraker.

The questions from Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) and the answers submitted by Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, are available here. More soon.

Below is a sample of the Q&A. Rove's answer is in italics, and is emblematic of his response to all 14 questions raised by Smith.

1. Before former Alabama Governor Donald E. Siegelman's initial indictment in May 2005, did you ever communicate with any Department of Justice officials, State of Alabama officials, or any individual other than Dana Jill Simpson, Esq., regarding Governor Siegelman's investigation or potential prosecution? If so, please state separately for each communication the date, time, location, and means of the communication, the official or individual with whom you communicated, and the content of the communication.

I have never communicated, either directly or indirectly, with Justice Department or Alabama officials about the investigation, indictment, potential prosecution, prosecution, conviction, or sentencing of Governor Siegelman, or about any other matter related to his case, nor have I asked any other individual to communicate about these matters on my behalf. I have never attempted, either directly or indirectly, to influence these matters.

Rove has long refused to comply with a committee subpoena about his role in the Siegelman prosecution, claiming executive privilege. Instead, he's offered to respond to written questions from the Democrat-controlled committee.

So Smith sent Rove's attorney, Luskin, a sycophantic letter on July 15, requesting that he make good on his promise and answer some questions from the committee:

The Committee majority, as before, declined your offer when it was renewed on July 9th. This unnecessarily forced up on your client the Hobson's choice of obeying the limitations placed upon him by the President or obeying the demand of the majority that he appear and testify at a July 10, 2008 hearing before the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law. The forcing of this issue did not obtain information for the Committee. Rather, it simply provoked partisan spectacle and gratuitously exposed your client to potential legal jeopardy.

Luskin, graciously accepted the request, and conveyed his bafflement at the committees' prosecution in his cover letter with his client's answers:

We simply cannot understand the Committee's interest in provoking a confrontation with Mr. Rove while the precise legal issue that is presented by his subpoena is subject to a pending action in District Court. We have struggled instead to find a method by which Mr. Rove could answer the Committee's questions while at the same time respecting the prerogatives of the President. We thank you for providing such an opportunity, and we trust that Mr. Rove's answers will assist the Committee in resolving these utterly unfounded allegations.

Late Update: The majority of the Q&A refutes the affidavit of attorney Jill Simpson, not that that's anything new. As you might remember, Simpson spoke before the HJC in October of last year and testified to Rove's involvement of Siegelman's prosecution. From what I can tell, the documents spend nine pages detailing the ways in which Rove does not know Simpson.

For the record, Karl Rove has never "communicated, directly or directly with Simpson." He does not and has "never known Simpson personally." He has "never worked with her." He is "not the Karl referenced" in the email on the FEMA contract. He never told Simpson to take "compromising pictures" of Siegelman.

Alice Martin

New OPR Investigation of Siegelman Prosecutor

Kate Klonick | July 16, 2008, 6:11PM

We already know that the the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility is investigating the alleged politically motivated prosecution in the case of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman (D). Today, TPMmuckraker independently verified that the OPR is looking into another complaint-- this one for prosecutorial misconduct-- involving the Northern District of Alabama's U.S. Attorney's office, specifically U.S. Attorney Alice Martin.

The new OPR investigation stems from a case involving Axion Corp., which was acquitted in October 2007 of violating the Arms Export Control Act. In an interview with TPMmuckraker this morning, Henry Frohsin, an attorney for Axion Corp., confirmed that they had sent a letter of complaint against Martin to the OPR on May 9. News of the investigation was first reported by Scott Horton, at the American Lawyer, citing anonymous sources.

"We consider this a serious case of prosecutorial misconduct that impacted the rights of the defendant," Frohsin, of the Birmingham office of Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell and Berkowitz, told us, "and we intend to rigorously pursue this matter with authorities at the Department of Justice."

Frohsin also stated that a DOJ attorney had been assigned to look into their complaint.

Martin has been with the Northern District of Alabama U.S. Attorney's office since September, 2001 and originally prosecuted a bid-rigging case against Siegelman, which was thrown out due to lack of evidence. U.S. Attorney Leura Canary started the successful, but disputed, prosecution of Siegelman for federal corruption -- but mysteriously recused herself from the case before it culminated. Both Martin and Leura Canary have been named in the affidavit of Republican lawyer, Jill Simpson, who claimed to have overheard a conversation assuring Siegleman's downfall, that occurred between William Canary, a wealthy Republican donor and Leura's husband, and the son of Siegelman's opponent in the governor race.*

Martin's case against Axion Corp., began in 2007 when the company was charged with violating the Arms Export Control Act by exchanging drawings for a Blackhawk helicopter part to a Chinese manufacturer.

According to an article on the case in the Birmingham News, one of the prosecution's own witnesses stated that the drawings Axion sent to the Chinese were not marked "with customary warnings barring it from being sent to trading partners subject to arms control laws." And according to the defense, the Black Hawk drawings were also available over the Internet-- excluding them from arms-control provisions:

"Hang on, I have not heard about that before," trial judge Johnson said as Alex Latifi lawyer James Barger cross-examined a government witness on the trial's fifth day. "These drawings are on the Internet?"

Despite their crumbling case, the prosecution refused to withdraw. Judge Inge Johnson of the Federal District Court of Birmingham threw out the case, writing that the "evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction."

The defense later filed a claim for compensation from the government-- called a Hyde motion. The defense argued that the Justice Department engaged in wrongful prosecution, and they were entitled to whatever money they spent fighting the prosecution.

And Judge Johnson agreed, ordering the Justice Department to pay the legal expenses incurred by Axion in defending itself from federal prosecution in April 2008.

From the Birmingham News:

Latifi, an engineer trained at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, will be able to collect about $500,000 in expenses, said his Birmingham attorney, Henry Frohsin. Latifi contends that he was selected for prosecution under arms-export laws because of his ethnic background.

And apparently the DOJ immediately started covering its tracks:

Johnson's ruling also said the government has withdrawn its request for a certification from the court endorsing the asset seizure as having had a reasonable cause. That eliminates any chances for Axion's lawyers to demand a hearing to examine the Justice Department's memos, legal papers and investigative methods, said Frohsin, a lawyer with the Birmingham office of Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz.

[Late Update]: This post has been changed from its original form to reflect the accurate roles of Alice Martin and Leura Canary in the prosecution of Don Siegelman.

Michael Mukasey

Biden to Mukasey: "You Really Are an Enigma to Me"

Kate Klonick | July 9, 2008, 3:25PM

There a whole host of issues confronting the Justice Department that remain unaddressed-- overall politicization, the Office of Legal Counsel memos, torture memos, hiring and firing practices, and selective prosecution. But when it comes to hard answers to Congressional Oversight, Attorney General Michael Mukasey dances around the questions, usually deflecting criticism that stems from the Gonzales era.

When Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) requested a listing of the OLC memoranda that the DOJ chose not to review, Mukasey stated that he didn't know that it "would serve anybody's interest" to do so.

When Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) questioned him about why Judith Miller was left in jail, he demurred, stating that it fell into the responsibilities of special counsel.

When Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) wanted to know if anyone was planning on reviewing Gitmo detainees files to see why they were being detained, Mukasey deferred noting the cases were before the D.C. district court.

And when Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) demanded accountability for the loss of valuable civil servants to the politicization of the DOJ Honors Program, the Attorney General stated that it had already been "covered by the OIG report."

But when it was Sen. Joe Biden's (D-DE) turn to ask questions, he took a more straight forward approach, tearing into Mukasey as an "enigma," "acting like you float above up in the ether somewhere."

Don Siegelman

OPR Reaches Out to Siegelman's Camp for Assistance in Investigation

Kate Klonick | July 9, 2008, 12:21PM

The Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility reached out for the first time to the Don Siegelman camp on Monday, asking in a letter to Siegelman's attorney for "information and documents that would assist" them in investigation the allegations that the "selective and politically motivated" prosecution of the former Alabama governor.

Vince Kilborn, Siegelman's attorney, said that he would take the OPRs request for assistance as an opportunity to focus on the reasons behind U.S. Attorney Leura Canary's recusal of herself from the case.

From the AP:

[Kilborn] wants a Justice Department review of the prosecution of former Gov. Don Siegelman to focus partly on the reasons a federal prosecutor in Montgomery stepped aside from the case.

. . .Kilborn said the office, an arm of the Justice Department, should seek documents regarding a decision by U.S. Attorney Leura Canary -- a GOP appointee -- to recuse herself from the prosecution of Siegelman, a Democrat. Canary's husband, William, leads the Business Council of Alabama and has been a Republican political consultant.

A copy of the OPR's letter to Kilborn is here.

Don Siegelman

Prosecutors Drop Siegelman Appeal

Kate Klonick | June 4, 2008, 1:26PM

From the AP:

Federal prosecutors are no longer seeking stiffer prison sentences for former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman and former HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy.

Prosecutors filed a motion this week with the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals asking that their appeals of the sentences be dropped. Their appeal had sought a longer prison term than Siegelman's more than seven-year sentence and Scrushy's almost seven-year sentence.

The longer sentences that had been originally requested in the prosecutors' appeal were 30 years for Siegelman, and 25 years for Scrushy.

Late last week, Siegelman received a surge of support from a bi-partisan group of 54 former state attorneys general when they filed a friend of the court brief with the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in support of Siegelman's appeal of his conviction.

On Monday, Richard Scrushy filed his appeal with the 11th Circuit, requesting the court throw out his conviction in the corruption case that snared him and Siegelman, arguing that there was a lack of evidence and that jurors improperly communicated by e-mail.

Karl Rove

Rove Hides Behind A Newspaper

Andrew Tilghman | May 26, 2008, 5:47PM

Karl Rove is getting more creative -- and less convincing -- with his non-denial denials about the politicization of prosecutions over at the Justice Department.

Asked directly by ABC's George Stephanopolus on Sunday whether he spoke at all with the DOJ officials about the prosecution of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman for corruption, Rove stammered and repeated the phrase: "I found out about Don Siegelman's indictment by reading about it in the newspaper."

The question's been nagging Rove for a year now, and will probably continue to since the House issued a subpoena last week ordering him to testify on Capitol Hill. House Judiciary Committee Chair John Conyers (D-MI) rejected Rove's proposal to submit a written statement to the committee. The White House asserts that executive privilege bars Rove from having to testify.

The question from Stephanopolus was more direct than he's faced in the past. But Rove has issued vague, strangely worded, lawyerly specific answers to essentially the same question before.

About one year ago, when he was first accused of pushing for Siegelman's prosecution, he could only refute the specific detail of an individual conversation he allegedly had with Alabama officials.

"I know nothing about any phone call," Rove told reporters in Alabama in June 2007, before a White House press aide intervened and said, "What he meant to say was that he has no comment."

Don Siegelman

Justice Department Watchdog Confirms Investigation of Political Prosecutions

David Kurtz | May 22, 2008, 3:42PM

At the same time that the House Judiciary Committee voted to issue a subpoena to former presidential adviser Karl Rove today, it released a May 5 letter from the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility to committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) disclosing that the OPR is investigating "allegations of selective prosecution relating to the prosecutions of Don Siegelman, Georgia Thompson, and Oliver Diaz and Paul Minor."

Most reader are already familiar with the Siegelman case. Georgia Thompson, you'll recall, was the Wisconsin state employee whose federal corruption conviction, obtained by Milwaukee-based U.S. Attorney Steven Biskupic, was considered so flawed that it was thrown out by the appeals court immediately after oral arguments.

Diaz and Minor may be less familiar to TPMmuckraker readers. Diaz is a former Mississippi State Supreme Court justice, and Minor is a Mississippi attorney. Their prosecutions by U.S. Attorney Dunn Lampton have been under scrutiny by the House Judiciary Committee as well:

Diaz and his ex-wife, Jennifer, were indicted in 2003 along with prominent Gulf Coast attorney Paul Minor and two former lower court judges on federal bribery allegations. Oliver Diaz was eventually cleared of all charges. The others were not.

Separately OPR is conducting a joint investigation of the U.S. attorney firings with the DOJ inspector general.

U.S. Attorneys

House Judiciary Committee Subpoenas Rove

David Kurtz | May 22, 2008, 2:45PM

So much for all those negotiations:

The subpoena issued Thursday orders Rove to testify before the House panel on July 10. He is expected to face questions about the White House's role in firing nine U.S. attorneys in 2006 and the prosecution of former Gov. Don Siegelman of Alabama, a Democrat.

House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers had negotiated with Rove's attorneys for more than a year over whether the former top political adviser to President Bush would testify voluntarily.

Will Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) do some ass-kicking (his words) now?

Late Update: Rep. Conyers released a statement following the vote to issue the subpoena:

"It is unfortunate that Mr. Rove has failed to cooperate with our requests," Conyers said. "Although he does not seem the least bit hesitant to discuss these very issues weekly on cable television and in the print news media, Mr. Rove and his attorney have apparently concluded that a public hearing room would not be appropriate. Unfortunately, I have no choice today but to compel his testimony on these very important matters."

Later Update: Conyers released the latest correspondence between Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, and the committee, part of a lengthy back-and-forth between the parties. Apparently the subpoena was issued today after Luskin told the committee in a letter yesterday that Rove would not voluntarily testify, essentially ending the negotiations.

Still Later Update: Here's is the cover letter that Cnyers sent Luskin along with the subpoena.

Karl Rove

Conyers on Rove: "Someone's Got to Kick His Ass"

Paul Kiel | May 15, 2008, 2:44PM

House Judiciary Committee Chair John Conyers (D-MI) forgot to keep his voice down when there are reporters present:

Just off the House floor today, the Crypt overheard House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers tell two other people: "We're closing in on Rove. Someone's got to kick his ass."

Asked a few minutes later for a more official explanation, Conyers told us that Rove has a week to appear before his committee. If he doesn't, said Conyers, "We'll do what any self-respecting committee would do. We'd hold him in contempt. Either that or go and have him arrested."

The chairman seems to have been having fire for breakfast lately, pursuing the testimony -- with the threat of a subpoena -- of a number of former administration figures, including Dick Cheney's consigliere David Addington. And of course he's also been pursuing Rove to testify about the prosecution of ex-Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL). Yesterday, in somewhat more diplomatic language, Conyers refused Rove's offer to testify in writing.

Don Siegelman

Conyers to Rove: No

Paul Kiel | May 14, 2008, 2:46PM

House Judiciary Committee Chair John Conyers' (D-MI) response to Karl Rove's offer to testify by letter: Nope.

The committee wants Rove to testify about his role in the prosecution of ex-Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL), but Rove has refused to appear for a hearing, instead offering to speak privately with staff off the record. He modified that offer to testify by letter.

But Conyers says that's a no-go. If Rove is willing to create a record with a letter, he argues, then there's no reason why he shouldn't be willing to sit down with staff for an on-the-record interview. Conyers says the committee is prepared to offer "other possible accommodations, such as providing a list of initial questions that may be asked," but there must be a live interview and a transcript. Conyers again mentions the possibility of a subpoena should talks break down.

So now the ball is in Rove's court.

Read more »

Karl Rove

Rove to Congress: Let's Be Pen Pals

Paul Kiel | May 13, 2008, 1:55PM

The House Judiciary Committee wants Karl Rove to testify about what he knows about the prosecution of ex-Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL). Rove doesn't want to testify. Conyers has threatened to seek a subpoena, and in response, Rove's lawyer made an offer for a compromise yesterday.

It was somewhat of an improvement on Rove's preliminary offer, which was a private interview with no transcript or oath and with strictly defined parameters. The new offer is that he will testify in writing. So it would create a record of his answers, thus creating a clear basis for prosecution if he were to lie. On the other hand, it's hardly the ideal forum for questioning.

Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) has yet to indicate what he thinks of the offer. We'll let you know when he does.

Congressional Subpoenas

Conyers Threatens Subpoenas for DoJ Selective Prosecution Documents

Paul Kiel | May 12, 2008, 11:04AM

Last July, the House Judiciary Committee requested documents from the Justice Department about three cases that seemed to be the worst cases of selective prosecutions undertaken by George Bush's DoJ. In each case, the U.S. attorney had pursued a flawed case that hurt a prominent Democrat.

Since that time, the Department has refused to turn over all but a few documents -- though one of the produced emails showed a DoJ official troubled by one of the cases, the Georgia Thompson prosecution (the other two cases are ex-Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL) and Cyril Wecht). And in a letter on Friday, Conyers warned Attorney General Michael Mukasey that if the Department did not take notice, "we will have little choice but to consider the compulsory process." You can see that letter here.

Conyers included in his letter a three-page chart of requests (pdf) made by the committee that have gone unanswered by the Department. "We very much that the pending requests can be resolved voluntarily," he writes.

Karl Rove

Conyers Threatens Rove with Subpoena for Testimony on Siegelman

Paul Kiel | May 1, 2008, 4:54PM

It's deja vu all over again.

House Judiciary Committee Chair John Conyers (D-MI) says that if Karl Rove won't agree to testify before his committee about his involvement in the prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman (D), then he'll be forced to consider issuing a subpoena. You can read his letter to Rove's lawyer Robert Luskin below.

In response to Conyers' initial request for Rove to testify, Luskin offered to have Rove speak to the committee behind closed doors, without a transcript and not under oath -- the same offer administration lawyers made to Congress in the U.S. attorney firings investigation. And you know where that went: the House is currently suing to enforce those subpoenas after finding former White House counsel Harriet Miers and chief of staff Josh Bolten in contempt of Congress.

Rove was subpoenaed by the Senate Judiciary Committee as part of that investigation and refused to show up to testify. That committee subsequently voted to find him in contempt, but the full Senate never voted on the citation.

Read more »

Karl Rove

Rove's Lawyer: SIKE!!!

Paul Kiel | April 18, 2008, 12:35PM

Oh, man, the House Judiciary Committee must be feeling pretty stupid right now.

Yesterday, the committee followed up on a comment that Karl Rove's lawyer had made to MSNBC, that Rove would welcome the chance to testify to Congress about his role (or lack of one, he says) in siccing Justice Department prosecutors on Don Siegelman.

But it turns out, not so much (sub. req.):

[I]n an interview with Roll Call, [Rove's lawyer Robert Luskin] said that his MSNBC comments were taken out of context.

"Whether, when and about what a former White House official will testify ... is not for me or my client to decide," but is part of an ongoing negotiation between the White House and Congress over executive privilege issues, Luskin said.

That ongoing negotiation, you might remember, is not going so well, since the House has gone to court in an attempt to enforce subpoenas issued last year as part of the U.S. attorney firings probe.

Note: For readers objecting to our spelling of sike, I refer you to the discussion in the comments section to an earlier post.

Don Siegelman

House Panel Calls Rove's Bluff

Paul Kiel | April 17, 2008, 3:00PM

Sure, Karl Rove would looooove to testify to Congress about his role in the Don Siegelman prosecution, his lawyer told MSNBC. So the House Judiciary Committee is following up. From the AP:

The House Judiciary Committee is taking Karl Rove up on an offer to testify about claims that he influenced a federal corruption case against former Democratic Gov. Don Siegelman of Alabama.

The committee on Thursday asked former White House adviser Rove to appear under oath soon. The panel also wants the Justice Department's inspector general to investigate allegations that political motivations drove the Siegelman case and several other federal prosecutions during the Bush administration.

Rove has denied any involvement in the Siegelman prosecution. His attorney told MSNBC earlier this month that Rove would testify on the matter.

Must Read

Today's Must Read

Paul Kiel | April 7, 2008, 9:56AM

After spending almost a year in prison, ex-Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL), released while his appeal to his conviction progresses, appeared on 60 Minutes last night to give his account of the key facts of his case and issue a challenge to Karl Rove. He also admitted, when asked if the prosecution had managed to destroy his political ambitions, "oh, they've accomplished that, I think."

In February, 60 Minutes reported on what has become known as the textbook example of a political prosecution by the Bush administration's Justice Department.

Nick Bailey, the prosecution's star witness in the case, 60 Minutes reported, had been coached to the point where he had to write his carefully recollected testimony over and over again to make sure he got it right. Bailey, a former Siegelman aide, testified at trial that Siegelman had told him that businessman Richard Scrushy had given him a $250,000 contribution to his state lottery campaign, and that all he wanted for it was an appointment on a state health board.

Last night, Siegelman gave his side -- that Scrushy, who had supported Siegelman's opponent, had given the money at Siegelman's request, that there had been no strings attached, and that Scrushy had not even wanted the spot on the board.

Seigelman also challenged Rove to testify to Congress. Rove has given blanket denials to playing any role in the Siegelman case and lately has taken to bashing 60 Minutes for reporting allegations by Dana Jill Simpson, a Republican Alabama lawyer who's testified to being involved in conversations where Rove's role in the prosecution was discussed. In his latest interview with GQ, Rove called CBS "a shoddy operation."

And there was also this memorable quote from the interview, where Siegelman describes watching February's broadcast of the 60 Minutes segment with his fellow inmates:

"Well immediately people were standing up, sayin', 'You got screwed.' And I'd say, 'Well, you know, I think there were a lot of ya'll that got screwed.' And then, one guy stood up and said, 'No, I was guilty. You got screwed.'"

Siegelman will also be appearing on Dan Abrams' show tonight on MSNBC.

Don Siegelman

Siegelman: Rove's Fingerprints "Are Smeared All over The Case"

Paul Kiel | March 28, 2008, 4:18PM

Don Siegelman's first interview out of prison:

Former Governor Don Siegelman of Alabama, released from prison today on bond in a bribery case, said he was as convinced as ever that politics played a leading role in his prosecution.

In a telephone interview shortly after he walked out of a federal prison in Oakdale, La., Mr. Siegelman said there had been “abuse of power” in his case, and repeatedly cited the influence of Karl Rove, the former White House political director.

“His fingerprints are smeared all over the case,” Mr. Siegelman said, a day after a federal appeals court ordered him released on bond and said there were legitimate questions about his case.

Update: Here's video of Siegelman's very brief statement just after leaving prison.

Don Siegelman

Siegelman Leaves Prison

Paul Kiel | March 28, 2008, 1:14PM

In the wake of yesterday's ruling, Siegelman's out and about. From the AP:

Former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman was released on bond from a federal prison Friday, saying he remains upbeat despite serving nine months for corruption.

Leaving the prison in a black sport utility vehicle, he stopped on a road outside the lockup to comment. He wore a ragged shirt that appeared to be prison clothing.

"I may have lost my freedom for awhile, but I never lost faith," Siegelman, 62, told reporters.

Don Siegelman

Siegelman Released from Prison

Paul Kiel | March 27, 2008, 4:44PM

From The Birmingham News:

Former Gov. Don Siegelman will be released from prison, after the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals granted him an appeal bond, the lead prosecutor in the case said.

Acting U.S. Attorney Louis Franklin said he received a courtesy call from the court today. "He's going to be released," Franklin said.

He said he was disappointed but said, "The 11th Circuit has the discretion to do that and I respect that."

Update: I just got off the phone with Hiram Eastland, one of Siegelman's lawyers, who said that today the appeals court had issued a "straightforward" four-page order simply finding that there were, indeed, "substantial questions" raised by Siegelman's appeal. The ruling overruled the controversial finding by the district judge in the case, which had sent Siegelman immediately to prison after his conviction. Eastland said that Siegelman could be released as early as tonight or tomorrow morning at the latest. "We're obviously very gratified that the court gave it that thoughtful consideration," he said. "The governor is coming home!"

Siegelman's release means, obviously, that the House Judiciary Committee won't have to go through the trouble of getting Siegelman released for him to testify.

Don Siegelman

House Panel to Seek Hearing with Jailed Alabama Ex-Gov

Paul Kiel | March 27, 2008, 12:11PM

The House Judiciary Committee will seek to hold a hearing where ex-Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL), currently in a federal prison after conviction on bribery charges, will testify before the committee. A spokesperson for the committee told me that the panel has notified the Justice Department and the Bureau of Prisons of their intent, and that the official request to the Department would be forthcoming. The spokesperson said that the committee was hoping to hold the hearing sometime this spring.

The committee has already held one hearing on Siegelman's case, a hearing that featured one of Siegelman's former defense lawyers, Doug Jones. Jones testified that prosecutors had told him in 2004 after the collapse of one prosecution against Siegelman, that Justice Department officials had ordered them to "take another look at everything." An effort which ultimately resulted in the successful second prosecution -- a prosecution full of holes as 60 Minutes showed in its report last month.

Don Siegelman

Kerry Presses FCC on 60 Minutes Siegelman Blackout

Paul Kiel | March 5, 2008, 10:22AM

Did CBS Alabama affiliate WHNT just have really rotten luck with its equipment during 60 Minutes' segment on ex-Gov. Don Siegelman (D), or did the station actually try to censor the story on Republicans' alleged attempts to use the Justice Department to take out a political opponent?

Michael Copps, a Dem appointee on the Federal Communications Commission, has already begun pushing for an investigation. Chairman Kevin Martin has been noncommittal.

But Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), who sits on the Senate Commerce Committee, wants Martin to know that he'll be keeping an eye on things. In a letter to Martin today, he asks that Martin share whatever findings emerge from an investigation, and adds "I will be monitoring this situation closely."

The full letter is below.

Read more »

Don Siegelman

FCC Commissioner Wants Probe of Siegelman 60 Minutes Blackout

Paul Kiel | March 4, 2008, 11:52AM

You remember the awful luck of WHNT, that CBS affiliate in North Alabama; on the night of the broadcast of 60 Minutes' story on Don Siegelman, just during the Siegelman segment, the station's feed went black. After initially blaming CBS for the error, WHNT revised its story and said that it had in fact been a technological problem at the station.

As questions mounted, the station ran the segment again that night (during the Oscars) and then again at 6 o'clock the following day as penance. But for some reason, a number of people seem disinclined to take them at their word. From Reuters:

A U.S. Federal Communications Commission official is seeking an inquiry into the blacking out of a politically charged segment of the CBS News magazine "60 Minutes" by a local television station in Alabama.

FCC Commissioner Michael Copps said he had asked the chairman of the FCC to open an inquiry into the Feb. 24 incident at WHNT, a CBS affiliate in Huntsville, Alabama, in which civil rights footage from the 1960s was blacked out.

"The FCC now needs to find out if something analogous is going on here," Copps said at a luncheon with media watchdog groups. "Was this an attempt to suppress information on the public airwaves, or was it really just a technical problem?"

Copps is one of two Democratic appointees on the five-member FCC. The chairman of the agency, Kevin Martin, is a Republican.

Martin responded by saying he would look into the matter but has not indicated yet whether he would issue a letter of inquiry to the station, a source close to the commission said.