In 2002, Alabama's Democratic Governor Don Siegelman demanded a recount when Republican opponent Rob Riley unofficially won by 3,195 of 1.3 million votes (AP/Fox). Riley opposed the recount and ultimately won.
Republican lawyer Dana Jill Simpson recently described a 2002 conference call with Riley's advisers, aiming to get Siegelman to withdraw the election challenge. The gist of Simpson's statement:
"William Canary, a senior G.O.P. political operative and Riley adviser... said 'not to worry about Don Siegelman' because 'his girls' would take care of' the governor....'His girls' was a reference to his wife, Leura Canary, the U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Alabama, and Alice Martin, the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Alabama" (Time/Truthout).
Simpson swore Mr. Canary said that Karl Rove "had spoken with the Department of Justice" about "pursuing" Siegelman, through two of Alabama's U.S. attorneys. In 2006, Siegelman was convicted on corruption charges.
I don't know if he did the deeds, because my mind-reading powers flew north for the summer to avoid Florida's humidity. Whether he's guilty or not, this issue is getting interesting....
William Canary (the GOP operative and US Attorney's husband) worked in the White House for President Bush's father and reportedly has "close ties" to the current President Bush's top adviser Karl Rove. Given Jill Simpson's recent statements, people are concerned that the Justice Department may have gone after Siegelman primarily for political reasons. Joshua Micha Marshall pointed out the following:
"Siegelman was acquitted on 25 counts and convicted on seven. With those charges, Siegelman didn't pocket any money himself but rather, in the words of the Times, persuaded a wealthy businessman 'to pay $500,000 to retire the debt of a political group that had campaigned to win voter approval for a state lottery.'
Compare this to Duke Cunningham, perhaps the most brazen and audacious bribetaker in recent decades. Duke to[ok] cash payments from multiple federal contractors in exchange for securing defense contracts. Duke got eight years and four months in prison .... Nothing Siegelman was convicted of seems even remotely in Duke's league and yet they want to give him a sentence almost four times as long?"
Note that Siegelman likely did benefit from having friends help pay the pro-lottery group's debt, because Siegelman had co-signed a loan for the group (New York Times). Still, Marshall's point about potentially slanted justice is worth considering in light of the fired U.S. Attorney scandal. (See BNP's scandal overview).
This month's Harpers cites the chilling example of the prosecution of a Wisconsin civil servant that:
"had the subtext of attempting to bring down a Democratic governor.... That case also produced a conviction, but was unanimously reversed by the Seventh Circuit, with its prominent Reaganite chief judge calling the whole case “preposterous.” And as the facts of the case were spelled out, any reader wonders not just how a jury could convict, but how and why a prosecutor would bring such a charge."
See a few other blogs' coverage of this increasingly entangled issue:
- DailyKos
Comments