Deceit In The Desert: Arizona GOP Stoops To New Low

Thomas and Evil Sheriff Joe

Thomas and Sheriff Joke

Hello from the state that has brought you John McCain. Sorry about that. You would think that would be enough shame for the Arizona Republican Party. Sadly, they have much more to offer. Reprehensible does not start to describe the efforts of the Arizona GOP and their poster boy of hate, Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas. You may remember Thomas, he was behind the blatantly unconstitutional arrest and attempted prosecution of the two publishers of the local independent investigative weekly newspaper, The New Times.

Andrew Thomas is a young, extreme right wing, fundamentalist nightmare, and he, along with his best friend Joe Arpaio, are the law in Maricopa County, the home of Phoenix and the fourth most populated county in the United States. Here is the latest morally repugnant bile out of Andrew Thomas and the Arizona GOP:

An official with the Arizona Republican Party says he pulled an innuendo-heavy ad linking Tim Nelson, the Democratic candidate for county attorney, to defense lawyers in child- pornography and child-murder cases.

The ad refers to suggestions made in news releases, news conferences and interviews generated by Rose’s agency.

In mid-September, one of Rose’s associates issued a news release saying that a lawyer who defends pornographers contributed to Nelson’s campaign. Nelson donated the $390 in question to a charity for parents of murdered children.

"It’s sickening that they have sunk to a new low," Nelson said.

Nelson characterized Thomas’ attacks as "personal, mean and with false innuendo."

The Nelson ad opens with images of children riding tricycles and eating dinner at a family table.

"They deserve a safe neighborhood, a secure home," a woman’s voice says. "They deserve the innocence of childhood and all of its wonder. And they deserve to be protected."

Then there’s a drum roll and a frowning photo of Tim Nelson flashes on screen.

"But can they count on liberal ACLU lawyer Tim Nelson?" the woman continues. "He took money from a child pornographer and from lawyers who defend child murderers. Liberal Tim Nelson isn’t just wrong. He’s dangerous."

What are Tim Nelson’s crimes? That fully upstanding citizens, that happen to be employed as criminal defense attorneys, contributed to his campaign. Oh, yes, and that over ten years ago, the firm that Nelson worked at was appointed by the court to assist an indigent defendant with a death penalty appeal. Not Nelson personally understand you, just his firm. Wonderful. Read more

Miers And Bolten Can Kicked Down The Road

images1.thumbnail.jpegThe opinion by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals in the Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten subpoena matter has just been issued. The court has granted the stay requested by the Bush Administration; which, by all appearances, will effectively end the litigation as the subpoenas presumptively expire on January 3, 2009 when the term of the current 110th Congress expires. The opinion is short, easily understandable and should be read by one and all to get a first hand look at truly mendacious appellate judicial practice.

The present dispute is of potentially great significance for the balance of power between the Legislative and Executive Branches. But the Committee recognizes that, even if expedited, this controversy will not be fully and finally resolved by the Judicial Branch—including resolution by a panel and possible rehearing by this court en banc and by the Supreme Court—before the 110th Congress ends on January 3, 2009. At that time, the 110th House of Representatives will cease to exist as a legal entity, and the subpoenas it has issued will expire.
….
In view of the above considerations, we see no reason to set the appeal on an expedited briefing and oral argument schedule. If the case becomes moot, we would be wasting the time of the court and the parties.

Last I heard consummate can down the road kicking was not an affirmative duty in the judicial canons. This is buggered up. Basically the Court has said "We’re going to presume there would be further appeal, which we are going to presume will take us past the moot date of Congress turn over – and VIOLA – it is already therefore effectively moot. Buh bye, gotta go lunch and martini now!"

Lest you think I am kidding about the pernicious nature of this decision, get a load of the specially concurring, and kind of dissenting, Judge Tatel:

Nevertheless, I am perplexed by the panel majority’s willingness to grant a stay while hypothesizing that the expiration of the 110th Congress might moot the case before it is heard on the merits. Never have we granted a stay that would have the effect of irrevocably depriving a party of its victory in the district court. Nor have we authority to do so, for a stay in such circumstances would necessarily cause "substantial” — indeed, overwhelming — harm.

Man; no kidding. That is kind of an understatement there Judge.

Read more

Court Greenlights Troopergate Investigation; Slaps Down McCain Campaign

photo by EarthPro flickr cc

photo by EarthPro flickr cc

Since nominating Sarah Palin for the Republican VP slot, John McCain and his campaign have put on a full court press in Alaska to shut down the Troopergate investigation. The main effort centered on the McCain Campaign strongarming several Republican Legislators in Alaska into filing a lawsuit seeking to halt the investigation into Palin’s alleged wrongful firing of her Director of Public Safety and abuse of the power of her office as Governor.

Yesterday, lost in the commotion of the debate, the Superior Court of Alaska slapped down the McCain Campaign’s attempt at obstruction:

An Anchorage judge today refused to halt the Legislature’s investigation of Gov. Sarah Palin and denied the state attorney general’s attempt to throw out legislative subpoenas.

Superior Court Judge Peter Michalski heard arguments from both sides Thursday morning and ruled just before 5 p.m. Alaska time.

"I think it’s great. It’s a big day for the state of Alaska," said Peter Maassen, the lawyer representing the Legislative Council, which ordered the investigation.

It is indeed a big day for Alaska. Their Constitutional separation of powers has been affirmed, and despite the brazen malevolent attempt by John McCain to thwart it, the will of the Alaskan people through the unanimous bi-partisan voice of their Legislative Council, has been honored.

But not just will the investigation and report by Investigator Steve Branchflower proceed with a due date of October 10, the court took woefully unqualified and incompetent Alaska Attorney General Tavis Colberg, a cipher in office only because he is Palin’s childhood friend, to the woodshed over his obstruction of enforcement of the subpoenas duly issued by the Alaska Legislature.

Judge Peter Michalski said the Alaska Legislative Council can move ahead with its investigation, including having the state Senate Judiciary Committee subpoena Palin aides to testify.

“It is legitimately within the scope of the Legislature’s investigatory power to inquire into the circumstances surrounding the termination of a public officer,” Michalski wrote in his ruling.

Barring the extremely unlikely intervention of the Alaska Supreme Court, the investigation is on and the subpoenas are active again. Branchflower may demand that the state employees, and First Dude Todd Palin, submit immediately to their depositions, and if they continue to refuse, it is quite clear that they will be subject to criminal prosecution, and potential incarceration, if convicted pursuant to Sec. 24.25.080 of the Alaska Statutory Code.

Well, this pretty much puts Read more

Prosecution Tanks In Toobz Stevens Trial

Ted Stevens has been sitting in the courtroom of Judge Emmet Sullivan in the E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse in DC since jury selection began on September 22. This morning the excrement hit the fan. Big time. Stevens’ attorney, Brendan Sullivan, has moved for dismissal of the charges against Stevens, and he just may get it. The prosecution has screwed the pooch in a fundamental and intentional way.

From a wire report off of Reuters filed an hour ago:

Lawyers for Republican U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska urged a judge Thursday to dismiss the corruption case against him because they said prosecutors had withheld evidence helpful to their defense.

U.S. Justice Department prosecutor Brenda Morris admitted a mistake had been made, but asked the judge to allow the trial to go forward. "We are human and we made an error," she said. "It was a mistake."

The information involved an interview by an FBI agent with Bill Allen, the prosecution’s star witness. In the interview, Allen said he believed Stevens and his wife would have paid for the renovations to their home in Alaska if Allen had sent them a bill.

Prosecutors had notified the defense about the information only late Wednesday, after Allen had completed his second day of testimony.

Stevens’s attorney Brendan Sullivan asked the judge to dismiss the indictment. "It goes to the core of the defense," he said.

U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan did not immediately rule on the request to throw out the case, but he clearly was angered by the mistake, calling it "unbelievable" and "very troubling." (emphasis added)

This is really bad. Blatant intentional withholding by the prosecution of exculpatory evidence. And it is evidence that bores straight into the heart of Stevens’ not guilty defense. The defense did not learn of the existence of this until long after Allen took the stand. The directly and materially exculpatory to Stevens. There is no way to argue that Stevens’ attorney would not have conducted his examination of all witnesses to date, much less Bill Allen, differently with knowledge of this in the government’s evidence set.

Here is the clincher.

The new evidence involved an interview that had been turned over to the defense, but the key part of what Allen said — that the couple would pay if they had been sent a bill — had been blacked out.

How do you not view this as intentional and malicious conduct by the prosecution? Read more

60 Days

The WSJ has a profile of Nora Dannehy, the prosecutor Michael Mukasey picked to further investigate the US Attorney purge. It includes a bunch of details that might make you more confident the investigation will be thorough.

In her 17 years in the U.S. Attorney’s office in Connecticut, Nora Dannehy has sent a governor and a state treasurer to prison. Is she up for tackling such a lengthy and politically dicey investigation? Legal peers and former bosses say the long-distance runner is up to it.

“She’s stubborn as hell and very, very smart,” said William Gerace, who went up against Dannehy in the investigation of his client, Lawrence E. Alibozek, who as a deputy chief of staff for Gov. John G. Rowland was accused of taking payoffs. “She doesn’t play politics.”

Because of the litany of public corruption cases Dannehy, 47, has prosecuted, she has a reputation as a pitbull, say attorneys.

But it’s not so much the profile that ought to give you pause–it’s the detail that the investigation already has a due date: in 60 days.

Today, Dionne Searcey, the newest addition to the WSJ’s legal gang, delivers us some background on the career prosecutor, who will have to turn around her investigation in a mere 60 days: [my emphasis]

Or roughly December 1. In other words, after the election (so results of the investigation can’t further sink the Republican Party), but before the next President appoints his own Attorney General. Or, to put it differently, long before the inevitable battle over whether Harriet Miers and Karl Rove have to testify, and whether the Administration has to hand over their own secret timeline of the firings.

CIA & Foggo: It’s Hard On Spy Pimps Out There

It’s getting hard out there on the pimps and cons in the CIA, first Director Goss goes down the tubes, and now his right hand man Foggo is headed to the slammer.

As reported Monday, Dusty Foggo has copped an incredibly lenient plea to one count of simple wire fraud. Foggo, formerly Number Three man in the Bush CIA, under Director Porter Goss who also resigned in disgrace, had been charged with 28 counts of sordid and sundry fraud, conflict of interest, bribery aiding and abetting, and false statements, all primarily related to the Duke Cunningham and Brent Wilkes criminal convictions.

Just how did Foggo get such a sweetheart deal?

It must have been the evidence that Foggo created a new deputy director of administration position and hired his mistress to fill it, the weekly poker games at Washington hotels with Congressmen such "Duke" Cunningham, lobbyists, House intelligence committee staff members and prostitutes. Or maybe Foggo’s assistance to childhood friend, Brent Wilkes, one of two defense contractors bribing House intelligence committee member Cunningham with tens of thousands of dollars in antiques, travel, fancy meals, house payments, and hookers in exchange for earmarks steering more than $100 million worth of government contracts to Wilkes’ San Diego-based firm, right?

As the always excellent Laura Rozen details in an article just out in Mother Jones:

No, what truly worried Agency brass were the darker secrets their former top logistics officer was threatening to spill had his case gone to trial as scheduled on November 3. They included the massive contracts Foggo was discussing with Wilkes, estimated by one source at over $300 million dollars. "Wilkes was working on several other huge deals when the hammer fell," a source familiar with Read more

Gonzo Sings! Justice In The Department At Last?

It has been clear for a long time that Gonzales had serious criminal exposure for his acts during his service in the Bush Administration, which is why immediately after departure from the DOJ AGAG lawyered up by hiring criminal-defense lawyer George Terwilliger. Probably one of the reasons Gonzales announced his resignation within a week of the initiation of an Inspector General’s investigation into his conduct.

That IG report described how Gonzales’ improperly, and illegally, possessed, handled and transported Top Secret information; i.e. the two most important, secret, and arguably illegal, programs in the history of the Bush Administration, the illegal wiretap program and–almost certainly–the torture program.

In most circumstances when the DOJ gets a fish like this on the hook, the first thing you would expect would be for them to work him for incriminating information on other malfeasance he is aware of and to entice him into a cooperations agreement to help bring others to justice. And this is just what it looks like is happening. Murray Waas is just out with a major article in The Atlantic:

According to people familiar with statements recently made by Gonzales to federal investigators, Gonzales is now saying that George Bush personally directed him to make that hospital visit.

Gonzales has also told Justice Department investigators that President Bush played a more central and active role than was previously known in devising a strategy to have Congress enable the continuation of the surveillance program when questions about its legality were raised by the Justice Department, as well as devising other ways to circumvent the Justice Department’s legal concerns about the program, according to people who have read Gonzales’s interviews with investigators.

In describing Bush as having pressed him to engage in some of the more controversial actions regarding the warrantless surveillance program, Gonzales and his legal team are apparently attempting to lessen his own legal jeopardy. The Justice Department’s inspector general (IG) is investigating whether Gonzales lied to Congress when he was questioned under oath about the surveillance program. And the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) is separately investigating whether Gonzales and other Justice Department attorneys acted within the law in authorizing and overseeing the surveillance program. Neither the IG nor OPR can bring criminal charges, but if, during the course of their own investigations, they believe they have uncovered evidence of a possible crime, they can seek to make Read more

Conyers Cranky Over Oil Fraud; Drills DOJ With Letter

You knew this was coming, and since I simply can’t stomach any more Lurch Paulson discussion today, I bring it to you. Remember Marcy’s Drill, Baby, Drill post on sex, lies and oil at the Minerals Management Agency?

Clearly, John Conyers found it as titillating as we did. He wants to hear more. From McClatchy:

The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee demanded Tuesday that the attorney general provide an "immediate explanation" for a Justice Department decision that could have cost taxpayers up to $40 million in royalties from a major oil company.

Michigan Democratic Rep. John Conyers’ cited a McClatchy story Sept. 12 that detailed the department’s rejection of the Colorado U.S. attorney’s recommendation to intervene in a whistleblower’s suit against the Kerr-McGee Corp.

In a letter to Attorney General Michael Mukasey, Conyers said charges that politics might have played a part in a decision favoring a major oil company "must be taken seriously and thoroughly investigated." Conyers said he wanted to question the officials involved in the case and that he sought access to all related records.

When Marcy last reported, the Inspector General’s reports had just been released, and they sure had some juicy material in them. Since that time, IG Earl Devaney is royally pissed that the DOJ prosecuted two line level scrubs at the MMA, but refused to prosecute the big dog managers he wanted nailed. And he let his displeasure be known:

"I would have liked a more aggressive approach, and I would have liked to have seen some other people prosecuted here," he said during a hearing before the House of Representatives’ Natural Resources Committee.

Devaney also recommended that the Justice Department prosecute RIK’s former Denver office director, Gregory Smith, and the former associate director of the Minerals Revenue Management office, Lucy Dennet.

The reports accuse Smith of having sex with two subordinates and improperly accepting $30,000 from a private company for marketing its services to oil and gas companies.

Dennet is accused of helping Mayberry create the contract he was awarded after his retirement.

The Justice Department hasn’t explained why it declined to prosecute them.

But in today’s McClatchy report on Conyers’ letter, we learn just how mad IG Devaney really is with the DOJ:

Inspector General Earl Devaney was so displeased with the department’s refusal, Conyers wrote, that he pulled his investigators off a department task force examining disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff’s influence-peddling.

In the grand scheme of things, a pretty small Read more

FBI Still Using Shiny Objects to Distract from Their Flimsy Anthrax Case

The WaPo’s big takeaway from the Robert Mueller/FBI oversight hearing today is something I reported last month: Pat Leahy believes Bruce Ivins did not act alone. As Leahy said today,

If Ivins is the one who sent the letter, I do not believe in any manner that he is the only person involved in this attack on Congress and the American people. I believe there are other people involved either as accessories before or after. I believe there are others out there who could [should?] be charged with murder.

Now that the WaPo has caught up, here’s where this story has been and continues to go. The FBI is attempting to use the shiny object of their fancy new science techniques to distract from how crappy the rest of the evidence in this case is.

Both yesterday and today, when Mueller was asked about an independent review of the case, he said the FBI would have the National Academy of Sciences appoint a board of scientists to review the genetic analysis that led the FBI to believe that the anthrax used in the attack came from a flask in Bruce Ivins’ lab. When Arlen Specter asked to name some people to serve on that review board, Mueller said–as he responded to most questions about the anthrax case–he would have to get back to Specter.

But, more importantly, it’s not just that Americans are wondering whether the fancy new genetic analysis the FBI did is sound.

We’re worried about Pat Leahy’s seeming certainty that only scientists at Dugway in UT and Batelle in OH have the technical competence to make the anthrax used in the attacks; when Leahy made Mueller call FBI to find out if that were true, Mueller eventually responded that the answer is classified. We’re worried that the FBI’s explanation for how and why Ivins would have driven several hours to Princeton to mail the anthrax letters keeps changing from dubious story to dubious story–meaning even if Ivins made this anthrax, they have no proof he mailed it. And we’re worried that the FBI seems to have attributed Ivins’ wife’s beliefs to him in order to explain the choice of targets–even though Leahy’s apparent suspicion (that the attack was related to recent efforts to develop an offenseive bioweapons program) provides a much more plausible explanation for the targets.

Read more

Robert Mueller Visits Senate Judiciary Committee

Oops, missed Pat Leahy’s opening statement, but the hearing is being streamed here. After babbling about how poor Curt Weldon was the victim of a nasty FBI leak, Specter is at least asking some specifics about the anthrax investigation.

Leahy interrupts Mueller just as he’s pitching his great anthrax investigation.

Leahy: I’ve thought about throughout this time. You briefed me in Vermont. These weapons that were used against the American people and Congress–are you aware of any facility in the US that is capable of making the anthrax besides Dugway in UT and Batelle in OH? Other than those two?

Mueller: Fifteen in the US and 2 overseas. 

Leahy: Are there any other facilities capable of making this anthrax?

Mueller: I do believe there are. I would have to get back to you.

Leahy: At some point we’re going to take a break and please get me that information, because I know of no others besides those two. I’m aware of the article from September 4 reporting a program of secret research on biological weapons, project has been embraced by Bush Administration. Weapons used against Americans were right after that. 

Now into questions.

Leahy: You commented on corporate scandals. There will be investigations regarding possible fraud or lawbreaking in those areas?

Mueller: 1400 investigations and 24 investigations looking at larger corporations who may have engaged in "misstatements."

Leahy: The USG is on the hook for 800 billion to 1 trillion–almost as much as the Iraq war–and I suspect that everyone wants to know if there was fraud.

Leahy: New guidelines. You say no broad new authorities. We’re unable to get a review of that, we have not been briefed. It’s been as superficial briefing as possible. I was surprised by your statement. Under the proposed guidelines, line FBI agent would be able to use several new intrusive methods at threat assessment level. 

Specter: Did you personally review the evidence and conclude there was proof beyond a reasonable doubt. 

Mueller: Yes.

Specter: WRT the hairs on the mailbox, why no effort to swab Ivins for DNA until the time he committed suicide.

Mueller: I would have to get back to you.

Specter: I’m going to send you a letter. When you anticipate designating an independent group of experts. 

Mueller: We are asking NAS to identify experts to serve on panel.

[Note: what about the non-scientific evidence???]

Mueller: I will consider whether you can name people.

Specter: What’s there to consider.

Mueller: I’m not familiar with how NAS does these reviews.

Read more