No Comment — October 11, 2007, 7:52 am

Karl Rove Linked to Siegelman Prosecution

Significant new information is appearing on the Siegelman case, in the form of the 143-page deposition of Jill Simpson, a Republican lawyer who previously issued an affidavit that described a telephone conversation in which Alabama’s leading G.O.P. strategist described Rove intervening with the Justice Department to get the Siegelman case going. The deposition is backed by a mountain of documents that corroborate Simpson’s statements on most critical points. The transcript was leaked by Republican Judiciary Committee staffers earlier in the week to the vest-pocket publication of the Alabama G.O.P., the Birmingham News, as I noted yesterday. Today, however, Time magazine weighs in with an accurate account of the transcript, which I am still reviewing.

Time’s Adam Zagorin writes:

A Republican lawyer claims she was told that Karl Rove—while serving as President Bush’s top political adviser—had intervened in the Justice Department’s prosecution of Alabama’s most prominent Democrat. Longtime Alabama G.O.P. activist Dana Jill Simpson first made the allegation in June, but has now provided new details in a lengthy sworn statement to the House Judiciary Committee. The Committee is expected to hold public hearings on the Alabama case next week as part of its investigation of possible political interference by the Bush Administration in the activities of the Department of Justice. Simpson said in June that she heard a close associate of Rove say that the White House political adviser “had spoken with the Department of Justice” about “pursuing” Don Siegelman, a former Democratic governor of Alabama, with help from two of Alabama’s U.S. attorneys. Siegelman was later indicted on 32 counts of corruption, convicted on seven of them, and is currently serving an 88-month sentence in Federal prison.

If Simpson’s version of events is accurate, it would show direct political involvement by the White House in federal prosecutions — a charge leveled by Administration critics in connection with the U.S. attorney scandal that led to the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. But her account is disputed; those who she alleges told her about Rove’s involvement during a G.O.P. campaign conference call claim that no such conversation took place. . .

[Simpson] recalls conversations in early 2005 with Rob Riley, Jr., son of Alabama’s current Republican governor, over his father’s coming gubernatorial race, in which Siegelman appeared to be the top Democratic challenger. The younger Riley, she says, told her that his father and Bill Canary, the state’s top Republican political operative and a longtime friend of Rove, contacted Rove in late 2004, after which he intervened with the Justice Department’s Public Integrity section to push for criminal prosecution of Siegelman. Months later, in May 2005, Siegelman was indicted, setting off a chain of events that led to his imprisonment and the end of his political career.

Simpson also claims Riley, Jr., named the judge who would eventually be assigned to the case, and says Riley told her the judge would “hang Don Siegelman” because of a grudge against the former governor. She says he also specified one of the exact charges that Siegelman would later face. She says Riley, Jr., told her that Siegelman had conceded the close 2002 governor’s race to his father only after being told he would no longer be subject to possible federal corruption charges.

I have previously documented Judge Fuller’s grudge against Siegelman, which was recorded in a local newspaper in Alabama’s wiregrass area. You can get the complete background in “Judge Fuller: A Siegelman Grudge Match.” As I discovered in my earlier research, Simpson’s claims of long familiarity with Alabama Governor Bob Riley, and his son, Birmingham lawyer Rob Riley, check out. Her dealings with both stretch back to the period well before Riley’s election as governor and are well documented. Simpson turned over some of those documents to the Judiciary Committee, and they thoroughly corroborate her claims. Zagorin gives us a sampling:

Simpson also provided evidence aimed at refuting the younger Riley’s claims, when the allegations first surfaced last June, that he barely knew Rove. This evidence includes a letter, over which a message is scrawled in what Simpson says is Riley’s handwriting. The message reads, “To: Jill — I e-mailed this to (name redacted), Karl (signed) Rob”. Simpson says Riley’s reference is to Karl Rove. Riley counters that “Karl” refers to another lawyer. The president of the company whose case Riley was handling at the time said: “Rob Riley mentioned Karl Rove about four or five times as someone he was getting in touch with to help settle our business in Washington.”

When the Judiciary Committee publicly examines the Siegelman case next week, sources close to the panel say that former Alabama U.S. attorney Doug Jones will likely be a witness. Jones had been Siegelman’s lawyer until 2005, and says that in July 2004, he was told by federal prosecutors that only three areas of potential wrongdoing by the former governor were under investigation. Yet when Siegelman went to trial, he faced a 32-count indictment. “We on the defense believed that the case would soon be over, based on that conference with Federal prosecutors in July 2004,” Jones said.

The external evidence perfectly matches the allegations—the vigor of the prosecutorial inquiry was measured perfectly to whether Siegelman was going to contest the G.O.P.’s grip on the Alabama statehouse. Moreover, Karl Rove’s fingerprints are now well documented, and they are all over the Siegelman case. At the core stand the senior figures of the Alabama G.O.P., many of them Karl Rove’s clients, and the U.S. Attorney in Montgomery—who is the wife of the state’s leading G.O.P. strategist, and a close and long-standing friend of Karl Rove’s.

These allegations also help put a focus on the role played by the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section in the case. At key points this section was headed by Noel Hillman, a protégé of Michael Chertoff and a partisan political activist from New Jersey. Hillman is now a federal judge. While the case was pending, Hillman is known to have been in regular discussions with the White House. We can guess what those discussions were about.

The U.S. Attorney involved, Leura Canary, has fielded senior professional staff in her defense. She leads her defense effort with an easily penetrated claim that she recused herself. But her staff have resorted to increasingly ridiculous claims by way of defense. They have claimed that they exercised all discretion in prosecutorial decision-making, a claim denied by senior figures at the Justice Department. They have also launched an assault on the press, saying that all of these concerns are coming from “out-of-state” troublemakers, echoing ugly accusations of the Civil Rights era. One staffmember was recently quoted in the media dismissing concerns about how the Montgomery office handled claims against Senator Jefferson Sessions and Judge William Pryor (the latter being the instigator of claims against Siegelman). Moneylaundering isn’t a crime, he claimed. At this point, I suspect that none of these prosecutors would be making the outlandish claims they’re offering up if they were speaking under oath. And the Judiciary Committee appears poised to swear them in and put them under cross-examination very shortly, as it should.

We should also consider the role played by the Birmingham News and the Mobile Press-Register in this entire affair, including their reporting in the last couple of days. Given these recent revelations it seems to me that these papers were active participants in the cover-up and in the original plan to take down Siegelman. Indeed, the News’s earlier reporting can now be understood to include a fairly pathetic effort to construct a defense for Rob Riley based on a differing understanding of who “Karl” was.

For months, the Alabama Republican machine has attempted to brush off claims about Rove’s involvement as some sort of fantastic speculation. Those efforts have just been exploded. We are one step closer to understanding why Karl Rove left the White House, and perhaps also why Alberto Gonzales stepped down as attorney general. The Siegelman case is emerging, as we predicted, as the most damning exhibit yet in the story of the Bush Administration’s use of the Justice Department as a partisan political tool.

Share
Single Page

More from Scott Horton:

Conversation August 5, 2016, 12:08 pm

Lincoln’s Party

Sidney Blumenthal on the origins of the Republican Party, the fallout from Clinton’s emails, and his new biography of Abraham Lincoln

Conversation March 30, 2016, 3:44 pm

Burn Pits

Joseph Hickman discusses his new book, The Burn Pits, which tells the story of thousands of U.S. soldiers who, after returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, have developed rare cancers and respiratory diseases.

Context, No Comment August 28, 2015, 12:16 pm

Beltway Secrecy

In five easy lessons

Get access to 167 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

February 2018

Notes to Self

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Within Reach

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Bodies in The Forest

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Minds of Others

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Modern Despots

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Before the Deluge

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
The Minds of Others·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Progress is impossible without change,” George Bernard Shaw wrote in 1944, “and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.” But progress through persuasion has never seemed harder to achieve. Political segregation has made many Americans inaccessible, even unimaginable, to those on the other side of the partisan divide. On the rare occasions when we do come face-to-face, it is not clear what we could say to change each other’s minds or reach a worthwhile compromise. Psychological research has shown that humans often fail to process facts that conflict with our preexisting worldviews. The stakes are simply too high: our self-worth and identity are entangled with our beliefs — and with those who share them. The weakness of logic as a tool of persuasion, combined with the urgency of the political moment, can be paralyzing.

Yet we know that people do change their minds. We are constantly molded by our environment and our culture, by the events of the world, by the gossip we hear and the books we read. In the essays that follow, seven writers explore the ways that persuasion operates in our lives, from the intimate to the far-reaching. Some consider the ethics and mechanics of persuasion itself — in religion, politics, and foreign policy — and others turn their attention to the channels through which it acts, such as music, protest, and technology. How, they ask, can we persuade others to join our cause or see things the way we do? And when it comes to our own openness to change, how do we decide when to compromise and when to resist?

Illustration (detail) by Lincoln Agnew
Article
Within Reach·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

On a balmy day last spring, Connor Chase sat on a red couch in the waiting room of a medical clinic in Columbus, Ohio, and watched the traffic on the street. His bleached-blond hair fell into his eyes as he scrolled through his phone to distract himself. Waiting to see Mimi Rivard, a nurse practitioner, was making Chase nervous: it would be the first time he would tell a medical professional that he was transgender.

By the time he arrived at the Equitas Health clinic, Chase was eighteen, and had long since come to dread doctors and hospitals. As a child, he’d had asthma, migraines, two surgeries for a tumor that had caused deafness in one ear, and gangrene from an infected bug bite. Doctors had always assumed he was a girl. After puberty, Chase said, he avoided looking in the mirror because his chest and hips “didn’t feel like my body.” He liked it when strangers saw him as male, but his voice was high-pitched, so he rarely spoke in public. Then, when Chase was fourteen, he watched a video on YouTube in which a twentysomething trans man described taking testosterone to lower his voice and appear more masculine. Suddenly, Chase had an explanation for how he felt — and what he wanted.

Illustration by Taylor Callery
Article
Before the Deluge·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In the summer of 2016, when Congress installed a financial control board to address Puerto Rico’s crippling debt, I traveled to San Juan, the capital. The island owed some $120 billion, and Wall Street was demanding action. On the news, President Obama announced his appointments to the Junta de Supervisión y Administración Financiera. “The task ahead for Puerto Rico is not an easy one,” he said. “But I am confident Puerto Rico is up to the challenge of stabilizing the fiscal situation, restoring growth, and building a better future for all Puerto Ricans.” Among locals, however, the control board was widely viewed as a transparent effort to satisfy mainland creditors — just the latest tool of colonialist plundering that went back generations.

Photograph from Puerto Rico by Christopher Gregory
Article
Monumental Error·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In 1899, the art critic Layton Crippen complained in the New York Times that private donors and committees had been permitted to run amok, erecting all across the city a large number of “painfully ugly monuments.” The very worst statues had been dumped in Central Park. “The sculptures go as far toward spoiling the Park as it is possible to spoil it,” he wrote. Even worse, he lamented, no organization had “power of removal” to correct the damage that was being done.

Illustration by Steve Brodner
Post
CamperForce·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

After losing their savings in the stock market crash of 2008, seniors Barb and Chuck find seasonal employment at Amazon fulfillment centers.

Chance that a Silicon Valley technology company started since 1995 was founded by Indian or Chinese immigrants:

1 in 3

A gay penguin couple in China’s Polar Land zoo were ostracized by other penguins and then placed in a separate enclosure after they made repeated attempts to steal the eggs of straight penguin couples and replace them with stones.

Trump’s former chief strategist, whom Trump said had “lost his mind,” issued a statement saying that Trump’s son did not commit treason; the US ambassador to the United Nations announced that “no one questions” Trump’s mental stability; and the director of the CIA said that Trump, who requested “killer graphics” in his intelligence briefings, is able to read.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Report — From the June 2013 issue

How to Make Your Own AR-15

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

By

"Gun owners have long been the hypochondriacs of American politics. Over the past twenty years, the gun-rights movement has won just about every battle it has fought; states have passed at least a hundred laws loosening gun restrictions since President Obama took office. Yet the National Rifle Association has continued to insist that government confiscation of privately owned firearms is nigh. The NRA’s alarmism helped maintain an active membership, but the strategy was risky: sooner or later, gun guys might have realized that they’d been had. Then came the shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, and at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, followed swiftly by the nightmare the NRA had been promising for decades: a dedicated push at every level of government for new gun laws. The gun-rights movement was now that most insufferable of species: a hypochondriac taken suddenly, seriously ill."

Subscribe Today