No Comment — October 12, 2007, 12:59 am

More Siegelman Updates

Anniston Star
The Anniston Star also calls Javert on his latest sleazy press release:

Louis Franklin has the worst legal job this side of defending Britney Spears. He is the career prosecutor tapped to stand in for U.S. Attorney Leura Canary, the Bush appointee whose husband Billy Canary is a top Alabama Republican. Mrs. Canary recused herself and handed the reins to Franklin.

Lately Franklin has taken to defending himself and his office via press release. Mrs. Canary recused herself from the prosecution, but one wonders if she’s had a hand in the press releases that have followed. Franklin’s release uses an old saw in Alabama politics, blame the outsiders. “Recently, a number of articles, editorials, and postings on blogs have been authored by out-of-state reporters, columnists, and bloggers about the investigation and prosecution of Don Siegelman and Richard Scrushy,” Franklin says, adding that the “media reports appear to be part of an orchestrated disinformation campaign about the case.”

Gasp! Outside agitators? This in-state editorial board has questions that deserve answers, Mr. Franklin. So do all Alabamians and Americans, who care that the law is applied fairly and without consideration of political party. The most serious charges are far removed from Franklin’s conduct or that of his team. They go to the heart of a presidential administration that demonstrated a willingness to use every angle, ethical or unethical, to go after political enemies, including firing U.S. attorneys who would not do its bidding.

American Enterprise Institute
The leading Republican think tank in Washington is the American Enterprise Institute, and its great voice on public integrity questions is Norm Ornstein. Ornstein and AEI have now joined an increasing list of honest-government Republicans in calling the Siegelman prosecution a corrupt and squalid mess. Here’s what Ornstein had to say in yesterday’s issue of Roll Call:

The relentless and politically timed prosecution of Siegelman has raised eyebrows since it was undertaken, but the story in Time shows another, more disturbing side–that politically connected officials from the U.S. attorney’s office and the Justice Department, many with direct ties to Pryor and Sessions, ignored direct evidence of wrongdoing connected to those two and never followed up on the allegations. If they did not do so because of the lack of Lanny Young’s credibility as a witness, why did he have great credibility with his allegations against Siegelman?

The scandal cries out for an independent investigation from someone with the strongest reputation and integrity. The idea that prosecutors will prosecute or fail to prosecute selectively based on partisan or personal considerations is absolute anathema in a fair system of justice with the rule of law. It appears that the prosecutors in this case who had worked with or for Sessions or Pryor, or had family and business dealings with them, did not recuse themselves from these cases and did not pursue them. On the face of it, this raises huge questions and makes it clear yet again that the core of the U.S. attorney scandal is not just the federal prosecutors who were fired or targeted for dismissal, but those who were not targeted because they did the bidding of their political superiors at the Justice Department.

This rancid mess needs to be investigated thoroughly, starting with Alabama. I understand that the House and Senate Judiciary committees have their plates full with many priorities and also pressure to look ahead, not just back to a prior scandal under a now- departed attorney general. But the committees have to get to the bottom of this one. The Senate has another duty–confirming a new attorney general–that it can use to help the cause. The scandal cries out for an independent investigation from someone with the strongest reputation and integrity. An ironclad commitment to do so from Michael Mukasey should be a prerequisite for his confirmation.

Ornstein is absolutely correct about this. Alberto Gonzales has just lawyered-up, hiring highly qualified criminal defense counsel to represent him in the coming investigations. Isn’t it time for Javert and his boss, Leura Canary, to do the same? They have horrendously abused the power of the prosecutor’s office. That much is plain. The main question at this point is whether they crossed the line into criminal conduct in the process. In any event, we’ve reached the point at which we shouldn’t be listening to any statement from Javert and his conspirators that is not under oath and made after having taken advice from counsel.

The Noel Hillman Connection
As noted in the past, all available evidence so far had already pointed to Noel Hillman as the principal vehicle through which Karl Rove tasked and pursued the Siegelman case. And now we have a Republican attorney testifying under oath about the Rove-Hillman links in relation to the Siegelman case. Here is the key passage, correctly flagged by The Next Hurrah:

A: And so, anyway, he was telling me all of the things that Alice [Martin, U.S. Attorney in Birmingham, now under investigation for perjury] had done as far as having messed up the deal. And then I — and that since she had messed it up, he was definitely running, you know what — I mean — and then he proceeds to tell me that Bill Canary and Bob Riley had had a conversation with Karl Rove again and that they had this time gone over and seen whoever was the head of the department of — he called it PIS, which I don’t think that is the correct acronym, but that’s what he called it. And I had to say what is that and he said that is the Public Integrity Section. . .

Q: Okay. And who — when you say they had made a decision, who are you thinking of?

A: Whoever that head of that Public Integrity — the PIS was as Rob referred to it. And then whoever — and Karl Rove.

Q: And what — well, from talking to Rob, this conversation you’re describing for me was in late January, early February 2005?

A: That is correct. . .

Q: Okay. And did Rob give you the name of the person at — I’m just going to call it Public Integrity — that he thought he understood Karl Rove had spoken to?

A: No, he said it was the head guy there and he said that that guy had agreed to allocate whatever resources, so evidently the guy had the power to allocate resources, you know.

Q: To the Siegelman prosecution?

A: Yes. And that he’d allocate all resources necessary.

Let’s plug in a bit more information. The head of Public Integrity during this period is named Noel Hillman. He’s a New Jersey politico, and came to Justice as Michael Chertoff’s sidekick. You can get more detail on his background here.

At key points in the Siegelman investigation, Hillman was having contacts and visiting the White House—including at least one interview with President Bush. Hillman had applied to get a judicial appointment from Bush, and Chertoff was backing him in this process, including helping him line up support from New Jersey’s two Democratic senators. Hillman’s communications with the White House may have had some relationship with his candidacy for the judgeship. But you can count on it: Karl Rove and his crew had a big say on who got judgeships, and they had a specific agenda. It therefore appears likely that Rove’s requests, which were grossly improper if not in fact criminal, occurred against the backdrop of Hillman’s campaign to land a judicial appointment.

Attorney Martin Garbus noted the 2005 dealings between the Hillman and the White House and instantly connected them to the Abramoff prosecution. Here’s how he viewed it:

At some point, it all becomes unbelievable. President George W. Bush has not made many moves more unethical than offering Noel L. Hillman, the Abramoff prosecutor, a federal judgeship. Hillman has apparently been talking with Bush’s representatives since last year, and on last Thursday, he publicly announced he was accepting the appointment.

Of course, when the Hillman nomination was pushed through, he was praised as “the Abramoff prosecutor.” But the more I learn about it, the more it appears that Hillman worked hard to stem the spread of the Abramoff probe and to protect a number of figures who would ultimately have figured in the cross-hairs of any competent investigation. Hillman’s true role in the Abramoff case was damage control.

A number of the logical Abramoff targets are in Alabama. In fact, they are lined up as Siegelman’s political opposition, which was funded with very shady money that came from Scanlon and Abramoff. But rather than going after the Abramoff tentacles in Alabama, Hillman poured his resources into concocting a case against Siegelman. He even traveled to Montgomery to stand by Leura Canary’s side as the indictment was unveiled.

In fact, while Javert and his sidekick have issued statements saying that they made all key decisions on the Siegelman case, they recently insisted in a conversation with a prominent Montgomery lawyer I have interviewed that the key shots were called in Washington by Public Integrity, and that they had little say. Funny how those accounts just keep changing whenever it suits them.

Also, after Hillman left Public Integrity, his successor told one of the lawyers handling the case that the Siegelman case was extremely hot and that key decisions relating to it were being taken way over his head, among the senior most level of political appointees at the Department. So even as Hillman was a principal conduit for Rove’s manipulation of the case, he was certainly not the only Justice politico who had a hand in the Siegelman case.

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

December 2017

Document of Barbarism

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Destroyer of Worlds

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Crossing Guards

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“I am Here Only for Working”

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Dear Rose

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Year of The Frog

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
Destroyer of Worlds·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In February 1947, Harper’s Magazine published Henry L. Stimson’s “The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb.” As secretary of war, Stimson had served as the chief military adviser to President Truman, and recommended the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The terms of his unrepentant apologia, an excerpt of which appears on page 35, are now familiar to us: the risk of a dud made a demonstration too risky; the human cost of a land invasion would be too high; nothing short of the bomb’s awesome lethality would compel Japan to surrender. The bomb was the only option. Seventy years later, we find his reasoning unconvincing. Entirely aside from the destruction of the blasts themselves, the decision thrust the world irrevocably into a high-stakes arms race — in which, as Stimson took care to warn, the technology would proliferate, evolve, and quite possibly lead to the end of modern civilization. The first half of that forecast has long since come to pass, and the second feels as plausible as ever. Increasingly, the atmosphere seems to reflect the anxious days of the Cold War, albeit with more juvenile insults and more colorful threats. Terms once consigned to the history books — “madman theory,” “brinkmanship” — have returned to the news cycle with frightening regularity. In the pages that follow, seven writers and experts survey the current nuclear landscape. Our hope is to call attention to the bomb’s ever-present menace and point our way toward a world in which it finally ceases to exist.

Illustration by Darrel Rees. Source photographs: Kim Jong-un © ITAR-TASS Photo Agency/Alamy Stock Photo; Donald Trump © Yuri Gripas/Reuters/Newscom
Article
Crossing Guards·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Ambassador Bridge arcs over the Detroit River, connecting Detroit to Windsor, Ontario, the southernmost city in Canada. Driving in from the Canadian side, where I grew up, is like viewing a panorama of the Motor City’s rise and fall, visible on either side of the bridge’s turquoise steel stanchions. On the right are the tubular glass towers of the Renaissance Center, headquarters of General Motors, and Michigan Central Station, the rail terminal that closed in 1988. On the left is a rusted industrial corridor — fuel tanks, docks, abandoned warehouses. I have taken this route all my life, but one morning this spring, I crossed for the first time in a truck.

Illustration by Richard Mia
Article
“I am Here Only for Working”·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

But the exercise of labor is the worker’s own life-activity, the manifestation of his own life. . . . He works in order to live. He does not even reckon labor as part of his life, it is rather a sacrifice of his life.

— Karl Marx

Photograph from the United Arab Emirates by the author. This page: Ruwais Mall
Article
The Year of The Frog·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

To look at him, Sweet Macho was a beautiful horse, lean and strong with muscles that twitched beneath his shining black coat. A former racehorse, he carried himself with ceremony, prancing the field behind our house as though it were the winner’s circle. When he approached us that day at the edge of the yard, his eyes shone with what might’ve looked like intelligence but was actually a form of insanity. Not that there was any telling our mother’s boyfriend this — he fancied himself a cowboy.

“Horse 1,” by Nine Francois. Courtesy the artist and AgavePrint, Austin, Texas
Article
Dead Ball Situation·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

What We Think About When We Think About Soccer, by Simon Critchley. Penguin Books. 224 pages. $20.

Begin, as Wallace Stevens didn’t quite say, with the idea of it. I so like the idea of Simon Critchley, whose books offer philosophical takes on a variety of subjects: Stevens, David Bowie, suicide, humor, and now football — or soccer, as the US edition has it. (As a matter of principle I shall refer to this sport throughout as football.) “All of us are mysteriously affected by our names,” decides one of Milan Kundera’s characters in Immortality, and I like Critchley because his name would seem to have put him at a vocational disadvantage compared with Martin Heidegger, Søren Kierkegaard, or even, in the Anglophone world, A. J. Ayer or Richard Rorty. (How different philosophy might look today if someone called Nobby Stiles had been appointed as the Wykeham Professor of Logic.)

Tostão, No. 9, and Pelé, No. 10, celebrate Carlos Alberto’s final goal for Brazil in the World Cup final against Italy on June 21, 1970, Mexico City © Heidtmann/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images

Chances that an American pediatrician has treated a child for a gunshot wound in the last year:

1 in 6

Researchers found that young teens who witness gun violence are more than twice as likely to commit a violent crime themselves.

Brailsford’s lawyer said Shaver was “not a bad person” but that “his actions” had gotten him killed, referring in part to the defendant’s claim that a hand movement of Shaver’s while he was on his knees made it appear as if he might have been reaching for a weapon in the waistband of his basketball shorts, which at that point had fallen down.

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