Investigation of U.S. Atty Perjury Charge is ‘Slow-walked’
Bob Martin reports that the perjury investigation of Alice Martin, the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama, by the DoJ Office of Professional Responsibility, is "being very consciously slow-walked."
This story was first broken here at the Political Parlor over a year ago and involves a perjury complaint filed against Martin in 2004.
2004? I am willing to believe that it is being slow-walked.
BTW, why aren’t Alabama’s major media outlets pushing on this story? Birmingham News editor Tom Scarritt told a Political Parlor reader in September 2007 that "we will continue to ask about it," but I know of no progress report on the investigation from the Birmingham News or anyone else. I only know of one mention in the Birmingham News (in 2004) of the perjury charge against Alice Martin.
Related Articles:
Danny,
I’d like to ackowledge your efforts here to bring justice and honor to our great state in the face of the “Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy”. I’d also advise you to bathe in your underwear.
When the Feds knock down your door, you won’t have time to finish your shower.
Just ask Sue.
Comment by Gunney Highway — February 8, 2008 @ 2:04 pm
Where’s the congressional oversight on this? Why has the Judiciary Committee of either house not decided to fight the battle and drag this into light?
A neat trick though for a paper devoted to following this up would front a brief article, lede with “Latest developments in perjury investigation of US Attorney” followed by a few blank lines and run it weekly until the villagers find their pitchforks and torches.
Comment by walt moffett — February 8, 2008 @ 2:32 pm
I bet I know why: the real journalists in this state have looked at it and found nothing there. If they did, it would be huge story. When Bob Martin is the only person writing about something, you can bet it’s because it serves his agenda, not because there’s really a “there” there.
Comment by Anonymous — February 8, 2008 @ 3:21 pm
A true indication there is some “there” there is when the so called “real journalist” won’t touch it. Another good indication is when ever a reporter does write about an issue either their motives are questioned or they are called kooks and nuts.
Comment by bhmhomeboy — February 8, 2008 @ 3:48 pm
It’s your lefty loonies who claim Brett Blackledge is in some sort of alliance with Bob Riley, homeboy.
Comment by Anonymous — February 8, 2008 @ 4:19 pm
Bob Martin is one of the most respected and independently minded journalists in this state.
To ridicule him as having an agenda because he writes on topics of which the state GOP spin machine [including but not limited to GOP consultants and hanger ons] has no control is naive.
The tragedy behind the Newhouse juggernaut is that it has helped diminish fair minded and independent investigative journalism in this state into political matters, unless of course the potential story aligns neatly with Newhouse’s preordained corporate and political agenda.
Comment by Old James Gang — February 8, 2008 @ 4:21 pm
Blackledge is lazy and writes only about what he is spoon fed from GOP Consulting and PR firms.
Otherwise, he would realize he is sitting on the expose story of a lifetime. Only he lacks the courage, guts, or …ding….authority from his employer to write about the story.
Comment by Anonymous — February 8, 2008 @ 4:30 pm
Yeah, the Pulitzer is awarded only to lazy reporters.
Comment by Anonymous — February 8, 2008 @ 4:51 pm
I just cannot get over how lazy Brett Blackledge is. That must be why the Pulitzer Prize Committee saw fit to honor him. Everyone knows the Riley/Rove/Bush/Colonel Sanders/Trilateral Commission Cabal control said committee.
Also, Bob Martin truly is independent and respected. You’d be surprised how much independence and respect one can get when Milton McGregor is your financier and taskmaster.
Comment by Will — February 8, 2008 @ 4:55 pm
Will (#9) , I would love for you to prove your association with Mr. Martin and McGregor, and if you can’t it isn’t something that should be said….makes you look like you don’t know what you are talking about. Willing to wager on it?
Comment by j — February 8, 2008 @ 9:26 pm
j, Milton McGregor owns the Montgomery Independent. I don’t see the need for any more proof in that regard.
Comment by Will — February 9, 2008 @ 1:43 am
I know for a fact that Milton doesn’t own the Montgomery Independent.
Comment by getyourfactsstraight — February 9, 2008 @ 9:17 am
Don’t steal the money, and you won’t do the time
Comment by JD — February 9, 2008 @ 8:14 pm
Anonymous in comment #3,
Thank you for the acknowledgement that this story should be reported if there is “something there.” I agree with you on that.
And this story is real. The documentation was there when I first broke it.
McClatchy has reported on this, and that is a solid outfit with a solid history that should tell you that there is “something there.”
If this matter has been dismissed or resolved, then appropriate spokespersons would be quick to say that there is “nothing there” instead of saying it would be “inappropriate to comment.”
Comment by Danny — February 10, 2008 @ 12:49 am