House Judiciary Calls for Investigation into DoJ Selective Prosecution
The House Judiciary Committee today has sent letters (available here in a .pdf file) to the DoJ Inspector General and to the DoJ Office of Professional Responsibility “to request that your offices conduct a thorough investigation and report on the troubling allegations of selective, politically-motivated prosecution in recent years by the Department of Justice.” The letters accompanied a 34-page report (available here in a .pdf file) issued today by the House Judiciary Committee’s majority staff entitled, “Allegations of Selective Prosecution in Our Federal Criminal Justice System.”
A point to be made here is that the Committee is not calling for an investigation into the specifics of Don Siegelman’s case, but into the issue of “selective, politically-motivated prosecution.”
Committee Chair John Conyers is unhappy that the Committee is not getting access to information it should have and sources close to the situation have told the Parlor that he will keep pushing on this issue.
For example, the Committee also sent a letter today (available here in a .pdf file) to former White House adviser Karl Rove telling him the committee is “seeking your appearance before the House Judiciary Committee to testify concerning the troubling issue of the politicization of the Department of Justice during this Administration, including allegations regarding the prosecution of former Governor of Alabama Don Siegelman.” While Rove has ignored a subpoena to testify before Congress in its investigation of the firing of nine U.S. attorneys, the Committee notes “recent reports that your attorney has stated your willingness to testify before the Committee” on this matter.
And the Committee today tells U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey in a letter (available here in a .pdf file) sent today that it is not going away on these issues:
There are few issues which have proved so corrosive to the [Justice] Department’s reputation as the persistent concerns that political considerations may have influenced the exercise of prosecutorial power during this Administration.
… Chairman [John] Conyers has today asked the Department’s Offices of the Inspector General and Professional Responsibility to conduct a thorough review of these issues as one of several needed steps in the restoration of the Department’s reputation for fairness and impartiality. The Committee’s work on this matter also continues and in this regard we are renewing the Committee’s prior request for relevant documents on the Siegelman and Wecht prosecutions discussed in prior correspondence.
Prior correspondence … make clear that the Department’s blanket refusal to provide information or documents about “open” cases is legally unsupportable…
Conyers looks determined to see this story through.
This is such bull. I find it amazing the dems are so paranoid that they will do anything but the actual business of running the country and getting bills passed on time. this is a waste of time, effort and money.
Comment by Nmore — April 17, 2008 @ 4:17 pm
and let’s remember who the Chairman is…John Conyers. “nuff said.
Comment by Nmore — April 17, 2008 @ 4:18 pm
Politically-motivated prosecution. Is that like when democrat Doug Jones prosecuted Republican Sheriff Jim Woodward?
Comment by Anonymous — April 17, 2008 @ 4:46 pm
Looks like a move to put some heat on the DOJ. Interesting to see where this goes say next February.
Comment by waltm — April 17, 2008 @ 5:15 pm
conyers wants to impeach bush and cheney as well. he is a nut job.
Comment by JT — April 17, 2008 @ 5:21 pm
Anyone but republican three monkey types, can see that the behavior of the Bush injustice department is highly questionable and Congress has a responsibility to look at this apparent political use of the justice department. I for one am sick and tired of my tax money going to supplement the republican campaign machine. All five posts above are nothing but ditto head bull!
Comment by Anonymous — April 17, 2008 @ 6:00 pm
Walt all of this will disappear exactly nine months and three days from now. This is nothing but politics. Siegelman is guilty as sin and everyone knows it. I have to say though for my own personal amusement I wish they would start claiming Dickie Scruggs,Charles Walker,Jim Black,William Jefferson and those fifteen democrats up in Nashville they caught on video taking bribes in ‘05 were framed by Rove as well. That would be hilarious if they start saying that.
Comment by dan t — April 17, 2008 @ 6:01 pm
dat t, not so sure things will die now. There are too many people sharpening axes for the Democrats not do a purge if they win.
Re: Scruggs being framed by Rove, that would make even a Vulcan laugh. Sad to see Delaughter mixed up in it all though.
Comment by waltm — April 17, 2008 @ 6:15 pm
About time! This is good news!
Comment by Anonymous — April 17, 2008 @ 6:16 pm
What a joke ! Former AG’s both R’s and D’s from 40 states, the House judiciary committee, Independent counsel, Reagan’s former Asst. Sec. of Treasury, and the 11th Circuit court of appeals are all full of crap. I don’t care that the 11th circuit is the most conservative appellate court in America, they are off base and obviously part of this brain washing. You mark my words, very soon people will go back to ignoring the facts just like they did for years, and we can simply say what we want about Don and it will be accepted as reality. I’m holding on for that day. Damn the facts….full delusion ahead.
Comment by Stubborn — April 17, 2008 @ 7:27 pm
>>The House Judiciary Committee today has sent letters (available here in a .pdf file) to the DoJ Inspector General and to the DoJ Office of Professional Responsibility “to request that your offices conduct a thorough investigation and report on the troubling allegations of selective, politically-motivated prosecution in recent years by the Department of Justice.”
A DOJ with some balls would respond with a list of selective, politically-motivated prosecutions from the Clinton Administration and ask, “Is this what you mean by ‘recent years’?”
Comment by Onelife — April 17, 2008 @ 8:32 pm
Onelife off in la-la-la-la land. There are no Clinton DOJ prosecutions that come anywhere near the stuff this DOJ has pulled. Pure fantasy to the degree that it is a waste of relocated electrons.
Comment by Anonymous — April 17, 2008 @ 9:45 pm
Siegleman is guilty of being a governor who lost. There is absolutely nothing that he did that Governor Bob Riley hasn’t already done. If Sieglemen deserves to be in jail then every single decision maker in Alabama politics needs to go to jail as well. Every Governor in Alabama history has appointed people to boards and every single one of those people appointed had given a donation to that Governor’s campaign.
Take something as insignificant as the Historical Commission and you will see that nearly every person appointed by the Governor was also a campaign contributor.
Comment by Nobody — April 18, 2008 @ 8:51 am
Nobody - tell me how Siegelman got the motorcycle.
Comment by Reactionary — April 18, 2008 @ 12:30 pm
To Anonymous #3-
Doug Jones might have prosecuted Jim Woodward, but it was the Bush Justice Department, and Alice Martin’s Northern District, that chose to continue the prosecution and brought him to trial again, after it was sent back following an appeal. Surely, had there been a “political prosecution” in the first place, the even-handed prosecutors currently in office would have righted the previous wrong. Or am I missing something?
Comment by Montgomery — April 18, 2008 @ 1:27 pm
Nobody — you and many others refuse to see this distinction. Appointing somebody who was a contributor is not a crime. Appointing somebody IN EXCHANGE for their contribution is a crime. That’s what Siegelman did with Scrushy.
Comment by Anonymous — April 18, 2008 @ 4:49 pm
#15, you’re assuming it was Alice Martin, and not mid-level Washington DC bureaucrats at DOJ (who aren’t necessarily replaced during a change in the presidency) who made the decision to continue the prosecution. Remember that the lawyers in her office didn’t actually try the case; lawyers from DOJ, I believe, were brought in to try it. Only one lawyer from her office sat at the table, and I don’t remember him doing anything substantive during trial.
Comment by Anonymous — April 18, 2008 @ 4:59 pm
John Conyers? please… has anyone looked at the House Judiciary Committee members? The only thief not present is Alcee Hastings, a disgraced federal judge/criminal, that most of the Judiciary Committee members who are democrats, vouched for.
Please, even if there is a smidgeon of truth, these are the wrong people to carry it. This is like Johnny Crawford, John Teague, Don Siegelman, Lanny Young, Nick Bailey, Bill Blount, Larry Langford, Paul Hamrick, and Steve Windom starting a Church or a bank…
Comment by publius — April 19, 2008 @ 8:47 pm