He's not going to turn down, especially to be made public, the opportunity to talk about this. Once you get him in your office and you give it to him straight, you don't do anything untoward.You give it to him straight you ask him question after question after question. Now he is on the hook for whatever he has answered and you're going to either A make sure that you've shown that this individual did nothing wrong, which is what the Feds should be into too. They should not just be trying to get convictions, they should be also trying to root out those who are innocent, but two is, if he has told you a lie you have got him on ten-oh-one and you have got an opportunity to do perjury.
If he has lied you can start from the top with the information and work backwards to see did he tell you the truth or didn't he or two, work up with the immunity to see if you can catch him, if he has done something wrong. I think that's a very beautiful way that the government should work and I think if they think about it, they will. Now I can tell you this, that Reid Shar was the US Attorney who prosecuted Blago here in Illinois. He has now been hired by the legislature in New Jersey to head up that investigation.
I can tell you this about Reid, he is extremely thorough, he is extremely dedicated, and if there are some of those things, that's where Reid will be very very very good at rooting out what occurred and I think that Christie is going to have some real issues here to decide. If that's the route that they take, they want to talk to him first, my advice as the criminal defense attorney is look, your political career has to take a step back to your freedom and right now we can't answer these questions because we don't know what they have and we can't go in there and answer anything.
R.K.: Wow okay, so you have gone on awhile I just want to ask a couple questions.
S.A.: Sorry, sorry.
R.K.: No, you're doing great! First thing is, you've said that in terms of looking at people who they're going to give immunity to, you start lower and you work your way up. Now I call my show the Bottom Up Radio it sounds like this is Bottom Up law
S.A.: Right, which is how truthfully which is how in my opinion it ought to be. You see a lot of drug prosecution where the guy who has got the most involved in it, the guy who has got the hundreds of millions ends up testifying against the mules, and you're working your way down. And the guy who has got the most involved in this gets the lesser time. Well I don't like that, I don't think that's the way it should be. Those who are most involved in crimes should be the most punished. This is the opposite of that. I think they can work their way up to the top and that's how the Feds are best and most effective.
R.K.: So they've really got to get the lay of the land in terms of his entire team and start lower down?
S.A.: Well what I think is going to happen is, look, politics is a dirty business, there's no question about it. One of the things that is going to help Christie is the fact he was a former US Attorney who did former investigations in criminal corruption and in politics. I think he got a hundred and thirty three convictions for pay-to-play politics and corruption in the political sphere, so he is going to know how the US Attorney works.
So he has that inner knowledge so he'll know what he can and cannot do. Whether he does it because he wants to be President of the United States or not remains to be seen. I don't think we can discount that. Blago truly, now everybody will laugh at this when they hear this, because they're looking in twenty fourteen back that he got fourteen years for corruption, but in 2005 and 2006 there was a real call that he might run for the Presidency of the United States, and he believed that.
And in fact people were trying to raise money for that. He was the first Serbian governor of Illinois and he had a big campaign, he had twenty four million dollars in his thing so he ran but that also caused him to make mistakes and caused him to say things he shouldn't say. I don't know if Christie is that same way. All signs of it seem to me that it very well may, when he comes out and gives a two hour speech regarding the Bridgegate incident, and having no thought to any other investigation, what he wanted to do, was clear to me, was come out and save his political career.
He really thinks about running for 2016 and as a defense attorney that's a killer to your defense if there are things out there. I mean he had no idea that this Mayor was going to come out and say the things that she said. Well how many more are there of those? How many people are going to come forward and say, listen, I was up to get a contract but he gave it to the guy who gave him a contribution. There has got to be many more of those out there, because that's just the nature of politics. When you allow individuals to give campaign contributions, you know there has got to be thousands out there. So that's what Christie is going to have to be facing because that's where the government is going to start.
R.K.: And we know that in Alabama the Feds were able to take Governor Don Siegelman and basically do what you described and he is now in jail even though I am a firm believer that what he did was not wrong and that he should be free.
S.A.: Well that's right and in fact they're still on appeal on a lot of those issues and I, you know, I had this problem in Blagojevich, I really did because I still to this day do not think what he did was a crime, now everyone is going to say I am his lawyer and of course I am supposed to say that, but it's true, I don't see it criminal. Unlike this situation, I'll get to that in one second. Blago never even was accused of taking one dime. There was not any, even the Feds had to admit during closing arguments that I was right, that if you follow the money he didn't get a dime. That's a little different than at least what's being argued here. What's being argued here, or should I say, at least what's being looked at here is there very well may have been direct campaign contributions given for this project to be supported that now is not being supported and so you're holding up funds.
Those are direct contributions, those are direct. And the US Supreme Court has said under those circumstances you can definitely get it on honest services. We have to look at this. Siegelman was even different than Blagojevich because there were at least some accusations of money going back and forth. Now I am not sure here who the contributors are. If I were an investigative reporter I would be, right now, this minute, on a website because you have to report these, looking at every single contributor over the course of his political career at least in the last six to seven years and I am sure you're going to start digging up, you're going to see the same contributors, you're going to see that, and then go to another website and look at who got the majority of contracts and there's no question in my mind that you're going to see some of the individuals getting big contracts also giving out big contributions.
And that's one of the issues here. Is that a crime? And I think with the way the Supreme Court decided right when I started Blagojevich honest services, there's a strong case to be made that it is.