As in the past, DoJ officials exaggerate to block justice and to protect themselves. By seeking to imprison Siegelman for 20 more years, DoJ clearly seeks to end public debate about Alabama's most prominent Democrat.
Siegelman's case remains the centerpiece of unresolved evidence that Karl Rove used DoJ to target Democratic officials nationwide. Scrutiny risks revelations in hundreds of other disputed DoJ investigations that altered the nation's political map during the Bush years.
Yet DoJ risks even more -- including everyone's civil rights -- by shirking its responsibility to tell the truth in its filings, and to endorse a public hearing to clear the air.
New evidence since Siegelman's 2006 trial includes claims of judicial bias and corruption, plus DoJ political prosecution orchestrated by Rove, judge-shopping, jury tampering, failing to comply with prosecutor recusal, firing a DoJ whistleblower, and suppressing evidence that DoJ tried to blackmail its central witness against Siegelman with a sex scandal.
Also, 75 former state attorneys general " the chief law enforcers from more 40 states " made a bipartisan filing that is unprecedented in U.S. legal history to argue that Siegelman committed no crime by appointing a donor to a state post.
Siegelman's convictions centered on his 1999 request to HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy to donate to a non-profit foundation to improve Alabama's funding for education via a state lottery. Scrushy arranged two donations to the foundation. Siegelman reappointed Scrushy to an unpaid state board on which he'd served under three previous governors. A jury found guilt on 7 of 32 bribery-related charges. The defendants received lengthy prison terms and heavy fines.
Last year, Siegelman, now 63, was released on appeal bond after a CBS 60 Minutes expose' about his prosecution. Scrushy, 53, remains in prison, with each of his convictions stemming from the donations to the foundation.
Alabama's Republican Party sniped at CBS reporting. But former National Press Club President Robert Alden, a Washington Post editor for 48 years before his retirement in 2000, found it compelling. "The Siegelman prosecution," Alden tells me, "is one of the worst miscarriages of justice that I'm aware of in the past half century in America."
Denial Under Oath?
DoJ's most recent filing falsely told presiding federal judge Mark Fuller that Business Council of Alabama CEO William Canary has denied under oath to the House Judiciary Committee that he schemed with "Karl" to remove Siegelman from Alabama politics. But no committee record exists of such a sworn statement, as noted by Alabama reporter Roger Shuler.
Canary is well-known in relevant quarters of DoJ, where many "loyal Bushies" remain in power after eight years of such employment practices as the mid-term firings of U.S. attorneys who failed to use their powers for political prosecutions. Politics has been vital also for hiring and promoting DoJ career staff.
Canary is a longtime Rove ally who advised the state's current Republican governor in his successful 2002 gubernatorial campaign against Siegelman. Canary's wife Leura is Alabama's U.S. attorney for the office that is prosecuting Siegelman. She remains in power despite the nation's tradition that its 93 U.S. attorneys resign after a change of presidents.
Many of those accused of framing Siegelman deny claims by the defense, whistle-blowers and investigative reporters. But none of the denials have been in public under oath and subject to cross-examination. Some have been comments to the press, and others in affidavits that can avoid key issues.
Rove and Harriet Miers, the highest-ranking of the Bush White House advisors accused of improperly interfering at DoJ, were interviewed in private this summer by House Judiciary Committee staff and a Congressman from each party. But the rules did not require an oath. Upon release of the transcripts Aug. 11, Rove claimed vindication in his Wall Street Journal column.
A Real Probe Needed