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.
R.K.: So Christie is in a lot of trouble. Okay so you mentioned and you differentiated between wire and mail fraud and RICO crimes. What are the differences?
S.A.: With RICO, which is Racketeering and Influencing Organizations Act, basically to give it to you in a layman's term, there are a certain number of individual crimes that the government has said look we want to crack down on, but we're not able to get at the individuals because they're hiding behind a corporate veil or they're hiding behind an organization.