Comments (6)

drew wrote on March 13, 2007 2:02 PM:

Go CREW! Sad we are not seeing this call coming from Democratic sources, but nonetheless, I am happy to see it coming from CREW.

Ebu wrote on March 13, 2007 2:16 PM:

How about Carol Lam.

Englischlehrer wrote on March 13, 2007 2:35 PM:

Seriously, get Carol Lam on the job!

Robin Boerner wrote on March 13, 2007 2:50 PM:

From last October. A little pre-election piece.

http://www.citizensforethics.org/press/pressclip-print.php?view=3730

Jurisdictional Issues Dog Member Probes
By Paul Kane and John Bresnahan, Roll Call

October 26, 2006

The Justice Department has employed a sprawling lineup of investigators and prosecutors to conduct its ever-expanding roster of Congressional investigations, and in the process created a patchwork of probes across the nation.

With at least 17 Members of the 109th Congress coming under federal investigation, Justice has used a pair of offices in its Washington, D.C., headquarters to conduct probes while at the same time coordinating with the offices of at least seven U.S. attorneys and roughly as many FBI offices to serve as ground troops for the inquiries.

Aides at Justice, along with other experts and former prosecutors, said the process of sorting out which offices lead investigations and prosecutions can be a sometimes messy division of labor that focuses on questions of jurisdiction and resources.

“There’s no cookie-cutter approach to it,” said Bryan Sierra, spokesman for the Justice Department.

“There is not any one protocol on who does what — it was designed to be handled on a case-by-case basis,” said Dick Thornburgh, who served as attorney general from 1988 to 1991.

That case-by-case process has led to at least a quartet of Members being investigated the past two years by Justice’s Public Integrity Unit, while another half-dozen Members have come under the prosecutorial glare of U.S. attorneys, almost always their local federal prosecutor.

While the Congressional corruption cases are some of the most sensitive for any prosecutor, they also bring with them the kind of big headlines that can make a prosecutor’s career. And some U.S. attorneys have been known to employ sharp elbows when competing with other federal prosecutors to lead a probe, initially flooding a case with their agents to demonstrate they’ve done the most work and stake claim to a case.

Sierra said jurisdiction is the most important aspect in determining which office will initially handle a case, leading to U.S. attorneys taking the lead when it involves circumstances such as a Member and a local contributor or contractor seeking favors. That was the case with ex-Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-Calif.), now serving a 100-month prison term for orchestrating the largest bribery scheme ever perpetrated by a single Member of Congress.

The Cunningham case was led by the U.S. attorney’s office for Southern California, based in San Diego, a natural base of operations since the main portion of his more than $2.4 million in bribes involved the sale of one home and the purchase of another in the San Diego area, orchestrated by a defense contractor and his co-conspirators.

An offshoot of the Cunningham investigation has been the probe into House Appropriations Chairman Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.) and his ties to defense contractors and municipalities in and around his district to the north of Cunningham’s former seat, which is now being led the U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles. While the probe is examining Lewis’ ties to lobbyist and former Rep. Bill Lowery and earmarks from Defense spending bills, the money has predominantly flowed into the suburban Los Angeles area near Lewis’ district.

These are cases of U.S. attorneys taking the lead because the prosecutors and local FBI agents are closest to “where the crime took place,” Sierra said.

But sometimes officials in Washington will have to step in because of conflicts of interest regarding a U.S. attorney’s office and the Member of Congress under the microscope.

Recently, for example, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) has come under investigation for appropriations earmarks he steered to municipalities and entities which were clients of a lobbyist whose spouse, Vicki Siegel, was a top appropriations staffer for Specter. Some of those clients of Siegel’s husband are in Philadelphia, but the investigation has so far not involved U.S. Attorney Patrick Meehan, the top federal prosecutor in the city of Brotherly Love.

Meehan was a longtime counsel on Specter’s Senate staff and won his spot as a U.S. attorney in 2001 largely because of Specter’s patronage.

Instead, the review of Specter’s appropriations work has been handled by the FBI’s Washington Field Office, agents who actually work in a Falls Church, Va., office.

Public Integrity — a unit based in Justice’s Washington headquarters with less than 30 attorneys — is running an investigation in Alaska into Veco, an energy services company that paid more than $250,000 to state Sen. Ben Stevens (R) for consulting services in recent years. The son of powerful Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Ben Stevens had his legislative offices raided Aug. 31 as part of the Veco probe.

Nelson Cohen, the new U.S. attorney for Alaska, has been recused from that case along with many other prosecutors in that office. Instead, Sierra said, a few prosecutors there are working with local FBI agents and Public Integrity prosecutors handling the case. Sierra declined to explain why Cohen was recused.

Unlike other U.S. attorneys, who often rely on home-state Senators for their appointments, Cohen was appointed top federal prosecutor in Alaska in late August over the objections of Ted Stevens, who had been publicly pleading for an Alaska native to get the post. Cohen came to the job from being assistant U.S. attorney in Western Pennsylvania.

Recusals, for whatever reason, aren’t always limited to political corruption cases. In the Enron investigation, the entire U.S. attorney’s office in Houston was walled off from the case because so many prosecutors had ties to the energy giant, whether through their past employment at firms that represented Enron or through family members working for the company.

Joe Whitley, who oversaw the Criminal Division at Justice during the late 1980s, said sometimes the level of experience and resources in U.S. attorneys’ offices can lead to cases being centralized in Washington.

“You are looking at the experience level of the offices involved,” Whitely said, especially whether prosecutors in a particular U.S. attorney’s office have ever successfully tried a corruption case involving a high-profile politician.

Public Integrity also has run the most prominent Congressional corruption investigation in recent years, the ongoing probe of felon-lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Sierra acknowledged that Public Integrity is in charge of that case because a large portion of the alleged crimes — including the giving of bribes in the form of meals and drinks at Abramoff’s restaurants, tickets in his suites to sporting events, private jets to exotic vacations and legislative provisions in return — occurred in Washington.

Some investigations are based out of Washington, D.C., simply because that’s where the cases originate, according to officials. Recently, Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) was confirmed to be under federal investigation for his daughter’s role in lobbying and consulting for Eastern European companies, which was immediately followed by a public raid on her suburban Philadelphia home and office.

All indications are that the Weldon probe was hatched by Justice and is being run by Public Integrity, not Meehan’s prosecutors in Philadelphia.

Other corruption cases are run by federal prosecutors whose roles simply aren’t clear. Such is the case with Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.), whose home and Congressional offices have been raided at various points by FBI officials conducting a long-running investigation into his ties with companies looking to do business in Africa.

The Jefferson probe has been overseen by the U.S. attorney’s office in Eastern Virginia, based in Alexandria, not by Public Integrity or by local federal prosecutors in Jefferson’s hometown of New Orleans. Some of the alleged crimes in the Jefferson probe have occurred in Virginia, such as the FBI raid on his Virginia home uncovering $90,000 in alleged bribe money in his freezer.

Sierra declined to say why prosecutors in Alexandria — long considered a more hospitable climate for jury trials involving federal officials than the District — are running this probe, saying to explain that rationale might reveal some of the investigation’s details.

“The Congressman has not been charged yet,” Sierra said. “Not all of the facts of that investigation are publicly known.”

oppositionradio wrote on March 14, 2007 12:42 AM:

Has anyone been catching they way the republican flacks have been coming out saying "this was wrong and we have to get to the bottom of it" and then adding "but Carol Lam refused to investigate immigration cases" it seems clear they are trying to build a moat around the boys in San Diego - others may fall... but the people Lam was beginning to get onto - are the sacred cows they are trying to protect. Josh is right - Cunningham, Wade, MZM, Lewis and the real targets Duncan Hunter and his connections in the CIA (remember Dusty Foggo - the limo company and the late night republican card games), and the defense industry so heavily based in San Diego is at the core of this story.

Will Pat Leahy subpoena Gonzales and ask him about this specific investigation and who related to it pressured him to get rid of Lam?

Kay Sieverding wrote on September 23, 2007 11:39 AM:

I'm a victim of extortion by the strip club judge, Edward Nottingham. I did a search on my name for criminal records and nothing came up. I was not arrested or charged or tried. Judge Nottingham just skipped that and put me in jail without charging me with a crime and without an evidentiary hearing. Apparently he did this to cover up for Lloyds of London. They had insured some district attorneys I sued in Colorado. That dispute also involved government corruption. I had complained that my former neighbor, the city council president, Kevin Bennett built buildings in volume and location not allowed by the zoning laws. There are three buildings you can see from the street that aren't even listed on the property taxes. When I complained about them, as adjoining property owner, I was criminally charged, but not arrested. I pled not guilty and hired a good lawyer so instead of trying me, they dismissed the charges out of court, which is not allowed, and then held a press conference to say that I was guilty but a trial was too expensive.