« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Wilkes Subpoena Tear Continues! Senators, Admin Officials on Wilkes' List
As if serving subpoenas on twelve members of the House wasn't enough, Brent Wilkes' lawyers apparently issued subpoenas to a number of senators and administration figures as well, it was disclosed today. At least two of those subpoenas, however, have not been served yet.
In a filing today by the House's lawyers seeking to quash the twelve subpoenas, the House's general counsel reveals that he'd been advised by an investigator for Wilkes' lawyer Mark Geragos earlier this month that subpoenas had also been issued to:
-- Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID)
-- Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-HI)
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI)
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV)
-- White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten
-- Secretary of Defense Robert Gates
-- Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England.
A spokesperson for Sen. Levin said that he had not been served with a subpoena, and a spokesman for Sen. Rockefeller said the same, adding that the Senate legal counsel had told him that they hadn't received anything. So it may be that Geragos has decided to hold off serving those additional subpoenas, at least for now. (Update: Sen. Craig's spokesman also said that he had not been served. Later Update: Ditto for Sen. Inouye.)
Geragos has refused to disclose the rationale behind the subpoenas, but Wilkes has tipped his hand that his defense might include the argument that his gifts to Cunningham were part of a corrupt system of which he was a victim. These additional subpoenas are more evidence that Wilkes is seeking to present evidence of how Washington works for a defense contractor, from the top down. Prosecutors filed a motion earlier this week seeking to prevent Wilkes from introducing such evidence at trial.
Wilkes and his associates contributed more than $40,000 to Craig. As for the other senators, they all chair powerful panels -- appropriations defense subcomittee, armed services, and intelligence (Inouye, Levin, Rockefeller, respectively)-- which would have had jurisdiction over the government contracts awarded to Wilkes' companies. Wilkes made his fortune off of defense contracts, which presumably explains why Gates and England would be on his list. And the White House... well, who knows.
Update: You can see the twelve subpoenas issued to members of the House here.
Comments (9)
Keith Lammers wrote on September 27, 2007 11:55 AM:I admire this lawyers chutzpah and energy. It's too bad all those Congress Critters have already pronounced that they are too important to answer mere subpoenas.
I guess they're learning from the White House that the rule of law is sitting at the bottom of the Potomac wearing a stylish set of "concrete galoshes".
Anonymous wrote on September 27, 2007 12:02 PM:Dig emptywheel's hypothesis about the connection between these subpoenas and Craig's refusal to resign:
http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2007/09/is-larry-craig-.html
anonymouse wrote on September 27, 2007 12:22 PM:It will be interesting to see if these subpeoned senators and congressment will be turning up as conspiritors or parties to Wilkes and other's wrongdoings.
I, for one, doubt very seriously that the corruption in Washington is limited to a "few bad apples". these guys have been (and are being) protected by a majority of both parties. Washington is a small place... the only ones out of the loophole are those folks voting the clowns in.
When so many investigations are resulting in so few penalties (bad guys helping the investigations and getting a get out of jail free card)... protectionism is proven more important than justice. When impeachment is off the table... protecting Washington insiders is more important than justice. When the laws allowing these actions to continue are not changed... protecting the ability to continue these atrocities is more important than justice.
"We the People" have lost our democracy. We still utter the word, but the meaning no longer exists. The concept of a representative government (anyone up there representing YOU?) is gone.
We are now acting out scenarios as if these ideals still meant something when, in reality, they do not. I guess this is why the frustration is so high amongst those of us who are not part of the highest levels. We still believe we have the ability (by our trust in those representing us) to stop the slide, but we do not.
I think the only way to stop the slide now is to make sure NONE of those mobsters up there are reelected. Those are the clowns who have gotten us to this point... both Reps and Dems. Why would we have any faith that they would even have a desire to get us out of the situation?
I for one... do not..
OneCrankyDom wrote on September 27, 2007 12:47 PM:In the past we have heard about this type of defense many times. I believe this is what they call a grey defense where they subpeona people that will calim States Secrets or somesuch nonsense causing the judge to have to throw the case out. I could have this wrong, but then my memory is fading daily.
Oscar wrote on September 27, 2007 12:50 PM:What about DeLay? As far as I can see, virtually every rep loosely tied to Wilkes is on the list and Tommy Boy, being more than loosely tied, should logically be there, too. He, if anyone, knows exactly the way Washington works. Or perhaps he HAS been subpoenad, given that he no longer has an obligation to disclose it...?
zk0sm0 wrote on September 27, 2007 12:56 PM:knowing what we know about wilkes being a scumbag, i find it surprising to see that so many here are so willing to believe that there is any substance behind these subpoenas. if wilkes had any evidence at all that any of these folks that wilkes wants to subpoena were actually guilty of being corrupt assholes like cunningham, he could easily trade that dirt for a plea-bargain. as it is, the only purpose of those subpoenas is misdirection: prey on the jury's and the public's negative sentiments wrt congress and hope for a facts be damned verdict. and as evidenced by the responses here, the tactic seems to be working. bravo.
mikefromtexas wrote on September 27, 2007 10:46 PM:If the congressmen refuse to testify, the defense will file for dismissal on the grounds of not being to properly defend their cliente. It's a cheap stunt, but it might work in front of the right judge.
Miss American Pie wrote on September 30, 2007 5:41 AM:Why have all the comments regarding TK and JM been removed, and no further comments allowed to be posted?
I understand that some posts may have been personal, intrusive and somewhat obscene at times, yet I am curious as to why ALL the posts have been excluded. By excluding everyone you have also excluded the people who have something meaningful and pertinent to add to this discussion. My understanding is that your site was designed to promote our understanding of our current politicians and politics, our right to speak freely of our views, as well as to question those who may deprive us of our views.
I am sure you (TPM in GENERAL) have your reasons for not posting these comments, and I am not asking for those reasons. I am just hoping it is not because of something someone did or said. Our free speech is our most valuable asset and I hope that you (TPM) would use and preserve it.
hotmail sign in wrote on December 20, 2007 8:58 AM:fdwuvte8jcjj hotmail sign in hotmail sign in