In the latest development in the federal case against former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman, retired Chief U.S. District Judge U.W. Clemon of Birmingham recently wrote a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder seeking a probe of misconduct by federal prosecutors, including their alleged “judge-shopping,” jury-pool “poisoning” and “unfounded” criminal charges in an effort to imprison Siegelman and forestall his election campaign in 2006.

Judge Clemon, a highly respected jurist and one of the first African American judges in the American South, took this unusual step because he felt duty bound to report corruption that occurred on his watch, according to an announcement from the non-profit Velvet Revolution.

This development comes days after detailed evidence revealed that Siegelman’s trial judge, Mark Fuller, was chosen to preside over the trial because he had a “grudge” against Siegelman which bordered on hatred because Siegelman appointed an investigator to look into Fuller’s shady activities.

Siegelman Deserves New Trial Because of Judge’s ‘Grudge’, Evidence Shows

Moreover, the new evidence makes a strong case that Judge Fuller labors under conflicts of interest because he owns a majority share in Doss Aviation, which receives hundreds of millions in contracts from the military and has ties to CIA activities.

Last week, VR called for the removal of Siegelman’s prosecutor, Laura Canary, and for an investigation into the activities of Judge Fuller, both which now have been echoed by Chief Judge Clemon in his letter to Eric Holder.

“What more does it take, Mr. Holder, to clear the stench of corruption from this case?,” the release asks, and then demands: “Step in and enforce the rule of law, now!”

Under the Microscope
by Glynn Wilson

Here is a little song I wrote
You might want to sing it note for note
Don’t worry be happy
In every life we have some trouble
When you worry you make it double
Don’t worry, be happy…
– A Bobby McFerrin song

The rain is coming down steadily in The Ham. But that’s OK. I’m dry in The Bunker and it’s good for the garden anyway.

Don’t worry. Be happy…

Some of my Facebook friends think I should join the crowd with the snappy, happy news, like Mike Royer, Pam Huff, Southern Living and the Newhouse boys, who of course write their columns four days before the paper comes out anyway…

And Dog knows I want to, since Bush is gone back to Texas and The Obama is in the White House and all’s right with the world, right?

Not so fast.

According to New York Times columnist Frank Rich, Obama Can’t Turn the Page on Bush, and neither can we until we get some unfinished business out of the way.

What prompted me to think about this today was an exchange I had this week on Facebook, the newest, most trendy, don’t worry be happy social networking Website, where I swear the programmer geeks who created it should adopt the Bobby McFerrin song as their theme song.

What they won’t tell you is that George H. W. Bush tried to use the song in the 1988 U.S. presidential election campaign until McFerrin, who was a Democrat, objected and the campaign desisted.

Oh, how soon we forget.

But don’t worry. Be happy…

While I love Google myself, if I were teaching again I would tell my students you can’t depend on Google for everything.

Here’s an example that fits right into today’s theme.

For some reason, my biggest critics on the Web tend to be engineers. Now back when I was pursuing a research academic career, one of my main professors used to make fun of engineers by calling them jarheads. Why? Because among pure research scientists, engineers are sneered at because they are involved in the so-called “practical science.”

But like a lot of things during the Bush years, that meaning got distorted when the movie Jarhead came out in 2005, depicting a company of marines calling themselves jarheads.

Not surprisingly, the sound track to the movie contained the song, “Don’t Worry, Be Happy.”

Now there is a host of communications research which shows a certain and fairly large segment of the public likes this snappy, happy news, which is why local television news broadcasters started smiling and laughing at each other on TV starting in the early 1980s. Prior to that, network TV news broadcasts were usually somber, straight news affairs. Anyone here old enough to remember Huntley-Brinkley?

Now, the silly local broadcasters will smile at the camera, even when they are reporting that several marines died in Iraq today. The jarheads…

Newspapers started picking up on this a number of years ago, which is one of the reasons that’s what you get when you pick up a Newhouse paper like the Birmingham News. Even when they are delivering bad news, the tone is still snappy and happy.

I had the opportunity to do some reporting for one of the Newhouse papers considered to be the best in the chain when I worked for a time in Washington, D.C., back in 2004 and 2005. I did some free-lancing for the Cleveland Plain Dealer, but the deal went sour when the DC bureau editor wanted me to produce some snappy, happy news about the latest campaign finance reports about members of Congress from Ohio, including Dennis Kucinich.

Now I don’t know about you, but I don’t see much humor in campaign finance reports. I stayed up very late one night analyzing the reports and wrote a story which I thought did them justice. But the editor was terribly distraught when he read my report. The paper used the AP story instead of mine. Why? Because the editor said, and I swear I’m not making this up, “We don’t want analysis. We just want something short and snappy and funny…”

Right. Sorry, but that’s not why I got into journalism.

For a local example from today’s Newhouse news, take this piece of so-called business reporting. It’s actually a pretty interesting tale about Richard Scrushy and his country band Dallas County Line, but to those of us who know the whole story, there are several things missing.

Where is the criticism of the Bush appointed prosecutor? And where is the admission that the Birmingham News made a fortune on advertising from Scrushy’s Healthsouth, before the editors and publisher lost money on HealthSouth stock along with everybody else in Mountain Brook who were taken in by it?

If you want to see some real, substantive reporting about the Siegelman-Scrushy cases, this week you have to turn to the Huffington Post, where a guy I know named Andrew Kreig has a report under the headline (my headline anyway):

Siegelman Deserves New Trial Due to Judge Grudge

I met Mr. Kreig in Atlanta on the day of the appeal hearing in Atlanta. He showed up with a binder full of printouts of all my stories on the Siegelman-Scrushy cases, and we had an interesting lunch talking about it all. His report is the result of his substantive investigation over a number of months, and it is a piece of investigative journalism worth catching.

Be forewarned, though. It’s not snappy, or particularly happy.

Of course the Alabama bureau of the Associated Press came out with an almost celebratory piece of reporting this week, saying what we already reported would most likely be the case before the all Republican panel of judges who heard Siegelman’s case on the U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

Siegelman, Scrushy Lose Bid for Full Court Review

The Newhouse reporter in Washington managed to break this little sentence of news this week at al.com, based on a leak, of course, from you know who: Obama to Replace Alice Martin With Joyce Vance?

And this came a little while later on a liberal blog: Bush U.S. Attorneys To Be Replaced in ‘Next Couple of Weeks’

Now that’s happy news.

But these items are not.

Politics As Usual On Siegelman Appeal?

Prosecutors Want Longer Sentence for Siegelman?

So sorry to be the harbinger of bad news today, but I hope you will agree that we delivered it in a snappy, happy way.

Don’t worry. Be Happy.

The world’s going to end in 2012 anyway.

Right…

Only snappy, happy news, please…

by Roger Shuler

An article in Sunday’s Montgomery Advertiser reveals that Alabama Governor Bob Riley apparently has committed a federal crime — not once, but twice.

The article, by reporter Sebastian Kitchen, was meant to provide details about the two political parties’ financial condition heading into Alabama’s 2010 election.

But Kitchen, perhaps inadvertently, reveals that Riley appears to have violated federal bribery and honest-services fraud statutes. Riley certainly committed crimes if the Don Siegelman case is to be believed as the law of the land.

Siegelman, Alabama’s former Democratic governor, and co-defendant Richard Scrushy, the former CEO of HealthSouth, were convicted on federal corruption charges in 2006. At the heart of the case was a transaction where Siegelman accepted $500,000 from Scrushy for an education-lottery campaign and then appointed Scrushy to a position on a state health-care board, where he had served under three previous governors.

Now, let’s take a look at what Kitchen reveals in his reporting about the Alabama’s GOP’s swelling coffers.

First, Kitchen states that Riley is chairman of the Alabama GOP’s Campaign 2010 fund-raising effort.

Then, comes this nugget about Raymond J. Harbert, CEO of Harbert Management Corporation in Birmingham: Some of those donors to the Republican Party include Raymond Harbert of Birmingham, who Riley appointed to the Auburn University board of trustees as an at-large member in March 2009. He donated $10,000 in 2008.

Let’s review that information briefly. Harbert made a donation to a fund-raising campaign, chaired by Riley, and then was appointed by Riley to the Auburn University board of trustees.

But that isn’t the only curious transaction in Kitchen’s story. We also have this regarding Birmingham physician Swaid Swaid: Dr. Swaid N. Swaid, who Riley appointed to the Certificate of Need Review Board, donated $5,000 in 2008.

Again, let’s review. Swaid gave to a campaign chaired by Riley and then was appointed by Riley to a spot on the Alabama Certificate of Need (CON) Review Board.

Both of these transactions sound an awful lot like the alleged crimes in the Siegelman/Scrushy transaction, do they not? And Swaid even was appointed to the same board to which Scrushy was appointed.

A devil’s advocate might point out that there was no proof of a quid pro quo in Riley’s transactions with Harbert and Swaid. But a student of the Siegelman/Scrushy trial knows that a quid pro quo was not shown in that case either, and U.S. Judge Mark Fuller’s jury instruction did not require one.

A devil’s advocate might also point out that the amounts of Harbert’s and Swaid’s donations were not nearly as large as the one from Scrushy. But if memory serves us correctly, the amount of the donation was not an overriding factor in determining whether a crime took place in the Siegelman/Scrushy case.

Finally, the donations apparently went to the Republican Party, not to Riley personally. But that also was the case in the Siegelman/Scrushy matter.

Scrushy currently is in federal prison, and Siegelman might be heading back, because Siegelman received a donation from Scrushy and then appointed the CEO to a state board.

That is exactly what appears to have taken place with Bob Riley’s donations from Raymond Harbert and Swaid Swaid.

Roger Shuler is a veteran legal journalist. This article appeared first in the Legal Schnauzer blog. He and I are in the process of teaming up to build the alternative, independent Web Press in Alabama. If you like to see these stories you will not see in the so-called mainstream press in this state and want to help fund this effort, consider making a large or small donation today.

A broad coalition of organizations and individuals launched a “Restore Justice At Justice” campaign today to demand redress for all those politically prosecuted under the Bush Justice Department, beginning with former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman and Paul Minor of Mississippi.

On Wednesday, a this group of organizations and individuals dedicated to an honest and accountable government launched a new Web site at RestoreJusticeAtJustice.com, a campaign to clean up the Department of Justice’s sad record of political prosecutions under the Bush Administration.

These organizations, representing hundreds of thousands of members, have a strong track record of spurring action on crucial issues. The coalition has sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, available on the Restore Justice At Justice website, requesting that he quickly investigate and identify those targeted, and vacate their convictions, beginning with Alabama ex-Governor Don Siegelman and Attorney Paul Minor.

The coalition asserts that under the Bush administration, the Department of Justice was driven by ideology, and prosecutions were often used to settle scores and intimidate the opposition. The GOP, at the direction of Karl Rove, used the DOJ to target political enemies including Democratic contributors and those who were a threat to GOP electoral gains and big business interests. The Department was used as an arm of the White House to destroy these Democrats. This political profiling resulted in the criminal prosecution of many on the GOP list, including Siegelman and Minor.

“Last week, Attorney General Holder ordered the dismissal of charges against Senator Ted Stevens because of prosecutorial misconduct,” said coalition spokesperson Brad Friedman. “Because targeted political prosecutions also constitute prosecutorial misconduct, AG Holder should apply the same standard to Siegelman, Minor, and all the others identified as targeted by the Bush DOJ,” said Friedman. “Siegelman and Minor were targets of political profiling, which is as unjust as racial profiling. President Obama and Attorney General Holder promised to return justice to the Justice Department and free the Department from politics. We demand that they do so.”

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., one of the signers at RestoreJusticeAtJustice.com, has stated publicly that “Paul Minor is an innocent man” who was targeted by Karl Rove, prosecuted by “crooked Justice Department prosecutors,” and sentenced to “a breathtaking 11-year sentence for non-violent, white collar crimes he did not commit,” while Minor’s wife of 41 years lies in a hospital dying from cancer, unable “to utter the word l-o-v-e to her husband.”

Kennedy summarizes the case this way: “Karl Rove’s crooked henchmen at the U.S. Justice Department have turned this dignified gentleman’s life into a horrible ordeal that is a disgrace to American democracy.”

**Late Monday, Sylvia Minor died without her husband by her side after the DOJ opposed Minor’s bail pending appeal and a compassionate furlough.

The campaign is spearheaded by VelvetRevolution.us, a national non-profit affiliated with over 150 organizations. The coalition urges other organizations that care about justice to sign on to this campaign by sending an email to RestoreJusticeAtJustice(at)velvetrevolution.us. Individuals can sign on at RestoreJusticeAtJustice.com.

Here at the Locust Fork News-Journal, with our extensive coverage of the Siegelman case and long-standing editorial opposition to Bush administration’s policies on this and other issues, join in the campaign today and urge readers to sign on as well.

Restore Justice

Editor’s Note: In any other state in the country with a functioning watchdog press, this story would have generated howls about a conflict of interest on the part of the governor’s son. Yet not one word about this has been published in a single Alabama newspaper. We are now pursuing funding from investigative journalism sources to begin shedding light on all the political shenanigans being conducted in the dark in this state, and teaming up with other reporters such as Roger Shuler to try and build the new Web Press infrastructure here. This story only scratches the surface of what we can accomplish. If you want to help, get in touch.

by Roger Shuler

Alabama attorney Rob Riley, who has a curious history of cashing in on the Don Siegelman prosecution, recently announced a $109-million settlement in a fraud lawsuit involving HealthSouth Corporation. But sources tell Legal Schnauzer that Riley himself is involved in a company that faces allegations it practices health-care fraud.

Riley, the son of Alabama governor and former Siegelman opponent Bob Riley, announced that HealthSouth investors had reached a settlement with the accounting firm Ernst and Young. The suit alleged that Ernst and Young failed to detect a fraud that almost destroyed Birmingham-based HealthSouth.

“We think it is a good settlement for the shareholders, many of whom thought they would never see any return on their investment,” Riley told The Birmingham News.

Riley is a curious choice to be lead counsel in a lawsuit alleging health-care fraud. That’s because, according to our sources, he is an officer in a company that appears to have engaged in health-care fraud–and perhaps still is.

Sources tell Legal Schnauzer that Riley is an owner and officer in a Birmingham-based company that provides physical-therapy services. The company is facing allegations that it has repeatedly defrauded federal health-care programs.

Alice Martin, U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Alabama, has received extensive information about the alleged fraud scheme involving Riley’s company, sources say. But Martin, a George W. Bush appointee and a long-time ally of Bob Riley, has refused to intervene in the case.

As we reported back in January, Martin has a history of providing favorable treatment to politically connected parties who have allegedly engaged in health-care fraud. She appears to be doing that again with the case involving Rob Riley’s company.

Riley’s connections to the HealthSouth lawsuit first came to light in April 2008, thanks to some expert reporting by Sam Stein, of Huffington Post.

Let’s review some of the key points from the Stein article:

* Months before Siegelman was charged, court documents show, Riley knew an indictment was coming and former HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy would be drawn into it;

* In what appears to be a case of legal-political “insider trading,” Riley managed to maneuver himself into a hugely profitable role as lead local counsel in a massive lawsuit against Scrushy, HealthSouth, Ernst and Young, and others;

* Riley snagged the lead counsel role even though most of his legal experience was in the area of medical malpractice. He had little or no experience in complex securities litigation;

* When the HealthSouth litigation began in 2003, Riley’s name was nowhere to be found. He joined the fray in January 2005, representing the New Mexico State Investment Council, a relatively new player in the case;

* Why did Riley rise to play a central role in the HealthSouth lawsuit? Almost certainly it was because of his ties to U.S. District Judge Mark Fuller, whom Riley knew held a grudge against Siegelman and would be the perfect hanging judge in the criminal case;

* Riley surely knew that his ties to Fuller would pay off in the civil case. That apparently happened in May 2006 when an investment banker testifying in the criminal case said HealthSouth had pressured him to come up with $250,000 for Siegelman’s education lottery fund;

* Shortly after this revelation in the criminal case, HealthSouth agreed to pay $445 million to settle its portion of the civil case. It was one of the largest settlements in securities-litigation history. And it appears that Rob Riley engineered it.

So what is the current status of the HealthSouth lawsuit? The $109 million payment from Ernst and Young appears to be set. An appeal issue has delayed disbursement of the $445 million from the 2006 settlement involving HealthSouth and several former officers and directors. Riley says a shareholder lawsuit still is pending against Scrushy and investment bank UBS AG.

Let’s do a little quick Schnauzer math. At least $554 million is waiting to be dispersed to multiple shareholders and plaintiffs’ attorneys. How massive is this litigation? The case file includes almost 1,600 documents, and roughly 150 plaintiffs’ lawyers have been involved.

Out of all of these attorneys, representing powerhouse firms from both coasts and some of the most prominent firms in Alabama, who was designated as “liaison counsel for shareholder lead plaintiff”?

Whose name was front and center on a motion for settlement filed on March 23, 2009? Why, none other than Rob Riley, who just happened to have all kinds of connections to the Siegelman/Scrushy criminal case.

Here are a couple of questions to ponder:

* Did any of the 150-plus lawyers who apparently allowed Riley to take a lead position in the HealthSouth lawsuit ever wonder if he might have more than a few conflicts of interest in the case? Were they concerned about the appearance of impropriety caused by Riley’s connections to the Siegelman criminal case? Or were they simply interested in the fact that Riley could help rake in big bucks — for them and for himself?

* Did any of these lawyers know — or did they even care — that Riley was an officer in a company that itself appeared to be engaged in health-care fraud? Would any of these 150 plaintiffs’ lawyers–or perhaps the numerous defense attorneys — think it relevant that lead counsel in the HealthSouth fraud litigation was himself an apparent actor in a fraud case connected to the delivery of health-care services?

* Aside from alleged fraud committed by Riley’s company, consider the conflict Riley appears to have in the HealthSouth case. Riley is an owner in a company that provides rehabilitation services. That’s the same area of medicine in which HealthSouth has made its name. If HealthSouth is greatly weakened in the rehabilitation field, do Riley and his business partners stand to profit?

Would some of these multimillion-dollar settlements fall apart if it is shown that Rob Riley has a massive conflict of interest — and is an owner in a company that allegedly engaged in health-care fraud while he purported to be fighting for victims of health-care fraud?

Stay tuned to Legal Schnauzer. We are going to be looking into all of these questions — and providing details about the case against Rob Riley’s company.

Originally published by the Legal Schnauzer. Republished here with permission. Roger Shuler is an experienced journalist who formerly wrote for the Birmingham Post-Herald, now defunct.

by Glynn Wilson

Former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman and HealthSouth founder Richard Scrushy are asking the full 12-judge Eleventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta to rehear the appeal in their political prosecution primarily on the basis that the alleged quid pro quo bribery claimed in the case was based on evidence of an “implied” agreement, not an “explicit” agreement.

“We filed today asking the 11th Circuit to rehear my case because we believe if their ruling, if left to stand, prosecutors will be able to pick and choose their targets among contributors and elected officials,” Siegelman said.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the McCormick case made it clear, he says, that in this area of First Amendment rights, before a jury could convict an elected official or a contributor on bribery there had to be an “explicit” not an “implied” agreement.

“My three judge panel has allowed my conviction and my seven and a half year sentence to stand basically by defining ‘explicit’ to be something that can be inferred or implied by the jury form the mind and actions of actors,” he said.

“Yes, this is about my personal freedom but it is even more important this First Amendment issue clarified so the law wont be a trap for the unwary,” he said, citing Thomas Jefferson, who once wrote: “Whenever the people see things that are wrong the people can be relied upon to set those wrongs to right.”

“We need to get a message to the U.S.Department of Justice to help get this wrong set right,” he said. “If the three judge panel’s new definition changing an ‘explicit’ to an ‘implied’ quid pro quo is allowed to stand not only am I up the creek without a paddle but federal prosecutors will be able to pick and choose contributors and elected officials seeking convictions based solely on a jury’s view of what was in the minds of the elected official not based on any express communication.”

“After having gone through this unbelievable episode in our lives,” he said, “I had an opportunity to re-read The Federal Prosecutor, a speech by the U.S. Attorney General at the time, Robert Jackson. Just read the first paragraph and you’ll get a flavor of what my family has been through and what I ask you to help guard against.”

Siegelman said 11 of the 12 judges decide whether a full court hearing is justified. He said three of the judges have recused themselves in this case, including Republican Bush appointee William Pryor, the former attorney general of Alabama. That leaves 8 judges to make the decision. Three of those have already voted to uphold the conviction, so he says it will require five of five votes to order a new hearing.

Legal experts say the full appeals panel rarely overturns three judge panel decisions en banc, the legal term for the full court. So this is likely headed for the U.S. Supreme Court. Whether they will agree to hear the case is anybody’s guess.

You can read the appeal motion filed in the case here and the appendix here.

Guest Column
by Roger Shuler

When commentators call for investigations of possible wrongdoing by members of the Bush administration, the discussions usually have an international focus. Subjects such as torture, illegal detentions, and spying tend to carry the day.

But a recent Gallup poll shows Americans are concerned more with domestic wrongdoing, such as politicization of the Justice Department, than with international issues, as reported by the Locust Fork News-Journal Feb 13.

The poll showed that 71 percent of respondents favored a criminal investigation or independent probe of possible attempts to use the Justice Department for political purposes. By contrast, 62 percent favored investigations into torture and 63 percent on warrantless wiretaps.

While national opinionmakers tend to focus on war crimes, folks in the heartland seem to be more concerned about the notion that Bush officials have prosecuted and imprisoned people for political reasons, not because they committed crimes.

And so we take time here at Legal Schnauzer to send this vital message: We must not forget our political prisoners. And we must take all necessary steps under the law to see that they are vindicated — and that the appropriate people are held accountable for their suffering.

I can think of no better way to remember the victims of the Bush “justice” system than to spotlight a recent three-part documentary produced by Project Save Justice. It is titled “The Political Persecutions of Karl Rove,” and it is compelling viewing. My hope is that every American, in one forum or another, will see it and be moved to action.

The documentary opens by noting that many Americans have heard about the apparent political prosecution of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman. But most Americans do not know that the U.S. House Judiciary Committee has received information about roughly 1,000 questionable prosecutions. And of the 700 investigations conducted by the Bush Justice Department since 2001, about 87 percent targeted Democrats.

Here is Part I of “The Political Prosecutions of Karl Rove:”

Part II focuses on the methods used by the Bush DOJ, noting the critical role played by Republican-appointed judges and compliant mainstream news outlets. It also notes that supporters of Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and John Edwards were frequent targets. One Edwards supporter, Michigan attorney Geoffrey Fieger, notes that his office was raided by 100 FBI agents. “You could rob a bank and murder someone and get maybe two or three agents on your tail,” Fieger says. The raid on his office, he says, was “unprecedented in American history.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Glynn Wilson

Former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman urges supporters in Rainsville at his 63rd birthday party to keep the pressure on Congress to continue the investigation of Bush administration officials, including Karl Rove, who perverted justice for political reasons not only in his case, but in cases across the country.

Nowhere are changes needed more in the Department of Justice than in Alabama, where former Governor Don Siegelman still awaits word from the Eleventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta and a Congressional investigation in Washington, D.C., on the fate of his political prosecution.

The New York Times carried a story Sunday about seismic shifts going on in the Justice Department to reverse course from the Bush years, when the department was turned into a political hit wing of the White House under Bush’s political adviser Karl Rove.

The Justice Department, probably more than any other agency (in Washington), is bracing for a broad doctrinal shift in policies from those of the Bush administration, department lawyers and Obama administration officials say.

Eric H. Holder Jr., whom the Senate is expected to confirm on Monday as the nation’s 82nd attorney general, plans to take the oath of office that evening to demonstrate a quick start, which will include overseeing the creation of a new detention policy for terrorism suspects.

The civil rights division, which had been reshaped in a conservative direction under President George W. Bush, is ripe for sharp change, as well, according to the Times, and expectations are that the division would be restored to its historic role of largely enforcing prohibitions against racial and ethnic discrimination.

Under the Bush administration, the division significantly diminished its involvement in those areas and shifted resources to fighting instances of religious discrimination.

Ridiculous. One of the cases under review will provide a much needed opportunity to have a court assess the Bush administration’s domestic wiretapping program, an issue of much concern to this news organization for the past three and a half years.

 Loading ...