Whistleblower from the DoJ Points Finger at Prosecution in Stevens Trial.
Buckle your seatbelt, folks, and get ready for the latest twist and turn in the long, strange trip that is the Ted Stevens trial. This one’s a doozy. The airbag might even deploy. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.
Remember back when Judge Emmett Sullivan reprimanded the prosecution for withholding certain evidence from the defense? They got their knuckles rapped, but the trial proceeded. Well, guess what happened last week…
A whistle-blower inside the Justice Department has accused members of the team investigating public corruption in Alaska of official misconduct, according to the judge who presided over Sen. Ted Stevens’ trial in Washington, D.C.
The whistle-blower’s complaint, dated Dec. 2, is now the subject of an internal investigation by the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility, according to a memorandum and order signed Friday by U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan of the District of Columbia.
Sullivan revealed the existence of the complaint, and three secret hearings about it last week, in his 29-page order.
Sullivan said little about the nature of the alleged misconduct. Among the allegations was that a government employee accepted “multiple things of value” from sources cooperating in the investigation, Sullivan said.
Multiple things of value? (double take) Did he really just say “multiple things of value? That sounds eerily familiar… Tell me more, Judge Sullivan. ( I sit on the edge of my seat with very large eyes).
From the onset, the government sought to keep the latest problem secret, Sullivan said. When it alerted the court to the complaint Dec. 11, it did so in a sealed memorandum, he said.
Prosecutors asserted the complaint bore “no relationship whatsoever” to the Stevens case.
“The court flatly rejects the government’s position,” Sullivan wrote. The complaint alleged a person involved in the investigation accepted “multiple things of value,” including “artwork and employment for a relative” from cooperating sources, the judge noted with some irony.
“Surely the Court does not need to remind the government that the defendant in this case was convicted for failing to disclose that he had accepted multiple things of value and, in fact, the trial included testimony about his receipt of artwork and employment for a relative,” Sullivan wrote.
(I have now gotten so close to the edge of the seat, that I actually fall right off the chair and land unceremoniously on the floor. After getting up, I have to almost physically restrain myself from typing “You can’t make this stuff up.” I remind myself that when Sherry Johnston got busted for dealing Oxycontin yesterday, I actually created a new category in the sidebar called “You can’t make this stuff up” under which I can file posts, so I am NOT going to say it anymore. After the hundredth time, it just doesn’t mean much any way. So, I’m just going to click the box. Now back to the story at hand…)
The judge also reported that the whistle-blower accused at least two federal employees of intentionally violating government policies in the corruption investigation in Alaska and in connection with material that was supposed to be provided to Stevens for his defense, Sullivan said.
Sullivan said it was premature to say whether the allegations, if true, could have affected the outcome of the trial. But Sullivan said the allegations were clearly relevant to the Stevens case.
[snip]
During one of the secret hearings last week, Sullivan said, he was unable to get any kind of answer from a government lawyer to repeated questions about whether the complaint contained favorable information that needed to be disclosed to Stevens. The lawyer’s refusal to answer “blinks at reality,” Sullivan wrote.
Maybe I should just stay sitting on the floor, and save my tailbone.
The report, with the identity of the whistleblower redacted, will be released at noon on Monday (Alaska time) despite the government’s request to keep the complaint sealed.
I think we all need to chip in and buy Judge Sullivan one of those high silk hats, and a pair of shiny shoes and spats. If you’re going to hav to run a three-ring circus, you may as well look the part.
Meanwhile, look forward to some good reading material Monday.
No comments? Is everyone still on the floor?
Wait … I’m confused.
Didn’t we just find out that somebody else that said they lied at the trial didn’t lie at the trial because somebody talked him into saying he lied at the trial? Or am I completely confused about that?
And now this??
what?
(Mudflats could be full of material for years to come just trying to untangle everything that has happened in the last six months…….I don’t know whether to congratulate you or just pat you metaphorically speaking on the back and shake my head with pitiful concern. )
No, you are absolutely correct. That would be David Anderson who said he lied at the trial, but didn’t lie at the trial. Former Rep. Jerry Ward, whose daughter Anderson is dating convinced him to say he was lying so Ward would maybe get immunity for an impending indictment which accuses him of taking illegal campaign contributions. It just won’t stop! AKM
Yes I was just waxing poetic
Still sittng on the floor here.
we are speechless…..
Getting out the large bottle of dramamine…shaking head….ok, I’m ready to finish reading post….
Thank you AKM for clearing that up for me, I was starting to think I was imagining things because it seemed impossible – we need a score card or something –
YCMTSU – so true. unbelieveable
I have relatives in another state who are very involved in politics – it is getting so I am embarassed to even mention what I know they are already reading about in the news.
Now that I know I am no more confused than usual – I am really turning in this time.
shheeeeeeeesh! right, Writing, YCMTSU !!
Let’s just pitch a tent over this and call it a circus………my oh my………the sheer lunacy of this is off the charts………
WOW! I have to say it again… WOW! SO how many days do you think it will be before we find out that A) the prosecutors were guilty of the very thing they were prosecuting, or B) the wistleblower has some romantic ties to somebody within 6 degrees of Ted Stevens or his corrupt cronies? It seems to me that the odds are fifty-fifty that it could go either way.
Okay, it’s all getting too weird. This is what I heard recently, from a reliable source in ANC who is in a position to hear things like this.
Uncle Ted pissed off Dick Cheney for getting a 10% no-bid gimmee for DBE’s in Iraq. DBE’s like Alaska Native Corporations. That cut into Cheney’s profits on his no-bid gimmes over there with Haliburton, Brown & Root and the usual war profiteers. So the whole thing to hang Uncle Ted came out of the West Wing –> disgrace Uncle Ted, get him out of the senate and send him home, so the Native Corps wouldn’t be able to rake 10% of the contracts and not pay the expected mordida.
It works for me. YMMV.
I think we all need to chip in and buy Judge Sullivan one of those high silk hats, and a pair of shiny shoes and spats. If you’re going to hav to run a three-ring circus, you may as well look the part.
I think that would be considered “multiple things of value”! LOL
Lord I do agree what a 3 ring circus! If I were the judge I think I would throw in the towel and say “They don’t pay me enough and I need a bigger shovel for all of this dung!”
grewingk- as we sashay down the midway of the “Carnival de Boosh” we first hear the barker saying “round and round it goes……..where it stops – no one knows !!”……..then we see it……..the BIGGEST wheel ever…..on the wheel is painted every crazy,dirty illegal,nefarious,lame-ass situation a human can imagine………the wheel is so BIG that it takes several men to turn it………well, well lookee there…….it’s Bush-Cheney-Rove !!! Spinning their little punk asses off…….well….the circus ALWAYS packs up and leaves…….thank God !!!
the CBC will do anything to spin this trial to there advantage.. I mean really they are the CBC don’t forget that…. They control all the power in Alaska, and have for my whole life.
you couldn’t trust them to keep anything honest.. can anybody say bamboozled?
May Justice prevail in any case..
Un-frickin-believable!
so, will the Gov Palin consider this gov business and comment? hmmmm?
Do you suppose Ted Stevens wants a do-over on the election?
(I shouldn’t be giving anybody any ideas!)
Can anyone say Train Wreck? Shit, I can’t turn away. Can Alaska really be this jacked up? With all of this, SP is beginning to look normal. The Feds probably don’t even have the manpower to investigate all the goings on, here.
Ahhh, but let’s not be too distracted…isn’t SWWNBN suppposed to be a grandmother, today?
Couple parts I don’t get… top of the list is why the governor’s office would make a request to keep anything related to this federal matter sealed. It’s a federal matter, Sarah Palin, so keep your nose out of it. That is… unless you played a part in the matters which resulted in this trial and conviction of Ted Stevens.
One other thing… I wouldn’t be too quick to dismiss the allegations of prosecutorial misconduct. It’s not unusual for misconduct to occur, but then again, it’s not all that unusual for these types of allegations to be made with the hope that some of the sh*t will stick. Prosecutors have only themselves to blame as there was some misconduct early on.
As we’ve seen time and time again, bad behavior not only begets bad behavior but also complaints about bad behavior (whether or not such actually occurred/s is another matter).
oops.
upon reading the pdf of the judge’s memorandum, realized that I had misread AKM’s post. the governOR did NOT request the whistle-bloer’s complaint be sealed; it was the governMENT (US attorney’s office). my bad so ignore the fist paragraph of my previous comment.
This is all very strange. This is a justice department that is totally in the republican back pocket and has been prosecuting for political motives and firing people for looking into republicans on the take, yet they seemed to have used their department to take out one of their own with the same dirty tactics they used to lock up that dem. governer for bribery that later turned out to be false. It will be facinating to see what comes out of this and I am sure it will come out if not now in 30 days or so when Obama takes over and justice goes back to doing what it is supposed to.
Here’s those same right-wingnuts in action on a somewhat unrelated matter…
.marketwatch.com/news/story/bush-insider-planned-tell-all/story.aspx?guid={3386CE02-96CC-4933-874A-C96677A2F36E}&dist=msr_1
These crazy people involve with Allen were trying to whack some guy.. Big oil at it’s best huh.. Corrupt Bastards. can anyone say Karen Silkwood!!!
This is all making my head spin. So is the upshot that if they ever get to the bottom of this issue, it could be favorable for Stevens?
Ok, help me out here. Is what they are saying is that someone who was cooperating with the case bribed a government employee to withhold information that may be favorable to Stevens? The only person I can think of who would think that was a good idea is Stevens himself, trying to set up a reason for appeal.
One other thing… I wouldn’t be too quick to dismiss the allegations of prosecutorial misconduct. It’s not unusual for misconduct to occur, but then again, it’s not all that unusual for these types of allegations to be made with the hope that some of the sh*t will stick. Prosecutors have only themselves to blame as there was some misconduct early on.
Ok, how about this. The US Attorney, a Republican, knows that someone will have to prosecute Stevens, sooner or later, so they purposely blow it through prosecutorial misconduct because they know if they put off his trial until a Democrat is in office (which looked very likely when they finally prosecuted him) that Stevens would be toast.
That’s the most likely scenario I can come up with considering the fact that the prosecutor and everyone else involved in this trial is a Republican.
AKM how about a little review on how the case was handled from Washington D.C. by US Attorneys and not U.S. Attorney from Alaska. A little back story might give us a few more clues. Like why US Attorney T. Burgess was replaced and by whom I think the guys name was Cohen.
It is somewhere on the spinning wheel……….
avahome – they should have sent Patrick Fitzgerald to take down Uncle Ted and on the way outta town he could’ve stomped Sarah !!! He takes care of bidness………..
Any bets on whether or not Uncle Ted will walk? Prosecutorial misconduct will get the defense a mistrial. On re-trial, the original witnesses will be found to have disappeared into the Great White North slope to be eaten by a starving polar bear. Then, the aforesaid polar bear will wind up as the main course at Uncle Ted’s, having been cooked on the $10,000 grill installed at his house under the original ‘loan’ from Veco. The polar bear will ‘live’ on as a hearth rug in front of Sarah Palin’s fireplace and eventually take up residence in the Oval Office in 2016.
Seriously, you think I’m kidding!!……..YCMTSU
I have to say, in a holiday season a little bereft of cheer this certainly does keep one’s Wow-o-meter up! YCMTSU – maybe that should be Alaska’s new motto
Looking forward to tomorrowq!
I’d like to see Siegelman walk before Stevens…
Mistrial.
On a lighter side.
Seasons’ Greetings to all!
From what I read in NYTimes and a piece on 60 minutes – Siegelman got hosed by Rove……..there is a really special place awaiting Rove……..not sure what or where……..I just smile knowing this……….
It’s such a shame when the good guys think they have to resort to dirty tricks in order to win. The victory is tarnished–nullified, even–by their actions. ::::::sigh:::::::
Looks like the best disinfectant, sunshine, is peeking under the edge of the big top, the elephants have gone rogue, and the tigers are starting to eat their keepers. Hope the ringmaster’s up for all this – that’s quite a tightrope to be walking on, who knows what manure is waiting to be stepped in? Seems like there’s a lot of unraveling going on.
This is what happens when you have a DOJ populated by wingnuts from inferior law schools who got the job b/c their resumes were thick with super-partisan GOP “qualifications” and they had a satisfactory answer to uber-wingnut Monica Goodling’s interview question “What is it that makes you want to serve President Bush?”
*wishing we had a puking smilie so I could fully express my feelings about this*
The Bush Administration will SURELY go down in history as the most corrupt and incompetant EVER.
Of course, this could have been the plan all along. It gets Stevens out of the way politically, but he doesn’t end up in the slammer.
A member of the prosecuters staff taking unnamed favors from a witness is hardly in the same category as a US Senator taking favors and gifts from a wealthy contributer and not reporting it on the proper forms. How in the world could a witness giving gifts to a prosecutor in any way affect the decision by the jury when they had been presented with such a preponderance of evidence against Stevens? This is a pretty desperate attempt to muddy the waters once again IMHO.
bob, I think the concern is that the member of the prosecution team is in a position to do just the kinds of thing that have already happened in the trial: fail to disclose required documents and information. If the failure had not been discovered, then the defence is prejudiced in its ability to respond to the charges.
If the cooperating witness who did the favours was also given a softer ride in terms of charges being dropped or a reduced sentence in exchange for his/ her cooperation (and favours), that is also a miscarriage of justice, albeit not necessarily for Stevens.