Federal Prosecutors Oppose Former Gov. Siegelman's Appeal to U.S. Supreme Court

[Hissyspit]

Source: Birmingham News

Federal prosecutors oppose former Gov. Don Siegelman's appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court
By Mary Orndorff -- The Birmingham News
November 14, 2009, 9:54AM

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Supreme Court does not need to hear the appeal of former Gov. Don Siegelman because prosecutors adequately proved at trial that he exchanged an official act for a political donation, according to written arguments filed late Friday by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Siegelman and co-defendant HealthSouth Corp. founder Richard Scrushy in August asked the justices to take up their case because they believe it raises broader legal questions about how much evidence is needed to prove bribery.

They argue that the donations Scrushy made to Siegelman's lottery fund and Siegelman's subsequent appointment of Scrushy to a state health board were normal political transactions, not criminal. And they contend that government prosecutors never proved there was an explicit agreement to exchange the appointment for the $500,000 in donations..

But the solicitor general of the U.S., responding Friday on behalf of the prosecution team, said case law allows the jurors to infer, even from circumstantial evidence, that there was an agreement to exchange the money for the official action.

Read more: http://blog.al.com/sweethome/2009/11/federal_prosecutor...

[madfloridian]

1. What is going on here?

Who is this solicitor general? Who appointed him? I assume it is not Holder,the AG. So this person can dictate what goes to SC or not?

I must be dumb or thickheaded or something.

Why is a Democratic administration letting Siegelman go on like this?

[QC]

3. It's more of that 455,658,659,125-dimensional chess. n/t

[struggle4progress]

8. Office of the Solictor General

http://www.justice.gov/osg/

[harkadog]

11. The solicitor general is Elena Kagan

She was a friend of Obama's when they both taught at the University of Chicago. Obama appointed her but she can't dictate what goes to the SC. She is giving the SC the government's recommendation which is not to hear the appeal. The SC could still decide to hear the appeal if they wished.

[Peace Patriot]

2. This sucks! nt

[unaffiliated liberal]

4. They let Ted Stevens off the hook but still go after Siegelman?

If what Siegelman did was wrong the DoJ needs to go after every member of congress, all 535, for what they've done in concert with the insurance and drug cartels regarding "health care reform" alone.

[snake in the grass]

30. Meanwhile, the war criminals continue to...

...tour the country and the TV channels, spewing their lies and poison.

[asjr]

5. This is rotten news. Siegelman was defeated

in the election by fraud. It was so blatant only a dummy would not be able to see it. Now the Republicans are getting by again with seemingly no one helping Siegelman. I hate to say it but this is the Alabama I knew. Why would the SG take the side of the prosecutors. Does he just not want to get involved? Rhetorical questions here, but I am really angry about this. Is there NO ONE in this administration that wants to investigate? Are they afraid they will hurt someone's feelings?

[atreides1]

6. More of that "Change you can believe in"

What a bunch of BS.

[TacticalPeek]

7. Bastards.

At least they are ashamed enough to dump it late on a Friday. As they ought to be.

[chill_wind]

9. W. T..F..!

[katandmoon]

10. Another despicable act by the Obama administration.

[boppers]

12. The $500,000 was... what... donations with nothing recieved?

I thought Siegelman was being railroaded, but the way the article covers it, it's pretty cut and dry. A jury agreed. And Siegleman now wants what, a retrial on selling a board position, because even though he asked what the guy wanted, and then gave it to him, there wasn't... uhm... a formal contract?

[Hissyspit]

13. Are you being sarcastic or do you really not know what you're talking about?

[boppers]

14. Both, actually. I haven't been following this that closely...

...but it looks like the appeal is based on requiring more formal proof than was delivered at trial, however, what was delivered seems pretty corrupt already.

[Hissyspit]

15. This conviction should have been thrown out a long time ago. It was a Rove attack job.

Here's quite a bit of background from a thread a couple of months ago:

PARENT THREAD: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

LOTS OF LINKS AND FACTS IN THESE THREADS, INCLUDING "91 Ex-Attorneys General Support Siegelman Appeal to Supreme Court":

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[boppers]

16. Thanks for the links!

I have some reading to do...

[Hissyspit]

17. You're welcome. I took out the "the hell" from my question.

Sometimes it's easy for me to get worked up over this issue.

[boppers]

18. No problem, I've been a wikipedia editor for years (6 years, 9 months, 22 days to be exact)...

WP:AGF (along with WP:BITE) are pretty much touchstones for me, as you can imagine, we catch serious hell from all sides, at all times, on anything even slightly mildly complicated....
...and so far, this thing reads like a Gresham novel. Lots of weird twists and turns. (A character named "Canary"? Really? )

[Hissyspit]

19. I believe Grisham drew on the Paul Minor case, which is connected to the Siegelman case

by some of the players, for his novel "The Appeal."

http://legalschnauzer.blogspot.com/2007/09/mississippi-...

[elleng]

21. Yup, LEURA can't even spell her own name!

Thanks for your work.

[boppers]

23. LEURA?

I missed that reference, 'splain please?

[elleng]

28. My 'joke.'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leura_Canary

[barbtries]

20. look below

read and learn. siegelman is the victim in this case. i can't even imagine the frustration he deals with. he was jailed for months, wrongly. the whole thing is a travesty.

[boppers]

25. I'm reading, and reading, and reading... there's a *awful* lot to go through....

I haven't seen a lot on Siegelman being innocent, though. I've seen more that trends to the thinking that Siegelman was just as corrupt as the others, who weren't prosecuted... which points towards yet another form of corruption, but doesn't let him off the hook.

[wroberts189]

22. It was to start a lottery to fund extra schooling for kids.

He did not personally profit.


It happens a hundred times a day in a hundred cities a day...

[boppers]

24. How about the board the guy would up being appointed to?

Was there any profit motive possible there? (I'll dig, but I'm guessing those on this thread might have more background on it...)

As far as how often it happens, in what cities, my (current) take at this point is that *all* of the people (implicated in different cases that this should have been started because of this) should have been taken down. It looks like the politics in the area is incredibly corrupt as hell, and the political angle was only prosecuting one corrupt guy, rather than a whole pile of them.

Sessions, for example, looks guilty as hell as well.

[boppers]

26. So far: a Heathcare business executive sitting on a CON board?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_of_Need
http://www.ncsl.org/IssuesResearch/Health/CONCertificat...

Yeah, I can see why that could be worth $500,000 to a business.

[Princess Turandot]

27. That's actually not uncommon...

they generally have members from the healthcare industry on these boards along with government representatives. For one thing, it helps to have people who actually have knowledge of the stuff that they're evaluating/voting on. Someone from outside of the industry would not really know which questions to ask when they hold a hearing with whatever entity has come before them with an application.

Southcare provides rehab services. In NYS, you'll likely find representatives of the not-for-profit rehab/nursing home facilities on the board. And while they are not-for-profit, they still have a strong vested interest in rehab matters that come before them. An example of this would be the application by an acute care hospital which wants to open an inpatient rehab program which will 'compete' with their freestanding facilities. So in all likelihood, that representative will challenge the application more strongly, which isn't really a bad thing in that type of an assessment.

So, that specific fact alone does not necessarily mean that shenanigans would automatically ensue.

[boppers]

31. It sounds like a great idea to have industry expertise on the board.

Paying for it.... not so much.


edit:typo

[elleng]

29. Hadn't he already sat on the board?

I have to re-read, too.

[boppers]

32. From my re-readings, he was on the board before.

I don't know what past arrangements were, but if they were similar, several previously elected people should be up for jail time as well.

[elleng]

33. I think the point here is that he was well experienced for the job.

[boppers]

34. I don't doubt his experience.

If he was well experienced, he wouldn't have any need to pay $500,000 to be re-appointed.

[elleng]

35. And he didn't.

[Joe Chi Minh]

36. Wouldn't the prosecutors be professionally disgraced, and maybe

sanctioned? Let's hope so.

[glitch]

37. Utterly despicable. No justification whatsoever, no matter how hard they try to spin it

or when they news dump it.

SHAME!

[nyc 4 Biden]

38. k&r

Exonerate Don!