Now he talks about a scandal in the WH…

Darrell Issa is an odd choice to talk about a ‘scandal’ in the White House. I’m sure this Sestak meme is just bullshit. I’m certain of that in large measure because Issa is the one leading the charge. He is a simple partisan hack who always puts party before Country. This latest episode is just more of the same.

A few years ago, Darrell and his Party controlled Washington. They had both Houses of Congress, the White House and the Supreme Court (now they only have the SCOTUS and most of the celebrity journalists). In 2004 a big scandal involving a lobbyist named Abramoff erupted over Washington. Some 60 members of Congress and the Senate were said to be involved along with untold staffers and many, many members of the Bush White House.

To hear Issa’s current concerns about any potential WH scandal one would guess that he was leading the charge to clean up the Abramoff affair and that Issa demand an independent prosecutor to get to the bottom of the Abramoff lobbying scandal…

hmmmm… nope.

Actually–and I know this will shock many of you–Darrell did the opposite.

Issa had a seat on the Government Reform Committee when the GOP was in the majority. The Minority of the Committee, led by Henry Waxman, conducted one of the only investigations in Congress into the Abramoff affair and like all the others, this inquiry DID NOT look at the many connections of Congress to Abramoff in any way. Waxman’s investigation DID look at the many, many, many connections between Abramoff and the Bush White House. In the course of those investigations emails and evidence linking White House staffers to Team Abramoff were uncovered and investigators were sent to interview these staffers.

Darrell Issa went to one of these under oath depositions not as a member of the Committee, but as moral support for the Bush staffer involved in the Abramoff scandal. Rubin Barreles was the staffer and Issa opened the deposition with these remarks:

Mr. Issa: Briefly. I guess maybe just briefly. I’m here both because Ruben, in the private sector now, represents my constituency on behalf of the greater San Diego Chamber but also because I knew him before, during his time in government, and I have a keen interest both in the continued investigation of Abramoff and also, in this case, the belated nature of this deposition. Meaning, long after individuals have left government, you know, the Abramoff scandal really began and ended well before — well, more than 2 years before Mr. Barrales left public life. So I hope today we can bring to a close, you know, a single deposition of this individual and anyone else since it is such an old case.

Having said that, I do have a keen interest, because the Congress has not yet reformed itself as to lobbying by government entities. The reforms we have done so far do not stop an “Abramoff” from representing in secrecy to a great extent government entities in a government-to-government relationship. We failed to do that reform under ,our ethics rules; and, therefore, we are still just as vulnerable today to somebody like Jack Abramoff.

That is some classic gobblygook. I think it is better than Darrell’s current concern over the non-Sestak frou-frou, but some may disagree. Issa is always entertaining when he acts like he is interested in good governance and he is a skilled lying bastard.

What was interesting about his appearance in the Barrales deposition was that it sent a signal to Ruben that Congress was NEVER going to investigate the Abramoff scandal and that therefore Ruben was free to forget any details–and so he did. The scene could have been lifted from the Godfather with Issa playing the Tom Hagen role.

And now Issa would like a Special Prosecutor to investigate the Sestak non-scandal. Of course he does. I would expect nothing less from such a partisan hack.

When it comes to White House scandals, I am more interested in the one that Issa helped to cover up than the one he is inventing out of partisan talking points.

So, when Issa calls for a real investigation into the Abramoff Scandal let me know. Until then, he is just a joke and more than that–he is an ass.

Cheers

90 replies
  1. 1
    Alex K says:

    So, when Issa calls for a real investigation into the Abramoff Scandal let me know.

    Don’t hold your breath.

  2. 2
    roshan says:

    Where have you been lately, Dennis?

  3. 3
    Dennis G. says:

    @Alex K:

    Nope. Instead I am waiting for him to call for a Chicken-Gate investigation. As I understand it, Michelle Obama fed the family a dead chicken and then had the bones used to make a soup (or a stock–that needs more digging). I think the fate of the free world may depend upon getting to the bottom of Chicken Gate!!!

    Cheers

  4. 4
    Dennis G. says:

    @roshan:
    I have been covered up with work from my day job as of late, but the light is at the end of a tunnel…

    or perhaps that is just a train… time will tell.

    Cheers

  5. 5
    Corner Stone says:

    I’m sure this Sestak meme is just bullshit.

    WTF are you talking about? BJ has spent several FP’s and follow up posts telling us all how fucking urgent this is.
    I think you’re out of the loop mi amigo.

  6. 6
    Corner Stone says:

    @Corner Stone: Oh shit!
    It’s Dirty Joe Sestak! He’s here to kill us alllllll!!

  7. 7
    Felanius Kootea (formerly Salt and freshly ground black people) says:

    Weird, my last post just disappeared. Anyway, welcome back!

  8. 8
    handy says:

    Yeah but all these Serious People on my teevee are insisting that the WH bribed Sestak out of the senate and that this is a CRIME! I am very concerned about this President’s actions and I think it would be irresponsible not to speculate what other sort of criminal behavior he has been engaging that hasn’t yet come to light.

  9. 9
    Little Boots says:

    How can these people not fall asleep contemplating the “Sestak scandal”? I mean, it’s just so obviously a bore to everyone involved, and yet they will keep going on and on about it. But how can they stay awake for it?

  10. 10
    Corner Stone says:

    @Felanius Kootea (formerly Salt and freshly ground black people):

    Weird, my last post just disappeared.

    Disappeared like John Cole when he gets called on his Joe Sestak bullshit?

  11. 11
    Corner Stone says:

    @Little Boots:

    I mean, it’s just so obviously a bore to everyone involved, and yet they will keep going on and on about it.

    Oh come on. Don’t be so hard on John Cole.

  12. 12
    Corner Stone says:

    @handy:

    Yeah but all these Serious People on my teevee are insisting that the WH bribed Sestak out of the senate and that this is a CRIME!

    Yeah, but John Cole has assured us this is a major fuckup!
    Don’t you trust him to know what’s best for you and the Democratic Party?
    I do!

  13. 13
    Delia says:

    Darrell Issa played a lead role in the 2003 move to recall Governor Gray Davis in California. Of course he was hoping to leap into the breach himself, and suffered a bit of a disappointment when Ahhnold jumped in, but that’s life. So he’s got to make a pest of himself in Congress instead.

  14. 14
    Corner Stone says:

    @Dennis G.:

    I think the fate of the free world may depend upon getting to the bottom of Chicken Gate

    That’s going to have to wait.
    Right in line behind Sestak-Gate!

  15. 15
    Corner Stone says:

    @roshan:

    Where have you been lately, Dennis?

    Joe Sestak threatened to harm his family if he wrote anything about him before the primary.
    And he’d have done it too, if not for those meddling kids!

  16. 16
    Dennis G. says:

    @Corner Stone:

    @Corner Stone:
    Perhaps, I am out of the loop, but this Sestak thing has seemed to be a non-story from day one if you use facts to judge what is a story and what is nonsense. Of course, that entire using facts to decide the meme of the day tactic is way out of fashion.

    And so, I can see how nonsense is urgent. As I read the posts about this meme on BJ over the last few days, I took them as comments on the silliness of the Sestak meme and not as celebrations of the same.

    But then again, I am almost always out of the loop…

  17. 17
    Alex K says:

    @Corner Stone:

    Kinda hyper tonight, are we?

  18. 18
    handy says:

    @Corner Stone:

    Don’t you trust him to know what’s best for you

    You clearly haven’t made good use of the “Archive” feature on this site.

  19. 19
    Lancelot Link says:

    The funny thing about this Sestak “scandal” is that Ronald Reagan did exactly the same thing with SI Hayakawa in ’82.

  20. 20
    Dennis G. says:

    @Lancelot Link:

    The funny thing about it is that anybody would take it seriously. May has not been a month where America’s best and brightest took center stage. Perhaps things will get better in June…

  21. 21
    HRA says:

    Sestak was offered a spot on an advisory board if he would stay in the HR by Bill Clinton. In fact it seems like it did not even go further since Sestak refused and there was no push and shove involved. Actually it makes sense if he would have stayed in the HR. Two solid seats for the Democrats in PA is how I see it.

    I read where Reagan personally asked Hayakawa to not run in a primary where there were 5 running for the a spot on the primary and Maureen Reagan was one of them. Hayakawa did drop out. I read this at Memeorandum earlier.

    IMO Sestak is a fool. TG I don’t have to vote in PA.

  22. 22
    Lynn says:

    Ah, but remember that it was Issa that Karl Rove went to when he wanted someone to put up the money for the 2003 recall of Gray Davis. Rove was able to convince him that he, Issa, was the one most likely to benefit by running for Governor.

    We all know how that one turned out for him.

    I have to guess that someone else put him up to this Sestak business. I just don’t see him doing it on his own.

  23. 23
    Keith G says:

    @Corner Stone:

    Step away from the tequila.

  24. 24
    Corner Stone says:

    @Dennis G.: No Dennis.
    Our bloghost came out and said it wasn’t much of anything, then proceeded to make it something against Sestak. He then talked much smack about it, and went on to say the WH was saving Sestak from himself. Or some such stupid nonsense.
    And when called on it Cole turned the firebagger hoses on and started spraying left and right. Then went and hid.

  25. 25
    Corner Stone says:

    @Keith G: I ran out of that hours ago.
    More’s the pity.

  26. 26
    Elie says:

    Sorry —

    Sestak has to be a rube to get tangled up in this one. And so clearly by his own acts… Lordy, the “I am stupid but so important” world view strikes again. Fool. Hopefully he is smarter than he seems…

  27. 27
    Corner Stone says:

    @Alex K: Yeah, probably.
    I’ve just been told a bunch that this is a story that won’t go away.
    So I’m making sure it does not.

    It’s obviously a make or break dealio in PA.

  28. 28
    Corner Stone says:

    @Elie: And this pretty much seals it for me.
    Cole, kay and elie.

    Need I say more?

  29. 29
    Corner Stone says:

    @handy: If you don’t trust John Cole’s political acumen then you are clearly a firebagger.
    FIREBAGGER! WOOP! WOOP! WOOP!

  30. 30
    Keith G says:

    Where were all these righteous people when this quid pro quo *did* happen?

    http://www.commondreams.org/he.....002-23.htm

  31. 31
    Davis X. Machina says:

    @Corner Stone: I haven’t had a post ‘take’ in a week. There’s probably a blacklist.

  32. 32
    Davis X. Machina says:

    Hey, it just ‘took’…

  33. 33
    tofubo says:

    … republican … hypocrisy … on … any … given … subject …

    tell me something i don’t know

    OtothemotherfuckingT

    ….represents the consensus view of all 16 American spy agencies….

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12......html?_r=1

    16 ??

  34. 34
    Corner Stone says:

    @Davis X. Machina: Why’s it gotta be “black”?

    Why can’t you call it a Sestaklist?

  35. 35
    robertdsc says:

    Welcome back, Dennis. :)

  36. 36
    Shade Tail says:

    @Dennis G.:

    Here’s the truth about the Sestak business, as has been happening here at BJ.

    Mr. Cole believes, with plenty of justification, that Sestak did something a bit scummy by making a completely unsubstantiated accusation that he was offered a job by the WH to convince him to give up his primary challenge. Since Sestak started this, Mr. Cole wanted Sestak to put up or shut up.

    Corner Stone made a lot of piss and wind that amounted to nothing, and now is tooting his own horn by conflating things Mr. Cole wrote with things DougJ wrote.

    …and that’s about it.

  37. 37
    Yutsano says:

    Shorter Dennis: Issa is a bitter whining hypocrite who didn’t get his pony so he’s gonna keep anyone else from getting anything shiny while his party is out of power. At least that’s the thought process that enters my brain whenever I see Issa squaking.

    Oh and you were definitely missed dengre. This will make SiubhanDunne and SIA very very happy to see you posting again.

  38. 38
    M. Bouffant says:

    Darrell Issa is not Debbie Schlussel’s favorite person.

  39. 39
    Corner Stone says:

    @Shade Tail: Shorter Shade Tail:
    I’m a fucking liar.

  40. 40
    Ailuridae says:

    @Shade Tail:

    Corner Stone made a lot of piss and wind that amounted to nothing, and now is tooting his own horn by conflating things Mr. Cole wrote with things DougJ wrote.

    Once he gets around to threatening somebody it’ll be a full Corner Stone trifecta.

  41. 41
    Ailuridae says:

    @Yutsano:

    Oh and you were definitely missed dengre. This will make SiubhanDunne and SIA very very happy to see you posting again.

    +1

  42. 42
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ailuridae:

    Once he gets around to threatening somebody it’ll be a full Corner Stone trifecta.

    Please show me where I have ever, ever, threatened anyone about anything.
    You can’t.

  43. 43
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ailuridae: As usual, just another tough guy liar. Back it up tough guy. Show us.

  44. 44
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ailuridae: C’mon man, I don’t have all night.

  45. 45
    Ailuridae says:

    @Corner Stone:

    Err, I don’t have to show you. That’s not how baseless attacks work. I figured you of all people would understand that.

    Now get back to punching it out to other posters’ stories about Swedish women. God knows you serve no other purpose around here.

  46. 46
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ailuridae: Ok, so you got nothing then? You’re just a liar?
    Got it, thanks.

  47. 47
    Uloborus says:

    Uh… Doug? John? I didn’t even want BoB banned, but do we *really* need an angry troll making half the posts on a single topic, none of which address the subject in any way and are basically just rapid-fire whinges about the front-page bloggers? It’s your blog, guys, but the trolling is just getting out of control these past few days.

  48. 48
    Ailuridae says:

    @Corner Stone:

    And yes, you do have all night. What else do you have to do you worthless PUMA troll?

  49. 49
    Ailuridae says:

    @Uloborus:

    Apparently you never got around to reading the special section of the B-J universe rules that apply to Corner Stone and Just Some Fuckhead. Never any content, no analysis, no ability to read or think critically just incessant whining that the blog they spend all of their time on was written by a former GOPer who better articulates Democratic concerns and views better than them.

  50. 50
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ailuridae: Hey, you’re the one who has said on a couple threads that I’m some kind of internet tough guy, and on this thread specifically that I threaten people.
    I asked you to please show us what you are referring to.
    You can’t so now you’re trying to crawfish.
    You’re just a liar.

  51. 51
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ailuridae: I guess we can’t all be flat out liars like yourself.
    Or do you have anything to back up any of your assertions?

  52. 52
    Ailuridae says:

    @Corner Stone:

    Isn’t it about time that you threatened someone? You might be the most useless poster I have ever encountered in any forum going back to usenet.

    Here’s a challenge: In your next two dozen posts write something or anything that isn’t just whining nonsense.

    I’ll wait. And its rich for someone who blatantly and repeatedly lied during the HCR debate to accuse me of lying. Go beat up a transvestite.

  53. 53
    Uloborus says:

    @Ailuridae:
    No, I’m cool with that part. It’s the way they’re clogging the forum topics that is the problem. They can bitch as furiously and as irrationally as they want as far as I’m concerned. I mean, BJ makes passions run high. It’s when I open a forum topic and half the posts are just whining Firebaggers I get a little concerned, and then I open this one and half the posts are *Corner Stone* himself just… bitching and bitching and bitching. That’s actually making himself an obstruction, however minor and petty of one.

  54. 54
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ailuridae:

    I’ll wait. And its rich for someone who blatantly and repeatedly lied during the HCR debate to accuse me of lying. Go beat up a transvestite.

    Wow. Project much?

  55. 55
    Ailuridae says:

    @Corner Stone:

    Or do you have anything to back up any of your assertions?

    Besides you repeated threatening people? No, I have nothing besides that to establish you repeatedly threaten people.

  56. 56
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ailuridae:

    Isn’t it about time that you threatened someone?

    Still waiting for you to show us the first time I have ever done that.
    It’s ok if you want to lie. Just expect to called on it.

  57. 57
    Ailuridae says:

    @Corner Stone:

    Isn’t it about time you threatened someone, tough guy?

    Or whined about how Texans are mistreated?

    Or lied about any number of things in some relevant policy debate you didn’t remotely understand?

  58. 58
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ailuridae:

    Besides you repeated threatening people? No, I have nothing besides that to establish you repeatedly threaten people.

    Anytime you want to post where I’ve done that…please do.

  59. 59
    Ailuridae says:

    @Corner Stone:

    I don’t have to show that you threatened someone. There is an empirical fact that you did. You can refute it by showing that you didn’t. Go ahead, I’ll wait.

  60. 60
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ailuridae: One of these days I’m sure you’ll have something relevant to say. About something.
    Too bad today is just not your day.

  61. 61
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ailuridae:

    I don’t have to show that you threatened someone. There is an empirical fact that you did. You can refute it by showing that you didn’t. Go ahead, I’ll wait.

    Any day now…please post it here for us.
    Or keep lying. Whichever you prefer.

  62. 62
    Ailuridae says:

    @Corner Stone:

    I have no interest in posting where you have done that. Please prove you didn’t. Ok, thanks.

  63. 63
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ailuridae:

    I have no interest in posting where you have done that. Please prove you didn’t. Ok, thanks.

    Ok, so you’re just a liar then. I think we can all accept that.
    Thanks.

  64. 64
    Ailuridae says:

    @Corner Stone:

    Ah, I’m not lying. My refusal to link to a thread where you threatened someone doesn’t mean you didn’t. You, sir, however, are a liar. And a troll. And a simpleton. And, not coincidentally, a Texan. And, a PUMA.

  65. 65
    Ailuridae says:

    @Corner Stone:

    You’re not the sharpest knife in the drawer, are you?

    Now its time for you to get back to advocating eugenics.

  66. 66
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ailuridae:

    Ah, I’m not lying. My refusal to link to a thread where you threatened someone doesn’t mean you didn’t.

    You can try this weaksauce all you like. Either put it up here or admit you’re a liar.
    Lots of people may not like me or my posts but I still challenge you, or anyone, to show us all where I’ve played internet tough guy and threatened anyone. About anything.

  67. 67
    Corner Stone says:

    @Ailuridae:

    Now its time for you to get back to advocating eugenics.

    Alright. So you’re just a serial liar.
    Until you put something up to back it. Meh.

  68. 68
    Yutsano says:

    ONE! TWO! THREE! FOUR! I DECLARE A FLAME WAR!!

  69. 69
    Corner Stone says:

    @Yutsano: As I said. Meh.

  70. 70
    Ailuridae says:

    @Corner Stone:

    Isn’t it about time you got around to fighting your pit bulls? Preferably against small children?

  71. 71
    Ailuridae says:

    @Corner Stone:

    Lots of people may not like me or my posts but I still challenge you, or anyone, to show us all where I’ve played internet tough guy and threatened anyone. About anything.

    Again. You’re not very bright, are you?

  72. 72
    Seitz says:

    Issa is very easily described and mocked. He launched the recall campaign for one reason: he thought that a successful recall would lead to his installation as governor of California. Then Arnold decided to run and dashed Issa’s dreams, which led to actual, physical tears.

    It’s very simple. Every time Issa is engaged by a Democrat, he should be greeted with: “Aww, what’s the matter Darrel, gonna cry?” over and over again. The man is a pathetic piece of shit who whines like a little bitch when he doesn’t get his way. He should be forced to cry like a child on camera as much as possible.

  73. 73
    Gravenstone says:

    /em hugs Cleek

    Thank you for your Pie Filter. My waning sanity is temporarily bolstered.

  74. 74
    Yutsano says:

    @Gravenstone: Yes, but is that much pie good for you? I guess it depends on the type, since IMHO there can never be enough chocolate pie.

  75. 75
    Perry Como says:

    I didn’t even want BoB banned, but do we really need an angry troll making half the posts on a single topic, none of which address the subject in any way and are basically just rapid-fire whinges about the front-page bloggers? It’s your blog, guys, but the trolling is just getting out of control these past few days.

    Check the archives. Intra and inter blog trolling is SOP. And I say this with a fondness for the practice.

  76. 76
    asiangrrlMN says:

    dengre, I just wanted to add my voice to the ‘welcome back’ crowd. I missed your posts, and I am glad there is a light at the end of your tunnel.

    @gocart mozart: Nice diversionary tactics!

  77. 77
    gocart mozart says:

    Hey, so how ’bout those Red Sox?

  78. 78
    Yutsano says:

    @gocart mozart: IIRC they lost tonight. But the Mariners won. And note to wifey: Mariners vs the Twins next week. Other than me drooling over Joe Mauer, any thoughts?

  79. 79
    asiangrrlMN says:

    @Yutsano: Ha! Well, gex just told me that the Twins are running the protect marriage sanctity ad, so….go Mariners! And, Ichiro is the hawt.

  80. 80
    Yutsano says:

    @asiangrrlMN: Speaking of Ichiro…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtImIqR5neU

    If this does not make you laugh your ass off call your mortician because you’re dead.

  81. 81
    Evolved Deep Southerner says:

    Wow. I haven’t seen anything like this since Michael Gass.

  82. 82
    asiangrrlMN says:

    @Evolved Deep Southerner: The helicopters….are….not……..laughing!

    @Yutsano: Better call 911, then!

  83. 83
    Yutsano says:

    @asiangrrlMN: He still looks cute in the video though, amirite?

  84. 84
    asiangrrlMN says:

    @Yutsano: Oh, hell, yeah.

  85. 85
    debbie says:

    Am I supposed to believe Karl Rove never directed where anyone should or should not run as he worked toward his permanent Republican majority???

    I watched Issa for a few minutes on C-Span yesterday. He couldn’t even string a clear sentence together as he struggled to cite the federal provisions on which he was basing his allegations. No tears, though.

  86. 86
    Thimbles says:

    Things are a little bad now that Issa is free to seed his scandal memes amongst the press and thump his drum demanding an investigation, but imagine how things would have happened just a few years ago:

    http://harpers.org/archive/2008/03/hbc-90002589

    However, there is a second tier of questions that needs to be examined with respect to the Spitzer case. They go to prosecutorial motivation and direction. Note that this prosecution was managed with staffers from the Public Integrity Section at the Department of Justice. This section is now at the center of a major scandal concerning politically directed prosecutions. During the Bush Administration, his Justice Department has opened 5.6 cases against Democrats for every one involving a Republican. Beyond this, a number of the cases seem to have been tied closely to election cycles. Indeed, a study of the cases out of Alabama shows clearly that even cases opened against Republicans are in fact only part of a broader pattern of going after Democrats.

    These were the kinds of rumors that got people thrown in jail a short while back. Sestak and the people who talked to him could have been involved in an all consuming investigation like the one that ruined and jailed Don Seigelman. Issa may be a joke, but don’t treat his activities as jokes. They’re really not funny if and when they get innocent people arrested.

  87. 87
    Sheila says:

    It is time for some thoughtful journalist (and there are a few) to begin researching all of the instances of this on the gops’ side and making them public.

  88. 88
    Kobie says:

    I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m terrified of this Sestak thing. Not because I think anything untoward happened, mind you. But the Republicans will bloviate, the press corps will turtle, nobody outside of the blogosphere will have the temerity to mention that similar deals have been made (including by St. Ronald), and Obama’s numbers will tank.

  89. 89
    Thimbles says:

    It is time for some thoughtful journalist (and there are a few) to begin researching all of the instances of this on the gops’ side and making them public.

    Scott Horton did a little:
    http://harpers.org/archive/2008/03/0081943

    It was a clear case of selective prosecution—and if the theory applied to the Siegelman prosecution were to be applied uniformly, many in the Bush Administration would now be in prison. George W. Bush singled out 146 individuals who gave or gathered $100,000 (to his actual political campaign) for appointment to far more desirable postings as ambassadors, cabinet officers, or members of his transition team. Not a single one of these appointments triggered a Justice Department investigation.

    One of those was likely Sam Fox, the Swift Boat funder who got an ambassadorship appointment to Belgium.

    Again read Horton’s summary of the Seigelman case and tell me the difference.

    In 2007, Donald Shields and John Cragan, two retired professors, released the preliminary results of a long-term study of the Bush Justice Department’s investigations of public officials. They found that between 2001 and 2006 the Justice Department had initiated 375 investigations of public officials. They also found that 298 of those investigations targeted Democrats and 67 of them targeted Republicans. Shields and Cragan concluded that the odds of this imbalance occurring randomly were one in ten thousand.

    One of those 298 Democratic targets was former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman…

    Later that year, however, as the Mobile Press-Register was publishing a poll that showed Siegelman trouncing Riley in a rematch, the Department of Justice finally took action. It launched an investigation of Siegelman. The case was based on allegations that Siegelman had appointed Richard Scrushy, the CEO of the Birmingham-based health-care firm HealthSouth, to an uncompensated hospital-oversight board as a quid pro quo for Scrushy’s having arranged a $500,000 contribution to a 1999 initiative to promote a state lottery bill favored by Siegelman. There were several problems with the case. First, the contribution itself was legal. There was no payment to Siegelman, or even to his campaign. Also, Scrushy didn’t support Siegelman in the election. He was a Republican and had backed Riley. In addition, Scrushy had been appointed to the same board by three prior governors. And finally, according to his own uncontradicted testimony, Scrushy didn’t even want the appointment…

    Siegelman became the target of two criminal investigations by two U.S. attorneys before two federal judges. In 2004 he was told that, although a couple of issues remained, the investigations were in the process of being wrapped up. But then, as the 2006 gubernatorial election approached, the case was dusted off and resumed. Even before the trial came about, Siegelman’s reputation had been demolished by a steady process of venomous leaks to the press, which could only have come from sources close to the prosecution. Siegelman was convicted in May 2006 on a series of corruption charges, and Riley coasted to an easy reelection the following November.

    But hey, it’s important that we don’t look back and focus on the past, amirite?

  90. 90
    Pococurante says:

    Sweet sweet post Dennis. More please.

Comments are closed.