Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Statement from Prosecutors on Siegelman/Scrushy Media Accounts

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-18-07 12:22 PM
Original message
Statement from Prosecutors on Siegelman/Scrushy Media Accounts
...The affidavit, made by Rainsville, Alabama, attorney Dana Jill Simpson (Attachment 1), focuses on statements allegedly made by William "Bill" Canary, husband of the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Alabama. Mr. Canary is identified in the affidavit as an advisor to Bob Riley, then a candidate for Governor. Ms. Simpson claims that Mr. Canary stated in a post-election November 2002 telephone conversation that he had "gotten it worked out with Karl and Karl had spoken with the Department of Justice and the Department of Justice was already pursuing Don Siegelman."

Ms. Simpson was recently interviewed and, according to a story by Brett J. Blackledge appearing in The Birmingham News on July 8, 2007 (Attachment 2), Ms. Simpson cannot say whether Rove was being identified in the call as the person behind the investigation or simply as someone who heard that Siegelman was already under investigation. She admitted that the alleged conversation described in her affidavit could be interpreted either way. She also stated that her affidavit does not say, and was not intended to say, that Rove was behind the investigation. In fact, as the article points out, nearly ten months before the alleged November 2002 conversation took place, The Birmingham News reported that Siegelman was under federal investigation. Moreover, the investigation was widely reported throughout the State of Alabama prior to the election. In fact, eight months earlier, in March 2002, Siegelman and his counsel, David Cromwell Johnson, convened a press conference about the investigation and, using caged canaries as a prop, demanded that Ms. Canary recuse herself from the case (see Attachment 3 at p. 2). That press conference was broadcast on new reports throughout the state.1

In any event, relying on the same affidavit, the national media has published:

Time Magazine: "A longtime Republican lawyer in Alabama swears she heard a top GOP operative in the state say that Rove ‘had spoken with the Department of Justice' about ‘pursuing' Siegelman, with help from two of Alabama's U.S. attorneys." Adam Zagorin, Rove Linked to Prosecution of Ex-Alabama Governor, Time, June 1, 2007.

The New York Times article by Adam Nossiter: "The lawyer, Jill Simpson, claims to have heard a top Alabama Republican operative with longstanding links to Mr. Rove boast over the phone in 2002 that Mr. Siegelman's political career would soon be scuttled." Adam Nossiter, Ex-Governor Says Conviction Was Political, The New York Times, June 27, 2007.

The New York Times editorial: "The most arresting evidence that Mr. Siegelman may have been railroaded is a sworn statement by a Republican lawyer, Dana Jill Simpson. Ms. Simpson said she was on a conference call in which Bill Canary, the husband of the United States attorney whose office handled the case, insisted that ‘his girls' would ‘take care of' Mr. Siegelman. According to Ms. Simpson, he identified his ‘girls' as his wife, Leura Canary, and another top Alabama prosecutor. Mr. Canary, who has longstanding ties to Karl Rove, also said, according to Ms. Simpson, that he had worked it out with ‘Karl.'" Questions About a Governor's Fall, The New York Times, June 30, 2007....



More >>>
http://www.wsfa.com/Global/story.asp?S=6806266&nav=0RdE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC