For progressives who once had hope for the Barack
Obama administration on justice matters, consider this: Beck is an Obama
nominee, and the Senate is controlled by Democrats.
Have Democrats come to "own" Bush/Rove scandals that made a mockery of the U.S. constitution? It sure looks that way from here.
Why does the Beck "confirmation hearing" emit such a foul odor? Andrew
Kreig, director of the D.C.-based Justice Integrity Project, provides
answers in
a splendid overview piece out today:
The U.S. Senate approved by voice vote June 30 a new U.S.
attorney for Alabama, thereby extending a series of disgraces blighting
the federal justice system in that state and nationally. The Senate
voted to approve George Beck, 69, to run the Middle District office in
Alabama’s capital city of Montgomery. The Senate failed to require that
Beck, right, appear at a hearing to answer questions about a host of
pending issues.
The most important question is how he could supervise personnel in that
office who framed former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman after Beck himself
represented the main witness who helped secure convictions. It remains
as the nation’s most notorious political prosecution of the past decade.
In 2008, CBS 60 Minutes reported that DOJ’s prosecutors coached and
threatened Beck’s client Nick Bailey in up to 70 interrogations without
required disclosure to the defense. Our Justice Integrity Project's
four-part investigative series cited below explains further why Beck’s
role is especially disturbing.
Is the Senate interested in actually serving the public, making sure
that citizens understand how the justice system they fund went so
haywire? Apparently not. Writes Kreig:
Confirmation hearings and trials are two of the rare moments
when the public has a chance to learn the secrets of powerful figures
in law enforcement via cross-examination. But the Senate shirked that
process and rubber-stamped Beck. Siegelman’s 2006 conviction on
corruption charges was enabled by the flagrant bias of a partisan
Republican trial judge, Mark E. Fuller. He is the chief federal judge in
the district. . . . As the trial and appeal moved forward, Fuller
secretly obtained $300 million in Bush contracts for Doss Aviation,
Inc., a closely held company the judge controls as by far its largest
shareholder. The company primarily refuels Air Force planes and trains
Air Force pilots, but also makes uniforms for military and civilian
federal personnel. . . .
We and others have published countless stories about scandals associated
with the Siegelman prosecution and his trial judge, Fuller. Among my
investigative reports was one in 2009 describing sworn testimony that
Republicans picked Fuller to frame Siegelman. We reported also that
Republicans had a plan to steer a $35 billion Air Force contract for
mid-air tanker refueling planes to Europe’s EADS, manufacturers of
Airbus.
Beck was smack in the middle of the Siegelman fiasco, as lawyer for
chief government witness Nick Bailey. Beck surely is aware that the
entire process had alarming ties to the military-industrial complex.
Writes Kreig:
Now 65, Siegelman is temporarily free on appeal bond, but
faces resentencing by his nemesis Fuller. The paramilitary undercurrents
in the Siegelman case are especially disturbing. The federal government
created a special anti-Siegelman strike force headquartered at an Air
Force base and led by an Air Force colonel in the reserves. The
prosecution took Bailey there for interrogation, helping foster an
unusual climate of fear. That climate is especially powerful if one
reads 2009 affidavits by Bailey and his friends describing how federal
prosecutors pressured Bailey, in serious legal jeopardy because of
crimes unrelated to Siegelman, by offering him leniency as well as
threatening to expose his sexual partners if he did not do what they
wanted. To be fair to Beck, one can argue that he sought and obtained
the best deal possible for his client and has remained silent since for
those reasons. But the immense discretion and powers of a U.S. attorney
require more vetting on overall notions of justice than mere loyalty to
one client.
Why did Obama nominate Beck in the first place? Apparently it's because
he's been listening to so-called Democrats such as Birmingham lawyer G.
Douglas Jones. Jones perhaps has been Beck's most outspoken supporter,
and it's curious that both men have clear ties to Republican elites, as
we outlined in a previous post:
Jones' public statements about the Beck nomination reflect
significant foot shuffling and dissembling. Could that be because George
Beck represented chief government witness Nick Bailey in the
Siegelman/Scrushy case and reportedly allowed prosecutors to browbeat
and coach his client? Could it be because Beck comes from the Montgomery
law firm of Capel and Howard, which has strong ties to GOP strategist
Karl Rove and Bill Canary, who is president of the Business Council of
Alabama, husband of Leura Canary, and confidant of U.S. Chamber of
Commerce chief Tom Donahue?
Doug Jones supports a lawyer from a firm that has ties to Karl Rove,
Bill Canary, and Tom Donahue? Sheesh, with "leaders" like that, the
Alabama Democratic Party surely will continue to spiral right down the
toilet. To top it off, Jones worked with Homewood attorney Rob Riley,
son of former GOP governor Bob Riley, on a federal HealthSouth lawsuit
that raked in more than $50 million in attorney fees. Has that been good
for the cause of justice in Alabama? Almost certainly not:
This scenario becomes particularly troubling when you
consider that the other co-liaison counsel in the HealthSouth
case--Jones' chief local assistant--was Rob Riley, the son of former
Republican Governor Bob Riley. Why did Doug Jones need Rob Riley on the
lawsuit team? Probably because Riley had inside information about former
HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy. And that information probably came
from Riley's involvement in a Republican conspiracy to conduct a
political prosecution against Siegelman and Scrushy, a scheme that
Alabama attorney and whistleblower Dana Jill Simpson revealed to the
world.
Should progressives be concerned about Doug Jones' willingness to make
money by jumping in bed with a member of the Riley clan? What about
Jones' apparent determination to now push tainted nominees to a
Democratic administration?
Obama has a background as a constitutional scholar. But the Beck
nomination, and the Senate's unquestioning acceptance of it, indicates
our leaders (of both parties) do not give a rip about such concepts as
"due process" and "equal protection" under the law.
How ugly was Beck confirmation and the process that led up to it? We
encourage readers to examine Andrew Kreig's recent four-part series on
the subject. And it's important to keep a key point in mind: This no
longer is just a Bush/Rove production; Obama and other Democrats now are
engaged in what appears to be a coordinated effort to ensure that the
public is kept in the dark about unsavory matters connected to the U.S.
Justice Department.
While many Americans were preparing to eat barbecue and shoot fireworks
for the Fourth of July, the U.S. Senate engaged in an extraordinary act
of cowardice--not to mention neglect of duty.
