It looks like there's even more muck than meets the eye in Trooper-Gate.

After the allegedly improper firing of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) appointed former Kenai Police Chief Chuck Kopp to the post.

Kopp served just two weeks this summer as the head of law enforcement in Alaska, resigning on July 25, after a past complaint of sexual harassment and a subsequent letter of reprimand surfaced in news reports.

But Palin made sure he had a soft fall from grace, giving him a $10,000 severance package for just two weeks served.

While Palin has conceded she was aware of the past complaint against Kopp, she claims that she thought the complaint had been unsubstantiated and was unaware of the letter of reprimand.

It looks like John McCain's new running mate, Sarah Palin, could be hit with some decidedly negative PR at the worst possible time. The Alaska legislature's investigation of whether Governor Palin improperly fired a state employee is scheduled to wrap up and release its findings just days before the November election.

The firing is at the center of a scandal that has largely remained confined to the Alaska press, but is now likely to become a national story in the wake of Palin's selection -- one that could conceivably have an impact on the presidential race.

As it happens, we've been tracking the story closely here at TPMmuckraker.

The scandal concerns allegations that Palin's office improperly fired the state's public safety commissioner because he refused to remove Palin's ex-brother-in-law from his job as a state trooper after his bitter divorce from Palin's sister. In addition to the legislature's investigation, the Alaska attorney general is also looking into the matter.

Palin had at first denied that her office had a hand in pushing to have the trooper fired, but was forced to retract those denials when taped evidence emerged that a staffer in her office was involved.

If the investigation finds that her personal involvement was more extensive than she has admitted, it could create some damaging headlines for the McCain campaign at the worst possible moment.

Here's a recap of the story:

The scandal began on July 11, when Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan was removed from his post with little explanation, a move whose abruptness quickly raised questions in Alaska. A few days later, Monegan decided to blow the whistle, and came forward to tell local media that he had been dismissed because he refused to fire trooper Mike Wooten, the ex-husband of Palin's sister, after having been pressured to do so by aides to Palin. (Monegan's replacement, former Kenai Chief of Police Chuck Kopp was only lasted two weeks on the job once past complaints of sexual harassment from 2005 were publicized.)

Critics pointed out that the effort to fire the trooper might have been directly related to the fact that Palin's family had a longstanding grievances with Wooten. In an internal state police investigation in 2005, Palin herself had accused Wooten of threatening to harm her father during the breakup of her sister's marriage. (The Palins claimed, among other things, that Wooten had used a taser on his 10-year-old stepson, and shot a moose without a permit.)

Since Monegan made his allegations, Palin has denied that she personally had a role in the effort to fire Wooten. On July 28, the state legislative council, a bipartisan panel of senators and representatives, appointed a special commission to probe the matter.

Her backtrack on her office's role was prompted by the preliminary findings of a separate ongoing investigation into the matter by the state Attorney General, launched on August 4, that she herself put into motion. At a press conference at which Palin revealed some of that investigation's finding, she acknowledged that in February, state troopers had taped a phone call from Frank Bailey, Palin's director of boards and commissions, whom she appointed in August 2007, in which Bailey appeared to push for the firing of Wooten on Palin's behalf.

In the call, Bailey appeared to say that Palin and her husband were frustrated that Wooten still had his job. "The Palins can't figure out why nothing's going on," Bailey said in the recorded phone call. "Todd and Sarah are scratching their heads ... 'Why is this guy representing the department, he's a horrible recruiting tool.' You know? So from their perspective everybody's protecting him."

The investigation could be particularly poorly timed for the GOP. Steve Branchflower, a former state prosecutor who is conducting the investigation, has a three-month contract for his work, which started August 1, and will end October 31, according to Alaska State Senate Judiciary Committee chair, Hollis French (D), who is overseeing the probe. French told TPMmuckraker that he expects Branchflower to release his report in the days before the November 4th presidential election.

A spokeswoman for Palin told TPMmuckraker that the governor's office would be fully cooperating with Branchflower.

Palin won the governor's office in 2006 as a squeaky clean reformer. "She portrayed herself as an open-government, ethical person," Rep. Mike Doogan, a Democratic state lawmaker, told TPMmuckraker. "You can see the obvious problem." He added: "These things don't help her [politically]."

And they may not help John McCain either.

(ed.note: The original version of this post incorrectly stated that the state legislature was in Democratic hands and ordered the probe of Monegan's firing. In fact, the senate is under the control of a coalition of Democratic and dissident Republican lawmakers and the House of Republicans. The state legislative council, which ordered the probe, is a bipartisan panel made up of members of both bodies.)

Since he began his campaign, John McCain has abandoned just about every position on which he had displayed his independence from President Bush. But his opposition to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) had, until recently, been perhaps the last remaining evidence of the maverick McCain.

His choice of Alaska governor Sarah Palin as his running-mate could well end that. The Weekly Standard this week described Palin as "the nation's most prominent advocate of drilling in ANWR," the wildlife refuge that environmentalists see as one of America's most precious natural wilderness areas (though she admits it would take at least 5 years to have any).

In a June interview with CNBC, Palin judged that McCain was likely to "evolve" into supporting drilling. That now looks prescient. Earlier this week, McCain told the Standard that he's considering flip-flopping on his anti-drilling stance, and that he plans to talk to Palin about the issue.

Indeed, it looks like the Bush administration is too pro-environment for Palin. Earlier this month, the state of Alaska sued the federal government for listing the polar bear as an endangered species.

Palin's husband, Todd Palin, is a production operator for BP on Alaska's North Slope.

Update: The oil industry seems to agree. The Institute for Energy Research, an industry-backed group, just sent out the following message to reporters: "FYI: John McCain's selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate naturally places ANWR energy production front and center in the policy debate once again. Visit IER's website for facts on ANWR oil and gas estimates, arctic production technologies, wildlife
statistics, and more."

The Pentagon today reiterated its view that recent U.S. airstrikes in Afghanistan killed only 5 civilians along with 25 militants. The tally contradicts the United Nations, Afghan officials, and human rights group, all of whom have put the civilian casualty toll at between 75 and 90. According to three Afghan officials, the U.S. was misled into attacking the village based on faulty information by tribal rivals. (Washington Post)

It may be more difficult for prosecutors to acquire sensitive information during investigations of corporate fraud cases, thanks to new guidelines issued by the Department of Justice. The changes will prevent companies from being penalized for paying for the legal expenses of their employees, and will prevent the government from demanding confidential legal materials. A representative from the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers said they were "overjoyed" at the changes. (Bloomberg)

A U.S. Marine has been acquitted for the manslaughter of four Iraqi civilians Sgt. Jose Nazario was the first military officer tried in civilian court for war crimes in Iraq. Jurors explained both that they felt there was inadequate forensic evidence to convict Nazario, as well as expressing reservations about passing judgment on Marines in combat situations. According to one juror, "I hope they realize that they shouldn't be second-guessed, that we support them and know that they're doing the right thing." (Los Angeles Times)

Read more »

Defense attorneys for the disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff last night filed 95 letters from friends and supporters in an effort to get the former GOP power-broker out of jail early. In the words of the Associated Press, the letters "describe him as a humbled, changed man whose family is suffering and nearly broke after his first 18 months in prison."

Apparently Abramoff has turned himself into something of a professor while in prison. His lawyers say that he has taught classes entitled "Parenting from a Distance," "Modern Marvels," "Cinema Studies," and "The Holocaust in Films," and is currently teaching a film theory class.

As we told you this morning, prosecutors have asked for leniency for Abramoff because he has already spent over 3000 hours helping them with their ongoing federal corruption probe, which implicates a number of other Washington players.

We've now looked through the lawsuit against KBR that we told you about this morning. The complaint (pdf) alleges that the company -- the biggest U.S. contractor in Iraq during the period at issue -- engaged in a human trafficking scheme whereby 12 Nepali men were brought to Iraq to work and were prevented from leaving. The men were then kidnapped by insurgents, and all but one were executed.

In sum: "Defendants' actions as set forth above constitute the torts of trafficking in persons, involuntary servitude, forced labor, and slavery."

What jumps out is that, though KBR's Jordanian sub-contractor, Daoud and Partners (which is named as a co-defendant) was more directly involved in the details of the alleged trafficking, this doesn't appear to be a case of KBR being held liable for acts committed by a sub-contractor that it may or may not have known about.

For instance, the suit alleges that after the kidnapping, the one survivor "was very scared for his safety and wanted to leave to return to Nepal. His employers (both Defendants Daoud and the KBR Defendants) told him that he could not leave until his work in Iraq was complete."

And:

Employees and managers of the KBR Defendants in Iraq were told by the laborers there that they had been taken to Iraq against their will. For example, another Nepali laborer, Sarad Sapkota, was recruited to work outside of Nepal as a cook in Oman in 2003, but was instead taken to Iraq against his will and forced to work for KBR on a military base. He and the other TCNs [Third Country Nationals] working with him repeatedly told their KBR managers that they did not want to come to Iraq and were not informed that they would be sent to Iraq, but were repeatedly told by KBR that they had no choice and would be forced to work in Iraq until their contract was completed.

This is hardly the first time that KBR has been in hot water, of course. As we noted back in June, the company "was criticized in March for making troops sick by failing to provide clean water. And top military officials have given false statements to Congress to quell controversy over the company." In addition, at least two female former KBR employees in Iraq have alleged that they were raped or sexually assaulted by co-workers, and that KBR was less than aggressive in investigating their claims.

United States intelligence services are increasingly relying on private contractors to perform essential intelligence tasks. Contractors make up about a quarter of core national intelligence workers and are involved in some of the most sensitive areas of intelligence. The average salary for a contract intelligence worker is over $200,000, compared to $125,000 for a government employee. (Washington Post)

Two U.S. military personnel were allegedly paid almost $100,000 to arrange three deals to rebuild Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan. The officers, Christopher West and Patrick Boyd, were indicted yesterday for bribery. Three Afghani contractors were also charged. (AP)

After years of incarceration, it is still unclear whether Guantanamo detainees will be able to witness their own trials or see the evidence the government has against them. One of the judges trying to create rules for Guantanamo hearings is worried that the procedures and evidence will be hidden from both the public and the defendants. Trials for Guantanamo defendants may rely on classified evidence that will be kept secret. (AP)

Read more »

The Washington Post reports that KBR, one of the largest U.S. contractors in Iraq, is being sued, along with a subcontractor, for engaging in human trafficking in Iraq. According to a lawyer for the Washington firm bringing the suit:

13 Nepali men, between the ages of 18 and 27, were recruited in Nepal to work as kitchen staff in hotels and restaurants in Amman, Jordan. But once the men arrived in Jordan, their passports were seized and they were told they were being sent to a military facility in Iraq, Fryszman said.

As the men were driven in cars to Iraq, they were stopped by insurgents. Twelve were kidnapped and later executed, Fryszman said. The thirteenth man survived and worked in a warehouse in Iraq for 15 months before returning to Nepal.

The suit alleges that the scheme was set up by KBR (formerly known as Kellogg Brown and Root) and its Jordanian subcontractor, Daoud and Partners. This spring, Daoud was ordered by a Department of Labor judge to pay $1 million to the families of 11 of the victims.

KBR said in a statement that it "in no way condones or tolerates unethical or illegal behavior."

Given KBR's prominence role in working with the U.S. military in Iraq and elsewhere, this deserves keeping an eye on.

Could the White House be getting desperate in its dramatic legal battle with the House Judiciary Committee? It certainly looks that way, as they scramble to delay Harriet Miers' congressional testimony after the court's recent denial of their request for a stay.

Yesterday, HJC Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) set Miers testimony for September 11, but the administration isn't going down without a fight.

From the AP:

The Bush administration had already indicated it would appeal but Justice Department lawyers said Wednesday that they will ask the court to step in quickly and temporarily put Miers' appearance on hold while the appeal plays out. It's a risky move for an administration that has spent years trying to strengthen the power of the presidency.

Yesterday, TPM's David Kurtz caught up with Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) at the Democratic National Convention and got his take on the new developments in the Miers case unfolding at the HJC.

Leahy made it clear that this battle wasn't just going to end in the event of an Obama presidency. "I remind them," he said, "I'll still be chairman next year."

We'll have to wait until next Thursday for a final decision, but in filings made yesterday, it appears that the Justice Department is seeking a pretty light sentence for the infamous former lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

From the Washington Post:

Since his conviction on fraud and conspiracy charges, former lobbyist Jack Abramoff has spent more than 3,000 hours helping more than 100 law enforcement agents in an ongoing federal corruption probe that has implicated "scores of other persons not yet charged," attorneys said in court filings today.

. . . If a federal judge in Washington accepts the recommendation from the Justice Department, Abramoff would serve no more than another three years and three months in prison, not accounting for credit for good behavior awarded by the Bureau of Prisons. Abramoff's attorneys are seeking even more leniency that could have him released from prison by 2010.

Yesterday, a District Court judge denied the White House's request for a stay on the Congressional testimony of Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten in the US attorney case.

Emboldened by that ruling, House Judiciary Committee chair John Conyers (D-MI) announced in a press release this afternoon that his office has sent a letter to the White House setting a deadline of September 4 to comply with the judge's order to produce documents relating to the case. The letter also says that the date for Miers to appear at a hearing has been postponed until September 11.

The quest to find out the extent of the White House's role in the scandal continues...

As Joe Biden gets set for his big moment in Denver tonight, there's renewed scrutiny on the activities of his lobbyist son.

On Sunday, the Washington Post reported that Hunter Biden -- along with Joe Biden's brother, James -- is being accused in one lawsuit of defrauding a former business partner, and in a separate lawsuit of defrauding an investor in a hedge fund deal. The facts of the cases remain unclear, but the plaintiff in one of the suits, Anthony Lotito Jr., alleges that he entered into a deal with Hunter and James to create a hedge-fund group, Paradigm Companies LLC, before the Bidens crafted another deal to create a "secret company" designed to buy out Lotito's shares. The suit also claims that Hunter entered into the original deal as a way to get out of the lobbying business, thanks to concerns about the impact of his lobbying activities on his father's expected presidential run. The Bidens allege in response that Lotito defrauded them, according to the Post, by "misrepresenting his experience in the hedge fund industry and recommending that they hire a lawyer with felony convictions."

That same day, the New York Times had its own angle on Hunter's lobbying activities. It reported that, while Sen. Biden, a longtime ally of the credit-card industry, was working in support of the 2005 bankruptcy bill, which made it harder for consumers to file for bankruptcy, Hunter had a consulting agreement -- which may have been worth $100,000 a year -- with financial-services giant MBNA, one of the bill's biggest backers.

The Times adds this interesting detail:

Campaign officials acknowledged that the connection between the Bidens and MBNA, the enormous financial services company then based in their home state of Delaware, was one of the most sensitive issues they examined while vetting the senator for a spot on the ticket.

And now today, the Post uncovers a link between Hunter Biden and Obama himself, reporting that the Illinois senator "sought more than $3.4 million in congressional earmarks for clients of the lobbyist son of his Democratic running mate, Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, records show." The Obama campaign said that Hunter Biden never met directly with Obama, and noted: "It's hardly surprising that a Senator from Illinois would fight for investments in Mercy Hospital, Thorek Hospital and St. Xavier University right in Illinois, or that he'd be joined in that effort by a Republican colleague, Representative Judy Biggert."

Whether this stream of reports will create a lasting problem for the Democratic ticket -- particularly given Sen. Biden's own record of close ties to Washington lobbyists, particularly for the banking industry -- or whether they'll get lost in the ever-churning mill of campaign news, remains to be seen. But they certainly bear keeping an eye on.

Freshly released from prison, former Ohio Republican Rep. Bob Ney is ripping into the administration, leveling charges that they were behind his prosecution.

Ney, who has taken to the airwaves as a radio commentator, recently appeared on the Thom Hartmann show to talk about the Bush administration's role in his prosecution and his past life as a felon.

"I made the bullets, I gave them the bullets," Ney says of his prosecution for bribery, but goes on to suggest that his willingness to challenge the administration's head-in-the sand approach to Iran made him a target.

From the transcript:

[Thom]: You were prosecuted by the Bush Administration for what Ellen [Ellen Ratner of Talk Radio News] has characterized to me as, you know, one possibly serious crime, one largely irrelevant crime. But mostly something that probably, a number of things that probably many members of congress could be gone after, and she seems to be of the opinion that your prosecution was a political prosecution because you were pushing back on Iran. You want to, can you speak to that, please?

[Ney]: But at the end of the day, you know, I brought a lot of things on myself. . . And I did some things that were wrong. But I also believe that part of this was fueled in the sense of the Iran issue. It's been no secret that when I went to prison I gave permission for a secret meeting I'd had with Mr. Guldimann [Tim Guldimann, then Swiss Ambassador in Tehran] who came from Switzerland. He presented a document that was absolutely incredible, where Iran would have recognized Israel and a whole host of other things, would have let our inspectors on their ground; and I sent that to the White House.

I'll stand by that today; the White House denies it, but Colin Powell's former assistant admits that that came over to the State Department and the White House wanted no part of it. And I believe that every step of the way, and I think it came more from Cheney's people, but every step of the way that I attempted to deal with Iran, it got pretty harsh back. And so I think part of this, I made the bullets, I gave them the bullets, but I think some of the force was also involved with, you know, Iran and people that would rather see those countries not communicate, no matter who is head of Iran.

Later, Ney amps up his critique, saying that the administration has "taken bloodsport to a new level":

[Thom]: It so sounds like the Don Siegelman story and the Paul Minor story, and if you're not familiar with those two stories, I encourage you to do a little Googling. I think that we have political prisoners in the United States now.

[Ney]: Well, I know that the harshness of the administration, and again, I take culpability, I did some wrong things, but when you get in their path, I think they've taken bloodsport to a new level in this administration.

Full transcript after the jump.

Read more »

Details about Dick Cheney's interview under oath with Patrick Fitzgerald about the vice president's role in the outing of Valerie Plame may soon become public, thanks to a lawsuit filed by a non-profit watchdog group. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington is suing the Department of Justice for failing to release records related to their investigation of the Plame leak. The House Judiciary Committee has sought access to these records for more than a year. (CREW)

Rep. Don Young (R-AK) appears likely to win the Republican nomination for re-election to Congress despite ongoing allegations of corruption, and Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) has won the Republican party's nomination for re-election to the Senate despite a criminal indictment. Both congressmen have gotten into hot water for failing to report gifts from the the VECO corporation. (New York Times)

The fate of Detroit mayor Kwame Kilpatrick could be in the hands of Michigan's Democratic governor Jennifer Granholm. Granholm has scheduled a hearing to determine whether Kilpatrick should be removed from office. Kilpatrick currently faces 10 felony charges, including bribery and misconduct in office. The hearing will begin September 3. (AP)

Read more »

Remember that New York Times story from February that didn't quite deliver the goods about John McCain's entanglement with the lobbyist Vicki Iseman? Well, there was one strand to the Times' reporting that was lost amid the unproven allegations of a sexual relationship. But the Times' own earlier reporting from 2000, as well as what TPMmuckraker has learned, suggests it deserves some attention.

Towards the end of the February story, the Times wrote about McCain's assistance to Iseman's client, Lowell Paxson, who ran the media company Paxson Communications:

In late 1999, Ms. Iseman asked Mr. McCain's staff to send a letter to the commission to help Paxson, now Ion Media Networks, on another matter. Mr. Paxson was impatient for F.C.C. approval of a television deal, and Ms. Iseman acknowledged in an e-mail message to The Times that she had sent to Mr. McCain's staff information for drafting a letter urging a swift decision.

Mr. McCain complied. He sent two letters to the commission, drawing a rare rebuke for interference from its chairman.

But it turns out that the Times had covered this before. Back in January 2000, Stephen Labaton, one of the four Times scribes on the Iseman story from this February, had reported on McCain's help for Paxson. Paxson, Labaton wrote, had lent McCain his corporate jet four times in the last year, and had scheduled a Florida fundraiser for McCain (which was subsequently cancelled); and McCain had received more than $20,000 in contributions from Paxson Communications executives.

And Labaton added something even more interesting:

The commissioners who approved the transfer were two Republicans and a Democrat, Susan Ness, who was been known for some time as the swing vote and whose nomination for a second term is now before the Senate Commerce Committee.
Ms. Ness said in an interview today that the rules prohibited her from talking about her deliberations in the Pittsburgh case and that as a matter of policy, she has declined to discuss her pending confirmation.

"I always vote in my decisions based on the law and the facts before us and anyone who knows my record knows that," she said.

According to a former F.C.C. staffer, Ness rarely broke with her Democratic colleagues, as she did on this vote. The former staffer added that being appointed to a second term as an F.C.C. commissioner was unusual at the time -- most commissioners served only one term -- and that Ness was actively campaigning for her re-appointment. The Atlantic's Joshua Green, who wrote about this in March, judged that "Ness's vote is widely thought to have been a bid to win her reappointment to the FCC."

So, did the Times miss the real story in their recent reporting on Iseman: McCain leveraging his position as committee* chair to help convince Ness to vote in favor of Iseman's client's TV deal? Could be...

*Corrected from an earlier version.

A district court judge denied Harriet Miers and Joshua Bolten's request for a stay on their Congressional testimony pending the appeal of the recent decision in HJC v. Harriet Miers et al. The decision means that Miers will have to appear in response to the House Judiciary Committee's subpoena for testimony.

From the ruling:

Accordingly, the Court will deny the Executive's request for a stay. Hence, the Executive should respond to the document aspect of the subpoenas by producing non-privileged material and identifying more specifically the materials it is withholding on a claim of executive privilege.

But it is on Ms. Miers's appearance that the dispute principally focuses. This decision should not, however, foreclose the parties' continuing attempts to reach a negotiated solution. Both sides indicated that discussions regarding an accommodation have resumed.

The judge, the Honorable John Bates, has mentioned before that he would really appreciate it if these two parties tried to keep every little squabble out of the court room, and that seemed to be the gist of his ruling:

Had the litigants indicated that a negotiated solution was foreseeable in the near future, the Court may have stayed its hand in the hope that further intervention in this dispute by the Article III branch would not be necessary.

As it stands, however, the Court must decide the questions presented to it. But there is still ample time for the parties to reach an accommodation. The Court's July 31, 2008 Order does not compel Ms. Miers to appear at any particular date.

Technically, this leaves open the possibility of continued negotiations, but considering this administration's history of fighting subpoenas, we're not holding our breath for an out-of-court resolution.

Late update: House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) has responded to the ruling:

"Today's ruling clearly rejects the White House's efforts to run out the clock on the Committee's investigation of DOJ politicization this Congress. I am heartened that Judge Bates recognized that the public interest in this matter is best served by the furtherance of the Committee's investigation," Conyers said. "The Committee intends to promptly schedule a hearing with Ms. Miers and stands ready as always to consider any reasonable offer of accommodation with the White House."

The FBI is finally coughing up more details on their illegal phone records demands, following FBI Dir. Robert Mueller's apology two-weeks ago to the Washington Post and the New York Times.

The Washington Times has an interview with FBI General Counsel Valerie Caproni, who says there was a "miscommunication" when an "exigent letter" -- which allows FBI agents to gather information without regular judicial oversight -- was sent to obtain Times and Post reporters' phone calls.

From the Washington Times:

Ms. Caproni said the case agent e-mailed an agent in the terrorism-investigating Communications Analysis Unit (CAU) to suggest seeking Justice Department permission and a grand jury subpoena to obtain the reporters' phone records.

Ms. Caproni said the case agent did not say it was an emergency, but the agent in CAU sent an "exigent letter" anyway.

While it is not known why the agent in CAU sent the letter, Ms. Caproni suggested the agent in CAU may have been trying to be helpful. She also noted CAU is on the front lines of the fight against terrorism and that the unit was busy at the time.

Mike German, policy counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union's Washington legislative office, said he didn't buy Ms. Caproni's argument. "It's clear the FBI wants to minimize this as a mistake and not abuse," he said. "The facts are, there was a ridiculous amount of misuse and abuse."

Attorneys for Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) fought back Monday after prosecutors filed a discovery motion that hinted at possible quid pro quos between Stevens and VECO executives.

"The government wishes to smuggle in suggestions of bribery and corruption that it has not charged and cannot prove," Stevens' attorneys wrote in their motion. Stevens is charged with making false statements for failing to mention over $250,000 in gifts on his Senate disclosure forms -- not with taking bribes.

From the AP:

Prosecutors also want to present somewhat unrelated evidence that they believe shows the Alaska senator got a sweetheart condominium deal, his daughter got a discounted car and his son got a job from VECO.

In court documents filed Monday, Stevens suggested the Justice Department was making accusations haphazardly, hoping to damage his reputation at trial. Those accusations have nothing to do with the crime he's charged with, attorneys said.

"They are an obvious attempt to smear the Senator's character," defense attorneys wrote, adding later that the Justice Department was "continuing its assault on the senator's family."

A United Nations investigation has found that U.S. airstrikes in Afghanistan killed 90 civilians. The U.N. report contradicts the official U.S. account of the attacks, which found that twenty five militants were killed and only five civilians. Afghan officials and human rights groups had previously disputed the U.S. tally. (AP)

A holistic health counselor pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit prostitution on Monday. Tanya Hollander, is the fourth person to be convicted in the prostitution ring that brought down former New York Gov. Elliot Spitzer. Hollander claims that she was tricked into believing that she was engaged in a legitimate business. (New York Times)

Poland is investigating claims that the country may have hosted a CIA secret prison used to detain terrorism suspects and move them to other locations. A European Parliament committee found that 14 E.U. countries have hosted these CIA "black sites," and according to a CIA source quoted in the New York Times, one of the most important secret prisons was in Poland. (EU Observer)

Read more »

We knew Randy Scheunemann, John McCain's top foreign policy adviser, was into guns. After all, in 1997 he was arrested for having a shotgun and several rounds of ammunition in his car on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol. And in addition to his extensive lobbying work on behalf of former Soviet bloc countries, he's also a longtime lobbyist for gun-rights groups. But it now looks like, for Scheunemann, doing the bidding of the gun lobby takes precedence over efforts to combat terrorism.

Newsweek reports that, according to registration documents filed by Scheuenemann's lobbying firm, Orion Strategies, Scheunemann lobbied on behalf of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) against a bill that aims to close a gun-control loophole that inhibits the government from stopping people on terrorist watch-lists from buying guns. According to Newsweek, "the bill was inspired by an official audit covering a five-month period in 2004 which found that, because of the loophole, the Feds had to greenlight 35 out of 44 cases where a gun buyer was on a terrorist watch list."

The bill, which is backed by the Bush Justice Department, was introduced last year by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), but has been held up in committee. It has since faced stiff opposition from the gun lobby, an aide to Lautenberg told TPMmuckraker, and has yet to come to a vote.

According to lobby disclosure reports, Scheunemann's firm was paid $120,000 by NSSF in 2007, and another $60,000 so far this year. Scheunemann himself took a leave of absence from the firm earlier this year to work on McCain's campaign.

Sen. McCain has not taken a position on the bill. His campaign would not tell Newsweek whether he supports it, or whether Scheunemann had ever lobbied McCain on gun-control issues.

We learned over the weekend, via Newsweek, that there's a Dick Cheney connection to the Ted Stevens case. But are federal prosecutors looking the other way?

In a phone conversation recorded by the FBI and included in a court filing by prosecutors, Sen. Stevens (R-AK) told oil-services executive Bill Allen that he would try to get some "bigwigs" from Washington to weigh in on a bill pending in the Alaska legislature, that would have given the go-ahead to a pipeline Allen wanted. Two days later, Newsweek notes, Cheney sent a letter to Alaska lawmakers urging them to pass the bill. Stevens told Newsweek that Cheney's letter had been sent at his urging.

But we were curious about one thing. Why didn't prosecutors mention Cheney's letter in their filing? Although technically Stevens is being prosecuted for giving false statements on disclosure forms, demonstrating that Stevens took action on Allen's behalf is still at the heart of the case.

And in citing another example of Stevens using his influence on Allen's behalf, prosecutors did include chapter and verse on the results Stevens got. Consider this passage from the filing:

Stevens added: "I'm going to try and see if I can get . . . the Secretary of Energy and also the head of, of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [("FERC")] up there to explain why it's necessary that they act before we act."

On July 7, 2006, Senator Stevens traveled to Alaska and addressed the Alaska Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, urging it to cease infighting and pass the pipeline legislation before liquified natural gas monopolizes the marketplace. Three days later, on July 10, 2006, the FERC issued a report similar to the message delivered by Stevens.

But when it comes to Stevens calling on Cheney, the prosecutors -- who are from the Department of Justice's Public Integrity Section, and the U.S. attorney's office in Alaska -- go strangely silent.

One former government prosecutor we spoke to said he could see little reason why the link to Cheney wouldn't have been mentioned. The most charitable explanation, the ex-prosecutor said, is that the government thought that bringing in Cheney would unnecessarily bog the case down. The least charitable is that they were "trying to protect Cheney."

Another former federal corruption prosecutor agreed, writing in an email to TPMMuckraker:

"If the government has the evidence that Stevens asked Cheney's office to intervene/write a letter, I can see no strategic or tactical reason not to have cited that evidence in their motion. They specifically argue for the admission at trial of evidence regarding Stevens' attempts to influence the executive branch on behalf of VECO. Citing the Cheney evidence could only bolster that argument and help educate the judge on the extraordinary lengths Stevens was going to help out VECO, which just happened to be providing him with undisclosed personal benefits at the time.

The source cautioned, however, that prosecutors may not have had evidence that Stevens was behind Cheney's letter, before Stevens confirmed it to Newsweek.

A DOJ spokesperson did not immediately return a call for comment.

In news that should surprise no one familiar with the Justice Department politicization under Monica Goodling and Jan Williams, a study conducted by the New York Times found that immigration judges installed during this period of illegal hiring were more likely than their peers to reject immigrants' bids for asylum.

According to the Times, of the 31 judges appointed during Goodling's tenure, only 16 had extensive enough records to support statistical analysis. Of those, nine rejected immigrant asylum seekers at a rate higher than other local judges, three were more likely to grant asylum, and four were in keeping with averages.

Collectively, the group was 6.6 percentage points greater in denying asylum than their combined local averages.

From the Times:

In Houston, for example, Judge Chris Brisack denied asylum in 90.7 percent of his cases, while other judges in that city averaged a 79.1 percent denial rate. Judge Brisack, a former Republican county chairman who also works in the oil business, did not return a call.

Garry Malphrus, the judge later elevated to the Board of Immigration Appeals, denied asylum 66.9 percent of the time, compared with an average denial rate of 58.3 percent among other judges at his court in Arlington, Va. Judge Malphrus, a former associate director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, did not return a call.

The highest gap belonged to Judge Earle Wilson. He worked first in Miami, where he denied 88.1 percent of asylum requests -- 9.8 percentage points higher than the local average. He then moved to Orlando, where his denial rate was 80.3 percent -- 29.2 percentage points higher than peers.

It wasn't but two weeks ago that Attorney Gen. Mukasey made the bold statement in a speech to the American Bar Association, that the Justice Department would not systematically remove all those hired during the DOJ's period of politicization.

"Two wrongs do not make a right," said Mukasey of the idea of dismissing those hired through the flawed process. "[T]he people hired in an improper way did not, themselves, do anything wrong. It therefore would be unfair - and quite possibly illegal given their civil service protections - to fire them or to reassign them without individual cause."

But even more interesting in the light of the Times report, is Mukasey's specific defense of IJs hired under Goodling's watch and his highlighting of one of the judges he had recently promoted:

One of the Immigration Judges identified by the joint report as having been hired through the flawed process was recently tapped - by the revised hiring process that gives no consideration to politics - to be a member of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Putting aside fairness to him, it would have ill served the public interest not to appoint him merely because those who first hired him had violated the civil service laws. Firing him and all those like him would be wrong, and it would be harmful to the Department and to the country.

In the same speech, Mukasey promised a "swift and unambiguous response" if anyone is "found to be handling or deciding cases based on politics, and not based on what the law and facts require."

The Times study certainly suggests that judges hired under this illegal process were likely to rule more harshly than their peers. It will be interesting to see if Mukasey considers these findings proof of "handling or deciding cases based on politics."

Some interesting news broke today that has been buried amid the orgy of convention coverage: Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki said -- apparently in a speech to tribal leaders in the Green Zone -- that the U.S. and Iraq had agreed that all "foreign soldiers" would leave Iraq by the end of 2011. Maliki was promptly shot down by the White House, which maintained there is no pullout date.

U.S. and Iraqi negotiators have been working toward an agreement for months, with the U.S. seeking a legal basis for stationing troops in Iraq when U.N. authority expires at the end of this year.

Here's how Campbell Robertson of the International Herald Tribune reported Maliki's comments today:

Iraq and the United States have agreed on a date for the departure of all American troops as part of a broader security pact they are negotiating, the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, said Monday.

"There is actually an agreement concluded between the two parties over the definite date, which is 2011, to end any foreign presence on Iraqi soil," Maliki said.

Maliki made the comments in a speech to tribal leaders in the Green Zone in Baghdad, but it was far from clear that the issue had been settled.

In its own version of the story, Agence France-Presse runs a slightly different Maliki quote:

"There is an agreement between the two sides that there will be no foreign soldiers in Iraq after 2011," Maliki said in a statement issued by his office.

AFP also includes a stern denial from Bush Administration spokesman Tony Fratto, who maintains that "we have not yet finalized an agreement." Fratto even seems to back away from Condoleezza Rice's recent endorsement -- however mushy -- of a "timetable" for withdrawal. Fratto's comment, after the jump:

Read more »

In the wake of the CIA's offical denial of Ron Suskind's explosive claim that the White Houe ordered the agency to fabricate a letter suggesting a Saddam- al Qaeda link, the blogger Laura Rozen makes a couple interesting points.

First, the CIA's statement seems to come close to contradicting Richer's own denial. According to the CIA statement, "our government considers Habbush [Saddam's former intelligence chief] to be a wanted man," implying that they don't know where he is. But Richer makes clear that the Bush administration was actively discussing how to use Habbush, writing of his conversations with Suskind: "I do speak to discussions regarding using Habbush, which were frequent during that period, but what I was talking about was the possibility of using him to tamp down the insurgency - not to influence western public opinion."

Richer also writes: "I was asked to respond to documents regarding the potential use of Habbush upon his defection ... I was also involved in many queries from elements of the Administration trying to document an Al-Qa'ida and Saddam government link." As Rozen notes, the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation doesn't appear to have seen these documents. Did the CIA fail to turn them over?

Looks like this is far from over...

A joint U.S.-Afghan attack killed 78 people on Friday morning, according to Afghan officials and human rights monitors. The tally contradicts the official U.S. coalition account, which reported that 30 militants and only five civilians were killed in the battle. The U.S. has said it will further investigate the matter. (AP)

Two U.S. Marines were found in contempt of court after they refused to testify against their former squad leader, accused of killing four Iraqi detainees. The Marines had previously told investigators that they had been ordered to kill the Iraqis by squad leader Sgt. Jose Nazario to avoid taking the time to process the prisoners according to the laws of war. Nazario is now being charged with manslaughter. (Los Angeles Times)

Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick rejected a plea offer from state prosecutors on Friday, in which the prosecutors would have dropped two felony assault charges against the Mayor in return for his resignation from office. The Mayor is accused of shoving two police officers as they attempted to serve a subpoena to one of his friends. A spokesman for the Mayor said that he considered the plea deal politically motivated and insincere. (New York Times)

Read more »

The corruption case against Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) is already yielding some interesting fruit.

Newsweek reported Saturday that, in a 2006 conversation secretly recorded by the FBI, Stevens and Bill Allen -- the oil-services executive who allegedly provided Stevens with $250,000 in financial gifts -- discussed how to get a pipeline bill through the Alaska legislature.

Stevens told Allen: "I'm gonna try to see if I can get some bigwigs from back here and say, 'Look ... you gotta get this done'." Two days later, Vice President Cheney took the unusual step of contacting Alaska lawmakers directly, urging them in a letter to "promptly enact" the legislation. Stevens confirmed to Newsweek that he had indeed asked Cheney to write the letter.

Newsweek notes that the former executive director of Cheney's energy task force had gone on to work as a lobbyist for BP, which would have built the pipeline. The magazine doesn't name the task force director, but it appears to be Andrew Lundquist. And it's worth pointing out that Lundquist -- who had worked as the Bush-Cheney campaign's energy expert in 2000, earning the nickname "Lightbulb" from the president -- has also worked as a top aide to Stevens.

Newsweek also reports that DOJ prosecutors did not include Cheney's letter in their motion and did not respond when the magazine asked why.

On Friday the CIA issued an official denial of Ron Suskind's claim that the White House ordered the CIA to fabricate a letter suggesting a link between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. The statement declared flatly that "it did not happen," and called Suskind's charges "false" and "offensive."

One of Suskind's key on-the-record sources for the claim, former CIA official Rob Richer, had challenged Suskind's account when it was first reported earlier this month. And over the weekend, Richer told The Washington Post that he agrees with the CIA statement, saying that the forgery "never happened."

In response, Suskind suggested to the Post that he thinks the Bush administration has been leaning on his sources. "The White House is focusing on this because there may be legal complications for the administration," he said.

To be continued, no doubt. . .