Why? Because yesterday li’l ol’ folo scored a link at my own favorite blog, Scott Horton’s No Comment (spelling-priss solidarity — W00T!).
As did I, Scott noted of yesterday’s Wall Street Journal coverage:
Whereas the Journal put the focus of the probe on the case before DeLaughter, my sources, though not disagreeing with the Journal, put it in Birmingham, Alabama.
Scruggs was facing trouble on another front. A federal judge in Alabama, William Acker, handed down a very strongly worded ruling in June in which he recommended that the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama [Alice Martin] prosecute Scruggs for the violation of a court order in some insurance litigation. The case was drawing a good deal of attention to Scruggs’s litigation tactics, which have widely been seen as pressing the outer boundaries of acceptable zeal, and clearly was troubling to Scruggs. Had Scruggs been seeking Lott’s intervention and help to bail himself out?
One thing is peculiar. Federal judges in the Northern District of Alabama didn’t want to have anything to do with the matter after Scruggs asked them to recuse themselves. And neither did the U.S. Attorney in Birmingham.
Here’s one scenario, which two senior law enforcement figures in Mississippi told me was "more than simply plausible. " The FBI had secured warrants to monitor Scruggs’s phone calls early in the course of the case, during the summer or early fall. In some of those conversations Dickie Scruggs asked for his brother-in-law’s help in fighting off Judge Acker’s attempts to have him prosecuted. Trent Lott picked up the phone and spoke with a few friends in the Justice Department …or perhaps even directly with a U.S. Attorney or two in Alabama, or a senator from Alabama …and asked them to lay off his misbehaving brother-in-law.
My bet is that the investigators are looking very carefully at whether the decision by the U.S. Attorney in Birmingham not to charge Dickie Scruggs had anything to do with intervention by Senator Lott.
Of course, the other point that the Journal failed to pick up on is that Lott had a history of intervening with prosecutors to protect his extremely wealthy brother-in-law. I documented this in connection with the prosecution brought against Paul Minor. No matter how you cut it, Dickie Scruggs comes out smack in the middle of that case, playing a substantial role. Yet he was not charged with anything, and indeed, prosecutors treated him with tremendous deference. The Biloxi Sun Herald quotes Lott as acknowledging having had discussions with the prosecutors about his brother-in-law’s case. Lott quickly corrected his comments as "a mistake. " But the circumstances surrounding the case leave many wondering just how mistaken the remarks might have been. Moreover, when an FBI agent working on the case started questioning why Scruggs had not been charged, the agent found himself quickly reassigned –to Guantanamo –where his expertise as a forensic accountant surely were of good service.
Agreed, Scott: those agents have scope and fodder a-plenty to check out on Trent Lott, and we might feel rather better about the post-Gonzales DoJ if that’s exactly what they’re doing.
The rumor mill has it that Trent’s interference in the Alabama case led to his abrupt resignation. The Delaughter involvement is probably just a little gravy on that big ole Bama biscuit.
Lotus, your “curiouser and curiouser” headline may have been more foreshadowing than I originally noticed. Here is what our Alice must be thinking today.
“If everybody minded their own business, the world would go around a great deal faster than it does.”
Quite, Sailor and fishwater.
(a flowah smiles)
I have seen no evidence the Government tapped Scruggs’ phones, certainly not in Mississippi. Am I missing something?
["I have seen no evidence the Government tapped Scruggs' phones, certainly not in Mississippi. Am I missing something?"]
Where would you have expected to have seen it, (since it would have had nothing to do with the Lackey investigation)?
I would have expected to see it in Goverment disclosures in Mississippi. It doesnt make sense to think the Goverment tapped Scruggs’ phones in connection with the Alabama criminal contempt action.
Scruggs may not have been the target, just rambling.
I was told that AG Hood also picked up the phone and made a call to AL. The attorneys who told me this said that’s why they believe that IF Hood were indicted, it would be (at least first) in Alabama.
But, iwannaknow, why would you have expected an unrelated, (and if it exists, so far, unprosecuted) wiretap to have been dislosed at this point? I’m trying to see your point, and I’m pretty up on Title 21 issues, but I not getting your drift, here.
The Alabama case was not a federal investigation. Does State Farm or Renfroe have the authority to order wire taps?
It is my understanding that private citizens or entities cannot legally order wiretaps. Only the government, where authorized by statutory authority AND judicial pre-approval, can order a wiretap.
The only thing private citizens can legally do (again, dependant on state law) with respect to recording phone calls is record a conversation to which they are a party (i.e. I legally can record phone calls I make/receive, if I knew how).
Private citizens can’t. The question was, if it had turned into a federal obstruction of justice investigation, and a Title 3 wiretap had been applied for, what would be the logic in saying it would have had to have been disclosed at this point?
I’m not saying there was one. I’m asking why people who think there might have been one, think it would have been disclosed at this point.
Researcher, by “Alabama case” I think is meant the contempt case.
I think Horton has to have some pieces of the puzzle very wrong. Look at the timing on the Balducci wiretap (late Sept) and the caution in that– they went after Balducci only after he was talking bribe with Lackey, and then went after Patterson only when he was talking bribe with Balducci on Balducci’s phone.
There was no evidence like this in the Spring – Summer of 2007 when Lott supposedly made calls to head off the contempt prosecution in Alabama. In what case would a Scruggs wiretap have been authorized that early? If there is such a case, NOTHING has surfaced from it– not a hint in the Lackey case, and not a hint relating to Langston’s case.
I thought it quite possible Lott made a call to Alabama for Dickie, thought that as long ago as December. The only things that have emerged related to that are suggestive only– that a political US Atty declined to prosecute. That’s it.
Researcher and DeltaNative, I think the implication is that wiretaps happened to Scruggs out of the ND Miss. investigation and picked up something to do with the Alabama contempt prosecution (which is criminal contempt). As I’ve said, I don’t think so, at all.
This raises questions in my mind as to whether the Feds could use it even if they heard it in the course of the investigation into the ND Miss matter. For the Feds to get a wiretap, don’t they have to be very specific as to what they are looking for? And, don’t they have to redact all unrelated information obtained from the wiretap from their records? So, even if they did turn up something related to the Alabama proceedings under the ND Miss wiretap warrant, could the Feds use it as evidence in the Alabama proceedings? Methinks the answer is no, but I’m no criminal defense lawyer. I believe you can see some evidence of the Feds having to redact unrelated information in the wiretap transcripts posted here and elsewhere.
I have recently heard that John Coale, Husband of Fox News’ legal commentator, Greta Van Susteren will somehow be dragged into the Scruggs mess. John Coale is the Tobacco Litigator Powerhouse out of D.C. He and his wife have also been drawing heat lately over the Millions they donate to the Scientology cult, especially after paying over $700,000 to settle an earlier Scientolocy scam in which they were involved.
Congrats on the Horton link lotus!
Delta Native, the short answer is yes, they could use it.
US Attys and DOJ have to log in inquiries by members of congress/senators regarding criminal prosecution. I think this is to curb such inquiries. Doubt Trent did this.
“But, iwannaknow, why would you have expected an unrelated, (and if it exists, so far, unprosecuted) wiretap to have been dislosed at this point? I’m trying to see your point, and I’m pretty up on Title 21 issues, but I not getting your drift, here.”
NMC comment 15 anwered very well. The timing is completely off. There was no reason to think the Goverment was tapping any phones at the time the US Atty in Alabama declined to prosecute Scruggs. And tapping law firms is a big deal because of potential privileges of clients. Very hard to get authorization.
The only taps we know of came out of the Mississippi case and it does not appear Scruggs’ phones were tapped in that case. Instead Balducci wore the body wire November 1.
On the other hand, it wouldn’t hurt my feelings if the story is correct.
If the Senator called the US Attorney or the DOJ or White House there definitely is a record. That is entirely different than the suggestion that Scruggs’ phone was tapped.
Iwannaknow. The timing being off, is only a good reason if you think the two cases are related. It not being disclosed, is also not really conclusive evidence of there not having been an earlier Scruggs wiretap, unless the two cases were related. I haven’t seen anything to indicate that the two matters have any relation at all.
But, you are finally getting the better reason, for it being unlikely that Scruggs phone was tapped in the another investigaton-because it is not as easy to get wiretaps approved as people who haven’t done it, think it is. Not because it is theoretically impossible for a person to be intercepted in two different Title 3′s, for two different conspiracies, in a short period (it happens to drug dealers every day, somewhere in the country).
ho hum
http://kingfish1935.blogspot.com/2008/01/meet-attorney-general-mike-mukasey.html
Kingfish, anyone who can’t admit that waterboarding is torture gets no respect from me. Mukasey is a tool, no more, no less. Feh.
Regarding Alabama. Do not forget old P.L. is lurking around in Hoover–only minutes from Birmingham. Flush with cash–$10 million down and $2 million a year for 20 years. Now just where do you think all of that money might be?
I have heard nothing from the Alabama case that would suggest that it generated anything like wiretapping. That’s the only case involving Scruggs other than the mess in the ND Miss. I just don’t see it. I think Horton was making interesting guesses in December that were sort of evident to people following this (I thought that at the time) BUT that were a stretch based on the available information. It didn’t pan out.
Researcher, others: Do you really think it unlikely that Trent Lott called the US Attorney about the contempt prosecution? It may have left tracks, but does that mean it didn’t happen? Here’s another thing floating around the word-of-mouth world– did he call Judge Aker?
That would have been a very serious blunder. But is that a possibility? Maybe that would be the choice because it didn’t leave the evidence Researcher mentioned.
This is all speculation. I’m ready to admit my disinclination to believe in the innocence of Trent Lott is somewhat the result of prejudice. But I really think there’s a lot of smoke here and there may be fire. I just don’t see Horton as being on the right track.
Jim, I think that your assumption that Blake’s presence in Alabama has anything to do with the federal court contempt prosecution there and/or calls to the US Atty or the judge by Lott is a classic example of mistaking correlation with causation.
I will readily admit that I underestimated Blake’s role as Scruggs’s bag man, right up to the present, when you were trumpeting that all along. But I don’t see the connection you mention as probable.
Trent Lott was making jokes today, in public, about giving stuff to federal judges. Seems to me he is pretty certain he’s not in trouble. Or maybe he’s just a good actor.
Edited.
MSL, he’s a politician isn’t he? And just to throw this out for shtzngigglz, he’s been known to be a singer also…
read the last paragraph.
I have no problems with waterboarding. None whatsoever. Considering it was used on the guy who planned 9/11, I wish it could have been even rougher on him as waterboarding didn’t injure him enough.
completely of topic – But, Jerry Mitchell just posted a new story on Clarion website – nothin really new but titled “Scruggs prosecutors want Lott testimony”. Like I said, I didn’t really see anything new. Just FYI.
Since we seem to have drifted just a bit according to my relevance-o-meter I want to ask the group a couple of questions. I have heard from several sources that Bobby D. has Cynthia Speetgens representing him in this investigation. Does anyone know if that is true? And secondly, has anyone heard who is representing Peters?
interesting.
isn’t that Robbie Bell’s lawyer as well?
kingfish 30, how very pre-USofA. You are out of your time. Pity you missed out on the Spanish Inquisition.
tired 32, I don’t know about “representing,” but I have previously heard (off-blog) that Cynthia Speetjens is “advising” Bobby DeLaughter, as her office-mate Cynthia Stewart is “advising” Ed Peters. Perhaps “advising” has now become “representing” in both cases, but I can’t confirm that as to either.
For the Folo trivia file…Cynthia Speetjens was one of the original Sweet Potato Queens.
Indeed she was, but if memory serves me correctly she was traveling under her maiden name of Hewes at that time.
NMC, you are probably correct regarding Blake and Alabama. I just can not accept that all of that money stuck with Blake–he sent it somewhere.Circles and cycles!
I have to ask for a point of clarification here because my credulity is being strained. Are you saying sweet potato queen or are you saying sweet potato queen? In either event, it’s pretty weird to have a character (admittedly minor) turn up with a sweet potato connection.
Cynthia Hewes Speetjens was one of the original sweet potato queens
If she is representing Robbie Bell, then that means she is one of the Ed Peters gang.