An early morning lead news story on NPR reports Attorney General Eric Holder is having DOJ withdraw corruption charges against former Alaska Senator Ted Stevens.
According to Justice Department officials, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has decided to drop the case against Stevens rather than continue to defend the conviction in the face of persistent problems stemming from the actions of prosecutors.
...Holder's decision is said to be based on Stevens age, he's 84; and because Stevens is no longer in the Senate. Perhaps most importantly, Justice Department officials say Holder wants to send a message to prosecutors throughout the department that actions he regards as misconduct will not be tolerated.
emphasis added. (more)
It's not possible to overemphasize that this action by A.G. Holder has sweeping implications - or that it represents both a great opportunity and a great danger. Here's a quick first-off set of impressions:
• The Republicans will seize on this to somehow blame it on rogue Democratic elements in the D.O.J. - ignoring that DOJ has been incredibly politicized over the last 8 years under some of the most corrupt/incompetent Attorneys General ever - and operated out of the White House as a political arm of the GOP.
• This will be used to discredit the entire judicial system - at a time when many in the former administration are nervously wondering if anyone is going to be coming after them for 8 years of, well everyone knows but no one has wanted to start turning over those rocks.
• Ted Stevens will seize on this as vindication, as will others in Alaska politics, who will claim the lower 48 is out to get them. (Will Palin decides to throw in with the secessionists after all? snark)
• The Senate - jealous of its perogatives - is going to be much harder to subject to the rules applying to ordinary citizens.
On the plus side:
• This offers Holder a huge opportunity to start clearing house. Misconduct on this scale is reason to scructinize everything DOJ has - and has not - done over the last 8 years.
• The actions of DOJ in the case of former Alabama governor Siegleman should be thrown wide open, and possible indictments brought for misconduct.
• This could be used as a lever to start driving forward other investigations and/or Congressional hearings into events of the last 8 years. Karl Rove in particular should be put on the stand to testify, and the matter of those thousands of missing emails from the White House should be vigorously pursued.
That's just my immediate reaction. This is going to be a hit and run post I'm afraid, as I'm going to have to head off to work shortly - but if the NPR report is followed up, this story should be all over the news today.
UPDATE:
Boy, go away for a few hours to earn a living, and the comments fly! Sorry I couldn't be here to respond directly, but I'll try to offer some kind of a wrap.
First off, for those who thought this was a bit of a sketchy diary, it was - I was pressed for time and NPR seems to have scooped everyone else. (And that is interesting all by itself. Is someone in the administration trying to do NPR a favor?) There was nothing on the NY Times website when I posted the diary. There's some comment NOW of course, but the Obama trip to the G-20 summit seems to be getting the most coverage right now. FWIW, here's Kevin Drum's take on the story, Christy Hardin Smith at Firedoglake, and the NY Times.
After going through the comments, it seems almost everyone is not happy that Stevens is not going to jail. Some are resigned, some are outraged.
On Holder's decision there seems to be a split between those who think he made a good call in a bad situation; others that he completely blew it; and others who are wondering about all the other things he should be doing.
I'm going to offer my take after having had a more few hours to think about all this.
On Stevens, I think the evidence is pretty clear that he is guilty of at least some of the charges and deserves to go to jail.That being said, while he is not going to spend time behind bars: his reputation/legacy is pretty well shot at this point, he has not been cleared, he is no longer a senator, and at his age we probably don't have to worry about a come-back.
Should charges be re-filed and a new trial sought? Assuming the double jeopardy clause doesn't get in the way, it has to be asked if the effort would be worth the cost. Holder does not have infinite resources at his disposal, and he has a tremendous task ahead of him - rebuilding the DOJ and beginning to address all of the things on his plate besides. Misconduct by the previous administration, GWOT detainees, ongoing cases brought by the previous administration, review of DOJ actions under BushCo, questions about Wall Street and the financial melt-down, the growing threat from right wing extremists, etc. etc.
Stevens is done at this point. There are a lot more higher priority targets out there. But, just in case he tries to rehabilitate himself,I'm sure there are things that could be done to smack him down again. Has anyone reviewed his tax returns, for example?
On Holder's decision to drop the charges, I think he made the right decision and a good start. It seems clear that there were so many problems with the conduct of everyone involved with the prosecution, the case was irretrievably tainted. A conviction would leave Stevens partisans in the position of being able to claim he did not get a fair trial - and they'd have a pretty good case.
And that's the key issue here. Stevens is lower than pond scum - but even pond scum deserves a fair trial where everyone plays by the rules. If someone who is a sitting senator can not get a fair day in court, who among us is safe? What I want to see now is the follow-up. Who resigns, who gets fired, who gets disciplinary action? The rule of law in this country is in really bad shape, and it will take drastic action to restore it.
Moving ahead from this, Holder will be in a much stronger position to look at what happened in Alabama, and everywhere else in the DOJ. To borrow a couple of phrases from one of my favorite authors, 1) this is a sign that he means to begin as he intends to go on. And for those who still want to see Stevens brought low, I'd offer 2) "We pray for mercy because we would all be fools to pray for justice."
If anyone deserves our hearts and prayers for work in the service of justice, well there's a long list - but I'd like to link to Glenn Greenwald's article on what Senator Jim Webb is doing from the other side of the problem. We need more leaders with true courage and integrity.