Albany Times Union Reveals Contours of Case Against Bruno

by: pontificator

Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 14:47:06 PM EDT

The FBI has assembled a potential case against Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno using a federal law that is the Justice Department's preferred weapon in public corruption cases, according to sources briefed on the investigation.

That law makes it a felony, punishable by up to five years in prison, to deprive the public of the "honest services" of its government.

The sources, who are involved in the case but spoke on the condition they not be identified, said agents in the FBI's white-collar crime unit in Albany believe they have compiled enough evidence to propose criminal charges to the U.S. Attorney's office. The sources declined to provide details.

A federal grand jury in Albany has been reviewing the matter for more than a year. A decision on whether the panel will consider an indictment of Bruno, the state's most powerful Republican, would ultimately be made by U.S. Attorney Glenn T. Suddaby, the top federal prosecutor in New York's Northern District and an appointee of President Bush.

[snip]

A source briefed on the investigation said the FBI is homing in on the so-called "honest-services" law, a one-sentence amendment Congress inserted into federal statutes 20 years ago to close a loophole in its laws defining mail fraud and wire fraud.

The broadly written law prohibits anyone from depriving the public of an inherent "right to honest services." The law has given the Justice Department wider discretion in the prosecution of public corruption, experts said, and has led to numerous convictions even in cases where there was no clear-cut bribe or theft.

"You don't have to establish the clear quid pro quo that you need for a bribery conviction," said Henning, a former federal prosecutor.

In recent years, the honest services law was used to convict Abramoff, former Illinois Gov. George Ryan, former Connecticut Gov. John Rowland and former U.S. Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham of California.

And the person who we must scrutinize is the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of New York, Glenn Suddaby.

So who is Glenn Sudaby?

Well, he was appointed by George Bush in 2002, and was not fired in the US Attorney bloodbath on December 7, 2006, and apparently never turned up on any of the lists of US Attorneys who should get the axe.  That in and of itself is a bad sign, as it suggests that perhaps Suddaby was all too willing to comply with the White House's political demands.

And John McCay, the fired US Attorney from the District of Washington, pointedly identified Suddaby as one of the US Attorneys who had been subjected to political pressure.

The three U.S. attorneys gathered in Seattle on Wednesday also gave nod to other federal prosecutors who while not among the eight dismissed in December have been bearing the brunt of political pressure from the Department of Justice and the White House.

"I know that our former colleagues, and I'm going to name several, are hurting because of what very senior people in the DOJ have done," said John McKay, the ousted attorney for western Washington.

McKay went on to name Glenn Suddaby in Syracuse and Steve Biskupic in Wisconsin as two attorneys still seated who are suffering from political pressure. McKay also named Debra Wong Yang, the former U.S. attorney in Los Angeles whose abrupt resignation last October is now drawing attention in light of reports that then-White House council Harriet Miers asked her to step down.

"People are now asking, if you're a good U.S. attorney, why aren't you getting fired?" quipped McKay.

In light of the above, the investigation of Bruno requires our scrutiny.  If charges are ultimately not brought against Bruno, we must demand answers as to whether pressure from Washington may have influenced Suddaby's judgment.