Showing posts with label Bob McDonnell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bob McDonnell. Show all posts

Sunday, October 26, 2014

We should look at political corruption much more broadly

Earlier this year, veteran political writer Thomas Edsall reported an eyebrow-raising fact about Americans' views of government.
Polling by Gallup, he noted, found that the proportion of Americans who believed government corruption is "widespread" had risen from 59 percent in 2006 to 79 percent in 2013.
"In other words," Edsall wrote, "we were cynical already, but now we're in overdrive."
Given the blanket coverage devoted to public officials charged with selling their influence, this shouldn't be surprising. Former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell and his wife were convicted last month of violating public corruption laws.
Former mayors Ray Nagin, of New Orleans, and KwameKilpatrick, of Detroit, were good for months of headlines.
So were Republican Rep. Rick Renzi, convicted last year on influence-peddling charges, and Democratic Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., who pleaded guilty to charges of misusing campaign funds.
If you add state and local officials who cross the line, it might seem that we're awash in corruption. Yet as political scientist Larry Sabato told The New York Times, that's more perception than reality. "I've studied American political corruption throughout the 19th and 20th centuries," he said, "and, if anything, corruption was much more common in much of those centuries than today."
Nor have the numbers through the past couple of decades risen. In 1994, according to the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section, 1,165 people were charged in public-corruption cases, of whom 969 were convicted. Last year, 1,134 were charged, of whom 1,037 were convicted.
Corruption is hardly a negligible issue. Americans rightly have very little tolerance for public officials on the take. Officials who violate the law in this regard should face criminal prosecution and incarceration.
Americans remain uncomfortable with "corruption" as our forebears viewed it. A hefty majority believe that government is run on behalf of a few big interests. And Congress, whose ethics committees have not been rigorous in looking for misconduct that brings discredit on their chambers, has contributed to that view.
I would hardly contend that all who seek to promote their private interests are corrupt. But I do think the Founders had a valuable insight when they saw that a focus on private concerns could lead to neglect of the common good.
I have the uneasy feeling that too many politicians are self-absorbed, failing to put the country first, and using their office to promote their private interests.
Our founders had very firm ideas about the importance to the nation of "virtue" in a public official — and they were thinking expansively about the basic standards of public accountability.
Maybe it's time we looked to them for guidance.
Maybe it's time not to think of corruption only in the narrow sense of violations of specific laws or precepts, but more broadly in terms of failing to pursue the common good.
Lee Hamilton directs the Center on Congress at Indiana University. He was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for 34 years.

Thursday, August 7, 2014

FBI computer analyst on stand in Virginia ex-governor's corruption trial

FBI computer analyst on stand in Virginia ex-governor's corruption trial


English: Governor of Virginia at CPAC in .RICHMOND Va. (Reuters) - An FBI computer forensic analyst will be back on the witness stand for the prosecution on Wednesday in the federal corruption trial of former Virginia Governor Robert McDonnell and his wife, Maureen.
The expert, Timothy Huff, had started his testimony in U.S. District Court on Tuesday when an alternate juror became ill, prompting U.S. District Judge James Spencer to adjourn early.
The McDonnells face 14 counts of corruption and bribery for allegedly accepting $165,000 in gifts and loans from businessman Jonnie Williams Sr. in exchange for supporting his former company, a dietary supplement maker now known as Rock Creek Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Jasen Eige, the former chief counsel to the governor, testified on Tuesday, the seventh day of the trial, that McDonnell never told him about loans and gifts he received from Williams.
Eige said he learned about them only when news accounts began appearing about the federal investigation into possible misconduct by the governor and his wife.
McDonnell wrote on a 2011 financial form that he incurred a $50,000 debt for “medical services" when Williams actually loaned him the money, Eige testified in U.S. District Court.
Williams, the prosecution's star witness, completed four days of testimony on Monday by detailing financial help he said he had given McDonnell and his wife.
Lawyers for McDonnell and his wife have argued that accepting the gifts was unseemly but not illegal. Defense attorneys have tried to distance the former governor from Williams, saying the interaction was primarily between the businessman and Maureen McDonnell.
If convicted, the McDonnells could each face more than 20 years in prison and a large fine. McDonnell's four-year term as governor ended in January.
(Writing by Ian Simpson; Editing by Bill Trott)

Bob McDonnell public corruption trial : How his marriage defense squares with his family values thesis.

Bob McDonnell public corruption trial : How his marriage defense squares with his family values thesis.

When Virginia’s former Gov. Bob McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, were charged earlier this year in a 14-count federal indictment, it seemed the story could get no more depressing than it already was. The McDonnells stand accused of trading the prestige of the governor’s office to Jonnie R. Williams and his dubious nutritional supplement company, in return for more than $150,000 in luxury gifts, loans, Manhattan shopping sprees, and junkets. What a sorry tale of Keeping Up With the Governor Joneses. But as the trial opened last week in Richmond the tale became even sadder. It’s no longer just a story of greed and craven opportunism. Now it’s a still life of a ruined marriage. And it stands in rather dramatic contrast to the sacred and pure vision of government-sanctioned marriage and family that McDonnell famously proffered in his 1989 master’s thesis at Regent University and with his careerlong posture as a family-values candidate and fiscally conservative public servant.
Instead of talking about public corruption and access to power, we are going to spend the next four weeks wallowing in the murk of the McDonnells’ sham marriage. The couple held themselves out as profoundly religious and moral, the clear-eyed, humble parents of five children. But the McDonnells’ improbable legal defense—and yes this is indeed their co-defense although they have separate lawyers—is that they couldn’t have conspired as a couple to use the governor’s office for personal gain because they suffered “a broken down” marriage and were “barely on speaking terms.”
Why did Maureen McDonnell work as diligently as she did to trade political favors for glittering gifts? The defense team claims she had a “crush” on Williams. (This was evidently news to Williams.) According to the defense, Maureen was never conspiring with her husband to trade on the prestige of the governor’s office. No. She was just a lonely woman in a broken marriage, so desperate for attention that she got her husband a $6,000 Rolex and free rides in Williams’ Ferrari and Learjet. I guess it’s cheating by the transitive property—where you get the guy now known as Maureen’s “favorite playmate” to finance your husband’s Style Section fantasies. The 1,200 text messages (52 in a single day!) and phone calls that flew between the first lady and the business tycoon during the period covered by the indictment reflect no quid pro quo, the McDonnells’ lawyers contend—more just a sad flirtation fueled by an underappreciated housewife.
Is the marriage a sham or is the defense a sham? Who knows? The only thing that matters is whether the jurors buy it. That and the fact that the sham marriage defense seems to become a self-fulfilling prophesy as the trial grinds on. At this point, the McDonnells enter the courtroom through separate doorways and sit at adjacent tables. They don’t look at each other. And as Dana Milbank reminds us much of the marital ugliness on display here would have been avoided if McDonnell had taken a plea deal that would have let his wife off the hook and required him to plead guilty only to a single charge unrelated to his official duties. But marriage is forever. So says McDonnell’s famous Regent thesis. And nothing says “forever” like blaming your wife for being an everything-but-adulteress until death do you part.
It’s impossible not to see this tragedy through the rosy lens of McDonnell’s much-scrutinized graduate thesis, authored in 1989 for a master’s in public policy and a J.D. from Regent University. When theWashington Post first reported on the thesis in 2009, it kicked upsomething of an Internet ruckus about whether it reflected McDonnell’sactual contemporary political views on gender equality (opposed), homosexuality (opposed), birth control (ditto), and welfare (also ditto). McDonnell was 34, married, and a father when he wrote that thesis, but he passed it off as youthful musings, explaining during his run for Governor, that voters should not judge him based on a “decades-old academic paper I wrote as a student during the Reagan era and haven’t thought about in years.” He publicly claimed that his views had changed over the years. But as the Post noted at the time “during his 14 years in the General Assembly, McDonnell pursued at least 10 of the policy goals he laid out in that research paper, including abortion restrictions, covenant marriage, school vouchers and tax policies to favor his view of the traditional family.”
McDonnell’s views on marriage, family, austerity, personal responsibility, and morality as laid out in the 93-page paper, are worthy of revisiting in light of the drama now playing out in Richmond. It’s not so much a question of whether he governed by these values anymore, as whether he and his family lived by them. The thesis was an argument for infusing Christian Republican values into government policy. His view was that family is an institution that predates civil government and thus may not be defined by it. This is because “the Creator instituted marriage and family in Eden.” The family and marriage are celebrated as the best safeguard against immorality and selfishness. The thesis is a lengthy exposition on the ways modern government has disrupted and undermined traditional families and a road map back to a Christian view of the primacy of family as an organizing unit. There is a lengthy section on the evils of government-assisted child care that enables women to work. There is a bracing reminder about the need for fiscal austerity(!). There are some nice zingers about liberals (who “measure equality on a factual economic basis”). And there is a lot of talk about the evils of welfare and government aid and the need for self-reliance(!!). There are strong words for families who “reject the traditional values of responsibility and accountability.” And the tour de force comes at the end with a laundry list of the “real enemies of the traditional family—materialism, irresponsibility, feminism, lust, and ultimately selfishness,” which McDonnell concedes are largely outside the sphere of government control. Those qualities now stand as the organizing principles of the current McDonnell defense strategy, although—to be clear—the materialism, irresponsibility, lust, and selfishness are all massed on Maureen’s side of the ledger. And the dreaded feminism is nowhere in evidence.
You need read no further than Page 39 of the document, where McDonnell whimsically muses: “Must government subsidize the choices of a generation with an increased appetite for the materialistic components of the American Dream?” to understand the real failure of the thesis as a political and moral argument: Materialism and greed know no ideological, class, or religious bounds. It isn’t just the greedy welfare beneficiaries who are seduced by the need for pretty, pretty things. Yet the lectures about morality and austerity unerringly seem to come from the guy with the free Rolex. People who live in glass governor’s mansions really shouldn’t throw stones.

Monday, August 4, 2014

Sordid public corruption trial for Virginia ex-Gov. McDonnell, wife

Sordid public corruption trial for Virginia ex-Gov. McDonnell, wife

It is the kind of corruption case that would attract attention even from jaded voters in places like Illinois or Louisiana, with long-established records of shady government dealings. But for Virginians, who have enjoyed generations of relative purity in state government, the spectacle in federal court here is shocking.
The ex-governor and his wife are on trial, trying to explain an unconsummated love triangle with a businessman who says he can nuke carcinogens out of tobacco in his kitchen microwave — and that's the defense version of the case.
It's a sordid tale involving secret cash transfers, private jets, a male model and an iPhone snapshot of former Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell wearing a very expensive Rolex.
McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, are charged with public corruption. Federal prosecutors allege that the couple, financially strapped and eager to live the high life, aggressively solicited cash and gifts from the businessman, Jonnie R. Williams Sr., a local millionaire.
In return, prosecutors say, the couple provided state help promoting a nutritional supplement made out of tobacco. The McDonnells admit taking the gifts, but deny giving favors in return.
Williams is now the government's star witness, and to try to defuse his testimony, the defense kicked off the trial with a bombshell: The McDonnells' marriage had unraveled in the governor's mansion, defense lawyers told the jury in opening statements. That, they said, left Maureen McDonnell desperate for attention, and she got it from the jet-setting Williams, on whom she had a "crush."
The argument, although undoubtedly embarrassing to the couple, forms a key part of their defense. To convict either of the McDonnells, prosecutors must prove that Bob McDonnell did governmental favors for Williams in return for gifts.
If the defense can convince the jury that Williams was motivated by friendship for Maureen McDonnell and that she had kept the governor in the dark about his gifts because she and her husband weren't speaking, the couple would escape prison.
Richmond, which long viewed itself as immune from the self-dealing that infects other state capitals, has for years resisted imposing gift limits and other ethics laws common in American politics. Showering lavish gifts on politicians is legal in the state, so long as the gift giver doesn't get special favors in return.
At the center of the scandal is a purported wonder drug — a nutritional supplement Williams says he invented from tobacco, which he told the jury he learned to make less dangerous with his microwave.
Williams testified that he was willing to supply gifts in return for help getting Virginia's public medical schools to embrace his product, as well as getting the governor to promote it.
The supplement was launched, with much fanfare, at an event at the governor's mansion. The state's first lady traveled the country with Williams, promoting the product at events with groups of doctors and potential investors.
The defense argues that none of that was caused by Williams' gifts. Indeed, they say, the governor was largely unaware of the money and presents Williams had given his wife.
That could be a hard argument for jurors to accept. Evidence shows Williams gave a $50,000 loan to the McDonnells, paid $15,000 for catering at the wedding of one of their daughters, took Maureen McDonnell on a $19,000 shopping spree at Oscar de la Renta and Bergdorf Goodman in Manhattan and bought the governor an engraved $6,500 Rolex at a jewelry shop in Malibu.
On Friday the government showed the jury a photo of the governor wearing the Rolex. McDonnell has said he thought the watch was a gift from his wife, not Williams. But this photo was one texted from the governor's phone to Williams. It shows McDonnell flashing what appears to be the watch while smiling a broad grin.
In court, Williams described the purchase of the timepiece: "I called Maureen McDonnell from the store," Williams said. "I asked her, what would you like engraved on the watch? She thought about it. Then she said, 'Put "71st governor" on it.'"
He regretted the purchase, he said.
"I shouldn't have had to buy things like that to get the help I needed," he said. "It was a bad decision."
He did not consider the first couple personal friends, Williams testified. They had "a business relationship," he said: He gave them money and gifts, and they helped him advance his business.
Whatever a jury ultimately decides, the case has caused an astonishing fall for the former governor.
The congenial McDonnell was known as an effective deal maker and a rising star in the GOP. He received accolades from Democrats and Republicans alike for his style of governance. Throughout most of the one term McDonnell was permitted to serve under Virginia's constitution, his relationship with his wife, a former Washington Redskins cheerleader, seemed drawn from a storybook.
"This was the Beaver Cleaver family," said Quentin Kidd, a professor of political science at Christopher Newport University in Newport News. "Everybody knew he was religiously conservative and socially conservative, but he did not play those things up. Nobody expected his family would become a story, or the behavior of his wife [or] his kids would become a story."
"Months into this scandal, there were still Republicans saying, 'There has to be an easy explanation, this can't be as it appears,'" Kidd said.
Now, Bob and Maureen McDonnell awkwardly sit feet away at adjoining tables in the courtroom, barely acknowledging one another as they face the prospect of prison terms that could run as long as 20 years — although as first-time offenders they would probably receive less.
Beyond the threat of prison, there is also the sheer tawdriness of the evidence.
Williams testified that on a luxury vacation for the McDonnells, which he paid for in Cape Cod, he had popped open a $5,000 bottle of cognac and poured the governor a glass. They drank the same cognac again, he testified, while traipsing around New York City with a friend of his who is a male model.
Defense attorneys are seeking to discredit Williams as a huckster and fraud. They point to his own considerable legal troubles and suggest he is fibbing to get in the good graces of prosecutors, who otherwise have a thin case.
In building the government case, Assistant U.S. Atty. Michael Dry returned repeatedly to the lengths to which Williams went to keep the transactions secret. Instead of lending $50,000 outright to the McDonnells, Williams sought to provide the funds through a complicated transfer of stock certificates, then eventually funneled the money through a real estate company the McDonnell family owned. He testified that his intention was to evade disclosure.