Check out this Washington Post article titled, "How Rove Directed Federal Assets for GOP Gain."  But the real question is whether an independent person or body will fully investigate the questions that have been raised.

(esp)

The white collar crime blog mourns the passing of Max Kravitz, a law professor and criminal defense attorney. As noted on the Capital Law School website, "[h]e began teaching in 1976 and over his 30+ years as an educator, he had taught criminal law, criminal procedure, advanced criminal procedure, federal criminal law, and capital punishment litigation and practiced and taught in the law school legal clinic."  Professor Kravitz had the rare gift of mixing the academic and practice world to benefit his students and colleagues.   He handled many a white collar case and was a member of the Board of Governors of the American Board of Criminal Lawyers. (see listing Kravitz, Brown & Dortch).

(esp)

Karl Rove, clearly a point of contention with many scrutinizing the White House, has announced that he will leave his position as  White House Deputy Chief of Staff at the end of the month. (see Washington Post, Wall Street Jrl).  Rove appeared five times before the Grand Jury that investigated the CIA leak, but unlike Scooter Libby did not face indictment. (see here) Recently his testimony has also been sought related to the "firing" of U.S. Attorneys. Like Harriet Miers, who left the White House, he likely will continue to argue for Executive Privilege when Congress seeks to question him. (see here)  But one has to wonder whether more pressure placed on securing his testimony will serve as a source of increased profits to him when he eventually writes the book.

(esp)

The ABA’s second National Institute on Securities Fraud is set for October 25-26th at the Fairmont Hotel in Washington, D.C. The program is described as follows:

"Is the Enron era of massive financial fraud over?  Will the internationalization of securities fraud enforcement ever end?  Is the options backdating scandal a blip on the radar screen or a long term full-time employment act for the defense bar?  Learn insights from the very best of the profession — judges, prosecutors, regulators, academics, compliance officers and defense counsel – about what to expect next and how to prepare for these new developments in the ever present, headline-making area of securities fraud.  The Second Annual Securities Fraud National Institute will provide an in-depth, cutting edge and rewarding educational experience for all practitioners, including prosecutors, regulators, compliance officers and defense counsel. Top officials and luminaries from the SEC, DOJ, law schools, the judiciary, corporations and top-tier law firms will share their insights concerning a multitude of important subjects including:

• How in-house lawyers evolved from counselors to targets

• Prosecution theories that do not hold up on appeal

• The long international arm of US securities laws

• The importance of loss calculations in both civil and criminal cases

• The return of insider trading"

For registration details see here.

(esp)

Dan Eggen of the Washington Post has yet another article on beltway news. This time it is Vice President Cheney, and he is expressing disagreement with the Libby verdict.  Does he have information that wasn’t presented to the jury?  Does he know something that the rest of us don’t know?  And if he knew something, shouldn’t he have disclosed it to LIbby’s attorneys.

And one finds in this article that Cheney is supporting Gonzales – and saying that the Attorney General has the support of the President. But does he have the support of the civil servants in his office? And does he have the support of the people?

(esp)

Blog Emperor Paul Caron turns 50 today.  Happy birthday, Paul.

(esp) & (ph)

Is this not the classic case needing mediation?   

Congress needs to enforce its powers.  After all it is the legislature, and for many years the Courts have been giving deference to this branch of government.  Equally persuasive is that when an executive out and out defies the legislature’s powers it needs to stand its ground.  So it is not surprising to see this Congressional committee move for contempt against White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and President Bush’s former legal counselor Harriet Miers. (see WSJ AP here) (See Wash Po here)

And one would think that the Executive would want Congress to have oversight abilities.  After all this is a democracy with three equal branches of government. The perception of an executive that can do as it pleases would bring us back centuries.

But playing this scenario out presents some interesting questions:  if the full house votes for contempt and then it goes to the US Attorney for the District of Columbia, it seems likely he will have to recuse himself because of a conflict of interest.  And if eventually the matter does get presented what kind of result could be expected? Would the President pull a "Scooter" Libby on this one?  Could this be a situation of a lot of time and money spend on worthless acts?  This could go in circles for some time, and in part it is because we have a balanced system of government that is supposed to have three co-equal branches. 

So wouldn’t mediation be a better solution here? Many have said that we need to incorporate alternative dispute resolution into our legal system.  Perhaps this might be a good time to start.

(esp)

The Wall Street Jrl reports of DOJ scrutiny facing Republican Representatives Don Young of Alaska and Senator Ted Stevens.

(esp)

Improper use of State Police to secure information on his rival?  The New York Times reports on happenings in the Spitzer camp.  And the paper also reports on the quick action taken by Governor Spitzer in response to the report that questioned ethical practices by those around him. The question will be whether any possible improprieties in his office should have been monitored by him.  There will be no question that he responded immediately by taking action against individuals suspected of wrongdoing.  It is odd to see the tables turned with Spitzer who has been tough on so many, now having to face questions.

(esp)

The International Society for the Reform of Criminal Law had a Plenary Session at its annual conference titled – The Corporation and the Criminal Law. Speakers included: Victoria O’Keefe, Assistant Director & Head of Policy – Serious Fraud Office in London, who spoke about Charging Decisions & the Company – The UK Serious Fraud Office Perspective; Mark Tuohey, of the law firm of Vinson Elkins in Washington, D.C., who spoke about The Corporation & The Criminal Law: Developments in the Law of Corporate Waiver of the Attorney-Client Privilege; Gerard Forlin, Barrister at 2-3 Gray’s Inn Square, London who spoke about The New Corporate Killings Proposal & The General Climate: Where Are We Now and Where Are We Going; Miriam Maisonville, Crown Counsel, Attorney General of British Columbia – Special Prosecutions, who spoke about Rethinking Theories of Corporate Liability in Criminal Law: Pushing the Legislative Envelope & Corporate Push Back – A Comparison of American, Canadian, & English Developments; and Annemicke Holthuis, Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section of Canada, who spoke about Criminal Liability of Organizations in Canada.  It was interesting to note the number of people who spoke to issues of extraterritoriality and the need for more cooperation between countries.

Others from the United States speaking at this conference included Ron Gainer, Professors Arnold Loewy (Texas Tech), Sara Sun Beale (Duke), and Linda Malone (William & Mary).

(esp)