Bush Appointed U.S. Attorney Blasted

The low scruples of the Rove Republican Racket in the waning days of summer is clear as smoke from a California Wildfire.

Now comes word that the Rove-Bush-Cheney appointed U.S. Attorney in New Mexico Gregory Fouratt (pictured) has accused New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson of being "dishonest" even though he was recently cleared in a federal probe.

From Main Justice:

Former D.C. U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova rebuked New Mexico U.S. Attorney Gregory J. Fouratt for remarks the prosecutor made about the decision not to file charges against Gov. Bill Richardson, The Associated Press reported last week.

diGenova, a Reagan U.S. Attorney, told The AP that a letter Fouratt sent to grand jury witnesses about the decision was “stupid.” The ex-D.C. U.S. Attorney said the letter made accusations of dishonesty after the investigation was over.“That letter is an outrage and the U.S. Attorney who wrote it should be fired,” diGenova told The AP. “The case is closed. If he had charges, bring them. Otherwise, he should shut up. He’s being a politician now, not a prosecutor.” Fouratt, a Bush holdover, wrote that “pressure from the governor’s office resulted in the corruption of the procurement process” and said that the letter “should not be interpreted as exoneration of any party’s conduct in that matter.”

Read the full post here.

Bias Biggers Recuses Himself

Breaking News....Earlier this week, we talked about Federal Judge Neal Biggers, who is overseeing the CIVIL trial against famous tobacco trial lawyer Dickie Scruggs, is the same judge who threw the book at Scruggs in the related CRIMINAL trial. Talk about extreme bias!

Well today, Biggers has done the right thing and recused himself. See the full story here.

Justice in Birmingham

Today, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder was present for the swearing in of the new U.S. Attorney in Birmingham, Alabama: Joyce Vance (pictured) who takes the reins from Alice Martin, the Rove Republican Racket's dearest political prosecutor of Democrats.

With Vance sworn in, true justice returns to Alabama. As you may recall, Martin was a vicious and extremely partisan prosecutor.

From the Associated Press:

Vance takes over an office that under former U.S. Attorney Alice Martin began an intensive investigation of Alabama's two-year college system. That investigation led to convictions or guilty pleas from three legislators and the former chancellor of the state's two-year-college system.

Some Democratic leaders have said the investigation was partisan and targeted at Democratic office holders. Vance did not mention those cases in her brief remarks, but said her office would dispense justice equally.

Some supporters of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman and former HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy have pressured Holder to clear the two of their 2006 convictions in a government corruption case.

Siegelman has charged that his prosecution was pushed by the administration of former Republican President George Bush and Bush aide Karl Rove.

There was one reference to the Siegelman case. That came when the master of ceremonies, Birmingham attorney Barry Ragsdale, introduced U.S. District Judge Mark Fuller, the chief judge in the Middle District of Alabama who presided over the trial of Siegelman and Scrushy. "We are pleased that Karl Rove gave you permission to come," Ragsdale joked as he pointed at Fuller.

Read the full article here.

Will Bias Biggers Recuse Himself?

Federal Judge Neal Biggers of Mississippi has been in the middle of some key political prosecutions of leading Democrats by the Rove Republican Racket.

Biggers, who chastised one prominent Democrat operative for having made millions off of judicial litigation while being a non-lawyer, may have a chip on his Republican shoulder against successful Democratic lawyers who happen to be key Democratic Party boosters.

Now comes the case of Dickie Scruggs (pictured), the wealthy tobacco settlement attorney and Democratic Party supporter who is rotting in jail for bribery, sent away by the "Honorable"Judge Biggers.

Judge Biggers' friend Judge Henry Lackey spent about five months setting up Scruggs and his idiot friends on taking the bait.

Biggers also threw the concrete book at Scruggs in another CRIMINAL bribery case called Wilson vs. Scruggs.

But new questions have arisen because Biggers is now overseeing the CIVIL bribery case against Scruggs related to Wilson vs. Scruggs.

Everyone should be asking: Will bias Biggers recuse himself?

The blog Slabbed writes:

The defendants face a mindfield of bias. I find it somewhat incredible, although it may not be unusual, that a judge can preside over a defendant’s criminal trial and then preside over a similar action in a civil trials. Judge Biggers is further compromised by circumstance because the Luckey trial on this same matter was conducted by one of his Magistrate judges. In that case Magistrate Judge Davis gave no consideration to the equity that defines constructive trust. Luckey lacked the clean hands and never denied Scruggs had fired him for cause directly related to the asbestos litigation. When it comes to just treatment of Dick Scruggs by our judicial systems, I’ve yet to see a clean hand although some may only have a smudge.

Read Slabbed's full post here.

Today, CIA Abuses. DOJ Abuses, Next?

Today U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder appointed a special prosecutor to investigate abuses by Rove Bush Cheney's CIA. The question we have is: Will Holder appoint a special prosecutor to investigate DOJ abuses by the Rove Republican Racket during the Rove Bush Cheney era? We hope so.

The human and political rights of prominent Democrats were trampled on for the sake of "political" security by Karl Rove and friends.While some suspected terrorists were threatened with power drills and guns by the CIA, real Democrats were threatened with extensive prison terms by the DOJ and persecuted on bogus political charges. Some eventually were imprisoned or "plead out" fearing decades in prison.

Time for justice! From Bloomberg News Wire:

Aug. 24 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder appointed a career prosecutor to review whether CIA officials and the agency’s private contractors should be prosecuted amid new revelations that terror suspects were threatened with guns and a power drill. Holder named John Durham, who previously investigated the destruction of Central Intelligence Agency videotapes of interrogations, to conduct the examination. The Justice Department released more details of the alleged abuses and new restrictions on interrogations. “The information known to me warrants opening a preliminary review into whether federal laws were violated in connection with the interrogation of specific detainees at overseas locations,” Holder said in a statement released in Washington today. “Neither the opening of a preliminary review nor, if evidence warrants it, the commencement of a full investigation, means that charges will necessarily follow.”

Firing Back at Karl Rove's Lies

The political fallout from Karl Rove's Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal is escalating.

In the piece, the father of the Rove Republican Racket demands an apology from the New York Times, The Washington Post and Congressman John Conyers, and states his role in the 2006 firing of U.S. Attorneys was "minimal."

Now two leading Democrats mentioned in his op-ed are firing back.

From Dana Beyerle of the Gadsen (Alabama) Times:

In a Wall Street Journal opinion piece, Rove put his spin on his testimony saying neither Siegelman nor Rainsville lawyer Jill Simpson, who publicly stated allegations about Rove's alleged involvement in events surrounding Siegelman's challenge to Gov. Bob Riley's 2006 re-election. Rove said Siegelman and Simpson "refused to cooperate with the Justice Department's review" while (Rove) willingly testified. Simpson said that's a lie. She gave sworn testimony to committee staffers on Sept. 14, 2007. And Siegelman was never called to testify, although he said he would have. "In fact, there's no indication that the Justice Department has considered the prima facie evidence of lying, concealment of evidence and witness intimidation by federal prosecutors," the Huffington Post reported. Siegelman's attorney, Vince Kilborn, in the Birmingham News, said he doesn't believe Rove's denial.

Conyers Spanks Karl Rove

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers has responded to Karl Rove's demand for an apology.

Conyers provides readers with a spanking of Rove's insidious comments that his role in the firing of U.S. Attorneys in 2006 was minimal.

From mlive.com (a Michigan News Site):

Karl Rove on Thursday took to the pages of the Wall Street Journal and demanded U.S. Rep. John Conyers of Michigan's 14th district apologize for accusing him of improper behavior in the 2006 firing of eight U.S. Attorneys, recounting a report from last year that Conyers once said "We're closing in on Rove. Someone's got to kick his ass."

Wasting little time and offering no apology, Conyers countered with an afternoon op-ed for the Huffington Post, criticizing Rove for rehashing discredited statements, the Wall Street Journal for publishing them and Rupert Murdoch for allowing the papers' conservative editorial stance to bleed onto the news pages.

Conyers earlier this month directly blamed Karl Rove for the firings, saying "This basic truth can no longer be denied: Karl Rove and his cohorts at the Bush White House were the driving force behind several of these firings, which were done for improper reasons."

But in his editorial, Rove wrote the 2 1/2 year House Judiciary Committee investigation into the firings showed that his role was "minimal and entirely proper."

Not so, according to Conyers.

On Karl Rove: Mr. Rove's self-serving assertions on this subject are simply inconsistent with the documents that the Judiciary Committee recently released and his claims have been discredited by the analysis of the documents and reporting on these matters by credible news outlets across the country. Anyone interested in the truth can read the documents for themselves (here) or the reporting on these matters from papers large -- Washington Post (here) and New York Times (here) -- and small -- Kansas City Star (here). Mr. Rove's points are largely a repeat of his prior discredited statements, and the purpose of this post is not to rehash Mr. Rove's rehash.

Read the entire story here.

An Apology for Rove?

Karl Rove today wrote an op-ed piece for The Wall Street Journal demanding an apology from The New York Times, The Washington Post, and House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers.

Rove writes:

Judging from the evidence released, it uncovered facts that show that my role in the U.S. attorneys issue was minimal and entirely proper. I did not conceive of the idea of removing certain U.S. attorneys, did not select those to be removed, and did not see the lists of U.S. attorneys Justice was considering to replace. I had no idea who was on the final list until Justice sent it to the White House in November 2006. No fair-minded person can review the thousands of pages of documents and testimony and conclude that I drove the process.

If he had asked us for an apology, we would have said: No, you, Mr. Rove, need to apologize!

Taking a closer look at his words, they are not the "whole" truth. Rove may not have conceived the idea but he surely approved of the idea. He may not have selected those to be removed but his staff gladly took suggestions from others. Rove may have not seen the list of replacements but he knew damn sure they were more "loyal" than those being given the boot. As Rove tries to spin the media, we think the independent investigator that is still on the case will conclude otherwise. To us, Karl Rove and the entire Rove Republican Racket turned the U.S. Department of Justice into a political arm of the Republican Party to prosecute Democratic leaders.

Maybe Karl Rove didn't turn on the light switch, but he made sure the electricity was running.

Karl Rove and "Land Swap" Renzi

In February, former U.S. Congressman Rick Renzi of Arizona was indicted for his corrupt land swap deal.

Now with the release of congressional investigative documents, it is evident that the Rove Republican Racket intentionally fired then U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton in 2006 to protect the disgraced Renzi from being probed.

And marching with Karl Rove was the Arizona Republic newspaper.

From the Phoenix New Times:

How did the Arizona Republic manage to screw up its initial coverage so badly? The answer, as it turns out, is Karl Rove. Last week, as part of a probe into the Bush Administration's dismissal of seven U.S. Attorneys, a Senate committee released thousands of pages of new documents. Some of them involved Paul Charlton. Charlton, the then-U.S. Attorney in Phoenix, was one casualty of the administration's forced resignations in December 2006. At the time of Charlton's "resignation," he was
in the midst of investigating a fellow Republican, Congressman Renzi. And though the documents still don't make 100 percent clear what led to Charlton's dismissal, they show for the first time the Bushies' attempt to spin the media in Renzi's defense. Let me explain. More than a month before the 2006 election, New Times broke the story at the center of the charges against Renzi — that Renzi pushed investors to buy land owned by his business partner in exchange for sponsorship of a land swap in Congress. Our report was no bit of conjecture. We nailed down the complete paper trail. Yet the Republic endorsed the guy, with nary a mention of our findings. I never expect other media outlets to credit our work — but I don't expect them to ignore such serious allegations, either. It seemed just plain lazy to not follow up. But within the coming weeks, the paper's passivity turned to outright misinformation. That's where Rove comes in. Go figure. Two weeks before the election, news outlets from the Washington Post to Roll Call relayed our findings along with news that Renzi was under federal investigation. But instead of looking into the facts, the Republic's Dennis Wagner followed with a bizarre story suggesting the whole "investigation" was a Democratic dirty trick.

Read the full article here.

Big Mouth U.S. Attorney

Breaking News from New Jersey... From the Associated Press:

WASHINGTON — The top federal prosecutor in New Jersey is facing an internal ethics investigation over public comments that may have helped his ex-boss' campaign for governor, law enforcement officials told The Associated Press on Tuesday.

The probe marks a particularly embarrassing turn for federal authorities charged with weeding out corruption in scandal-scarred New Jersey: An internal affairs investigation has been launched into their handling of a major corruption case just days after they filed charges in the case.The investigation by the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility is another potential embarrassment for the department, which already has acknowledged mishandling other high-profile public corruption cases, particularly the botched prosecution of former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens.

Such internal investigations are rarely acknowledged publicly, and the results are usually unknown. Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler declined to comment or even confirm the existence of the probe in New Jersey.

At issue are comments [U.S. Attorney Ralph] Marra made at a news conference last month announcing the arrests of 44 people as part of a sweeping federal corruption probe. Of those arrested, 29 were elected or public officials — a high count even in a state with a reputation for official misdeeds.

Asked about the issue of corruption in the state, Marra said: "There are easily reforms that could be made within this state that would make our job easier, or even take some of the load off our job. There are too many people that profit off the system the way it is and so they have no incentive to change it. The few people that want to change it seem to get shouted down. So how long that cycle's going to continue I just don't know."

Justice Department guidelines say a prosecutor "shall refrain from making extrajudicial comments that pose a serious and imminent threat of heightening public condemnation of the accused."

The $46,000 "Loan"

In the heated gubernatorial race in New Jersey, new allegations came out against former U.S. Attorney and Rove Republican Chris Christie.

Christie loaned $46,000 to a former colleague, now a top prosecutor in the Garden State, and is receiving monthly payments from the prosecutor.

We remind you that Paul Minor, the Democratic political operative in Mississippi, did the same thing by loaning money to judges and was sentenced to prison by Christie's friends in the Rove Racket.

From the Star-Ledger:

TRENTON -- Former U.S. Attorney Chris Christie, the Republican gubernatorial candidate, has an ongoing financial relationship with one of the top federal prosecutors in his old office, mortgage records show. The document says Christie, while serving as New Jersey's federal lawman, lent Michele Brown $46,000, to be repaid with monthly installments of $499.22 through October 2017. Brown is the first assistant U.S. attorney and had been promoted to two top posts by Christie while he ran the prosecutor's office. The Corzine camp questioned whether it is proper for a candidate for governor to have any financial relationship with someone inside the U.S. Attorney's Office....It comes as Democratic incumbent Gov. Jon Corzine continues to raise questions about Christie's management of the U.S. Attorney's Office and whether the Republican's political ambitions played a role in investigative decision-making.

Republican Senator vs. Rove

Breaking News from Missouri... The fallout of the released transcripts and documents of Karl Rove's behind closed-doors interview with the House Judiciary Committee is now hitting the fan.

Republican Senator Kit Bond of Missouri denies the allegation that he wanted U.S. Attorney Todd Graves replaced.

The Rove Republican Racket is falling apart.

From the Associated Press:

Missouri Sen. Kit Bond says he never sought to replace U.S. Attorney Todd Graves and, in fact, asked the White House to allow him to stay on the job. The Republican senator's comments come after the House Judiciary Committee released Bush administration e-mails earlier this week as part of a probe into the firing of nine prosecutors. A December 2005 e-mail by a White House aide references "Sen. Bond's request regarding a replacement for the U.S. attorney." Bond told The Associated Press on Friday that he made no such request and would have disavowed it had he known that a staff member had done so. Bond says he asked White House political adviser Karl Rove to let Graves stay on, but Rove told him they had their own reasons to replace Graves.

NY Times: Evidence of a Rove Scandal

We have been documenting the political and legal consequences of the Rove Republican Racket and today, the gray lady, The New York Times, agreed with our general view on Rove's political firing of nine U.S. Attorneys in 2006, especially the firing in New Mexico.

From today's editorial, appropriately titled, "More Evidence of a Scandal:"

Documents released by Congress, including testimony from Karl Rove, offer powerful new evidence that the Bush administration fired top prosecutors who refused to use their offices to promote the electoral fortunes of Republicans.

Turning law enforcement into a tool of partisan politics is a serious offense, and a Justice Department investigation is under way. Congress must also continue its investigation and call Mr. Rove and others to testify publicly so the American people can hear for themselves how the justice system was hijacked.

The materials released on Tuesday paint an ugly picture of fair-minded prosecutors under siege by the White House for refusing to politicize their offices. And it puts Mr. Rove, former President George W. Bush’s chief political operative, at the center of it.

Some of the most disturbing revelations concern the firing of David Iglesias, the United States Attorney in New Mexico. He was put on a list to be fired shortly after a White House aide complained to Mr. Rove that Mr. Iglesias was not doing enough — including refusing to bring politically useful public corruption cases — to help Heather Wilson, a Republican member of the House of Representatives, fend off a Democratic challenger in the 2006 election.

Harriet Miers, the former White House counsel, told investigators that an “agitated” Mr. Rove called her before the election to say that Mr. Iglesias was a serious problem, and he wanted something done. Mr. Iglesias had received high marks from the Justice Department for the quality of his work.

Read the full editorial here.

Rove Deeply Involved in Firings

Karl Rove can't hide anymore. Karl Rove can't spin it away anymore. The truth is out.

We have intensely focused on the follies of the Rove Republican Racket and now the mainstream media is picking up on the political decisions made by the Rove-Bush-Cheney Administration that turned the U.S. Department of Justice into a political wing of the Republican Party.

From The New York Times:

WASHINGTON — Thousands of pages of internal e-mail and once-secret Congressional testimony showed Tuesday that Karl Rove and other senior aides in the Bush White House played an earlier and more active role than was previously known in the 2006 firings of a number of United States attorneys.

Aides to former President George W. Bush have asserted that the Justice Department took the lead in the dismissals, which set off a political firestorm that lasted months. Mr. Rove played down his role in the firings in a recent interview and in closed testimony last month before Congressional investigators.

But the documents, released by the House Judiciary Committee after a protracted fight over access to White House records and testimony, offer a detailed portrait of a nearly two-year effort, from early 2005 to 2007, by senior White House officials, including Mr. Rove, to dismiss some prosecutors for what appear to be political reasons.

Read the full article here.

Rove Denies Siegelman Role

Breaking News from The Birmingham News...

Karl Rove denies having a role in the political prosecution of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman. Rove arrogantly told congressional investigators that he had "more pressing" matters to attend to.

Here is today's breaking news story:

WASHINGTON -- In an interview with congressional investigators last month, former White House adviser Karl Rove again denied pressing the federal prosecution of former Democratic Gov. Don Siegelman as a way of helping to elect current Republican Gov. Bob Riley, according to a transcript released today by the House
Judiciary Committee.

"I had a lot more pressing things on my platter than the Alabama governor's race, and, as a result, a lot more significant things to worry about than the Don Siegelman case," Rove said under questioning by a committee attorney. Although Rove did not testify under oath, it is a crime to lie to Congress.

The deposition took place July 30 as part of the committee's probe into whether that top members of the Bush administration improperly sought to politicize the Justice Department. Siegelman, who served as governor from 1999 to 2003, is free on bond as he battles to overturn his 2006 conviction on federal corruption charges. While no conclusive evidence has so far emerged to support Siegelman's charge that he was the victim of political prosecution, a bi-partisan group of 75 former state attorneys general asked the Justice Department in April to look into the matter. Siegelman defense attorney Vince Kilborn of Mobile could not immediately reached for comment this afternoon on Rove's testimony.

Rising from Political Death

When the Rove Republican Racket fired nine U.S. Attorneys in 2006, they turned the U.S. Department of Justice into a political arm of the Republican Party.

Now, Scott Horton of Harper's Magazine takes a look at some U.S. Attorneys that were to be fired but were saved all because of politics, not prosecutorial skills.

A number of U.S. attorneys were scheduled to be axed, but survived when the White House intervened. How did these U.S. attorneys keep their jobs? One of these “Lazarus candidates” was the U.S. attorney in Jackson, Mississippi, Dunnica Ott Lampton.[pictured left]...Lampton was handling one case that was a matter of intense concern to Republican Party leaders in Mississippi as well as to Karl Rove in the White House: the Minor prosecution. That prosecution was used heavily by the Republicans in their efforts to portray their Democratic opponents as “corrupt.” [It] formed the core of a Republican advertising campaign, coordinated perfectly with Lampton’s prosecution efforts. It sent a message to campaign contributors in Mississippi that they donated to the Democrats at their great peril. The coffers of the state Democratic Party quickly went dry, helping to ensure a series of Republican election triumphs. But Lampton’s efforts failed in the courtroom. The trial resulted in the outright acquittal of one defendant and a hung jury on the balance. That was in August 2005, as Lampton’s name appeared on the list of U.S. attorneys to be fired. In December 2005, however, he secured a new indictment of Minor and the judges. A few weeks later, Lampton’s name was removed from the firing list. The convictions of Paul Minor and his codefendants are now on appeal, with a ruling past due. The appeals court judges hearing the case have requested an almost unprecedented second round of post-argument briefing–pressing the Justice Department to explain its decision to reindict following the initial acquittal and hung jury. They are focused on just the act that may have saved Lampton’s career as a U.S. attorney, and they are suggesting that it looks improper.

Read the full article here.

Absolute Shame in Wisconsin

Although our blog focuses on the prosecutorial misconduct and political chaos created by the Rove Republican Racket, we wanted to share a story of absolute shame.

This is what politics creates in our legal system when the objective is to indict, hide some evidence, and ask real questions later. Many U.S. Attorneys during the Rove-Bush-Cheney era have engaged in the "indict and plea out" strategy as well.

From Wisconsin as published in the North Country Gazette:

A Wisconsin Circuit Court Judge dismissed rape and murder charges against Ralph Armstrong on Friday based on the misconduct of a Dane County prosecutor who concealed evidence of Armstrong’s innocence. Armstrong was convicted in 1981 of the rape and murder of fellow University of Wisconsin-Madison student Charise Kamps. He has always maintained his innocence. Armstrong’s conviction was overturned by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in 2005 after DNA testing on hair and semen excluded Armstrong as the perpetrator. Prosecutors sought to retry Armstrong, and he has been in custody awaiting retrial for four years. At a hearing in April, a woman testified that she called Assistant District Attorney John Norsetter in 1995 to report that Armstrong’s brother, Stephen, confessed to the crime. Stephen Armstrong was visiting his brother at the University when the crime occurred and was interviewed by police as a possible suspect immediately after the crime. Even though Armstrong’s case was on appeal when Norsetter learned of the confession in 1995, he never told defense attorneys about the phone call and never pursued the lead. Stephen Armstrong has since died.

John Norsetter should be held accountable. Read the full story here.

Revenge in Nevada

Karl Rove spearheaded the firing of nine U.S. Attorneys in 2006 for pure political purposes. Last Friday, one of those former U.S. Attorneys had the sweetest revenge against the Rove Republican Racket: he was renominated for the same post.

From The Washington Post:

President Obama on Friday nominated Daniel G. Bogden, whose firing as a federal prosecutor by the Bush administration is under congressional investigation for its potentially partisan motivation, to return to his former job nearly three years after his dismissal. Bogden's nomination as Nevada U.S. attorney marks a step toward reversing what many Democrats consider the previous administration's illegal firing of nine federal prosecutors in 2006. Congress began investigating the dismissals the next year, and this week Karl Rove, Bush's top political adviser, concluded two days of closed-door testimony before the House Judiciary Committee about the firings.

Read the full article here.

Pied Piper Plays Eaton's Tune

Previously, we've written about that former DA from Mississippi named Ed Peters, whom we call the Pied Piper.

Looks like he's caused another mess.

Now everyone is asking, "Will the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Mississippi do the right thing and criminally prosecute the high-paid executives of Eaton Aerospace?

It seem that Eaton used the Pied Piper to influence a court decision. From yesterday's Clarion Ledger:

[Eaton] the aerospace company alleges former engineers stole trade secrets for military contracts and gave them to their new employer, Frisby Aerospace of North Carolina. Eaton is seeking $350 million in a civil suit. "Ed Peters is expected to testify that he was brought into the case by Eaton, not as counsel of record, but as somebody who could influence DeLaughter," [U.S. Attorneys] said in a document .... Attorneys for Frisby -now known as Triumph Actuation Systems - maintain rulings from DeLaughter began going in Eaton's favor after Peters became one of Eaton's attorneys. Eaton officials called the document reckless. "There are a lot of false statements in here," said Don McGrath, senior vice president of communications for Eaton, said of the document. "In no way did we ask Ed Peters to imply or ask or insinuate that he would do anything improper in trying to influence Judge DeLaughter or any other judge." The prosecutors allege that DeLaughter went against Dunbar's recommendation to sanction Eaton for failing to disclose its use of a paid whistle-blower in the case. "Peters is expected to testify that he recommended to Judge DeLaughter that the court remove Jack Dunbar and find another special master. Ed Peters even took it upon himself to call another attorney to inquire about his availability for appointment as a special master in the case but called back to ask that his name not be mentioned." According to prosecutors, Dunbar didn't hear back from DeLaughter on his recommended sanctions and was removed from the case.... "In short, once Eaton attorneys found themselves in trouble, they brought in Ed Peters into the case to influence DeLaughter," prosecutors wrote. Asked why Eaton decided to hire Peters, a longtime prosecutor, McGrath replied, "There are few Mississippi trial lawyers that have as much experience as Ed Peters."

Experience or influence peddling? McGrath is full of beans.