Six Virginia Attorneys General, four Democrats and two Republicans, are supporting Governor McDonnell’s request that he be allowed out of prison on bond while he is appealing his conviction.[read_more] They are asking the 4th circuit court of appeals to allow them to file a brief in support of McDonnell. Democrats Andrew P. Miller, Anthony F. Troy, Mary Sue Terry and Stephen Rosenthal, and Republicans J. Marshall Coleman and Mark L. Earley said they
“are persuaded that federal law does not criminalize the alleged acts on which those counts are predicated.”
The six attorneys general do not find that McDonnell provided any quid pro quo to Jonnie Williams.
“Indeed all five ‘official actions’ alleged in the indictment appear to us as nothing more than granting or fulfilling access, if such acts can form the basis for Governor McDonnell’s conviction, it will be anyone’s guess as to where the line between lawful and unlawful acts might be drawn.”
“The expansive interpretation of federal law on which his conviction is based is erroneous. It is completely alien to any legal advice that any of us would have given to any governor of Virginia.
“Moreover, that expansive interpretation, if allowed to stand, would wreak havoc upon the public life of Virginia by casting a shadow of federal prosecution and imprisonment across normal participation in the democratic process.”
41 comments
[…] that was simply “the Virginia way.” Indeed, several former Virginia Attorneys General have filed briefs on McDonnell’s behalf, arguing they would have advised him his conduct was legal and that his federal prosecution is […]
[…] that was simply “the Virginia way.” Indeed, several former Virginia Attorneys General have filed briefs on McDonnell’s behalf, arguing they would have advised him his conduct was legal and that his federal prosecution is […]
“casting a shadow of federal prosecution and imprisonment across normal participation in the democratic process”
These words are nothing more than “literary vomit” to the middle-class, poor, and conservatives. Politicians from both party’s are attacking every part of our democratic process in an attempt to put themselves above not only man’s law, but the Law of God as written in Scripture.
As I have said many times, the Virginia General Assembly, has attempted to legalize what is considered crime in the “real world”.
To let McDonnell get away with what he did while governor, is nothing more than ASKING FOR MORE OF THE SAME.
The American corporation, is determined to “purchase” purity and innocence for Bob McDonnell, just like they have “purchased” just about everything else in government.
Jeanine, why don’t you talk about the key parts of the McDonnell trial that led 12 jurors to unanimously convict him of being a criminal?
You mean the instructions to the jury by Judge Spencer? That’s what lead to the conviction and that is what will be cause for overturning the verdict.
What, you want to blame it on a highly regarded judge? A Reagan appointee at that? No way.
No, what led to the conviction is Bob McDonnell, and the refusal of Virginia’s elected officials to pass clear and meaingful ethics regulations and laws. Ethics laws with stiff penalties. They still are refusing to do so.
Besides, did McDonnell fail to follow even the Virgina gift reporting laws by not reporting gifts?
Gov. McDonnell was not charged in Virginia with any wrongdoing. I do blame it all on Judge Spencer. The case was over as soon as he issued his erroneous instructions. I don’t care if he was appointed by Reagan or even Jimmy Carter.
Just why was he not charged with not reporting the gifts?
Isn’t that alone a miscarriage of Justice?
Correct that he hasn’t been charged, but it is still possible. This may still be coming if the federal case comes up short.
Since everything I have read in the media, says that the Honorable Judge Spencer, followed the 4th circuit 2012 definition of an official act, why on earth would the 4th circuit now be inclined to now change direction?
Just how can this happen, or, is this just a bump in the road to get to a 4-4 Supreme Court which would let Justice Kennedy make the call?
Personally, I think Judge Spencer made the most out of an impossible situation. Everybody got something. If McDonnell were smart, he would write a book, hit the talk circuit, and apply to Fox for his own show.
In other words, flip this whole episode into an opportunity.
I fail to understand why Judge Spencer didn’t allow Bob McDonnell to remain free while his case is on appeal. In the corruption case involving Congressional Representative William J. Jefferson, also prosecuted in Alexandria federal court, he was allowed to be free while his appeal was processed and in his case he was videotaped by the FBI accepting a briefcase with $100,000 cash in it. This cash was later recovered from his freezer at home. McDonnell’s case isn’t even close to the Jefferson matter.
What I don’t understand if his conviction was so based on flawed judicial procedures as I have read many on this blog maintain why does it seem everyone is so focused on bail and release awaiting appeal and not on pushing expediting the appeal process for what is proposed will be an overturned conviction. I’m no expert in this process but I would expect if pressure were applied an accelerated appeal date could be obtained given the nature of this case (within 30 days). On a two year Federal sentence with 85% mandatory to be served what is the point to drag this out? It would seem to me his best interest would be to get his conviction under appeal for a ruling immediately.
You can’t get an appeal done in 30 days. It’s impossible. The best guess is even with pressing the matter that the appeal will take over a year.
“it will be anyone’s guess as to where the line between lawful an unlawful acts might be drawn”
Well, then why didn’t these former attorneys general pass some meaningful ethics laws with stiff penalties to take the “guess” out of the equation. Why does the GA refuse do so now? Virginia now ranks 47th out of 50 states in ethics laws and regulations. Three from the bottom of the list.
Isn’t clouding the ethics issue and making it a “guess” exactly what the Republican controlled GA wants? And now, the politicians are pissed off and crying because a jury took the “guess” work out for them.
Isn’t the appeals process also part of this normal “democratic process” that the former attorney generals are implying above that needs to be “protected”?
This is nothing more than big government, being financed by milking the tax payer dry, and at the same time allowing corporate donors to use politicians as little more than puppets.
Oh, but there just has to be something wrong when an elected official does not report gifts, cannot drive around in a corporate supplied Ferrari, wearing a corporate supplied Rolex? Or is there something wrong when an elected official cannot receive corporate loans? Or, is it the $15,000 for a wedding? Or the corporate jet shopping trips to New York for the wifey?
All of this is part of the normal democratic process for an elected official in Virginia?????
This case was prosecuted under Federal law. It has nothing to do with the General Assembly or Virginia’s former Attorneys General.
It has everything to do with Virginia’s General Assembly!
The one point I am trying to make is that Bob McDonnell is victim of his own governance, or lack of it.
All the time he was part of Virginia’s elected government and they never made sure that there were clear ethics regulations and laws in place to protect not only the taxpayer, but themselves from making terrible decisions regarding accepting gifts or whatever.
Virginia’s elected officials probably thought they were being smart by playing loose with ethics rules, and could damn well do as they please. Apparently they out smarted themselves by not figuring on the Feds throwing a monkey wrench in their plans.
More proof that what goes around, eventually comes around.
The Fourth is one of the most efficient federal appeal circuits in US, taking an average of just over seven months to resolve each appeal, so over a year, unless defense is dragging it’s feet or you are including request to be placed on Supreme Court docket no way. Granted 30 days not likely but around 6 months well within reason.
The seven month figure includes all of the appeals that are decided on the briefs without oral argument. There are no identifiable statistics indicating the average for criminal appeals with oral argument. On the civil side, my experience has been that civil appeals with oral argument take on average an additional twelve months.
Messrs. Webster and Prados I stand corrected.
It took months to get from conviction to sentencing, and weeks after that for the judge to deny McDonnell’s request to remain free while appealing the verdict. By the time his appeal is heard, Bob will have served most, if not all, of his sentence. If his conviction is overturned (which most people believe it will be), who is going to give Bob McDonnell the 12 to 18 months of his life back that he spent in jail as an innocent man? That is not justice.
I agree expedite the appeal ruling regardless of bail status to minimize this as much as possible although I’m less sanguine on a procedural overturn on all counts then you appear to be.
Having the appeal heard in 12 to 18 months IS expediting it. There is simply no reason (other than spite on the part of the judge) to deny bail in this case.
Expediting an appeal is an uncommon process in a civil context. You need to have the danger of irreparable harm to warrant an expedited appeal. In a criminal process you are almost always faced with the dilemma of incarceration pending completion of the appeal. If expediting cases were the norm to avoid the irreparable harm I agree that seeking an expedited appeal is the appropriate remedy. Instead the criminal justice system heavily disfavors the expedited appeal and instead favors bond pending appeal, but only in those cases where there is reasonable legal controversy.
Most criminal appeals are summarily dismissed.
Probably because Judge Spencer knows the conviction will be overturned on appeal and he wants to force McDonnell to go to jail. It is pure spite. If anything, I think it definitely shows that Spencer is still bitter over his wife’s appointment being blocked by McDonnell.
McDonnell and his defense team had the upfront option prior to trial to have Judge Spencer removed from the venue and made the acknowledged decision not to do so. I really doubt they would have proceeded if they had even the smallest suspicion of any evident bias. Just doesn’t fit the facts of how the case proceeded.
All they could do was ask the judge to recuse himself. It is up to the judge to decide whether or not to do so. If they decided to ask for his recusal, they ran the risk that he would refuse, and then they would have angered the judge for no gain. I don’t fault them for making the decision they did.
Knowing the things that went on in the McDonnell administration, just the things he has admitted to, how do people come to the conclusion that he does not need to be punished?
Just what thought process do people use to sanction this type of behavior of elected officials? Do these people not realize that to allow this is to ask for more of the same?
Is the McDonnell administration the type of government that people want?
“Knowing the things that went on in the McDonnell administration, just the things he has admitted to, how do people come to the conclusion that he does not need to be punished?’
Simple. It’s called THE LAW. You may not like McDonnell. You may be mad at him (like I am) for raising taxes when he promised he wouldn’t. But that doesn’t change the fact that what he did was not a crime. Yes, he took a lot of gifts, and I completely agree it was a dumb thing to do. But under Virginia Law any politician is allowed to accept gifts of any amount, and (here is the important part) McDonnell NEVER gave special treatment to Williams or his products. There was NEVER a QUID PRO QUO.
If the instructions given to the jury become the new de facto standard of corruption then you have, for all intents and purposes, criminalized the private lives of every politician in Virginia. Nobody would be allowed to go to dinner with a friend, or even exchange Christmas gifts with someone who is not a blood relative for fear of being prosecuted.
Good luck getting any good people to serve in that world.
but he was indicted, prosecuted & found guilty of violations of Federal law. by a jury. did his defense team ask for a bench trial?
The standard for public corruption cases has been the establishment of a quid pro quo relationship. Person A gives policitician B something of value (gifts, money, etc…) and politician B uses their official capacicty as an government official to give Person A something of value (permits, grant awards, etc…)
Judge Spencer’s instructions to the jury said, in essence, that all the jury needed to prove corruption was the acceptance of gifts from Williams to convict. The need to demonstrate an official act on the part of McDonnell was not needed. That flies in the face of the whole idea of public corruption, and that is what is being appealed. The idea that simply accepting a gift of any shape or size is enough to confict someone of corruption.
Tell me this. If Judge Spencer is so confident that his instructions will be upheld and the conviction not overturned, then why is he so determined to make sure McDonnell serves his sentence before his appeal can be heard???
Well, based on what I read in the media, didn’t Judge Spencer use the 4th US appeals circuit court definition of “official act” in his jury instructions? Did this definition originate from a 1917 court decision?
So, basically are you not saying that Judge Spencer’s “boss” is wrong also? Now, isn’t that the same court that McDonnell is appealing his conviction to? So I guess McDonnell expects to lose in that court also? See link,
http://www.snookandhaughey.com/news/mcdonnell-trial-just-official-act/
Also, you talk about “It’s called THE LAW”? Then why don’t you talk about Virginia’s gift reporting laws? Did McDonnell report the gifts as required under Virginia law? Yes or No?
You need to go back and re-read that article again. It proves my point pretty well. Especially this little bit,
“the Supreme Court held that the illegal gratuities statute requires a link between a gift and an official act. Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion, for a unanimous court, said that the prosecutor’s interpretation of the law was so broad that even a high school principal could be in legal trouble for giving a souvenir baseball cap to a visiting Secretary of Education.”
THe 4th circuit case you are referring to is the case against William Jefferson, who was caught on tape in an FBI sting receiving a briefcase full of cash that was to be used to bribe other officials. Are you seriously trying to compare the McDonnell case with Jefferson??
“Did McDonnell report the gifts as required under Virginia law? Yes or No?”
Some yes, others no. Some were not required to be reported, and for others it is questionable when Bob McDonnell even knew they were gifts from Williams (but that goes into his relationship with his wife, that I don’t want to get into).
I did go back and read it again.
It is exactly as I said the first time, and that the media has reported. Judge Spencer used the 4th circuit definition of official act. That also is the court McDonnell has appealed to. I suggest for you to go and read it again. I would also advise others to read the entire link, not just what you have pasted.
Also isn’t the 4th circuit decision 13 years more recent than your paste?
The real question is did the McDonnell defense team plan all along on throwing Judge Spencer under the bus if they lost? Using this judge issue to try the case in the court of public opinion by using the media, and claiming that the Judge had a grudge against McDonnell for whatever happened years ago? Is that the real reason why they did not ask for the Judge to recuse himself before the trial? Is this plan “B”?
If you want to pick on an honorable judge, then ask why is it fair that the judge did not follow sentencing guidelines? Why have guidelines if they are going to be tossed? All those felony convictions, and he only gets 2 years? Is that fair to Blago?
Also, in your last paragraph about the reporting of gifts. It is you who prove my point by implying, I believe, that the issue is “cloudy”? Well, that is exactly why we have grand juries, and trials, to make sure that the “sun” breaks through those “clouds”!
Is it true that the defense strategy, and blame, is mostly placed on the wife? I would be very concerned if I were in her shoes with sentencing coming up. No guarantee she will not get the book thrown at her. That is unfortunate if it happens.
In your previous post, about getting good people to run for office? Are you implying that the $300 million Rt. 460 fiasco, HB 2313 largest tax increase in history, , the massive spending during the McDonnell administration, constitutes a good person serving?
I think that it is safe to assume that your definition and my definition of what to “serve” means probably differ to say the very least.
You are again showing that you can’t separate Bob McDonnell’s policies from this case. You don’t like that he raised taxes (and I agree with you on that), and so you want him to go to jail. It doesn’t work that way.
It is pointless trying to make you see reason on this, so I am going to stop trying. All I know is that there is a reason SIX former Attorneys General of both political parties are calling out this judge and his decisions on bail and jury instructions, and it’s not because they think he did a bang-up job. Tell me, when McDonnell’s conviction is overturned on appeal, will you admit you were wrong?
What? You have ran into a brick wall of facts regarding this case, and you cannot have your way with my word processor.
Now, you are doing the only thing possible when one is surrounded and cornered by the truth. Bailing out and running for cover.
In spite of the questions that have been raised about Bob’s defense. and defense team, they have done one hell of a good job for him.
Another “dream team” perhaps? They have fooled just about everybody in the media court of public opinion. How many felony’s and just 2 years? But not me, I have not been fooled.
What exactly am I wrong about? Bob did not take the plea deal, lost in court, and you are still betting on him?
Why not, he is winning by losing! In man’s world, big money almost always wins in the end. Exactly where is big money regarding this case?
everyone I know that has practiced in front of Spencer commends his fairness. In your practice before him, did you find him to be spiteful?
“everyone I know that has practiced in front of Spencer commends his fairness”
I’m also sure everyone you know that has practiced in front of Spencer (how many people did you say that was?) did not personally prevent his wife from getting a plum appointment, thus directly affecting (and embarrassing) Spencer and his wife.
my question to you: in your practice before Judge Spencer, did you find him to be spiteful? if so, cite cases.
if indeed the defense thought Judge Spencer to be potentially biased, they would have moved for recusal.
“if indeed the defense thought Judge Spencer to be potentially biased, they would have moved for recusal”
Already asked and answered above. As for your question, I am ignoring it because it is irrelevant. How Judge Spencer may have acted in any particular case has no bearing on how he would act in a case involving the man who stopped his wife’s appointment.
you must think Judge Spencer is a dishonorable man
So if it blaming it on bat crap crazy Maureen doesn’t work then blaming the judge comes next huh?