We all know that former Rep. Ernest Istook (R-Okla.) earned a lot of ink in Kevin Ring's September 2008 indictment, but that was not the first time Rep. Istook was referred to as "Representative 4". Rep. Istook was originally named "Representative 4" in June 2008 court documents related to the guilty plea of his aide John Albaugh.
From time to time, I like to provide a running list of Justice Department codenames and their status. This is a good time to do that:
Representative 1: Rep. Bob Ney (R-Ohio) -- GUILTY
Representative 2: Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Fort Bend County) -- Not charged
Representative 3: Rep. Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) -- Not charged
Representative 4: Rep. Earnest Istook (R-Okla.) -- Not charged
Representative 5: Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.) -- Not charged
Staffer A: Tony Rudy -- GUILTY
Staffer B: Neil Volz -- GUILTY
Staffer C: Will Heaton -- GUILTY
Staffer D: Fraser Verrusio -- INDICTED
Staffer E: Ann Copland -- GUILTY
Staffer F: Kevin Koonce -- Not charged
Lobbyist A: Jack Abramoff -- GUILTY
Lobbyist B: Ed Buckham -- Not charged
Lobbyist C: Kevin Ring -- INDICTED
Lobbyist D: Todd Boulanger -- GUILTY
Lobbyist E: Jim Hirni -- GUILTY
Lobbyist F: Unidentified lobbyist for United Rentals 1
1 The unidentified lobbyist for United Rentals was referred to as "Lobbyist F" in the Factual Basis for Plea of Trevor Blackann. "Lobbyist F" was renamed "Person #1" in James Hirni's Information. Although press accounts have never identified Lobbyist F/Person #1, we do know that Ernest Delle Donne has served as Vice President - National Accounts and Government Services at United Rentals.
Rep. Ernest Istook (R-Okla.)
Let's take a moment to review the appearances of Rep. Istook in the Ring Indictment:
February 4, 2003: At Mr. Albaugh's request, Mr. Ring hosted a fundraising dinner for Rep. Istook at Jack Abramoff's Signatures Restaurant. Rep. Istook's campaign committee failed to reimburse Mr. Ring, Greenberg Traurig or Signatures for this event. (Paragraph 34)
March 13, 2003: Mr. Albaugh suggested to Rep. Istook that Rep. Istook thank Mr. Abramoff in advance for the use of Mr. Abramoff's FedEx Field suite for a fundraising event. (Paragraph 37)
March 19, 2003: Following a conversation with Rep. Istook, Mr. Abramoff emailed Mr. Ring and other Team Abramoff members telling them that Rep. Istook had "basically asked what we want in the transportation bill". Mr. Abramoff instructed his staff to "make sure we load up our entire Christmas list." (Paragraph 38)
July 14, 2003: Mr. Ring emailed Mr. Abramoff to tell him that funding had been secured for various Team Abramoff clients (including $2 million for the Sandia Pueblo). Mr. Ring asked Mr. Abramoff to call Rep. Istook to thank him for his "help with our priorities in the" bill and say, "Your staff, especially John Albaugh, has been very responsive and helpful in working with Kevin Ring on our team." (Paragraph 43)
July 28, 2003: Mr. Ring hosted a fundraiser for Rep. Istook during an American Idol concert at the MCI Center. Rep. Istook's campaign failed to timely reimburse Mr. Ring, Mr. Abramoff or Greenberg Traurig. (Paragraph 45).
July 29, 2003: Mr. Ring asked for Mr. Albaugh's help in securing $4,183,000 in funding for a Team Abramoff client's road project. (The ACR Blog believes this client to be Carter County, Montana.) Mr. Ring, Mr. Albaugh and Rep. Istook had discussed this funding item the night before at the American Idol concert. Mr. Albaugh replied, "I don't think it will be a problem ..." (Paragraph 46)
September 4, 2003: Mr. Ring and Greenberg Traurig held the fundraiser for Rep. Istook at FedEx field discussed on March 13, 2003. Rep. Istook's campaign did not timely reimburse Mr. Ring, Mr. Abramoff or Greenberg Traurig for the use of the sports suite. (Paragraph 47)
January 13, 2004: Mr. Ring sent Mr. Albaugh an email offering to host another fundraising event for Rep. Istook. In the email, Mr. Ring asked about a "bill in the US Senate" and Rep. Istook's "office's relationship with the U.S. Department of the Treasury." The ACR Blog does not know what those two items refer to. (Paragraph 56)
==
Simply due to the fact that the Justice Department has given Rep. Istook the codename "Representative 4", the ACR Blog believes that the DoJ may be building a case against the former Congressman. Contrast this with how the DOJ referred to Rep. Heather Wilson in the indictment. The DoJ called Rep. Wilson "the New Mexico tribe's U.S. Representative" (Paragraph 156). If the DoJ had given Rep. Wilson the codename "Representative 6", the ACR Blog would have been more likely to think that Rep. Wilson might possibly face legal jeopardy herself.
==
Part I -- Kevin Ring Indictment: ED BUCKHAM!
Part II -- Kevin Ring Indictment: MASHPEE WAMPANOAG
Part III -- Kevin Ring Indictment: REP. HEATHER WILSON
Part IV -- Kevin Ring Indictment: JENNIFER FARLEY
Part V -- Kevin Ring Indictment: DAVID LOPEZ
3 comments:
I've been wondering about how the prosecutors intend to use the Boulanger/Copland-scheme as part of their strategy against Ring.
I suppose they could put Boulanger on the stand to testify about their lobbying practice in general, but Copland's activities are not covered by the indictment. Should we be looking for a Superseding Indictment? And if so, will it move the trial (further) down the calendar? September seems like a long wait as it is...
Anon:
You make a good point. The Ring indictment doesn't seem to refer to Copland at all, and where it does refer to Boulanger, Boulanger is playing a very small role. But the DoJ certainly wasn't chasing down red herrings when the lawyers there got Boulanger and Copland to plead guilty.
So here are my guesses:
As you suggest, Boulanger worked at GT at the same time Ring did. Boulanger may be able to testify about how business in general was done there. When Boulanger is mentioned in the indictment, he is participating in email chains that I believe the DoJ will use to establish either (1) a stream of things of value going to public officials, or (2) official actions performed by public officials in return for the stream of things of value.
If I'm right, Boulanger was involved in the Honest Services Fraud Relating to Work Done for the New Mexico Tribe (Paragraphs 152-163) due to Boulanger's friendship with Erik Einertson.
Copland is a bit more of a mystery to me. But without a doubt, we know that Copland was involved in matters relating to the Mississippi Choctaw tribe. Perhaps Copland will be able to shed light on Honest Services Fraud Relating to the DOJ (Paragraphs 164-198).
Let's take a quick look at paragraph 184. On February 8, 2002, Team Abramoff told a Senate staffer that demand for Dave Matthews Band tickets "is simply too high from people who do 'dirt' for us on a regular basis." An industrious blogger would try to figure out who the Senate staffer is. I'm not industrious, but based on what I know now, Ann Copland is a plausible guess for our mystery staffer.
All of this must related to Count I, the Conspiracy charge. All the other charges are very specific and don't seem to involve Boulanger or Copland.
Let's look at who the DoJ will rely on:
Robert Coughlin
Count II: Payment of Gratuities: Robert Coughlin received eight tickets to the Washington Wizards in return for accelerating a decision by the INS related to visas for students to Eshkol Academy.
Count III: Honest Services Wire Fraud related to the activities covered in Count II.
John Albaugh
Count IV: Honest Services Wire Fraud related to an email from Ring to John Albaugh on Nov. 17, 2003. This could involve "trips and also potential [Oklahoma] clients." (Paragraph 52) or Wiggles and Nov. 30, 2003 Redskins/Saints tickets (Paragraph 53).
Count V: Wire Fraud related to a Nov. 20, 2003 email that offered Albaugh tickets to a professional horse show and a Dec. 14, 2003 Redskins/Cowboys game. (Paragraph 54)
Count VI: Wire Fraud related to a Nov. 24, 2003 email from Ring to Albaugh that we don't know a lot about from the indictment.
Count VII: Wire Fraud related to a Jan. 13, 2004 email from Ring to Albaugh. Paragraphs 56-57 give a couple of possible explanation regarding that. On Jan. 13, 2004, Ring offered to host a fundraising dinner for Albaugh's boss, Rep. Istook. Ring also wanted to know about an unidentified bill in the Senate and the relationship between Istook's office and the Department of the Treasury. Albaugh also asked for Disney on Ice tickets that same day.
==
Count VIII
Wire Fraud related to the payment of $5,000 to Julie Doolittle, wife of Rep. John Doolittle.
==
Counts IX and X relate to alleged lies Ring told investigators hired by GT. Ring knew these investigators would pass along their information to the DOJ. It is possible that Boulanger may be in a position to help the jury determine whether Ring's statements to investigators here were truthful.
Thanks for reading and commenting. It is good for me to be challenged like you have done. I hope you learned something from my answer. I certainly learned something from your question.
ACR
Great work as usual! I did learn a lot from your answer (and I never meant to challenge you:))
I was not even aware that the indictment did refer to Boulanger, but then again, I know far too little to be able to figure out who is hiding behind all the "another lobbyist at Firm B"s.
My belief is that Kevin Koonce is also connected to Ring in some way (I may explain my reasons for believing this when I find a way to explain them succintly), and once he's plead guilty, prosecutors will indeed re-indict Ring to cover Koonce and Copland. This would be major bad news for Ring, four people saying they received gifts for favors certainly makes a stronger case than two (Coughlin and Albaugh).
Anyway, we will likely find out in the near future. As your chart illustrates, the pressure is now on Koonce, and it remains to be seen whether he will talk or "do a Verrusio". i.e. stick his head in the sand and pretend nothing is going on.
Keep up the good work!
Post a Comment