Shane Tessimond: GUILTY

More to come later ... I'm off to College Station for the weekend, but I should have time to write a quick post.

UPDATE
March 1, 2009

On Friday, February 27, the US District Court released two documents from a plea hearing the day before:

Plea Agreement

Statement of Offense (similar to a Factual Basis for Plea)

I don't really have much to say about the Statement of Offense. I have included it for those interested in the case at hand.

I'm more interested in the Plea Agreement. On January 22, 2009, I wondered if Mr. Tessimond could be pressured into providing testimony against his former roommate and scandal figure Todd Boulanger. Mr. Boulanger subsequently pleaded guilty on January 30, 2009. The timeline of events makes it difficult to determine how much help Mr. Tessimond could have been in helping federal prosecutors secure a guilty plea from Mr. Boulanger.

December 3, 2008: Mr. Tessimond indicted.

December 10, 2008: Mr. Tessimond is arrested in New Hampshire

December 18, 2008: Mr. Tessimond enters "Not Guilty" plea

January 16, 2009: Mr. Boulanger agrees to plead guilty (from Mr. Boulanger's Plea Agreement)

January 22, 2009: Federal prosecutors make formal plea offer to Mr. Tessimond (from Mr. Tessimond's Plea Agreement)

January 30, 2009: Mr. Boulanger pleads guilty

February 26, 2009: Mr. Tessimond pleads guilty (from Mr. Tessimond's Plea Agreement)

A lot of these dates overlap, and it is certainly plausible that Mr. Tessimond's cooperation convinced Mr. Boulanger to plead guilty. It is also certainly plausible that these two former roommates admitted to felonies, but that their criminal activity and overlapping prosecution is purely coincidental.

Also, let's look at the language in Mr. Tessimond's Plea Agreement to see if he agreed to help prosecutors in future cases:

Plea Agreement page 2
"The government agrees to file a motion ... for an additional 1-level decrease [in the sentencing guidelines] provided ... defendant ... provides assistance in the investigation and prosecution of this offense."

Plea Agreement page 4
"[T]he government ... agrees not to oppose [Mr. Tessimond's] voluntary surrender to commence serving any sentence which is imposed, provided [Mr. Tessimond] continues to show his acceptance of responsibility by: ... (b) cooperating fully and truthfully with the court in any proceeding arising from this matter;"

There isn't a lot of clarity in the above quotes. In fact, they seem somewhat boilerplate to me. But at a minimum, Mr. Tessimond has agreed to provide assistance to prosecutors going forward. It will be interesting to see if the court defers Mr. Tessimond's sentencing. If it does, that will be evidence that Mr. Tessimond is cooperating with prosecutors on other crimes.

But if Mr. Tessimond is cooperating, who is he providing testimony against? My original premise was that Mr. Tessimond was providing evidence against his former roommate, Mr. Boulanger. But Mr. Boulanger has pleaded guilty and is presumably helping prosecutors himself now. If Mr. Tessimond is cooperating, the subject of the cooperation would still be a mystery to me.

[On a somewhat related note, the sentencing for Trevor Blackann was recently deferred. Mr. Blackann's Factual Basis for Plea implicates Lobbyist D (Mr. Boulanger), Lobbyist E (James Hirni), Lobbyist F (the in-house lobbyist for United Rentals), and Staffer D (Fraser Verrusio). Mr. Boulanger and Mr. Hirni have pleaded guilty. Judicial proceedings against Mr. Verrusio may be forthcoming. Court documents have suggested to me that "Lobbyist F" will not be pursued by the Justice Department. So if Mr. Blackann is indeed cooperating with federal authorities, who is he providing evidence against?]

===

Here's one last coincidence for your consideration:

Mark Parisi was Mr. Tessimond's accomplice in crime. Mr. Parisi pleaded guilty for his participation in criminal case number 1:08-cr-272-ESH. The case number for scandal figure Kevin Ring is 1:08-cr-274-ESH. (Case number "273" is a child pornography case that I believe to be unrelated.)

===

I still think Mr. Tessimond's prosecution is related to the Abramoff scandal. I admit that direct evidence to support that position is hard to find. But I can't get past the above "coincidences".

Three Things to Know About Drew Maloney

Drew Maloney

Career

For this part of the entry, Drew Maloney helpfully posts a bio at the eponymous www.drewmaloney.com. Mr. Maloney began his Congressional career working for Rep. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and Rep. Ed Bryant (R-Tenn.). The most important job Mr. Maloney held on Capitol Hill was the Administrative Assistant and Legislative Director (other reports indicate that he was Chief of Staff) for our own former Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Sugar Land). Today, Mr. Maloney works as a lobbyist for Ogilvy Government Relations (formerly the Federalist Group).

Ethics

Mr. Maloney caught the attention of the House Ethics Committee in 2004. As a matter of fact, the Ethics Committee determined that Mr. Maloney attended organized the very same 2002 fundraiser at The Homestead resort in Virginia that Jack Victory did attended. The Ethics Committee wrote:

On the basis of the information before the Committee, the Committee concluded that [Mr. DeLay's] participation in and facilitation of the energy company golf fundraiser at The Homestead resort on June 2-3, 2002 is objectionable in that those actions, at a minimum, created such an improper appearance. As a general matter, fundraisers directed to a particular industry or to others sharing a particular federal interest are permissible, and at such events Members are free to talk about their record and positions on issues of interest to the attendees. In addition, of course, a Member has no control over what the donors at a fundraising event spontaneously say to or ask of the Member with regard to their legislative interests. Nevertheless, there are a number of considerations regarding this particular fundraiser that make [Mr. DeLay's] participation in and facilitation of the fundraiser objectionable under the above-stated standards of conduct.

In particular, there was the timing of the fundraiser, i.e., it took place just as the House-Senate conference on major energy legislation, H.R. 4, was about to get underway. Indeed, one of the communications between organizers of the fundraiser that [Mr. DeLay] provided to us – an e-mail of May 30, 2002 from Mr. [Drew] Maloney to Mr. [Chris] Perkins that notes the legislative interests of each of the attendees – includes a specific reference to the conference. That legislation was of critical importance to the attendees. In addition, there was the fact that [Mr. DeLay was] in a position to significantly influence the conference, both as a member of the House leadership and, by action taken about a week and a half after the fundraiser, [Mr. DeLay's] appointment as one of the conferees.

According to the Ethics Committee, Mr. Maloney (and Mr. Perkins for that matter) acted in a manner that "at a minimum, created ... an improper appearance" that campaign contributions would lead to "special treatment or special access" to Mr. DeLay. At a minimum. The Ethics Committee leaves the door open that the behavior at this fundraiser created more than just an appearance of impropriety.

At any rate, we can certainly conclude that Mr. Maloney's presence at organization of this event was a contributing factor to the Ethics Committee unanimously admonishing Mr. DeLay.

Drew Maloney and Todd Boulanger

Back in 2006, there was a minor story in the Lone Star State involving state-related lobbying contracts that, on the surface, seemed to be politically inspired. Democrats in Congress and the state legislature howled at the cronyism apparent in the contracts:

U.S. House Democrats from Texas have asked Gov. Rick Perry to cancel the lobbying contracts for Cassidy & Associates, which receives $15,000 a month from the state, and the Federalist Group, which receives $10,000 a month. The lawmakers say the contracts are a waste of taxpayer money because of the firms' strong Republican ties...

Neither firm would say whether two controversial Republican-tied principals, Todd Boulanger at Cassidy & Associates and Drew Maloney at the Federalist Group, who have drawn the most criticism from the Democrats, would remain as principals on the state contract.

Yep. Both Drew Maloney and admitted criminal Todd Boulanger were the lobbyists at the center of these politically charged lobbying contracts. Demonstrating the similarities of the two contracts, Gov. Rick Perry announced in January 2007 that he was canceling both contracts:

Perry informed the Democrats that he was canceling two controversial state lobbying contracts that Democrats had opposed....

The two canceled contracts had been a particular sore point for the delegation, which saw them as DeLay's attempt to bring some "K Street Project" lobbying dollars to political friends. In 2003, the state cut 10 staffers from its Office of State-Federal Relations, which helps advance the state's agenda in Washington, and began to replace them by contracting with private lobbying firms. The state hired The Federalist Group in 2003 and Cassidy & Associates in late 2004, at a rate of $15,000 a month.

Is it possible that the corruption investigations underway in Washington could work their way into the Governor's Mansion in Austin?

========

Update
February 26, 2009

It is unclear to me whether or not Mr. Maloney attended The Homestead resort fundraiser, but the Ethics Committee makes it clear that Mr. Maloney did organize the event. The post has been amended accordingly.

Kuff saved a portion of a Houston Chronicle story about this event that may shed additional light on the situation:

The fund-raiser was organized by former DeLay energy aide Drew Maloney, in coordination with ARMPAC staff. Energy executives were told they could play golf with DeLay for corporate contributions of $25,000 to $50,000 to either ARMPAC or TRMPAC.

At the time, Westar was trying to get legislation passed to remove the company from regulation under the Public Utility Holding Company Act.

A company lobbyist, Richard Bornemann, had written executives a memo explaining how campaign contributions could help the firm gain influence with House leaders, including DeLay.

But at first, Maloney did not want Westar participating in the golf excursion because the company was not a traditional electric-producing energy company. Bornemann told company executives in a memo they still might get into the event if they were willing to make a corporate donation to a DeLay committee.

"We think we can get by with that if we beg," Bornemann wrote.

A May 8, 2002, memo from Maloney to DeLay's daughter, Dani DeLay Ferro, who organizes fund-raisers for her father, said energy companies that had confirmed attendance at the golf event were Reliant Energy of Houston with $50,000; and Williams Energy of Oklahoma, Mirant Corp. of Georgia and Westar, with $25,000 each.

Executives of those companies were the only ones to attend the golf event. But other companies donated, for a total of $152,500 raised at the two-day event, according to a memo from Maloney to an ARMPAC employee, Chris Perkins.

In a separate memo to Perkins before the event, Maloney detailed what the companies attending the golf tournament needed from federal legislation.

"Reliant's primary goal for the conference is to make sure the progress that has been made to deregulate the wholesale electricity markets are not rolled back," Maloney wrote.

As for Westar, "the company has a unique problem that was addressed in the House bill."

========

Housekeeping

I know I promised a Part II to the Jack Victory post mentioned above. I keep my promises. It's coming. Besides, a really cute picture of Stephanie Szymanski Victory showed up in my inbox. It would by such a shame for it go to waste.

Ann Copland and Tom DeLay

No one on the web knows more about how the Abramoff scandal meets the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) than Unheard No More!

In her post about the charges against Ann Copland, the former staffer to Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), Unheard No More! connects dots, through Ms. Copland's favorite Indian tribe, the Mississippi Choctaw, that lead straight to our former Congressman Tom DeLay (R-Sugar Land):

Why would Abramoff take the Governor of the CNMI to meet the Choctaw Indians in Mississippi? The billing records indicate that the governor and his party met with Choctaw Chief Martin, another client of Abramoff. Was it to visit the casinos or to discuss mutually beneficial legislation? There are some common threads between the CNMI and the tribe.

Both [former CNMI Governor] Froilan Tenorio and Martin were praised by Abramoff friend, Rep. Tom Delay. Delay manipulated legislation to favor the Choctaw Tribe and he manipulated legislation for Tenorio and the CNMI.

Read the whole thing.

I know that Unheard No More! is factually accurate. Now let's see if the Justice Department finds these connections as interesting as Unheard No More! does. Gentle reader, I suggest that you keep checking in at her site to see if she learns more. I know I will.

Blog Hosting that Allows Javascript

Blogger is a great blog hosting site. It is very easy for beginners to use and actually teaches users how to use html. One of the criticisms of Blogger is that it gives up functionality for simplicity. For three years, I needed simple, so Blogger was right up my alley.

Now I'm looking for a blog hosting site with more functionality. But nearly every one I look at won't allow me to use Javascript like Blogger does. (Maybe the knock against Blogger isn't entirely justified.)

So here's my bleg: Does anyone know of a more sophisticated blog hosting site that allows Javascript?

Ann Copland: FORMALLY ACCUSED

Ann Copland, left.

Yesterday in US District Court for the District of Columbia, Ann Copland was formally accused of conspiracy to commit honest services wire fraud in an "Information" filed by the Department of Justice. Ms. Copland is a former staffer to Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.). She was named as "Staffer E" in Todd Boulanger's plea agreement.

The AP's Nedra Pickler reminds us of the significance of these charges being filed in the form of an "Information":

Charges against Copland were outlined in a legal document called a criminal information, which only can be filed with the defendant's consent and typically signals a plea deal. The document says Copland understood that Senate rules prohibit staffers from soliciting gifts from lobbyists, but still secretly did so.

So expect a plea deal soon. Also expect Ms. Copland to file a "Factual Basis for Plea" that may reveal new facts to us.

I'm not going to copy anything from the "Information" (link above), but I encourage my readers to review it. This document is another warning shot fired at Kevin Ring. The Justice Department accuses Mr. Ring of acts that, in my opinion, appear to be part of the conspiracy to commit honest services fraud.

Who is Jack Victory? (Part I)

No, I'm not talking about the professional 'rassler'.

The Jack Victory the ACR Blog finds interesting is a former Congressional staffer who passed through the revolving door and is now a lobbyist for Capitol Hill Consulting Group. Mr. Victory hasn't been making headlines lately. In fact, the only current return on a Google News Search of his name yields this article from The Sun News (Myrtle Beach, S.C.) where he tells South Carolinians that the pork barrel spending in the so-called stimulus bill is a good thing. While Mr. Victory is nominally a Republican, he is obviously no conservative.

Mr. Victory grew up in Nevada and went to school in Stockton, Calif. He got his start on Capitol Hill working as a low-level staffer for Abramoff-tainted former Rep. Richard Pombo (R-Calif.) between 1994-1996 before joining the staff of Rep. Jim Gibbons (R-Nev.) as a Legislative Assistant in 1997. In December 1997, Mr. Victory went on a junket to the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), Tom DeLay's "petri dish of capitalism". Although the trip was funded by the CNMI government, the CNMI government was a Jack Abramoff client at the time.....

During the time of his employ with Rep. Gibbons, Mr. Victory's name repeatedly appears in Abramoff lobbying records produced by the law firm Preston Gates. (The ACR Blog believes these documents are incomplete):

Dates

April 26, 1999
April 27, 1999
April 29, 1999
July 19, 1999
August 26, 1999*
Item: Lobbying contacts between unidentified Team Abramoff member(s) and Mr. Victory
Topic: Republic of the Marshall Islands (Note: Like the CNMI, the Marshall Islands was an Abramoff client.)

* The August 26, 1999 teleconference included Mr. Victory and Kathleen Casey (Legislative Director for Sen. Richard Shelby R-Ala.)

On January 8, 2001, Mr. Abramoff left Preston Gates. He surfaced, along with much of his team, at another lobbying firm, Greenberg Traurig. They continued to heavily lobby Mr. Victory as these billing records indicate:

Dates

March 23, 2001
Team Abramoff Lobbyist: Shawn Vassell
Item: Call and e-mail
Topic: "Hansen letter"

March 26, 2001
Team Abramoff Lobbyist: Shawn Vassell
Item: Call
Topic: "Hansen letter"

April 3, 2001
Team Abramoff Lobbyist: Shawn Vassell
Item: Discussion
Topic: "Murkowski Bill"

April 6, 2001
Team Abramoff Lobbyist: Shawn Vassell
Item: Meeting
Topic: "Murkowski Bill and Resources Committee"

May 2, 2001¹
Team Abramoff Lobbyist: Shawn Vassell
Item: Discussion
Topic: "Murkowski Bill"

¹ In the Greenberg Traurig billing records, Rep. Tom DeLay was identified as Mr. Victory's boss for the May 2, 2001 lobbying contact. The ACR Blog believes that Mr. Victory began working for former Rep. DeLay on May 17, 2001 and that the above-mentioned notation is inaccurate.

On May 17, 2001, Mr. Victory left his position with Rep. Gibbons and was promptly hired by our own former Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Sugar Land) as a Policy Analyst in the Majority Whip's office. Mr. Victory was promoted to Senior Policy Analyst in 2003, and remained on Mr. DeLay's Congressional staff until February 24, 2006. This date was three weeks before Mr. DeLay's dismal performance in the 2006 Republican Primary for our TX-22 Congressional seat. Less than eight weeks after Mr. Victory resigned, DeLay staffer Tony Rudy pleaded guilty and Mr. DeLay announced his own retirement. Greenberg Traurig billing records show two additional lobbying contacts during this period.

Dates

July 3, 2001
Team Abramoff Lobbyist: Shawn Vassell
Item: Discussion
Topic: "Miller legislation and appropriations"

November 27, 2002
Team Abramoff Lobbyist: Michael Williams
Item: Meeting and follow-up
Topic: "thank him for his help in defeating Underwood bill"

The point here is that Mr. Victory has undeniably had a long relationship with members of Jack Abramoff's team and on a variety of subjects.

In reviewing Mr. Victory's Congressional career, another important highlight is his "dishonorable mention" in the October 6, 2004 House Ethics Committee report that unanimously admonished Mr. DeLay for actions that "were objectionable under House standards of conduct" (related to a fundraiser at the Homestead Resort in Virginia).

In its letter admonishing Mr. DeLay, the Ethics Committee wrote:

[T]he Committee concluded that your participation in and facilitation of the energy company golf fundraiser at The Homestead resort on June 2-3, 2002 is objectionable in that those actions, at a minimum, created such an improper appearance (that because of a contribution, a contributor will receive or is entitled to either special treatment or special access to the Member in his or her official capacity.)

With respect to Mr. Victory, the Ethics Committee wrote:

[O]ther aspects of the fundraiser that would have been unobjectionable otherwise had the effect, in these specific circumstances, of furthering the appearance that the contributors were receiving impermissible special treatment or access. One of these aspects was the presence at the fundraiser of two of your key staff members from your leadership office: Jack Victory, who handled energy issues, and your office counsel, Carl Thorsen.

In other words, Mr. Victory's presence at the Homestead fundraiser was specifically cited by the Ethics Committee as contributing to the perception that donors to Mr. DeLay's political entities had special access to Mr. DeLay's staff. Some of the donors at this event were identified by the Ethics Committee as Douglas Sterbenz and Doug Lawrence, executives from Westar Energy.

Even though this post is getting a little long in the tooth, I have still have a lot more to say about Mr. Victory's lobbying career. Mr. Victory's wife, Stephanie Szymanski Victory (a.k.a. Stephanie Victory), is an interesting person, too. Stay tuned ...

Enumerating Sen. Judd Gregg's Reasons

The actual Enumeration shall be made within three years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent term of ten years, in such manner as they shall by law direct.

United States Constitution; Article I, Section 2

And, thus, the US Constitution requires a census every ten years. People who believe the US Constitution is a "living" document (whatever that means) believe that when the Constitution requires an "actual Enumeration" that the Constitution doesn't really mean an "actual Enumeration". Because professional statisticians routinely employ sampling in their craft, these people would prefer to ignore the "actual Enumeration" clause found in the Constitution......

The "Sampling" vs. "Enumeration" issue came up in the 2000 census. President Clinton's administration proposed counting 90% of the US population and using some sort of secret sauce to estimate the remainder. Fortunately, in 1999 the Supreme Court ruled that the government could not use sampling for allocating Congressional seats:

Dealing a bitter blow to Democratic hopes, the Supreme Court ruled today that the official census for 2000, which will be used to apportion seats in the House of Representatives, must be conducted by the traditional head count.

The Court prohibited the statistical sampling that the Clinton Administration had planned to use to prevent millions of Americans -- disproportionately urban, Democratic-leaning members of racial and ethnic minority groups -- from being missed, as they were in the last census.

[I like the editorializing in the second paragraph of this "news" article.]

Why am I bringing this up? Because President Obama doesn't want to feel constrained by the "actual Enumeration" language of the US Constitution, either.

Some corners of the "Rule of Law" wing of the Republican Party (of which I belong) saw a silver lining in the nomination of Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) to head the Commerce Department. You see, the Commerce Department administers the census. From an opinion piece (as opposed to the NY Times' news article above) on US News & Report's website entitled: Judd Gregg at Commerce Could Keep Democrats From Cooking 2010 Census Numbers:

[T]he Commerce Department includes the Bureau of the Census. Ten years ago the Clinton administration attempted to use sampling instead of an actual headcount for the Census enumeration which is used for reapportioning the House of Representatives and for redistricting of all kinds. It was resisted by the Republican Congress, notably by Florida Congressman Dan Miller, who chaired the relevant House subcommittee. And it was finally abandoned after career Census Bureau statisticians, who like most professional statisticians prefer sampling to headcounts, conceded that they could not guarantee that the sampling procedures they proposed to use would be more accurate than a headcount.

I have expected Democrats to attempt to use sampling again, and Republicans no longer have majorities in Congress. But Gregg could exercise an important supervisory role here, by at least insisting on the kind of statistical rigor that Census Bureau career statisticians showed they had when the Clinton administration (in my view) contemplated cooking the numbers.

That column, written by Michael Barone, was written on February 3, 2009. By February 5, 2009, President Obama's administration decided to yank the census out from under the purview of the Secretary of Commerce; rather, census decisions would be made by someone who reported directly to the White House:

The director of the Census Bureau will report directly to the White House and not the secretary of Commerce, according to a senior White House official.

The decision came after black and Hispanic leaders raised questions about Commerce Secretary nominee Judd Gregg ’s commitment to funding the census.

Democrats, it seems, think a more accurate headcount involves counting heads we can't find.

Now the Commerce Secretary is not a high profile position. Name me three or four outstanding Secretaries of Commerce throughout the years. Nevertheless, Sen. Gregg was willing to take the job. But after President Obama signaled that he planned on politicizing the census, the most important part of the Commerce Secretary's job had been emasculated. Sen. Gregg would have been limited in his ability to follow the Constitution to the letter if he took the Commerce Secretary position. In fact, Sen. Gregg probably will have a better chance of defending the Constitution from the US Senate.

Here's how Bill Kristol describes events on the Washington Post website:

More likely, it was the announcement, made just a couple of days after Gregg's nomination, that the director of the U.S. Census Bureau would work under the oversight of senior White House aides (even as the bureau itself would remain, as the statute requires, part of the Department of Commerce). The story circulating among Hill Republicans is that Gregg wasn’t notified about the Census matter before the announcement, and that he demanded of Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel a few days ago that the decision be reversed. I'm told that Emanuel said he would get back to him, but Gregg heard nothing. So he requested a meeting with the president and said he couldn’t be part of the Obama administration.

The point is that it is President Obama's politicization of the US census that led to Sen. Gregg's withdrawn nomination. The White House changed the rules on the census after Sen. Gregg had agreed to take the Commerce post. As I wrote before, I want to discourage speculation that Sen. Gregg is under investigation in the Abramoff scandal.

I know that Dengre at DailyKos takes an opposite view of Sen. Gregg's situation. While I respect Dengre's immense knowledge of the Abramoff scandal and know that Dengre had been a forceful voice against corruption long before I began blogging in 2006, I also know that there's probably little we can agree on beyond our shared view that corrupt officials need to be held accountable. One of us may be wrong with respect to Sen. Gregg's culpability. But we both can agree that, at the very least, Sen. Gregg could have had better control over his staff.

January 29, 2009. First reports emerge that Sen. Gregg is being considered by President Obama as Secretary of Commerce.

January 30, 2009. Associated Press reports of Todd Boulanger's guilty plea. "Staffer F" is mentioned for the first time.

February 1, 2009. ACR Blog links Kevin Koonce's name to "Staffer F".

February 3, 2009. President Obama announced his nomination of Sen. Gregg as Commerce Secretary.

February 3, 2009. Sen. Gregg informs White House of investigation into Mr. Koonce

I don't believe this entire timeline. I simply refuse to believe that readers of the ACR Blog, as informed as they are, are more informed than the President of the United States.

What's Up with Ann Copland?

Todd Boulanger's guilty plea implicated Ann Copland a former staffer to Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.). I've been meaning to learn more about Ms. Copland, but just never got around to it.

Yesterday, the AP's Ben Evans came out with an article about the Senator and Ms. Copland. I didn't learn a whole lot from yesterday's piece. There's nothing in the article to suggest that Sen. Cochran engaged in anything shadier than employing Ms. Copland. But this sentence caught my attention:

Last month, Copland left the state job and moved back to Washington, telling associates that she needed to focus on the investigation. She had kept her house outside the capital, in Fairfax, Va.

Moved back to Virginia to focus on the investigation? I wondered if that meant Ms. Copland has been cooperating with authorities. What I discovered, though, is simply bizarre. Let's create a timeline here. Months are approximate based on articles appearing in the press:

March 2008
Ms. Copland accepts a $90,000 a year job with Mississippi Public Broadcasting. For two months, she also draws her $140,000 a year Senate salary. While many Americans hold two jobs simultaneously, one of Ms. Copland's jobs was in Mississippi and the other was in Washington, DC.

May 7, 2008
Ms. Copland separates from her Senate employment.

January 2009
Ms. Copland quits her job at Mississippi Public Broadcasting and returns to Fairfax to "focus on the investigation".

First of all, people typically wouldn't exchange a $140,000 a year job for a $90,000 a year job, particularly if the lower paying job would put geographic distance between the family. Ms. Copland only held the Mississippi Public Broadcasting job for eight months, excluding the time she held two jobs. Meanwhile, we know that she and her husband kept their Fairfax, Va. home. Also, Ms. Copland's husband has been a public middle school teacher in suburban Washington this entire time. Ms. Copland has a high school age son ... I wonder where he went to school this past fall.

Something doesn't add up to me. Maybe Ms. Copland is cooperating after all. But I suspect she never intended to hold that Mississippi Public Broadcasting job for long. I have no clue what is going on here, but one explanation is that Ms. Copland has been dealing with the Justice Department since the first quarter of 2008 when she began looking for a job to replace her cush position on Sen. Cochran's staff.

Glenn Marshall's Day in Court

Former Tribal Chief Glenn Marshall of the Mashpee Wampanoag formally pleaded guilty in US District Court in Massachusetts today. In the race for the best news coverage of this event, all national reporters take a back seat to Stephanie Vosk of the Cape Cod Times:

Glenn Marshall, former Mashpee Wampanoag Tribal Council Chairman, pleaded guilty today in U.S. District Court to political corruption and embezzling tribe funds...

Assistant US Attorney Jonathan Mitchell outlined the allegations against Marshall and what the government would prove if there was a trial. He spoke of the campaign contributions that Marshall convinced other tribal councilors to make with the promise they would be reimbursed with tribe funding.

“These payments were designed to give a leg up – an illegal leg up - on both Capitol Hill and Beacon Hill,” Mitchell said. He also made clear to the judge Marshall’s cooperation in the ongoing investigation.

Marshall admitted he funneled $4 million from the tribe’s initial casino investor, Herb Strather of Detroit, into a nonprofit corporation known as the Mashpee Fisherman’s Association Inc., which kept it out of view of the rest of the tribe.

Strather bankrolled the tribe’s successful final push for federal recognition, which gives the Wampanoag the right to build a gambling casino. The tribe is proposing to build a $1 billion casino on 539 acres in Middleboro.

Is AUSA Jonathan Mitchell being coy here? Just how illegal was the leg up Mr. Marshall desired to have on Capitol Hill? And against whom is Mr. Marshall providing evidence through his cooperation?

I don't have the answers to those questions. But read this post from 2007. In it, we learn

1. Mr. Strather is implicated because he bankrolled the recognition efforts of the Mashpee Wampanoag.

2. Our good friend Kevin Ring lobbied on behalf of the Mashpee Wampanoag.

3. Former US Congressmen Richard Pombo (R-Calif.) and John Doolittle (R-Calif.) championed the federal recognition of the Mashpee Wampanoag.

On one hand, I'd like to think that this action is intended to put pressure on the indicted Kevin Ring. But we've known that prosecutors have been working this case since 2007, even before Mr. Ring's plea negotiations broke down. One alternative is that Chief Marshall can help the Justice Department prosecute former Rep. Pombo or former Rep. Doolittle.

Grand Jury Investigates Rep. Tom Feeney

A couple of obscure articles from last week suggest that the Justice Department is actively pursuing Scotland vacationer and former Rep. Tom Feeney (R-Fla.).

:::::


Tom Feeney's Rookie Mistake
:::::

First up: According to an Orlando Sentinel blog, Mr. Feeney continues to rack up legal fees associated with the Abramoff investigation:

According to new campaign records, Feeney paid about $20,000 for legal services in the final weeks of 2008 -- even after losing the election. The latest fees build on the nearly $200,000 that Feeney has spent on lawyers since 2007; his office previously acknowledged spending money on legal fees related to Abramoff...

Despite the expensive price tag, Feeney can continue paying legal fees through his old campaign fund -- at least for the next several months. Records with the Federal Election Commission show Feeney had almost $207,000 in the bank.

A Department of Justice official would not comment.

The second article from the Washington Post, we learn that a federal appeals court refuses to limit the abuses of the Constitution's Speech or Debate clause:

A federal appeals court has dealt a blow to the investigation of a former congressman in a ruling that could also limit probes of other lawmakers, according to three sources familiar with the matter.

The order, which has not been made public, came during the grand jury investigation of former representative Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) and his potential ties to former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, the sources said. The appellate judges who issued the ruling did not say when they would release an opinion explaining their decision, which reversed a lower court order favorable to prosecutors seeking documents and grand jury testimony, the sources said....

Few details have emerged about the behind-the-scenes legal wrangling in the Feeney investigation. No court documents or judicial opinions have been made public, and oral arguments were conducted in a closed courtroom...

The sources said the order and lack of clarity surrounding it will temporarily halt aspects of the Feeney investigation and could compromise the government's case. Depending on the scope of the opinion, other investigations may also be affected, the sources said.

Ugh. Other investigations may also be affected. I fear that means the investigation into our own former Congressman, Tom DeLay.

I first wrote about Congressmen's use of the Speech or Debate clause to protect themselves from criminal liability back in the Summer of 2007. We've seen former Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.) abuse the Speech or Debate clause. Here's what I wrote at the time:

I certainly hope that the courts won't allow Congressmen to use the Constitution to protect themselves from a criminal investigation. But as an admirer of the Founding Fathers, I also know that the "Speech and Debate" clause was necessary to prevent abuses of Congress like the abuses perpetrated by the English crown against parliament. I fear that Rep. Doolittle's abuse of the "Speech and Debate" clause will cheapen and damage it. Any damage to the Constitution is intolerable. Rep. Doolittle is harming the country more and more. He needs to go.

And from this November 2008 article from the WaPo, we also know that Tom DeLay is abusing the "Speech or Debate" clause:

Long-running investigations of Rep. John T. Doolittle (R-Calif.) and former House majority leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) and their connection to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff have slowed to a crawl because of debates about the scope of the speech or debate clause...

"Speech or debate is not an absolute privilege, but the courts have been pretty clear that when it applies, it applies absolutely," said Elliot S. Berke, a former top lawyer for DeLay and onetime House speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.).

Ooh. Elliot Berke. We know him! Mr. Berke is such an interesting figure to the ACR Blog that I wouldn't be surprised to see a "Who is Elliot Berke? Part II" post before long.

Who is behind KAR Consulting?

(L-R) Scandal figures John Doolittle, Kerrie Ring, Kevin Ring, Julie Doolittle

=====

Kerrie A. Ring (nee Kerrie O'Brien) is the wife of indicted Abramoff associate Kevin A. Ring. Isn't it cute how Kevin and Kerrie share the same initials?

Now humor me a minute as we review excerpts of the testimony of indicted scandal figure Kevin Ring before the Senate Indian Affairs Committee chaired at the time by Anti-Corruption Republican Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

The Chairman. Mr. Ring, what is KAR Consulting? You can respond if you wish to or assert your 5th amendment privileges under your previous statement if you choose.

Mr. Ring. I respectfully invoke my constitutional right.

The Chairman. According to the information we have, KAR Consulting is a Maryland limited liability company formed on April 25, 2002 and registered to your home address. We have attached corporate registration from the Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation. In February 2004, KAR Consulting, which is listed to your home address, Mr. Ring, received a $25,000-payment from a company called Grassroots Interactive. We have an exhibit which I will enter into the record, without objection, exhibit 183 of December 15, 2003 check for $25,000 from Grassroots Interactive LLC to KAR Consulting. Do you know who KAR Consulting is, Mr. Ring?

Mr. Ring. I respectfully invoke my constitutional right under the 5th amendment.

The Chairman. At the time of the payment, did you know that Jack Abramoff controlled Grassroots Interactive?

Mr. Ring. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully invoke my constitutional right under the 5th amendment.

The Chairman. In March and April 2002, did you receive a total of $125,000 from Michael Scanlon's company Capitol Campaign Strategies?

Mr. Ring. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully invoke my constitutional right under the 5th amendment.

The Chairman. Did that money come from payments made by Pueblo Sandia Tribe of New Mexico to Capitol Campaign Strategies?

Mr. Ring. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully invoke my constitutional right under the 5th amendment.

The Chairman. What services benefiting the Pueblo Sandia did you provide for that $125,000? In fact, you did not provide any services, according to the information that we have. Let's take a look at exhibit 43. It is an e-mail exchange between you, Mr. Ring, and Jack Abramoff dated April 24, 2001. In that e-mail, you asked Mr. Abramoff whether there is any way to ``bury'' your University Club dues in the Choctaw or SGMA bill. What did you mean when you asked Mr. Abramoff where you could ``bury'' your University Club dues in the Choctaw bill?

Mr. Ring. Regretfully, Mr. Chairman, I must respectfully invoke my constitutional right under the 5th amendment.

[Formatting altered; parenthetical phrase omitted]

Mr. Ring was hardly helpful in his testimony. Sen. McCain, however, does give us several facts. In March and April 2002, Mr. Ring received a total of $125,000 from Mike Scanlon's company Capitol Campaign Strategies. A limited liability company called KAR Consulting was created and registered at the residence of Mr. and Mrs. Ring. I'm not 100% comfortable attributing the March/April 2002 payments to KAR Consulting since KAR Consulting wasn't even created until April 25, 2002. The following payments were received by KAR Consulting after this date:

December 15, 2003
$25,000
From: Jack Abramoff's Grassroots Interactive, LLC

February 2004
$25,000
From: Jack Abramoff's Grassroots Interactive, LLC

Although Sen. McCain only claimed that KAR Consulting was registered at Mr. Ring's home address, news organizations universally seem to have concluded that KAR Consulting is Mr. Ring's creation:

Roll Call
The hearing revealed that Ring had established his own firm, KAR Consulting, based out of his own home and received $50,000 from another of Abramoff’s smaller companies, Grassroots Interactive, and $135,000 from Scanlon’s Capital Campaign Strategies.

Washington Post
The committee also released documents showing cash flowing in and out of a limited liability corporation called KAR LLC that was based at Ring's Maryland home. The corporation received a check for $25,000 on Dec. 15, 2003, from Grassroots Interactive LLC, a company apparently controlled by Abramoff ... Ring's corporation also received $125,000 in the spring of 2002 from Scanlon's public affairs firm, Capital Campaign Strategies.

The ACR Blog has obtained a copy of the Articles of Organization for KAR Consulting and has made an interesting discovery. Kevin's name is nowhere to be found on the document, but one KERRIE A. RING is listed as KAR Consulting's resident agent. This suggests to the ACR Blog that Mr. Ring, while almost certainly aware of KAR Consulting and its 'business dealings', may have very well been protecting his wife as well as himself when he refused to answer Sen. McCain's questions. Were the payments discussed in the Senate hearings actually made to Kerrie A. Ring, and is she in any legal jeopardy?

Why is this important? Well, we already know that many of the players in the Abramoff scandal further enriched themselves by paying lucrative consulting fees to their wives, even as many of them appear to have done little or no work to earn such fees. Think Christine DeLay, Julie Doolittle, and of course Lisa Rudy. In fact, the Factual Basis of Plea for Tony Rudy describes a scenario that sounds nearly identical to the one described by Sen. McCain in the above testimony. Even the amount of the payments is identical:

7. In August 1999, Rudy established a company called Liberty Consulting, LLC, through which his wife would provide consulting services...

18. From February 2002 through July 2002, Abramoff, with Rudy's knowledge and consent, arranged for payments totaling $25,000 to be made to Liberty Consulting by one of [Greenberg Traurig]'s clients, a Native American Tribe in Mississippi. The payments were made in five monthly installments, which were usually sent by mail. Rudy knew that no additional services were being provided to the client for the payments.

Both Liberty Consulting and KAR Consulting purportedly provided 'consulting services', and it appears that both companies accepted payment when no services were provided. (The same accusations have been made against the other wives mentioned above.) There does, however, appear to be three major differences between the Ring experience and the Rudy experience.

First, Tony Rudy himself created Liberty Consulting whereas Kevin Ring's wife Kerrie appears to have created KAR Consulting.

Secondly, Abramoff's clients paid Liberty Consulting directly whereas Abramoff-controlled entities paid KAR Consulting.

Lastly, and most importantly, Mr. Rudy secured a non-prosecution agreement with the federal government for his wife Lisa (Rudy Plea Agreement, Paragraph 18). In contrast, plea negotiations between the government and Mr. Ring fell apart.

It is noteworthy that nothing¹ regarding KAR Consulting appears in Kevin Ring's Indictment. Maybe there was nothing illegal in the payments received by KAR Consulting, and therefore this is not a big deal. But maybe there is something illegal about these payments. The question then becomes: Who is culpable? Kevin A. Ring or Kerrie A. Ring?

==

¹ In paragraph 6 of Count IX of the Kevin Ring indictment, there is discussion of two payments made by Mike Scanlon's Capital Campaign Strategies directly to Mr. Ring. Each payment was $67,500 (summing to $135,000); one was made on March 25, 2002 and the other was made on April 17, 2002. These payments are similar to the ones described in Sen. McCain's hearing except Sen. McCain said the two payments summed to $125,000. In my opinion, KAR Consulting was created on April 25, 2002 to receive similar payments going forward.

AP Identifies 'Staffer F'

AP reporters Devlin Barrett and Erica Werner win the blue ribbon for being the first identify Kevin Koonce as the mysterious 'Staffer F' in court documents related to Todd Boulanger's guilty plea:

A former congressional aide to Commerce Secretary-nominee Judd Gregg has been caught up in a long-running investigation into a Capitol Hill lobbying scandal.

A person familiar with the case confirmed Wednesday that "Staffer F" in court documents is Kevin Koonce, who worked as legislative director in Gregg's Senate office from 2002-04. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because the case is still under investigation.

Staffer F was cited in a guilty plea last week by Todd Boulanger, a former deputy to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff. In federal court, Boulanger admitted he plied the staffer with front-row tickets to a hockey game, meals and drinks and other tickets to a baseball game, and in exchange received favors in spending legislation.

The Washington Post and New York Times came out with their own articles shortly after the AP. From the New York Times:

Mr. Gregg released a statement confirming that the Justice Department had contacted his office as part of its investigation on Tuesday, the day Mr. Obama formally announced his nomination.

“Prior to this, I was not aware of any improper acts by the former staffer in question,” the statement read. “In a Department of Justice letter, I have been informed that I am neither a subject nor target of the investigation, and my office welcomes the opportunity to be helpful.”

A White House official said Mr. Gregg alerted the administration to the situation after receiving the letter.

President Obama and Sen. Gregg found out Tuesday? Are you kidding me? Are readers of the ACR Blog really more informed than President Obama? The alternative is that President Obama and Sen. Gregg are not being completely forthright about when they learned about Mr. Koonce. Gentle reader, you may determine which possibility to believe.

I don't have much else to add except to discourage my readers from concluding that recent developments mean that Sen. Gregg is under investigation in the Abramoff scandal. For that matter, I'd like to discourage similar speculation about Sen. Kit Bond (R-Mo.) and Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) simply because they have had staffers recently implicated in this scandal. Certainly new evidence may come to light, but even though the ACR Blog has many irons in the fire, no resources are currently being allocated to investigating these three senators.

DC District Court Document Dump

The following items appeared on PACER today.

Todd Boulanger

Todd Boulanger Factual Basis for Plea

Todd Boulanger Plea Agreement

These items appear to have filed with the court on January 30. I have no clue why it took until today for them to appear on PACER. The ACR Blog made an editorial judgment call out of an abundance of caution not to publish these documents until they appeared on PACER in case doing so would jeopardize any Justice Department investigation.

==

Fraser Verrusio

CJA 23 Financial Affidavit as to FRASER VERRUSIO. This document is unavailable due to E-Government Act. Signed by Magistrate Judge Alan Kay on 2/4/09.

This entry appeared under case number 1:09-mj-00064-AK.

This is the point in our blog where I mention that I am not a lawyer. So be wary of any conclusions made here.

Let's look at that case number for a second. I don't know what the "1:" prefix means. The "09" indicates that the case number was assigned in 2009. The "mj" means this is a magistrate judge case. This is not a criminal case or the "mj" would be "cr". This is the 64th case filed this year, hence the "00064". And the "AK" represents Magistrate Judge Alan Kay's initials.

This is what we know: There is no criminal case pending against Fraser Verrusio.

It appears to me that Mr. Verrusio filed a financial affidavit with the court. I can't imagine he did this for any other reason other than pressure from federal prosecutors. Why are prosecutors interested in Mr. Verrusio's finances? Your guess is as good as mine, and my guess is that the Department of Justice may be interested in disgorging ill-gotten assets from Mr. Verrusio's possession. It's not like Mr. Verrusio has admitted to unlawfully acquiring hundreds of thousands of dollars. At this point, all we know is that lobbyists took Mr. Verrusio to the same 2003 World Series game as Trevor Blackann.

In Mr. Blackann's Plea Agreement, Mr. Blackann admits he underreported at least $7,579.24 in income over four years:

2001: $1,232.06
2002: $1,184.63
2003: at least $4,166.89
2004: $995.66

Mr. Blackann's tax liability obviously includes more than the 2003 World Series trip. It isn't clear how Mr. Blackann, the IRS and the Justice Department arrived at these figures. Perhaps the IRS discovered unrelated unreported income from an invasive audit. Or perhaps the Justice Department found other instances of Mr. Blackann taking things of value from lobbyists.

The point is that Mr. Verrusio may be on the hook for more than just the 2003 World Series trip.

Jessica Boulanger - Naughty Cheerleader?

The ACR Blog had a chance to view Todd Boulanger's Plea Agreement and Factual Basis for Plea. Paragraph 27 of the Plea Agreement managed to catch my eye. Federal prosecutors have agreed to waive their right to prosecute former cheerleader and staffer for Tom DeLay Jessica Boulanger (nee Jessica Incitto), provided that she cooperate fully and honestly with the Justice Department:

27. The defendant understands that the United States will offer to enter into a non-prosecution agreement with the defendant's spouse if defendant's spouse's cooperation is required in this investigation, in exchange for that individual's full and complete cooperation, pursuant to which the United States will agree not to charge that individual with any offenses arising from facts disclosed at her interview(s) with the United States, with the exception of perjury, false statements, obstruction, or any charge relating to an act of violence.

This is not boilerplate language. Laura Blackann, staffer for former Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.), did not get such assurances in Trevor Blackann's Plea Agreement. There's no such protection for James Hirni's wife in his Plea Agreement, either.

[Whether Mrs. Blackann and/or Mrs. Hirni have been cheerleaders in the past is unknown at press time.]



Here are a couple of possible explanations as to why Mrs. Boulanger received assurances from the Justice Department that she wouldn't be prosecuted:

1. Mr. Boulanger's attorneys are hard-nosed negotiators and managed to secure protections that attorneys for Mr. Blackann and Mr Hirni were unable to get.

2. Mrs. Boulanger did something naughty that required such an agreement whereas Mrs. Blackann and Mrs. Hirni weren't naughty and had no need for a spousal protection clause.

Even though we know that spousal protection from prosecution isn't standard, it isn't unprecedented, either. Recall that Lisa Rudy received similar assurances in the Plea Agreement of Tony Rudy, her husband (paragraph 19). We do know, however, that Mrs. Rudy received consulting payments for no work while her husband was on the Congressional payroll meaning Mrs. Rudy may have needed such an agreement

The fact that Mrs. Boulanger received a non-prosecution agreement suggests -- but certainly does not prove -- that Mrs. Boulanger may have done something wrong.

====

Update
February 21, 2009

I heard Bowling for Soup's "High School Never Ends" today and thought how perfectly that song applies to Mrs. Boulanger. I make no secret that I'm a New Waver, and in the new millennium punk rock is as close as we have to New Wave music. So in Casey Kasem style, I'd like to make a Long Distance Dedication to Mrs. Boulanger.

So Casey, could you please play "High School Never Ends" for Mrs. Boulanger?

AP: "Staffer D is Verrusio"

Erica Werner, my favorite AP reporter, covers the scandal beat. She reports that "Staffer D is [Fraser] Verrusio":

A second former staffer to an Alaska congressman has been implicated in the Jack Abramoff influence-peddling investigation as the scandal sweeps up a growing number of ex-Capitol Hill aides and lobbyists.

Fraser Verrusio, who worked under Republican Rep. Don Young when the congressman chaired the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, figures in plea deals reached recently by two former Abramoff associates and a one-time congressional aide.

Identified in federal court papers only as "Staffer D," he's described accepting an all-expenses-paid trip to Game One of baseball's 2003 World Series from lobbyists who wanted his help.

Two attorneys familiar with the case said Monday that Staffer D is Verrusio, who was policy director on the transportation committee for about five years.

Of course I thought Mr. Verrusio might be Staffer D too, but alas, I am not a lawyer. I guess I'll never get quoted, even anonymously, in an AP article.

Maybe if I could just figure out who "Staffer F" is. I've certainly been ruminating on it these last few days (second item).

Who is Kevin Koonce?

Kevin Koonce is currently a lobbyist at Sorini, Samet & Associates. Mr. Koonce has also worked as a lobbyist and consultant at Cassidy & Associates. The name of that firm should ring a bell for my loyal readers; after all that's where Todd Boulanger worked before he abruptly resigned. James Hirni is also a Cassidy alum.

Mr. Koonce has held other jobs, too, but, in my opinion, the most interesting job he has had is that of Legislative Director for Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), a job he held from April 2002 until December 2004.



Records provided to me suggest that Mr. Koonce grew up in Newtown, Connecticut. Conventional wisdom says that Connecticut's baseball loyalties are divided by the Connecticut River. Those who live east of the Connecticut follow the Boston Red Sox; those who live west of the Connecticut are New York Yankee fans. Although Newtown is west of the Connecticut River, I wonder if Mr. Koonce is actually a Red Sox fan. Being a New Englander, Mr. Koonce may also appreciate hockey.

I have it on good authority that Mr Koonce is personal friends not only with admitted criminal Todd Boulanger (another Cassidy alum), but also with his wife Jessica.

=========

What do we know about 'Staffer F'?

Many of the things we know about 'Staffer F' appear in Nedra Pickler's AP article from yesterday:

The prosecutors said one legislative director in the Senate, identified only as "Staffer F," tried to help insert spending measures and add other amendments to legislation for Boulanger's clients. Later, the staffer asked Boulanger if he could "score some hockey tickets," and Boulanger got him front-row seats.

"This is without a doubt the most in demand game of the season," Boulanger wrote. "You, my friend, are in debt to me for a while!"

Boulanger later got the staffer box tickets to see the Baltimore Orioles, but the staffer wanted more. "Could you make sure there's beer this time," he wrote. I "mean, the red sox, crab cakes, and fillet mignon's were nice but haha."

Later, Boulanger expressed confidence that the senator whom the staffer worked for would give them a favor. "Easy money," Boulanger wrote to Abramoff. The staffer "practically lives in our various suites. We are shady."

Emphasis added

In my original post involving 'Staffer F', commenter dengre points to a few more factual items about 'Staffer F'. dengre tells us to look in the press release issued by the Department of Justice:

Boulanger admitted that he provided more than $10,000 worth of tickets, meals and drinks to the legislative director for a U.S. Senator. Boulanger admitted he met the legislative director on July 16, 2002, and provided the things of value for 20 months following their first meeting.

With dengre's help, we know that our LD worked on the Hill between July 2002 and March 2004 (20 months later). So let's focus on LDs that worked during that time frame.

We here at the ACR Blog are actively trying to identify 'Staffer F'. Keep checking in to see if we've made any progress.

===========

Update on Jessica Boulanger

I mentioned Todd and Jessica Boulanger are friends with Kevin Koonce. We already know that Jessica Boulanger worked for our own former Congressman, Tom DeLay. Our kindred spirit over at Unheard No More! reports that Mrs. Boulanger has recently joined the firm of New Media Strategies. But Unheard No More! doesn't stop there. She tells us that the CEO of New Media Strategies is Peter Snyder. Then Unheard No More! identifies Mr. Snyder's wife, Burson Taylor Snyder, in a picture I've already posted on the ACR blog.


Jessica Boulanger, far right
Burson Taylor Snyder, to the left of Jessica Boulanger