Why did disgraced former Congressman Tom DeLay (R-TX) never face federal prosecution? The public has a right to know, but the Department of Justice isn’t telling. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Department of Justice (DOJ) requesting all documents and communications related to the five year investigation into the former Texas lawmaker and his associates. Mr. DeLay is slated to face state charges in Texas later this month; as a result, CREW asked DOJ to expedite a response to the request.
“One of the most corrupt members to ever walk the halls of Congress will never have to answer for operating the House like a pay-to-play casino. The American people deserve to know what evidence the Department of Justice collected on Mr. DeLay and why that evidence was not sufficient to charge him,” said Melanie Sloan, CREW Executive Director. “The Department of Justice has not made prosecuting crooked government officials a top priority. The Public Integrity Section lacks the staff and resources necessary to prosecute even some of Washington’s demonstrably most unscrupulous leaders. The Obama administration must ensure this section has resources it needs to do its job properly. After all, if Tom DeLay can get away with brazenly selling legislative assistance to Jack Abramoff, who knows what other scheming self-interested members of Congress might try?”
Título original
CREW Request to the Department of Justice Regarding Tom Delay Investigation (Combined Exhibits)
Why did disgraced former Congressman Tom DeLay (R-TX) never face federal prosecution? The public has a right to know, but the Department of Justice isn’t telling. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Department of Justice (DOJ) requesting all documents and communications related to the five year investigation into the former Texas lawmaker and his associates. Mr. DeLay is slated to face state charges in Texas later this month; as a result, CREW asked DOJ to expedite a response to the request.
“One of the most corrupt members to ever walk the halls of Congress will never have to answer for operating the House like a pay-to-play casino. The American people deserve to know what evidence the Department of Justice collected on Mr. DeLay and why that evidence was not sufficient to charge him,” said Melanie Sloan, CREW Executive Director. “The Department of Justice has not made prosecuting crooked government officials a top priority. The Public Integrity Section lacks the staff and resources necessary to prosecute even some of Washington’s demonstrably most unscrupulous leaders. The Obama administration must ensure this section has resources it needs to do its job properly. After all, if Tom DeLay can get away with brazenly selling legislative assistance to Jack Abramoff, who knows what other scheming self-interested members of Congress might try?”
Direitos autorais:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Formatos disponíveis
Baixe no formato PDF, TXT ou leia online no Scribd
Why did disgraced former Congressman Tom DeLay (R-TX) never face federal prosecution? The public has a right to know, but the Department of Justice isn’t telling. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Department of Justice (DOJ) requesting all documents and communications related to the five year investigation into the former Texas lawmaker and his associates. Mr. DeLay is slated to face state charges in Texas later this month; as a result, CREW asked DOJ to expedite a response to the request.
“One of the most corrupt members to ever walk the halls of Congress will never have to answer for operating the House like a pay-to-play casino. The American people deserve to know what evidence the Department of Justice collected on Mr. DeLay and why that evidence was not sufficient to charge him,” said Melanie Sloan, CREW Executive Director. “The Department of Justice has not made prosecuting crooked government officials a top priority. The Public Integrity Section lacks the staff and resources necessary to prosecute even some of Washington’s demonstrably most unscrupulous leaders. The Obama administration must ensure this section has resources it needs to do its job properly. After all, if Tom DeLay can get away with brazenly selling legislative assistance to Jack Abramoff, who knows what other scheming self-interested members of Congress might try?”
Direitos autorais:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Formatos disponíveis
Baixe no formato PDF, TXT ou leia online no Scribd
EXHIBIT Acitizens for responsibility
and ethics in washington
CREW
October 19, 2010
6117
By faesimile: 20:
Rena Y. Kim
Chief, FOIA/PA Section
Criminal Division
U.S. Department of Justice
Suite 1127, Keeney Building
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20330-0001
Re:
edom of Information Act Request
Dear Ms, Kim:
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (“CREW”) makes this request for
records, regardless of format, medium, or physical characteristics, and including electronic
records and information, audiotapes, videotapes and photographs, pursuant to the Freedom of,
Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. §§ 552, ef seg., and U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”)
regulations, 28 C.F.R. Part 16.
Specifically, CREW requests any witness statements, investigation reports, prosecution
memoranda, and FBI 302 reports related to DOJ’s investigation of former House Majority Leader
‘Tom DeLay. This includes, but is not limited to, DOI’s investigation of relationships between
Mr. DeLay and Christine DeLay, Dani DeLay, Jack Abramoff, Edwin Buckham, Tony Rudy,
Michael Scanlon, Susan Hirshmann, the Alexander Strategy Group, the National Center for
Public Policy Research, eLottery, Inc., the U.S. Family Network, Americans for a Republican
Majority PAC (“ARMPAC”), Texans for a Republican Majority PAC (“TRMPAC"), and/or the
mmonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands,
Mr. DeLay was one of the subjects of DOJ’s extensive investigation into illegal lobbying
activities by Mr. Abramoff and others. See R. Jeffrey Smith, Justice Department Drops
Investigation of DeLay Ties to Abramoff, Wash. Post, August 17, 2010 (attached as Exhibit A).
Among other things, DOJ investigated allegations Mr. Abramoff, Mr. Buekham, and Mr. Rudy
laundered money from entities with interests before Congress through non-profit organizations to
pay for Mr. and Mrs, DeLay’s overseas travel. For example, Mr. Abramoff funneled payments
provided by eLottery, Inc, and other gambling interests through the National Center for Public
Policy Research to pay for Mr. and Mrs, DeLay’s trip to Scotland, and used the same
organization to launder money from a Russian oil company to pay for Mr. and Mrs. DeLay's wip
to Russia. See, eg. Phil Shenon, Ex:DeLay Aide Pleats Gully NY. Times
1400 Eye Steet, NW, Sute 450, Washington, 0.C. 20005 | 202.408.5565 phone | 202.588.5020 ax | wawrcitzensortiRena Y. Kim
October 19, 2010
Page 2
Wash. Post, December 31, 2005 (attached as Exhibit C); R. Jefitey Smith, DeLay Airfare Was
Charged To Lobbyist’s Credit Card, Wash, Post, April 24, 2005 (attached as Exhibit D); James
V. Grimaldi & R. Jeffrey Smith, Gambling Interests Funded DeLay Trip, Wash. Post, March 12,
2005 (attached as Exhibit E).
DOJ also investigated allegations: (1) the Alexander Strategy Group, a lobbying firm run
by Mr. Buckham and Mr. Rudy, employed Mrs. DeLay in an effort to influence Mr. DeLay, see
Susan Schmidt & James V. Grimaldi, Lawmakers Under Scrutiny in Probe of Lobbyist, Wash
Post, November 26, 2005 (attached as Exhibit F); Philip Shenon, Lobbying Cases Highlight
Prime Targets’ Family Ties, 1V.¥. Times, April 9, 2006 (attached as Exhibit G); (2) Mrs. DeLay
and the DeLays’ daughter Dani improperly were paid $350,000 in consulting fees and expenses
paid by ARMPAC, Mr. DeLay’s political action committee, see Michael Hedges, As Lobbying
Scandal Drags On, DeLay Takes a Shot at FBI, Houston Chronicle, May 9, 2007 (attached as
Exhibit 1); (3) Mr. Abramoff and Mr. Buckham funneled $1 million from the Russian oil
company through the U.S, Family Network in an effort to influence Mr. DeLay and others, see
Smith, Wash. Post, December 31, 2005; Laylan Copelin, Subpoena List in DeLay Case Reads
Like Who's Who of Political, Business Interests, Austin American-Statesman, October 16, 2010
(attached as Exhibit 1); and (4) Mr. DeLay and two associates conspired to illegally lauder
corporate campaign contributions through TRMPAC, id; and (5) Mr. Abramoff arranged for a
trip to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands to influence Mr. DeLay, see Michael
Hedges, Lobbyist Pleads Guilty to Conspiracy, Houston Chronicle, November 22, 2005 (attached
hibit J)
DOF apparently concluded its investigation of Mr, DeLay recently without bringing
charges against him, See Smith, Wash, Post, August 17, 2010,
Please search for responsive records regardless of format, medium, or physical
characteristics. Where possible, please produce records electronically, in PDF or TIF format on a
CD-ROM, We seek records of any kind, including electronic records, audiotapes, videotapes,
and photographs. Our request includes any letters, emails, facsimiles, telephone messages, voice
mail messages, and transcripts, notes, or minutes of any meetings, telephone conversations, or
discussions, Our request also includes any attachments to these records,
Ifit is your position that any portion of the requested records is exempt from disclosure,
CREW requests that you provide it with an index of those documents as required under Vauighnt
¥. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir, 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 97 (1972). As you are aware, a
Vaughn index must describe each document claimed as exempt with sufficient specificity “to
permit a reasoned judgment as to whether the material is actually exempt under FOIA.”
Founding Church of Scientology v, Bell, 603 F.2d 945, 949 (D.C. Cir. 1979). Moreover, the
Vaughn index must “describe each document or portion thereof withheld, and for each
withholding it must discuss the consequences of supplying the sought-after information.” King v.Rena Y. Kim
October 19, 2010
Page 3
US. Dep't of Justice, 830 F.2d 210, 223-24 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (emphasis added). Further, “the
‘withholding agency must supply ‘a relatively detailed justification, specifically identifying the
reasons why a particular exemption is relevant and correlating those claims with the particulat
pert of a withheld document to which they apply." Jd, at 224 (citing Mead Data Central v. US.
Dep't of the Air Force, 566 F-2d 242, 251 (D.C. Cit. 1977).
In the event that some portions of the requested records are properly exempt from
disclosure, please disclose any reasonably segregable non-exempt portions of the requested
records. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(b). If it is your position that a document contains non-exempt
segments, but that those non-exempt segments are so dispersed throughout the document as to
make segregation impossible, please state what portion of the document is non-exempt, and how
the material is dispersed throughout the document. Mead Data Central, 566 F.2d at 261. Claims
of nonsegregability must be made with the same degree of detail as required for claims of
exemptions ina Vaughn index. Ifa request is denied in whole, please state specifically that it is
not reasonable to segregate portions of the record for release
Finally, CREW welcomes the opportunity to discuss with you whether and to what extent
this request can be narrowed or modified to better enable DOJ to process it within the FOIA’s
deadlines
Fee Waiver Request
In accordance with $ U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)iii) and 28 C.P.R. § 16.11(K), CREW
requests a waiver of fees associated with processing this request for records. The subject of this,
request conceins the operations of the federal government and expenditures, and the disclosures
will likely contribute to a better understanding of relevant government procedures by CREW and
the general public in a significant way. Moreover, the request is primarily and fundamentally for
non-commercial purposes. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4\(A)(ii). See, e.g., McClellan Ecological v.
Carlucci, 835 F.2d 1282, 1285 (9th Cir. 1987).
These records are likely 1o contribute to greater public awareness of alleged malfeasance
and possible criminal behavior by the former majority leader of the House of Representatives,
and of DOJ’s recently conchided investigation into Mr. DeLay’s activities. Related DOJ
investigations resulted in criminal convictions of Mr. Abramoff, Mr. Rudy, Mr. Scanlon, former
Rep. Bob Ney, and others. While DOJ eventually decided not to prosecute Mr. DeLay, his
activities still may have been illegal or violations of the rules of the House of Representatives,
and the requested records would shed light on them. In addition, other criminal allegations
against Mr. DeLay remain very active - a trial on state charges related to money laundering
through TRMPAC is scheduled to begin on October 26, 2010. See Copelin, Austin American-
Statesman, October 16, 2010. The public unquestionably has a powerful interest in learning the
extent (o which a leading member of Congress engaged in illegal or improper behavior. U.S.
Dep't of Justice v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749, 774 (1989)