COMPLAINTS DEPARTMENT

Gadfly Gene Stilp has wasted no time leaping into the spotlight now glaring on Senate Minority Leader Bob Mellow, who is accused of enriching himself at taxpayer expense.

Stilp, a failed lawyer and legislative aide, has made something of a career of picking at the wounds of scandalized lawmakers. In fact, thanks to Stilp's enthusiasm not only for filing ethics complaints, but for making a public spectacle of doing so, Pennsylvanians may now be treated to an endless parade of political candidates filing baseless ethics complaints against their opponents, then rolling out negative ads based on those complaints.

It probably never occurred to him there actually was a sound reason for the ban on publicizing complaints.

But we digress. If Stilp really is offended by ethical lapses by public officials, and not just addicted to the publicity that goes with complaining about them, he should be interested in an apparently serious ethical violation on the part of lawyers for the Office of Gubernatorial Candidate Tom Corbett.

Rule 1.5 of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's Rules of Professional Conduct is: "A lawyer shall not enter into an agreement for, charge, or collect an illegal or clearly excessive fee."

Corbett insists that the law firm of former Mike Veon Chief of Staff Jeff Foreman (who most recently served as counsel to then-Majority Whip Keith McCall) "was placed on retainer by [Beaver Initiative for Growth] for $4,000 a month at Veon's suggestion, but that the firm didn't do legal work justifying those payments."

It's hard to imagine that accepting such payments would not be a violation of Rule 1.5.

The bigger problem is that Corbett's team clearly believes Foreman committed this violation (since they based a huge part of their case against Veon upon it). Rule 8.3: "A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, shall inform the appropriate professional authority."

Part of the reason charges against Veon related to BIG were thrown out of court is that Foreman would not admit in court that he violated Rule 1.5. Regardless, if Corbett's team is convinced that he did, they are obligated by Rule 8.3 to report him.

Sounds like a situation that is just ripe for Stilp to exploit. The only problem is, the law requires that such complaints remain confidential. Without any publicity to milk, what's in it for Stilp?

PA.LOTIX ASKS CORBETT: "WHAT ARE WE SUPPOSED TO THINK NOW?"

It has been over a year since partisan Republican Attorney General Tom Corbett cuffed Democrats and paraded them in front of the statewide media. Now, everyone in Harrisburg is waiting for the long promised Republican indictments, but it appears that Corbett is looking for a day when his new arrests won't be crowded out by budget news.

Laura Vecsey who covers the state Capitol for the Harrisburg Patriot News gets straight to the point on her blog, pa.lotix, today:

"What are we supposed to think now?...Corbett has said that more people will be arrested, but no one has been arrested since last summer.

It's tough for Corbett to find the right time to bring government officials and workers up on charges, what with campaigns, elections and budget negotiations crowding the political calendar.

Even taking into account the idea that Corbett's massive and lengthy probe of lawmakers and legislative workers is politics-free, the fact that his investigation has yielded no Republicans and is now bumping into his own gubernatorial ambitions only further clouds a murky Harrisburg picture."

EXTRA! EXTRA! READ ALL ABOUT IT!!

Partisan Republican Attorney General Tom Corbett recently told PCN call-in viewers that many times his office starts an investigation based on his or his staff's perusal of the daily media:

"So many times our investigations, we receive initial information from newspaper accounts, from television accounts and then we start developing witnesses and continue working our way through an investigation." -- PCN 6/10/09

If Corbett read this morning's Inquirer, then Senate Democratic Leader Bob Mellow may find himself sitting in a Grand Jury room for his questionable arrangements involving his district office. ("An ethical question for leading Pa. Democrat" Philadelphia Inquirer, 7/13/09)

This got us thinking about what other news clippings are probably in Corbett's and his investigators' files (or at least should be.) We've all read them and remember them, but we don't want to take it for granted that Corbett was looking as closely.

Topping the list should be another Inquirer item that outlines how the House Republican caucus maintained extensive amounts of political campaign material on their state funded computer system. ("A tangled web at state house" Philadelphia Inquirer, 2/18/07)

Of course, Corbett subsequently allowed the House Republicans to destroy their hard drives and servers. Republican spokesman Steve Miskin admitted as much to the Tribune Review last year. ("Bonus allegations borderline slanderous" Pittsburgh Tribune Review, 10/16/08)

Another news item that Corbett should have his agents diligently investigate would be how Drew Crompton, a Senate Republican staff person who took off 4 months to work on Lynn Swann's gubernatorial campaign, received a $20,000 bonus in 2006. Colin McNickol wrote a column about it and we all know that any respectable GOP primary candidate like Corbett would read the Trib diligently. ("The Susquehanna sewer backs up again" Pittsburgh Tribune Review, 2/4/2007)

Here is a blast from the past, but this Morning Call story recounting how Democratic State Senate staffers used state resources on state time to recruit candidates should give Corbett more than a few leads to follow. ("State Senate staffer found politicking on work time" Morning Call, 2/23/2002)

Let's not forget the well-publicized antics of the Philadelphia Parking Authority and how John Perzel and his henchmen maced employees there. Surely, Corbett has the fortitude to stand up to Bob Asher and go after Perzel after reading this one? ("5 city aides claim they were maced" Philadelphia Daily News, 9/14/2004)

Whenever Corbett's much anticipated (and promised) next round of indictments finally are announced (it has been over a year since Corbett hammered House Democrats,) we hope they reflect all the political activity everyone in the Capitol has been reading about and know has been standard operating procedure in all four caucuses for years.

IT'S TOO LATE, BABY

In a half-hearted swat at Gubernatorial Candidate Tom Corbett, the Patriot-News today urged him to bring his long-vaunted next round of Bonusgate charges "as soon as possible."

Folks, "as soon as possible," is long, long in the past. It's way too late to file them "as soon as possible."

"As soon as possible," would have been as soon as it was possible to file his first round of charges, which was as soon as it was possible to have the maximum impact on the 2008 legislative elections.

The editorial repeats Corbett's false rationale that he had to launch an investigation on Democrats alone in January 2007 because he believed - mistakenly, as it turns out - that the Democrats were destroying evidence. The Post-Gazette exposed the lie in November of 2007, pointing out that investigators "rushed" to seize boxes after they got the "tip" in August.

It also begs the question of when he would have begun investigating Republicans if he hadn't believed the Democrats were destroying evidence. It makes no sense if you think about it too much; fortunately for Corbett, no one seems to be thinking about it too much.

One can hardly blame the Patriot-News for clinging to this discredited theory, because the alternative theory - that Corbett never intended to charge any Republicans - is almost too overwhelming to contemplate. Corbett's been getting by on winks and nods ever since his fake "moratorium" on charges last September, without facing any tough media scrutiny.

If Corbett charges any Republicans now, it will be nearly impossible for him to rebut the accusation that he did so primarily to avoid the appearance of partisanship.

It's too late for Corbett to avoid the appearance of partisanship. His investigation at this point is so compromised it's impossible to separate politics from justice.

ONE YEAR LATER: STILL WAITING

Pending Bonusgate charges will "shock the conscience of people. You will be stunned. It's the amount of money involved."

-Gubernatorial Candidate Tom Corbett in the Tribune-Review, February 20, 2009

CHECKING THE BALANCE CONTINUES TO QUESTION CORBETT

For months the blog Checking the Balance has done an exemplary job cutting through the horse-hockey partisan Attorney General Tom Corbett puts out.

Yesterday, CTB yet again asks some good questions about Corbett and his off-the-rails investigation:

http://checkingthebalance.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/07/murky-waters.html

MORE GREAT COMMENTARY FROM PA2010.COM

As we approach the one year anniversary of partisan Attorney General Tom Corbett's announcement of indictments against the 12 Democrats, here is a great post from our friends at PA2010.com:

http://www.pa2010.com/2009/07/a-big-moment-looms-for-corbett/

We're still anxiously waiting for the indictments of Republicans that Corbett has promised.

He told the Pittsburgh Tribune Review in February his next indictments in his Bonusgate investigation will "shock the conscience of people...You will be stunned. It's the amount of money involved."

Although, Corbett has been teasing us for over a year now...so we're not holding our breath.

DUDE, WHERE'S MY EVIDENCE?

We've just finished conferring with our spies in the courtroom for yesterday's hearing on pretrial motions filed by the Bonusgate defendants.

While most of the media coverage centered on the motion to dismiss the charges based on "selective prosecution," we found the revelations about how evidence was gathered much more interesting.

Get this: not one of the battalion of lawyers representing the Office of Gubernatorial Candidate Tom Corbett had any idea what the OAG requested in the subpoenas served on the House Democratic Caucus in 2007. Did they request certain computer hard drives? Did they request electronic copies of e-mails between particular members, or sent during a particular time period? Did they request specific memos or documents?

They don't know.

Lawyers for Mike Veon contend that Corbett allowed then-House Democratic Leader Bill DeWeese to choose his own scapegoats, scouring the caucus computer system for evidence that implicated those scapegoats alone. They contend that a thorough search of the caucus' hard drives and servers would have implicated others - DeWeese in particular. But no such search was conducted.

Robert Soop, supervisory agent of the OAG's legislative corruption investigation, testified as much at a preliminary hearing for two of the defendants in October:

Q: What I am more interested in is, who gave you this?
A: Who gave us the actual e-mails?
Q: Yes.
A: It was negotiated -- my understanding is, it was negotiated through representation from the House.
Q: So the House Democratic Caucus gave you the e-mails?
A: Specifically, Mr. Chadwick would have been involved in that process.
...
Q: You can't testify under oath here today that these e-mails came from any computer in particular? You don't have the IP address to trace it to a particular computer, correct?
A: The House gave them to us, and these e-mails were obtained as a result of the system at the House.
Q: That's not my question. My question is you didn't go to the particular hard drive of Mr. Veon's computer, or Miss Rosepink's computer and you as law enforcement did not retrieve these e-mails from those hard drives, according to your testimony?
A: I personally did not do that, no.
Q: Nor did any law enforcement person? It was the House Democratic Caucus, according to your testimony?
A: Again, I was not involved in that process. That is my understanding of how it took place.

Umm...hey, OJ? Can you let us know if you find anything suspicious?

Agent Soop was subpoenaed to testify at yesterday's hearing, but Judge Richard A. Lewis temporarily blocked all subpoenas while he considers whether he will hear testimony on the motion to dismiss based on selective prosecution. Those subpoenaed to testify on other motions, including Agent Soop, still could be required to appear no matter how Lewis rules on the selective prosecution motion.

Veon's lawyers argued that prosecutors should not be allowed to introduce the e-mails that DeWeese turned over unless they can authenticate them. Based on Agent Soop's October testimony, it appears they can not.

It's very clear to Team CasablancaPA that DeWeese did just as Veon's lawyers contend. As we have pointed out before, we already know that DeWeese failed to turn over a large cache of e-mails that were later discovered, printed out, in an office previously occupied by caucus attorney Bill Sloane. Sloane facilitated the caucus' response to subpoenas in 2007. According to the Post-Gazette, many of the e-mails appear to implicate DeWeese and those in DeWeese's inner circle.

We also know DeWeese failed to turn over about 200 emails that show his top two aides, Kevin Sidella and Tom Andrews, directing a taxpayer-funded contractor to perform campaign work. Corbett noted in a presentment last year that DeWeese himself corresponded with the same state contractor on campaign matters. Rather than pursue charges Corbett inexplicably praised DeWeese for using his campaign e-mail account.

We don't know what other evidence DeWeese withheld, and more importantly, we don't know why Corbett allowed DeWeese to determine the course of the investigation. We do know that DeWeese turned over the e-mails only after Corbett granted someone immunity under a sealed order.

Meanwhile, Judge Lewis is expected to decide this week whether to hear testimony on the "selective prosecution" motion, and rumors are rampant that Corbett is desperate to defang Veon's allegation by sprinkling a few more indictments around the Capitol (Or, at least, by creating the impression that he will).

HYSTERIA IN THE STATEHOUSE

For the first time in more than two years, the public may be about to hear a side of the Bonusgate story that Gubernatorial Candidate Tom Corbett doesn't want to be heard.

Has this possibility been greeted in the Capitol with anticipation? Relief? A sense of satisfaction?

No, it's been more like one long primal scream of panic.

The Tribune-Review today reports that lawyers for the defendants on Thursday served between 40 and 100 House members and staff with subpoenas to testify at a hearing next week on the defendants' motions to dismiss the charges.

The motions are based on various deficiencies in the shoddy case Corbett has cobbled together. Anyone whose true goal is justice would welcome the opportunity to expose these flaws.

Diogenes needn't waste his time in Harrisburg. Caucus lawyers immediately reassured the desperate witnesses they will fight to quash the subpoenas. The same caucus that supposedly encouraged staff to go forth and tell the truth when Corbett was asking the questions now issues the order, "Clam up!" when telling the truth might look bad for Corbett.

Part of the reason for the hysteria can be found in a second Tribune-Review article today, which gives Corbett free rein to bang his "investigation is continuing" drum.

This unceasing din, while headache-inducing for most of us forced to endure it, brings Corbett great joy on several fronts. Most importantly, it keeps everyone in the Capitol perpetually cowed. How can any member or staff person have the courage to step up to the witness stand and tell the truth about Corbett's disaster of a case when Corbett's foot is on his or her neck? "You could be next," is the not-so-subtle-message.

Where does this leave our hapless defendants? The defendants' right to a defense includes the right to carefully examine the case Corbett has constructed. Instead, Corbett throws out his arms to block it from view and shrieks, like a middle-schooler working on a science project, It isn't finished yet!!

If it isn't finished (and by this time the rest of his class has graduated and moved on) then why did he file charges? If he's not ready, after all this time, to stand up in court and allow the public to examine his case, then this case doesn't belong in court.

Of course, it may be that Corbett really never wants this case to end up in court, at least not while he's still got to make it work. He needs this jalopy to carry him only as far as the Governor's Office. Then he can abandon it on the side of the road and leave the mess for someone else to clean up.

P.S. Could it be Corbett already is hearing the tell-tale sounds of sputtering under the hood? He told the Tribune-Review, "The people who are in charge of this investigation are career prosecutors, career agents. The decisions that will be made — and I won't be making those decisions — are made in the best interests of the prosecution ..." That may not be finger-pointing quite yet, but he's definitely taking off his gloves.

E-MAILS? WHAT E-MAILS?

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette today reports that a grand jury is "poring over" a collection of e-mail printouts and campaign donation spreadsheets "recently discovered" in the former office of a top aide to Bill DeWeese.

The story tells us very little we don't already know and that Gubernatorial Candidate Tom Corbett hasn't known for years: DeWeese directed his legislative staff to do campaign work on state time and top aide Kevin Sidella was a full-time campaign operative.

We'll set aside for now that Corbett obviously STILL is investigating the House Democratic Caucus after TWO AND A HALF YEARS and not so much the House and Senate Republicans as Corbett so often claims.

The one interesting fact is that these e-mails are "recently discovered." Wasn't DeWeese supposed to have turned over all that stuff to Corbett already? If these are caucus e-mails - and if they weren't they'd be of no interest to Corbett - they would have turned up in DeWeese's infamous "internal investigation" (Also known as The Great Scapegoat Hunt of '07)

This isn't the first batch of incriminating e-mails that DeWeese failed to turn over to Corbett even though they obviously resided on caucus servers. About 200 e-mails from Sidella and another DeWeese aide, Tom Andrews, to a taxpayer-funded contractor show the two "directing various political battle plans," and "green-lighting campaign mailings or Web postings." Although most of the e-mails were sent from their caucus accounts, DeWeese never surrendered them to Corbett. Corbett instead obtained them from the contractor's computer, which never passed through DeWeese's machiavellian hands.

If DeWeese was granted secret immunity back in October 2007, as we have long suspected, these lapses in good faith could invalidate the agreement. Or, Corbett could go after DeWeese for crimes not covered by the agreement.

If so, no one will laugh louder and longer at DeWeese's "perp walk" than Team CasablancaPA. But until we see some solid evidence that Corbett is doing a real investigation of House and Senate Republicans, we won't call it justice.

INVISIBLE REPUBLICANS

The master sleuth at the Patriot News, Charlie Thompson, has caught a Democrat in the act again! The act of testifying to a grand jury, that is. Lurking outside the courtroom, Thompson has identified and publicized the identities of many House Democratic staff who have testified.

In a short item in Friday's newspaper, apparently unavailable online, Thompson noted that ex-chief of staff to ex-Majority Leader H. William DeWeese put in another appearance Thursday.

What's most interesting is Thompson claims in the same story, "In recent months, Corbett's prosecutors have focused most heavily on taking testimony from witnesses affiliated with the House Republican caucus."

Yet in all his lurking, Thompson apparently never has spotted one of these elusive Republican witnesses. He certainly never has identified one.

It's certainly odd that all of Thompson's stakeouts coincide with the appearance of Democratic witnesses only, when so many Republican witnesses supposedly are giving testimony.

DEWEESE: GIVE ME SOME OF THAT OLD TIME RELIGION

Every week for a year, it seems, Bill DeWeese has a "come to Jesus" moment regarding bonusgate, reform and openness.

Yesterday, he attended another tent revival where he joined Republican Jim Christiana in touting a database that tracks state spending.

In a bout of glossolalia for the Tribune Review, DeWeese opined that if such a database existed then the entire bonusgate scandal never would have happened (Pittsburgh Tribune-Review 6/26/09).

Watching Bill DeWeese handle snakes in his effort to prove he is blameless in bonusgate is very entertaining. He is quite good at it...too bad he doesn't put the same effort to improve his table manners (but that is a different miracle for a different post.)

As with many of the most overtly religious and sanctimonious (think Sen. Ensign and Gov. Sanford), there is always a strong measure of hypocrisy lurking in the background. Bill DeWeese is certainly no different.

We stood in line at the Dauphin County Courthouse to get our copy of the Veon filing from earlier this month. It is a great read, especially when it comes to seeing specific examples of the arbitrary nature of partisan Republican Attorney General Tom Corbett's enforcement of what he considers the law.

DeWeese's latest effort to abdicate responsibility reminded us of one particular email in the Veon filing that really shows how big a hypocrite, and quite frankly, how big a liar Bill DeWeese is when it comes to reform and his use of state resources for political campaigns.

Take a look at the email for yourself here.

As you can see, DeWeese's political campaign was so intertwined with his legislative office that no one on his staff could tell the difference. "Special Leadership Account" funds were used to pay for political advertising. These very same Special Leadership Accounts were used to award legislative bonuses in all four state legislative caucuses.

It is outrageous for DeWeese to have used "Special Leadership Account" funds to pay for campaign advertising, but it is equally as outrageous to see that DeWeese is supervising and directing his campaign using state employees, during work hours using their state email accounts.

The greatest outrage is the fact Attorney General Tom Corbett had this email and the testimony of Kevin Sidella ("DeWeese aide was fundraiser" Tribune Review, 10/18/08), Mike Manzo ("Manzo testifies before grand jury" Inquirer, 10/17/08), and perhaps many of the other DeWeese staff on this caucus email. Yet, Corbett decided that this isn't the kind of evidence that would result in charges being filed against DeWeese.

What kind of investigation has Corbett conducted?

Everyone has seen and read about the emails that clearly show DeWeese was fully aware of the bonuses ("DeWeese email exchange damning evidence in bonus probe" AP, 3/17/09) and the campaign work being done by his state funded employees ("Bonusgate records contradict DeWeese" 4/6/09). Plus, everyone in the Capitol knows that numerous House Democratic employees testified to the grand jury about what DeWeese knew and what he ordered his staff to do for his campaigns.

DeWeese may have found religion when it comes to reform, but here at CasablancaPA we still consider him the Devil...and it seems like he has cut some deal with Corbett.

MIKE LONG...OUT OF SIGHT, OUT OF MIND

Our friends at pa2010.com put together a top 10 list of political consultants and apparently there was such an uproar over Mike Long being omitted from the list that Dan Hirschhorn felt compelled to make a special addendum blog post giving Long a bj.

Good for Mike Long. No one will argue that he ran the State Senate Campaign Committee for nearly 2 decades and kept the Republicans in the majority for most of that time.

However, Hirschhorn forgot to mention that Long did much of this exemplary campaign work while a full-time state employee.

And, there was no mention of Long receiving $41,405 in bonuses for 2005 and 2006 -- more than any other state legislative employee.

Finally, and most importantly, Mike Long is added to a top 10 list based on his political acumen exhibited over two decades as a state employee, using state resources on state time, yet there is no mention of the bonusgate investigation being conducted by Attorney General Tom Corbett and that Long was one of the top targets for investigation.

This omission by pa2010.com is a wonderful example of "out of sight, out of mind" when it comes to Corbett's bonusgate investigation.

It has been a year since partisan prosecutor Tom Corbett charged 12 Democrats, yet there has been no sign of any impending indictments for anyone in the Senate Republican Caucus and certainly no word about Mike Long who has been called the Senate Republican "chief campaign strategist" (Post Gazette), "political guru" (Patriot News), "a homegrown version of White House political czar Karl Rove" (Morning Call), and "top political aide" (Capitolwire).

So, when there has been no news from Corbett about Mike Long, it shouldn't be surprising that even a sophisticated political site like pa2010.com would forget that Long was at one time a prime suspect for Corbett to investigate.

UH, WE MEANT TO DO THAT

Today's Post-Gazette contains Gubernatorial Candidate Tom Corbett's most hilarious rationalization yet. Faced with undeniable proof that he ignored campaign shenanigans when they didn't involve Mike Veon, Corbett pretends he's still mulling the evidence after nearly a year.

Almost two weeks ago, CasablancaPa pointed out that Corbett had, in response to Veon's motion for dismissal, abandoned his longtime practice of vaguely referencing possible future indictments. Instead, he dipped his toe in the water of actually defending his own actions (or inaction, in his case). Apparently, that didn't work out so well, so he darted back into his "investigation is continuing" sofa fort.

Will Corbett now indict Steve Stetler, just so he can prove Veon wrong? Considering the rate at which Corbett's investigations creep along, Stetler might not have to worry about it for at least another year or two.

CORBETT'S PROMISE: BEFORE OR AFTER JULY 14TH

This weekend the Philadelphia Inquirer reports that Vince Fumo is attempting to delay his sentencing hearing now scheduled for July 14th. ("Fumo could get 21-27 years" 6/13/09)

Here at Casablancapa we're assuming the judge won't delay, so we're using July 14th as the date for making over/under bets on when partisan Republican Attorney General Tom Corbett will bring his long promised indictments against Republican members of the legislature.

A July 14th news splash regarding Fumo presents Corbett an interesting public relations problem.

On one hand, Corbett could hold true to his past practice and make a bonusgate related announcement only when there is unhelpful news or commentary regarding his conduct of his bonusgate investigation. If he does, then he'll wait for Fumo's sentencing (which will provide his gubernatorial rival Pat Meehan some good media attention) and then trump Meehan by bringing his Republican indictments afterward.

On the other hand, Corbett may not want to let the one year anniversary of his one-sided indictiments of Democrats to pass on July 10th. It is hard to imagine that the media, the chattering class and large numbers of voters won't notice that a year has passed without Corbett living up to his promise of indiciting Republicans.

If you remember, Corbett was adamant as early as September of 2008 that he was preparing to indict Republicans. Here he is telling Pete Jackson with the Associated Press how close he was to bringing indictments:

"Pennsylvania's attorney general says the next round of arrests in the 'Bonusgate' investigation will come either this month or after the election...Corbett said more arrests could be made this month 'if all the dominoes fall in the right line.''' (Associated Press, 9/8/08)

This is quite a public relations conundrum for Corbett. Let's face it...Corbett's handling of the bonusgate investigation has been one big p.r. cow to milk for his gubernatorial aspirations.

Either Corbett waits to announce Republican indictments until AFTER Fumo is charged on or around July 14th thus blunting good coverage for his rival Meehan, or he announces his long promised Republican indictments BEFORE July 14th so he doesn't let the one year anniversary of his hammering of Democrats on July 10th pass without living up to his promise of Republican arrests.

Of course, there are still a few holdouts here at Casablancapa who don't believe Corbett will make any Republican arrests (and certainly no charges that even come close to his hammering of Democrats a year ago.)

Let us know what you think! Tell us if Corbett makes his Republican arrests before or after July 14th.

WHAT'S PUZZLING YOU IS THE NATURE OF MY GAME

Regular readers are well aware that Gubernatorial Candidate Tom Corbett secretly granted a favored informant immunity under a sealed order in October 2007. It appears to be the second of only two immunity orders granted under seal.

Team CasablancaPa has long suspected that favored informant goes by the initials H.W.D. We have grown more convinced with the public release of thousands of pieces of evidence, which Corbett reviewed and turned over to defendants as part of the discovery process.

Our theory is controversial; after all, Corbett certainly had no reason to trust Bill DeWeese. But wouldn't he have every reason to trust a Republican former state Inspector General and campaign contributor? Bill Chadwick was paid at least $1.3 million in taxpayer loot to keep DeWeese out of jail, and certainly the ability to broker such deals was among his bag of costly tricks.

The problem with the "speeding car" analogy some invoke to defend Corbett's failure to charge DeWeese is that Corbett didn't just let the DeWeesemobile go zipping by. He stopped it, searched it, looked under the hood and kicked the tires. ("DeWeese is the most-investigated guy on the landscape," Chadwick says)

What we have here is: an obviously culpable person who inexplicably faces no charges, a sealed immunity order that - like Cinderella's slipper - fits no other foot but DeWeese's, and a secret, taxpayer-produced file DeWeese refuses to reveal to the rest of the Democratic Caucus. Occam's Razor applies.

Did DeWeese know the caucus apparently was awarding bonuses for political work? Check.

(Did he lie about it? All. The. Time.)

Did DeWeese's top aide testify that DeWeese was complicit in awarding bonuses for political work? Check.

Did DeWeese base personnel decisions on political work? Check.

Did DeWeese employ staff members solely to perform political work? Check.

Did DeWeese and his staff use state-funded resources for political work? Check.

As if all this weren't enough to throw suspicion on Corbett's failure to charge DeWeese, there's the matter of DeWeese aides Kevin Sidella and Tom Andrews.

Political operative Sidella left public employ in October 2007, just before DeWeese gave his chosen scapegoats the ax, and coinciding with the secret immunity order. Every month since his departure, Sidella has collected a payment from DeWeese's campaign committee, equal to the salary he had received as a state employee.

Evidence recently made public reveals Sidella and Andrews supervised and orchestrated the very activities at the center of Corbett's prosecution. Corbett examined nearly 200 e-mails demonstrating their direction of the "LCOMM" and petition challenge efforts for which others face multiple felony charges. These e-mails not only implicate Andrews and Sidella, they actually conflict with Corbett's allegations against the defendants. The only reason those e-mails came to light is because they were among the small percentage of evidence that didn't pass through DeWeese's hands on the way to Corbett.

A curious side note about "LCOMM": Corbett included a weird non sequitur in the grand jury presentment that DeWeese "always communicated with Buxton through his campaign account." Of course it doesn't matter whether DeWeese used a state e-mail account, a campaign account or a big box of crayons to assign political tasks to a taxpayer-funded contractor. So why even mention it? "Sure, he broke into your house, but he wiped his feet on the mat first!"

Sidella was granted immunity and has been "cooperating" with prosecutors though none of his statements yet have been presented as evidence against the defendants. Whether Andrews scored a similar deal is unknown - according to investigators' notes, he apparently was neither interviewed nor subpoenaed. Though he serves as DeWeese's press secretary, he largely has escaped press scrutiny regarding Bonusgate.

What is known is that it would raise inconvenient questions for Corbett to prosecute either Andrews or Sidella without prosecuting DeWeese.

Still not suspicious? Let's look at the timeline:

In August of 2007, Corbett seized files from the House Democratic Research Office.

DeWeese fought to prevent admission of the "privileged documents."

In September of 2007, Corbett subpoenaed seven staff members to testify to the grand jury.

DeWeese fought to quash the subpoenas.

During September and October, the Supreme Court refused to block the subpoenas, and a judge ruled the seized files admissible.

In October, Corbett granted secret immunity to his mystery informant. Kevin Sidella quietly left the state payroll and began collecting the equivalent of his state salary from DeWeese's campaign fund.

In November, DeWeese fired seven staffers, most of whom were later indicted, and delivered to Corbett thousands of carefully-selected e-mails and documents that would become a basis for those indictments.

DeWeese immediately launched a revisionist history campaign, declaring that he'd been cooperating with Corbett "since Day One." (Try to exclude evidence and quash subpoenas? Who, me?) He confidently predicted he would not be indicted. (Wonder how he could be so sure?)
Keep in mind, this is just the case an average blogger can make with information already public and documented. Imagine the case a prosecutor could make with the powers of search warrants and subpoenas. If he wanted to. Of course, none of this is proof of an immunity deal. There's always the possibility that Corbett is just astonishingly inept.

Another side note: As we reviewed more than two years of media coverage, it dawned on us that prior to Veon's motion for dismissal, editorialists across the state were nearly unanimous in calling for DeWeese's head. ("Is Time Running Out For DeWeese?"... "The wrong folks lost their jobs in Harrisburg this week" ... "More questions raised on DeWeese's role" ... "Burden of suspicion." )
No one could believe DeWeese would escape prosecution. ("It's hard to see how Mr. DeWeese survives "Bonusgate." ... "DeWeese's latest controversy just stirs up more questions." ... "There could be a whopper of a furball in his future.")

Now that it's clear Corbett has given DeWeese a pass, columnists and editorial writers are lining up to defend his decision. The Post-Gazette is so confused that it hyperventilated over events Veon had nothing to do with while simultaneously bashing Veon for pointing to events he had nothing to do with. "We have always been at war with Eastasia!"

DEWEESE ABDICATES RESPONSIBILITY...AGAIN.

Once again, Bill DeWeese abdicates responsibility. Today in a letter to Pittsburgh Tribune Review, he says lots of hinky activity was happening in the caucus, but it wasn't his responsibility:

"As more details become known -- such as the recent revelation that large magnets and hand drills were used to destroy House computer hard drives and backup tapes despite my directive to preserve evidence -- I believe that my team's cooperative efforts will ultimately lead fair-minded people to draw positive conclusions regarding my conduct."

Who was in the leader of the caucus in 2007 and 2008 when this supposed destruction of evidence occurred? Why, it was Bill DeWeese!

If this supposed destruction of evidence really happened or was illegal, wouldn't someone have been charged with a crime by Corbett by now?

Only Bill DeWeese could have ordered anyone to monkey around with hard drives and backup tapes...remember, DeWeese's scapegoat Veon was no longer a member of the caucus at that point.

Also keep in mind, the investigator notes mentioning the magnets and drilling were part of the investigation that resulted in the July 2008 charges against Veon and the Democratic staff. Among them Mike Manzo, the only staff person with authority to make that kind of call to the caucus computer geeks, and Steve Keefer, the head of the caucus computer department. Neither of them were charged for destroying evidence last July and Corbett certainly would have brought charges before now, nearly a year later.

The real question in this matter is why didn't Corbett charge anyone with a crime regarding this alleged destruction of evidence?

Perhaps because it is part of Corbett's wholesale disregard of mountains of evidence that implicates DeWeese. Last week, information provided to Veon's defense team by Corbett showed DeWeese and his staff, notably Kevin Sidella and Tom Andrews, did significant amounts of DeWeese campaign work on caucus time using caucus resources. Today's Patriot News has a great re-cap here.

And, don't forget that Mike Manzo, a key witness for Corbett, said under oath at the preliminary hearing in October 2008 that DeWeese knew about the allegedly illegal bonus program.

What kind of arrangement does Corbett have with DeWeese? How will this arrangement impact Corbett's campaign for Governor?

If Corbett does follow through on his promise to indict high ranking Republicans, how does he go back to the GOP faithful during his gubernatorial primary and tell them, "Hey, I indicted Jubelirer/Brightbill/Perzel but ignored obvious wrong doing by DeWeese"?

CORBETT CAMPAIGN CASH

An Ugarte post:

Yesterday, the US Supreme Court handed down an important decision regarding the influcence of campaign contributions on the administration of justice in America.

In Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Company, the ruling was made that elected judges must recuse themselves from cases where those involved spent large amounts of money to help them win their elections.

In the majority decision, Justice Kennedy wrote that when an interested party's contributions to a judge could have a "disproportionate influence" on a matter before the court, then the judge must disqualify him or herself.

This ruling deals with a situation that closely mirrors partisan Republican Attorney General Tom Corbett's bonusgate investigation.

For over a year, many here in Pennsylvania (and not just Democrats) have been asking the question, "How can Tom Corbett be impartial in his investigation of Republicans in the legislature if he has taken large amounts of campaign donations from the very people he is supposed to be investigating?"

Corbett has taken over a quarter million dollars in campaign donations from Republican legislators, Republican leadership committees and Republican legislative staff.

When you add in contributions Corbett has received from local Republican candidates and Republican Party committees his total take increases to $2,866,938.20. This is over one-third of all contributions Corbett has accepted since filing to run for Attorney General in 2002.

It isn't unprecedented to see prosecutors use their power to further political and personal agendas.

In the last few years, Alberto Gonzales ruined the reputation of the US Department of Justice, and right here in Pennsylvania Mary Beth Buchanan followed Gonzalez's example, most notably with the Wecht case. Even the Pittsburgh Tribune Review has documented Buchanan's one-sided bias toward prosecuting Democrats. ("Majority of defendants in corruption cases by Buchanan were Dems", 6/7/09)

If the United States Supreme Court thinks it is possible for a sitting judge to have their impartiality compromised by campaign donations, then what would they think of a prosecutor conducting an "active" investigation who receives one in three campaign dollars from the very people he is ostensibly investigating...Republican organizations and elected officials? Even more, a prosecutor who is running for Governor and needs the support of these very same Republican individuals and organizations?

CORBETT ADMITS TRUTH; NO ONE NOTICES

As Gubernatorial Candidate Tom Corbett's investigation of the legislature enters its 30th month(!), we here at CasablancaPa have noticed a not-so-subtle shift in Corbett's rhetoric.

When confronted with proof that he'd reviewed hundreds of pieces of evidence that other House members engaged in political activity using state resources, he didn't hint that those members might face charges, as he has done so often in the past. Instead, he defended his decision not to charge them.

Until now, it's been easy for Corbett to maintain his facade that all members of the legislature were facing equal scrutiny, because the compliant capitol news corps has never challenged him.

Much to our amusement and Corbett's amazement, Veon and his co-defendants appear not to be as compliant. The Post-Gazette last week revealed that a judge lifted a gag order in the case after Veon's lawyers pointed out there's “no longer any justification” for it. Corbett, never questioned on this point outside the courtroom, was forced by Veon's lawyers to admit his investigation of House Democrats is over.

Brad Bumsted of the Tribune-Review appears not to have noticed these two important admissions, smugly predicting that a DeWeese arrest will render Veon's argument moot. Perhaps Bumsted doesn't read the competition.

WHICH IS WEIRDER?

Team CasablancaPA is trying to settle a bet. Which makes less sense?

a) That Attorney General/Gubernatorial Candidate Tom Corbett conducted a two-year investigation of alleged illegal campaigning by House Democrats and never once questioned the guy who was in charge of House Democratic campaigns, or

b) That former finance and operations chairman of the House Democratic Campaign Committee Steve Stetler received a subpoena to testify to the grand jury and simply ignored it with no consequences.

According to Brad Bumsted's column in today's Tribune Review, Revenue Secretary Stetler received a subpoena to appear before a grand jury on June 21. He told reporters at a Nov. 12 news conference that agents of the Attorney General's office had never questioned him. He also said he'd never witnessed any alleged criminal activity.

Again: the guy who was in charge of the House Democratic Campaign Committee during the entire time Corbett claims illegal campaigning occurred never witnessed any alleged criminal activity.

And, Corbett never even asked him about any of it.

Bumsted claims to have "numerous examples of e-mails back and forth between House Democrat staffers and Stetler on political activity." But Bumsted doesn't describe what's in the emails.

Bumsted writes that a spokesman for the Governor's Office said the Attorney General's agents told Stetler's attorney they'd "get back to him if they needed Stetler." Since when do witnesses get to respond to a subpoena only if they feel like it? Why was Stetler subpoenaed if he wasn't "needed?" What the heck is going on?

What's most interesting about Bumsted's column is his observation that "Steler didn't run the caucus. He couldn't assign people beyond his own limited staff to do much of anything." Yet the guy who who did run the caucus, H. William DeWeese, was not indicted. And a bunch of other people who "didn't run the caucus" and couldn't assign anyone to do much of anything were indicted.

We suspect we haven't heard the last of the mysterious tale of Stetler's subpoena.