A federal judge has issued an order requiring the White House to preserve a controversial group of e-mails. Scott Horton, of Harper's, notes that the focus will be on Karl Rove's e-mails dating to the outset of the Bush presidency. The e-mails are likely to be relevant to the overall U.S. attorneys investigation and to specific political prosecutions, such as those involving former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman and Mississippi attorney Paul Minor (and former judges Wes Teel and John Whitfield).
A gift for Siegelman witness?
Alabama blogger Robby Scott Hill has a most interesting post today. Hill reports that Mark Pugh and CDG Engineering of Andalusia, AL, received a $2-million contract from the Alabama Conservation Department for purported consulting services they can't document. The contract is stuck in the Legislative Contract Review Committee, where it is being scrutinized by Senator Roger Bedford and Representative Alvin Holmes. Pugh, you might recall, testified against Don Siegelman. And Hill raises this question: "Could it be true that Troy King and Bob Riley were using a public contract to pay off Mark Pugh for his prior testimony against Don Siegelman? Now that is the classic definition of quid pro quo."
Emergency in Alabama
Blogger Phil Smith, a close follower of the Don Siegelman/Richard Scrushy trials, has an interesting piece about the justice system's failure to act upon emergency appeals that could free Siegelman and Scrushy pending the outcome of the appellate process on their convictions. As of Veterans Day, Smith writes, it had been 4 1/2 months since emergency appeals were filed in the case. Smith notes that the federal courts seem to have a peculiar definition of "emergency," with rulings bouncing back and forth from Judge Mark Fuller in Montgomery to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta. Meanwhile, Siegelman and Scrushy wait in prison for an appellate process that could take up to two years.