Could Head of U.S. Chamber of Commerce Wind Up in the Slammer?

A campaign to bring criminal charges against the CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is gaining steam--and national attention.

Even Fox News has noticed the campaign against Chamber CEO Tom Donohue, which was launched by the progressive advocacy group Velvet Revolution (VR) in October.

VR is offering $200,000 for information that leads to the arrest and conviction of Donohue. This all reminds me of a splendid recent piece by Larisa Alexandrovna of at-Largely, explaining Donohue's plans to undermine the rights of regular Americans on behalf of business interests. They originated with a fascinating memo out of the Nixon years.

The Velvet Revolution campaign got the attention of Roll Call in yesterday's edition. In a statement at its stopthechamber.com site, VR states:

Mr. Donohue and the U.S. Chamber have been publicly accused of criminal activity in complaints filed by attorneys and Attorneys General in numerous states, and also by non-profits such as Citizens for Reform and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and Public Citizen. StopTheChamber.com now seeks direct evidence that will stand up in a court of law--documents, affidavits, and testimony--implicating Mr. Donohue for crimes including fraud, tax violations, campaign finance violations, money laundering, insider trading, election tampering, and criminal manipulations of pension funds. StopTheChamber.com wants to hear from insiders and whistleblowers possessing information not already in the public domain.

Is stopthechamber.com serious about this? You be the judge:

Specifically, StopTheChamber.com is seeking evidence pertaining to the period of Mr. Donohue's tenure at the Chamber and his membership on the boards of Sunrise Senior Living, Union Pacific, Qwest Communications (until 2005) and XM Satellite Radio (until 2008).

Sounds serious to me. And this wanted poster looks serious.

Kevin Zeese, an attorney and spokesperson for stopthechamber.com sure sounds serious:

The Chamber of Commerce, under the leadership of Tom Donohue, has used pay-to-play, opaque, dishonest and unaccountable practices to corrupt all branches of Government and the elections of our representatives. We have been investigating the unethical and criminal conduct of Donohue and the Chamber for quite some time and now we are asking more insiders to come forward with documents and other hard evidence to add to our request for a criminal prosecution. Our reward is meant to assist both law enforcement authorities and those who make the courageous decision to expose the Chamber’s criminal wrongdoing.

Alabama has been a primary testing ground for Donohue's corrupt tactics. And he was in Birmingham just last Friday to address his acolytes at the Business Council of Alabama.

Maybe the next time Donohue visits our fair state, federal authorities will be prepared to arrest his greedy butt. Can you imagine Tom Donohue being handcuffed and dragged off the dais at an Alabama business function? Sort of brings a smile to your face.

If Kevin Zeese has his way, Donohue might be arrested before he returns to Alabama. Reports Roll Call:

Zeese says he’s confident he’ll get the goods on Donohue.

“There are enough people that are angry at [Tom Donohue], they’ll tell us what’s going on,” Zeese said, noting that more ads are in the works. “We’ve begun to get tips, and we’re investigating them.”

What about the Nixon-era memo that inspired Donohue's ruthless campaign on behalf of American business? It was written in 1971 by Lewis Powell, who later was rewarded with a judgeship by President Richard Nixon. Here is how Larisa Alexandrovna explains it:

The Powell memo, named after Lewis Powell, its author--whom Nixon later rewarded with a judgeship--was written in 1971 to the then-director committee at the Chamber,Eugene B. Sydnor. The document essentially argued for a fascist take-over of politics by big business through dirty tricks, front groups designed to influence domestic policy, media ownership and propaganda, and a whole lot more. Powell was himself on the board of 11 different corporations at the time of its authoring:

Though Powell's memo was not the sole influence, the Chamber and corporate activists took his advice to heart and began building a powerful array of institutions designed to shift public attitudes and beliefs over the course of years and decades. The memo influenced or inspired the creation of the Heritage Foundation, the Manhattan Institute, the Cato Institute, Citizens for a Sound Economy, Accuracy in Academe, and other powerful organizations. Their long-term focus began paying off handsomely in the 1980s, in coordination with the Reagan Administration's "hands-off business" philosophy.

You can read the full Lewis Powell memo here. In it, Powell discusses the "enemies" of business and how they should be attacked. The memo had a profound impact on Tom Donohue. Alexandrovna explains:

The culprits Powell is describing as enemies, radicals, "leftists" are people who tried to reform the way business operates, including taxes, consumer safety, and so forth. So Powell and the Chamber set forth to create the "guerrilla warfare" Powell thinks was needed. I suggest you read the whole memo.

Now, Tom Donohue--who is very close friend of Karl Rove and was a key adviser to President Bush on business issues--which has resulted in the massive corruption of unregulated banks and other institutions that we have to deal with now - is a big fan of the Powell memo. More than that even, he is a big fan of laundering political contributions through the Chamber and pouring them into state judicial elections-- against the law in some of these states, including Mississippi.

Before Donohue and Rove combined for a campaign to take over state courts in Mississippi, they did it in Alabama.

Is it a coincidence that the two most prominent political prosecutions of the George W. Bush era--those involving Don Siegelman and Paul Minor--took place in Alabama and Mississippi, respectively? Not at all. Political prosecutions of prominent Democrats are a natural by-product of Donohue's campaign to subvert our justice system. And it all grew out of the Lewis Powell memo.

Does Velvet Revolution have the right man in the crosshairs? Oh, yes. Regular Americans should be pulling for VR to nail him.

Why Is Obama Troubled by Corruption in Afghanistan, but not in U.S.?

We enthusiastically cast our ballots for Barack Obama in November 2008 partly because, after eight years of George W. Bush, we couldn't wait to have a smart guy in the White House again.

Almost one year into the Obama presidency, we still think he's a smart guy. And that's why it pains us when he takes a position that is intellectually inconsistent, if not dishonest.

Obama's weakest position, in our view, has been his determination to "look forward, not backward" regarding the apparent crimes of the Bush administration. That stance has never made sense, and it makes even less sense now that Obama has announced plans to send 30,000 more U.S. troops into Afghanistan.

At the heart of the Obama plan is a push to root out corruption in Afghanistan. And that's ironic because Obama has shown no interest in rooting out corruption here at home.

Why the surge in Afghanistan? Obama hopes to stabilize the country and turn it over to the government of President Hamid Karzai. Unfortunately, the Karzai government is flagrantly corrupt, marked by cronyism and electoral fraud.

Sounds a lot like the Bush administration, doesn't it? But Obama wants Americans to forget all the pain that was inflicted upon our democracy over the past eight years.

Obama is a smart guy, so he should be able to see the irony in headlines like this: "White House Tells Karzai to Fight Corruption or be Left Behind." Consider this report out of France last week:

The White House on Wednesday warned Afghan President Hamid Karzai to fight corruption or see Washington bypass his cabinet and seek out lower level officials to provide essential services to Afghans.

The warning--coming a day after Obama said the US government would no longer give Afghanistan a "blank check" for US aid--turned up the pressure on Karzai to end the corruption seen as fueling the Taliban insurgency.

Here's a key statement from Obama's speech last week at West Point:

"We'll support Afghan ministries, governors, and local leaders that combat corruption and deliver for the people. We expect those who are ineffective or corrupt to be held accountable."

Accountability for corruption? That's exactly what many progressives want to see regarding the Bush administration. But Obama, so far, has turned a deaf ear.

How concerned is the White House about corruption in Afghanistan? Consider this report from The New York Times:

In addition, some American officials and their European counterparts would like at least a few arrests of what one administration official called “the more blatantly corrupt” people in the Afghan government.

The names of some high-profile Afghans have been floated for possible arrest, including Karzai's brother who is suspected of being a major player in the country's illegal opium trade. Writes the Times:

“A couple of high-profile heads on a platter would be nice,” said one European diplomat involved in Afghanistan.

High-profile heads on a platter? What about the ones who are close at hand? Former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman, perhaps the most prominent victim of a political prosecution during the Bush era, has pointed to a "high-profile head"--a guy who goes by the name of Karl Rove. But the Obama administration seems to have no platters for such high-profile heads here at home.

The surge in Afghanistan cannot work, Obama seems to be saying, if the people do not have a government they can trust. But the president apparently does not realize that, after eight years under George W. Bush, many Americans see no reason to trust their government. And that could doom Obama's efforts at change.

Which brings us back to our essential question: Why is corruption a problem when it occurs in Afghanistan, but not when it happens in the United States?

How Obama answers that question might largely determine the success or failure of his presidency.

What Are Your Cats Doing When You Are Away?

Most cat owners probably think their "pooties" spend a lot of time sleeping when their "hoomins" aren't at home.

That's what we figured about Baxter and Chloe, our brother/sister Tonkinese duo. But a recent study shows that we were wrong about that. Cat "parents" might be surprised to find how active their kitty kats are when "mom and dad" are away.

Jill Villarreal, an animal behavior scientist, attached collar cameras to 50 house cats, taking a photo every 15 minutes. What did she discover? Only six percent of the cats' time was spent napping. Their favorite activities were looking out the window (22 percent), interacting with other family pets (12 percent), and climbing on chairs, kitty condos, or other objects (8 percent).

And get this: Cats, like people, are heavily into electronics. The study cats spent 6 percent of their time looking at televisions, computers, DVDs, or other forms of media. A few other favorites:

* Hiding under tables, 6 percent;

* Playing with toys, 5 percent;

* Eating or looking at food, 4 percent.

I was curious about all of this, so I decided to run it by our kitty kats. Chloe is like our "perfect child." She is good natured, almost never makes a sound, and shows little interest in getting into things. She spends most of her time looking gorgeous, chilling, and thinking about her next meal. Baxter's a different story; he's our "Dennis the Menace." He's always "talking" and looking for opportunities to get into mischief. He also makes no attempt to hide the results of his misadventures, so I thought I would go to him.

"Hey, Baxter," I said, "have you heard of this story about cameras that catch what cats do when their parents are away?"

"Oh, yeah," he said. "I read it on your computer the other day while you were gone."

"You use the computer while we're gone?"

"Sure. By the way, you're due for an upgrade. And did you know there are some fascinating kitty porn Web sites out there?"

"I didn't know that."

"They'll probably be showing up on your next bill."

"Thanks for the heads up. What else do you do when we're gone?"

"I check out your music. I've never seen so many '60s and '70s albums in one place. You're living in the past, dude."

"Can you actually put the albums on the turntable and listen?"

"No. It would help if you realized it's the 21st century. Have you ever heard of a CD player or an iPod?"

"Which albums do you find most interesting?"

"This band The Byrds . . . I find them intriguing. In fact, I can't take my eyes off their album cover."

"I bet."

"And this guy Cat Stevens. He must be cool."

"Any albums you don't like?"

"Oh, yeah. What's with all this Three Dog Night stuff? That looks lame. I threw all of those out. Hope you don't mind."

"You threw away my Three Dog Night?"

"Heck, yeah. That song about Jeremiah, the bull frog? You ought to thank me that's not around any more."

"Hey, you think I'm square, have you checked out your mother's records? She's got the complete Village People collection."

"I know, I saw it. What a hoot! You guys are hopelessly unhip."

"Anything else you do when we're gone?"

"Oh, yeah, Chloe and I like to turn on the TV and watch old game shows on cable."

"Cats like old game shows? Who knew?"

"Our favorite is To Tell the Truth. What a classic!"

"Why do you like that so much?"

"We love Kitty Carlisle. She is one smart lady. They can never fool her."

"Of course."

Time Magazine Ignores a Key Story in "The Decade From Hell"

The cover story for the current issue of Time magazine (dated December 7, 2009) tells us that we are experiencing probably the worst decade in modern American history.

Time recites a litany of dreadful events that have marked the years 2000-2010, but it goes relatively easy on the guy who occupied the White House for most of that period.

Time even includes an online photo gallery titled "The 10 Worst Things About the Worst Decade Ever." But it fails to mention what might be the most profound debacle of the 2000s: The criminalization of the U.S. justice system. Thanks to the political prosecutions of Don Siegelman (Alabama) and Paul Minor (Mississippi), those of us who live in the Deep South are acutely aware of how the Department of Justice has been used as a political weapon.

What has made the 2000s "The Decade From Hell"? Here's how Time puts it:

Bookended by 9/11 at the start and a financial wipeout at the end, the first 10 years of this century will very likely go down as the most dispiriting and disillusioning decade Americans have lived through in the post–World War II era.

For the most part, we can't blame the miserable decade on wars. Writes Time's Andy Serwer:

Calling the 2000s "the worst" may seem an overwrought label in a decade in which we fought no major wars, in historical terms. It is a sadly appropriate term for the families of the thousands of 9/11 victims and soldiers and others killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. But the lack of a large-scale armed conflict makes these past 10 years stand out that much more. This decade was as awful as any peacetime decade in the nation's entire history.

So why did Time ignore justice issues when examining the 2000s? Editors at Time probably would argue that wrongdoing in the Justice Department has not been proven--and that the perpetrators have not been fully identified. They probably would say that the story is still evolving--and they would have a point.

We would argue that a number of stories on their list--the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the market meltdown, the implosion of the automobile industry--are still evolving. The problem with the justice story, we suspect, is that it is spread out and not easy to grasp in a single view. Plus, much of the skulduggery surely took place behind closed doors, and neither journalists nor oversight groups have unearthed much of it.

But the evidence of gross wrongdoing is there--in the firings of U.S. attorneys, in the transcripts from the Siegelman and Minor trials--and Time should have addressed it.

Most of the events that Time examines, both in print and online, can be placed in three categories:

* International disasters--Afghanistan and Iraq wars; attacks of 9/11

* Natural disasters--Hurricane Katrina; Asian tsunami

* Financial disasters--market meltdown; Bernie Madoff; auto industry

The closest Time comes to political corruption is a brief mention of the Jack Abramoff episode.

Is it a coincidence that all of these events took place while George W. Bush and his band of criminals were in power? To read Time, you would think it was. But for pretty much every disaster that is mentioned, the Bush administration either caused it to happen or failed to manage it properly after it happened.

What makes the justice story so important? It goes to an abuse of our government's basic machinery--and it happened at home, right under our noses. Yes, there was government incompetence both before and after Katrina. And yes, the 9/11 attacks were a colossal failure with international repercussions.

But the criminalization of our justice system is a purely domestic story. And evidence suggests that it goes beyond mere incompetence to truly evil intent. In a scene right out of Josef Stalin's Soviet Union, the Bush administration used our courts to imprison political opponents.

Our guess is that the Bush administration engaged in criminal acts on a number of fronts. But the justice story--where innocent people where prosecuted and imprisoned for purely political reasons--might be the most grotesque criminal enterprise of all.

It goes right to the heart of the ugly Bush years. And that's probably why Time wanted no part of it.

A "Deep Throat" Emerges in the Mike Connell Plane Crash

An anonymous informant has provided information indicating that an airplane piloted by Republican computer expert Mike Connell was sabotaged before it crashed on December 19, 2008, near Akron, Ohio.

One of Connell's sisters says she believes the family will file a wrongful-death lawsuit against Republican strategist Karl Rove if foul play ever is proven in the plane crash.

Those are two of the major revelations in a stunning recent investigative piece at BradBlog, by award-winning television producer and writer Rebecca Abrahams.

Connell, the founder of New Media Communications in Richfield, Ohio, was considered a skilled and experienced pilot. He developed campaign Web sites for a number of Republican clients, including George W. Bush and John McCain.

Connell had been forced to give a deposition in an election-fraud lawsuit on November 3, 2008, the day before the general election. Roughly six weeks later, his plane crashed next to a vacant house in Lake Township, Ohio, as Connell was returning from a business trip to Washington, D.C. The cause of the crash is unknown, and it remains under investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board.

Why was Mike Connell a central figure in election-fraud issues? And why have questions been raised about the nature of the plane crash that killed him? Abrahams summarizes:

Although mainly un-reported, there's a great deal of controversy surrounding Connell's death--largely in part because he was the architect of many Republican websites including GeorgeWBush.com and GWB43.com, the site Karl Rove used for 95% of his email correspondence. Connell was also considered a key witness in the election fraud lawsuit King Lincoln Bronzeville Neighborhood Association v. Blackwell. The suit implicates Former Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth J. Blackwell, Karl Rove and others of 2004 election night vote rigging.

Attorneys in the case believe that Connell, who had not been accused of any wrongdoing, had firsthand knowledge about the missing White House emails and Rove's alleged wrongdoing with respect to the 2004 Presidential election.

Connell's sister, Shannon, says she believes her brother's work related to politics led to his death. Reports Abrahams:

Although her brother never spoke of his work, Shannon believes that Mike's ties to the Bush Administration and the GOP are somehow related to his death.

"It just seems way too convenient, the timing since he had been deposed. He didn't get to testify. But I don't think he would've perjured himself. When it comes down to it, he was basically an honest person. If push came to shove and he was under oath testifying, I believe that he would've told the truth. I think that there were other people who believed that as well."

The Connell family has received tangible evidence that suggests foul play in the plane crash. Reports Abrahams:

Recently, the Connell family has been dealt another blow--an anonymous memo penned by someone identifying themselves as "Mark Felt" (the name of the man who was ultimately revealed to be "Deep Throat"), cataloguing an order and mission to remotely intercept and rig the instrument panel of Mike Connell's plane then "sanitize" the area.

Heather confirms receipt of this memo, which was cc'd to six unknown recipients.

What does the memo mean? Abrahams reports that it is being taken seriously:

Those close to the case believe the person behind the memo is a real informant with inside knowledge about Connell's plane crash. There are a number of Intelligence officials looking into it, including the FBI. The FBI field agent in charge of the case, Jack Vickery, did not return my calls. But Cliff Arnebeck, the prosecuting attorney in the case and the one who deposed Mike Connell last November, issued the following statement:

We received copies of the "deep throat" letter and redacted report of a jackal that "is not supposed to exist." We passed on to the FBI this and other information we have relevant to the matter. Our impression is that the FBI is doing its job of investigating specific allegations regarding the assassination of a vital witness in our federal election fraud case.

The term "jackal" refers to a hired assassin. And Abramhams quotes an expert on the subject:

Former CIA operative John Perkins wrote about such "jackals" in his book, Confessions of an Economic HitMan, and says while he doesn't have any inside knowledge about Connell's death, he would not be surprised if he was murdered.

"It wouldn't surprise me a bit. They've certainly assassinated a lot of people in this country. The Kennedys were assassinated. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated. It's entirely possible that Paul Wellstone was assassinated. We've had a long, long history of assassinations. It's extremely successful in terms of turning politics around and getting people off cases. In a way, Bill Clinton was assassinated but it was a personality assassination. The Connell case is just one more possibility."

Perkins says that the mysterious plane crash long has been a popular tactic with hired assassins:

"It's so easy to cover it up. The evidence is destroyed and everybody knows airplanes are fragile anyway, small airplanes in particular. So it's a very clean type of assassination in terms of ways to do it because the area where the plane crash happens can be quickly cordoned off . . . and the evidence can be cleaned up very quickly and most of it is destroyed anyway. But if there's anything left, it can be disposed of very, very quickly."

The Connell family wants to know the identity of the informant. The family also wants to know more about threats Mike Connell reportedly received in the weeks leading up to his death.

Shannon Connell is quick to say that justice will be difficult to achieve in her brother's death. Reports Abrahams:

Shannon says if there were proof of foul play, she believes her family would file a wrongful death suit against Karl Rove. But she says she's not sure her family will ever know what really happened that day in December.

"I think Mike got caught up in some other people's lives and didn't know how to get out or was trying to get out. You know, I'm real cynical about whether justice will be done. A lot of the government officials probably have gotten away with a lot of things. My position now is what's going to make this different? What's different with my brother's death that's any different than Paul Wellstone's?"

The Man Who Should Be UAB's President

With more than 18,000 employees, the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) is our state's largest employer. With some 56,000 jobs statewide related to the university, UAB is one of Alabama's primary economic engines.

But this critically important institution, thanks to the mismanagement of the University of Alabama Board of Trustees, is working on 17 years of failed presidencies. That streak of incompetence is only growing under UAB's current president, Carol Garrison.

Time magazine, however, recently spotlighted a man who could turn UAB's fortunes around. His name is Freeman Hrabowski, president of the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC). He grew up in Birmingham, and his home state desperately needs him--or someone very much like him--to get UAB back on the path that made it one of the nation's higher-education success stories.

Time featured Hrabowski in an article about the "10 Best College Presidents in America." E. Gordon Gee, president of The Ohio State University, tops the list, and you can check out the full top 10 here.

Creating lists of the top this or that in higher education seems to be a popular--if dubious--pastime for various news magazines. It's almost impossible to determine what such lists really mean--and if they are accurate.

But it seems clear that Hrabowski is a big-time presence in higher education. And he has deep roots in Alabama, where his kind of leadership is sorely needed.

Hrabowski, an African-American, was jailed as a 12-year-old in the fight for civil rights in early '60s Alabama. His record indicates that he hasn't backed down from many challenges since.

Time notes that Hrabowski has been almost too successful at turning UMBC into a powerhouse in engineering and science, which are areas of strength at UAB:

Freeman Hrabowski has a problem. The president of the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC), has been so successful at cultivating his school's reputation for steering African-American students toward science and engineering — fields in which they have been traditionally under-represented — that he fears the university will be forever typed as a hard-discipline powerhouse at the expense of everything else. "I often say to people that yes, over half of our students are in science fields, but the other half are in arts," says Hrabowski. "We're working to build a university that has first-rate research across all disciplines."

Is Hrabowski a well-rounded guy? Does he know how to get things done? Consider this from his biography:

In 2008, he was named one of America’s Best Leaders by U.S. News & World Report, which in 2009 ranked UMBC the #1 “Up and Coming” university in the nation and fourth among all colleges and universities in the nation for commitment to undergraduate teaching. In 2009, Time magazine named him one of America’s 10 Best College Presidents.

He serves as a consultant to the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, the National Academies, and universities and school systems nationally. He also serves on the boards of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, France-Merrick Foundation, Marguerite Casey Foundation (Chair), and The Urban Institute. He also sits on the boards of Constellation Energy Group, McCormick & Company, and the Baltimore Equitable Society. He also served on the board of the Maryland Humanities Council as both a member and Chair.

We highlighted the section about UMBC's commitment to undergraduate teaching because UAB needs a boost in that area. How badly does UAB need the kind of leadership that Hrabowski could provide? Consider its three most recent full-time presidents:

* J. Claude Bennett (1993-1996)--An internal promotion from the UAB Department of Medicine, Bennett resigned after it was discovered that state employees were performing work at his personal residence. Also, Bennett appointed Dr. Ken Roozen as executive vice president and provost, and Roozen managed to alienate huge segments of the campus--before beating a hasty retreat to South Carolina.

* W. Ann Reynolds (1997-2002)--UAB's first female president, Reynolds came from CUNY in New York with a stellar resume and a combustible personality. She was a major source of friction on the campus and exited not long after a whistleblower revealed massive research fraud at UAB. As a parting gift, Reynolds filed a lawsuit against the University of Alabama Board of Trustees, claiming she had been a victim of discrimination.

* Carol Z. Garrison (2002-present)--UAB has been beset by human-resources problems and a variety of research scandals during Garrison's tenure. In her first year on the job, Garrison embarrassed the university by playing a prominent role in a scandal that led to the ouster of University of Tennessee President John Shumaker. (Much more is coming soon at Legal Schnauzer on the Garrison/Shumaker story.) Garrison's unseemly dalliance with Shumaker on multiple occasions involved misappropriation of public funds. She probably should have been fired after only a few months on the job. She probably would have been fired, but the UA board already was expecting a lawsuit from Reynolds and almost certainly did not one to see another one coming from Garrison.

UAB can be viewed as a smaller-scale version of the United States. It's a big, robust institution, and a few bad presidents are not going to ruin it. The US of A, so far, has survived the George W. Bush debacle--and UAB is likely to survive the likes of Bennett, Reynolds, and Garrison.

But there are signs of significant decay at UAB. If you know the institution, and know where to look, you can easily spot them. And like the United States, UAB is not so powerful that it cannot become permanently scarred--and impaired--by an extended period of poor leadership.

Would Freeman Hrabowski consider returning to his hometown to take on the serious challenges facing UAB? On the plus side, he has been president at UMBC since 1992 and might be ready for a new challenge. On the minus side, Hrabowski's deep roots in our state probably give him significant insight into the dysfunctional nature of the University of Alabama Board of Trustees. He might not want any part of working for that board.

Here is the bottom line: UAB is too important to Alabama's future--and its present--to muddle along under incompetent presidents. Alabama citizens, particularly those living in the Birmingham metro area, need to rise up and demand that Carol Garrison be sent packing. And they need to demand that Freeman Hrabowski at least be consulted about the future of Alabama's most important university.

If we can't get Freeman Hrabowski himself, we at least need someone very much like him. And there is no reason that Hrabowski cannot be involved in the process to get UAB back on the right track.

UAB is suffering. And the process to heal a potentially great university needs to start now.

UAB Makes Money Off India, while Cheating Trainees From India

The University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) seems to be on a public-relations offensive to tout its financial and medical connections to India, which has one of the world's fastest-growing economies.

Is this an effort to mask the blatant discrimination medical trainees from India have experienced at UAB? While striking deals with business and political leaders from India, does UAB mention that it has treated international medical graduates (IMGs) from India in a shameful fashion? Does UAB mention that a federal jury recently found that it had discriminated against Dr. Seema Gupta, an IMG from India, because of her Hindu faith?

Somehow, I'm guessing that subject doesn't come up in these high-level international discussions. But it has come up here at Legal Schnauzer. And we will continue to take an in-depth look at rampant discrimination against IMGs--from India, Pakistan, Germany--at UAB's family-medicine residency program in Huntsville.

UAB seems to have no qualms about mistreating its own trainees from India. But when the university has an opportunity to make money off India--or to score PR points with a "feel good" story about a sports hero from India--hey, it's full speed ahead.

What have we learned in recent days? UAB announced that it and Birmingham-based Southern Research Institute have entered into a drug-discovery joint venture with an Indian firm called Jubilant Organosys. Richard Marchase, UAB's vice president for research, says the deal could be extremely lucrative. "If we can get a steady stream of millions of dollars a year, we'd count it as a success."

Ashok Singhal, president of CFS Research Corp. in Huntsville and president of Alabama India Business Partnerships, says he expects to see more such partnerships down the road.

Marchase apparently can't wait. He notes that a blockbuster drug at Emory University had a payoff price of $500 million and hints that the Indian firm could help UAB achieve such a payday. "The upside potential is almost unlimited," Marchase said.

Ah yes, the sweet smell of money. UAB always likes that.

UAB also likes the sweet taste of "feel good" PR connected to India. That came yesterday in the form of a front-page news article about Baljit Singh, a goalie for India's national field-hockey team. Singh, considered one of the top goalies in his sport, recently received treatment at UAB for a possible career-ending eye injury. The story featured a photo of Singh wearing a UAB cap.

How cute.

What's not so cute is UAB's established record of discriminating against its own trainees from India. And the university has done it while exhibiting breath-taking arrogance and hypocrisy. Get a load of this quote from Marchase, the research director who hopes the Jubilant deal will help UAB recruit against other top research universities: "We hope it will be an important recruitment tool and a potential retention tool."

Uh right, like the "retention tool" you used with Dr. Seema Gupta and at least two other IMGs from India in the UAB family-medicine residency program?

Speaking of arrogance, UAB continues to wine and dine prominent Indian leaders while trying its best to sweep the jury verdict in the Seema Gupta case under the proverbial carpet.

A number of UAB folks, including Provost Eli Capilouto, recently attended a reception that was part of a three-day visit in Alabama from Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, former president of India.

Kalam was here to help announce that an Indian software company, Congruent Solutions Inc., plans to establish headquarters in Birmingham. News reports stated that the law firm of Haskell Slaughter Young & Rediker, and the University of Alabama System, helped arrange the trip.

Someone evidently has done a splendid job of pulling the wool over Kalam's eyes. Consider this from The Birmingham News:

Economic ties with Alabama fit in Kalam's plan to help decrease poverty in India by the year 2020.

"The state is very progressive," Kalam said of Alabama. "The people are very happy people and hard-working."

Alabama, and its flagship university system, progressive? Dr. Kalam might want to check with Dr. Seema Gupta about that. He also might want to learn about what a federal jury found regarding UAB's treatment of IMGs from India.

In fact, one wonders if Dr. Kalam is aware of the discrimination that Dr. Gupta and other IMGs from India faced at UAB. Perhaps it's time he finds out.

Fortifying Your Defenses in a Culture of Facebook

You might say we are the "accidental tourist" of the Facebook world. We sort of stumbled into the social-networking site and have continued to dip our toes in the water without really understanding what it's all about.

Facebook has become so pervasive, and it is so filled with quirks and oddities, that it is ripe for parody. The folks at Break Media, producers of the online comedy Man in the Box, have done a splendid send up of Facebook and the curious culture it has created.

Man in the Box could be described as "Dilbert Meets Office Space," and its episode "Facebook Abuse" focuses on the potentially invasive nature of social networking--to great comedic effect. The episode even ponders some of the deep questions posed by Facebook, such as, "What on earth is a poke? And isn't it a little creepy to be 'poked' by someone?"

Mike Polk plays Greg Bizjack, the central character in Man in the Box, who utters some classic lines that capture the wackiness of the Facebook culture.

A pesky female coworker named Judy wants to know why Greg has ignored her request to join a work-based group on Facebook. "We spend nine awful hours a day together here, five days a week," says Greg. "Why would we need a way to communicate outside of that?"

"Why are you even on Facebook if you're going to be a Grinch," Judy says, with a pout.

"I got on Facebook for one reason and one reason only: To keep tabs on all of my ex girlfriends and make sure none of them are living more fulfilling lives than I am."

"Are they?"

"Well, yeah, every one of them--across the board. But that's not the point."

Great stuff. And Greg's "work home" even looks like the cubicle I used to have at UAB. Maybe Man in the Box would like to do an episode about a guy who was cheated out of his job at a government employer because he writes a blog about matters of public concern.

But enough of that. Here is "Facebook Abuse" from Man in the Box:

Siegelman: Justice Department Hasn't Changed Under Obama

How has the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) changed now that George W. Bush is gone and President Barack Obama is in charge?

It hasn't changed, says former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman. And that's distressing news for progressives who hoped to see accountability for the Bush officials who used the DOJ as a political weapon.

It's particularly distressing for Siegelman, who is perhaps the most high-profile victim of a Bush-era political prosecution. But what other conclusion can Siegelman reach? He recently saw U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan, an Obama appointment, file a brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court not to hear the Siegelman case.

In so many words, Kagan is saying, "The Bush DOJ, probably at Karl Rove's direction, got the Siegelman case right based on the facts and the law." That is an outrage, and Siegelman seemed to have a hard time controlling his anger in a recent interview with TPM Muckraker. Reports TPM:

"There's really been no substantial change in the heart of the Department of Justice from the Bush-Rove Department of Justice," Siegelman tells TPMmuckraker in an interview.

Siegelman, a Democrat, served roughly nine months in prison after his 2006 bribery conviction. He was ordered released pending appeal in March 2008. The case, which has been dogged by allegations of politicization and prosecutorial misconduct -- including links to Karl Rove -- centers on what the government called a pay-to-play scheme in which Siegelman appointed a large donor to a state regulatory board.

Siegelman has asked the Supreme Court to consider the definition of bribery, arguing that he merely engaged in routine political transactions. But, in the Nov. 13 filing that raised Siegelman's hackles, Obama's solicitor general argued that "corrupt intent" had been established in the trial.

Either Kagan is completely out to lunch or loyal Bushies embedded in the DOJ still are running the show. As we reported in a series of posts here at Legal Schnauzer, the trial court and the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals both clearly got it wrong in the Siegelman case. The outcome represents a gross injustice, one the U.S. Supreme Court needs to address. Reports TPM:

While Solicitor General Elena Kagan was appointed by Obama, Siegelman says the DOJ staffers who are giving advice and making decisions on his case are the same people who were at the department under Bush. "The people who have been writing the briefs for the government are the same people who were involved in the prosecution," he says.

The filing by the DOJ is a sign that the Obama Administration intends to stay the course in the case, despite entreaties to review it, including a letter from 75 former state attorneys general.

If the Supreme Court declines to hear his appeal, or rules against him, the consequences could be grave, Siegelman says.

"We've got a bunch of people in this country -- including President Obama and mayors and members of Congress -- who will be in jeopardy because any rogue prosecutor who wants to target a politician or a donor will be able to do it."

How bad is the brief? You can check it out below. But here is perhaps the bigger question: Under Rule 15 of the U.S. Supreme Court, a reply brief is not mandatory in a non-capital case such as the Siegelman matter. So why did Kagan file one?

She could have stayed silent on the matter, keeping her distance from the corrupt Bush appointees who preceded her, and let the Supreme Court decide whether to issue certiorari based on Siegelman's brief alone. Instead, she weighed in when she didn't have to--and sided with the cause of injustice in a case that was butchered from the outset.

Here is the reply brief that Kagan filed, arguing that the U.S. Supreme Court should let the Siegelman judgment stand. It really makes you wonder what is going on in the Obama Justice Department. And it makes you wonder if anybody in the administration gives a damn that innocent people are rotting in federal prisons, all because they were on the wrong side of the political fence during George W. Bush's eight long years in office.

Siegelman Case--Elena Kagan Reply Brief

Losing Football Coach Goes Out a Winner

Al Groh lost his job as head football coach at the University of Virginia over the weekend. But he won fans here at Legal Schnauzer.

During a press conference after a season-ending 42-13 loss to Virginia Tech on Saturday, Groh recited a poem called "The Guy in the Glass." It's a poem about being able to live with yourself, about striving to do the right things, regardless of outcomes. And it certainly resonates with us, given our efforts to shine light on legal and political corruption in Alabama and beyond.

"The Guy in the Glass" might not be considered great poetry. But for a football coach to recite any poem that doesn't begin with "Here I sit all broken hearted . . . " well, that's pretty impressive. And it was Groh's classy answer to critics who wanted him gone, even though he was the second winningest football coach in school history.

I interviewed Al Groh one time in the 1980s, when I worked as a sportswriter for the Birmingham Post-Herald and his Wake Forest University team played at Auburn University. I was impressed with him then; I'm even more impressed with him now.

"The Guy in the Glass" was written in 1934 by Dale Wimbrow. The author often is cited as "Anonymous," and the title often is incorrectly stated as "The Man in the Glass" or "The Man in the Mirror." Wimbrow's children have established a Web site to shine light on the poem and honor their father's memory.

Why does the poem hit home with us? Two reasons, I think.

Looking within, I did a lot of checking with "the guy in the glass" in the weeks leading up to the decision to start this blog. My wife and I had witnessed blatant corruption in Alabama state courts, and we strongly suspected that we were not the only victims of such criminal activity.

Not long after starting the blog, I began to research the Don Siegelman case in Alabama and the Paul Minor case in Mississippi. I quickly realized that, indeed, we were not alone as victims of a broken justice system. And the corruption went way beyond Alabama state courts, deep into our federal-court system and probably to the George W. Bush White House.

I knew we might pay a price for daring to start a blog and tell the truth about crooked judges, lawyers, and politicians. But we ultimately decided--and it was very much a joint decision by Mrs. Schnauzer and me--that we could not live with the guy and gal in the glass if we sat back and did nothing.

Have we paid a price? Oh yes, a steep one. We both have been cheated out of our jobs. My unlawful termination at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) undoubtedly was connected to my blog. My wife's unlawful termination, at Infinity Property and Casualty Corporation, probably was driven mainly by a lawsuit we've filed against unethical debt collectors. But I've written about that issue, too, so the blog likely played some role in her work situation.

Looking externally, I've often wondered, "How do corrupt judges, lawyers, and politicians live with themselves? How do the people responsible for putting innocent people in prison live with themselves? How do the people who cheated my wife and me out of our jobs live with themselves?"

To put it in Wimbrow's words, what do these people see when they look at "The Guy (or Gal) in the Glass"? They should see a pretty ugly image. But here is perhaps the bigger question: Does a person without a conscience even bother to look in the glass?

Here is the full version of "The Guy in the Glass." Thanks to Al Groh for bringing it to our attention. And props to Groh for essentially telling his critics at the University of Virginia, in a subtle way: "Up yours."

The Guy in the Glass

by Dale Wimbrow, (c) 1934

When you get what you want in your struggle for pelf,

And the world makes you King for a day,

Then go to the mirror and look at yourself,

And see what that guy has to say.



For it isn't your Father, or Mother, or Wife,

Who judgement upon you must pass.

The feller whose verdict counts most in your life

Is the guy staring back from the glass.



He's the feller to please, never mind all the rest,

For he's with you clear up to the end,

And you've passed your most dangerous, difficult test

If the guy in the glass is your friend.



You may be like Jack Horner and "chisel" a plum,

And think you're a wonderful guy,

But the man in the glass says you're only a bum

If you can't look him straight in the eye.



You can fool the whole world down the pathway of years,

And get pats on the back as you pass,

But your final reward will be heartaches and tears

If you've cheated the guy in the glass.