Federal Siegelman Frame-up Created Many Victims: Part I

The federal prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman has hurt many victims in addition to the state's most prominent Democrat, who continues to serve a 78-month prison term on corruption charges based on 1999 events described by independent experts as non-criminal and routine for the nation's elected officials at every level.

Don SiegelmanHis Bush-era political frame-up deserves ongoing scrutiny. But so does the prosecution's devastating effect on co-defendants, whistleblowers, their families, and many ordinary citizens who saw their most effective public policy advocates removed from public life.

As the anniversary approaches Sept. 11 of his return to prison, this two-part series focuses on these topics.

First, today's column summarizes the villains in both major parties who railroaded Siegelman to prison. Their greed, fear and other motives help illustrate a breakdown of law extending into the Oval Office.

Part II illustrates how victims include many others besides Siegelman, his co-defendants and their families. They include civic groups and their aspirations, including litigants in other cases who cannot be assured of justice because obvious rogues remain in power in Alabama and elsewhere in the nation's courts and other branches. This Part II does, however, provide practical solutions for steps an individual can undertake for the reform urgently needed in this case and others.

The first step is to understand the full dimensions of the official wrongdoing in the Siegelman case. That points the way to vulnerable pressure points against the criminals in law enforcement. Appeals to their good nature is like showing Colonel Sanders in his heydey photos of cute chickens in hopes of persuading him to give up the business.

I suggest several individual actions to improve the effectiveness of reform efforts that can be so frustrating given the clout of the power structure over courts, Congress, political parties, universities, and the news media. For most of them, responding to concerned individuals beyond superficialities counts for little. But they must adhere to professional standards and respond to criticism from organized groups. So, my advice is two-fold: find the pressure points and work through organizations.

Let's first explore the Siegelman prosecution as a case history. What seems like a fully-litigated and nearly closed criminal case from long ago is actually a roadmap to pressure points that led to the corruption of many civic institutions. Now, with luck and your attention for a few minutes here, the case could help illustrate pressure points needed for national reform.

The path is not simple.

The Siegelman prosecution has hurt many civic groups and well-meaning individuals. So we must learn from this history. Those Alabama interest groups damaged especially badly include Alabama's financially crippled Democratic party, the state's African-American community, and others who support moderate or progressive social policies. By the end of this long series, readers will understand the story encompasses many national interests. including arguably the new Mideast war for the United States looming in Syria. The reason? Siegelman's federal trial judge as a state prosecutor ran a company that secretly trained Saudi pilots, among other tasks.This helps illustrate the secret defense industry ties that permeate the case and help immunize the true wrongdoers.

Siegelman started making a name for himself by calling for peaceful co-existence in 1964 as a student government leader at Murphy High School in Mobile, which was Alabama's first K-12 school to be integrated. Throughout Siegelman's career, he advocated for racial fairness and better funding for public education. He became Presidential possibility in the mode of fellow Southern moderates Clinton and Gore

Other victims include state and federal taxpayers who paid the vast sums necessary for meritless prosecutions. Siegelman's prosecution cost taxpayers an estimated $100 million. That includes prosecution expenses to pursue two co-defendants who were acquitted and co-defendant businessman Richard Scrushy, who was convicted on corruption charges that were far more bogus even than Siegelman's.

Barack ObamaLongtime Alabama newspaper editor Bob Martin estimated $50 million in additional taxpayer costs for the later prosecution of Alabama gaming entrepreneur Milton McGregor.

Jurors acquitted McGregor and his co-defendants of every corruption charge in two federal trials totaling nearly 130 counts. The defeat was one of the most embarrassing defeats for federal prosecutors nationally in modern times. By official policy and common sense, prosecutors are not supposed to bring complex charges in dubious cases. The transformation of much of the media into sycophant stenographers for prosecution leaks and indictments  has made accountability difficult.

The government crusade against McGregor was rooted in political favoritism to McGregor's rivals in gambling casinos, who lavished donations on well-connected officials who mounted a long-running attack on the legality of electronic bingo entertainment complexes built by McGregor-affiliated companies. The defendants never would have been prosecuted, in my view, if the Justice Department had disciplined its prosecutors for previous gross misconduct, if not crimes, in their Siegelman/Scrushy prosecution.

Wasted taxpayer money was only part of the financial damage from such prosecutions. Also, the prosecutions diverted public intention -- doubtless by intention -- from actual criminals and their schemes to loot taxpayers of vast sums.

1. Whether Canary's continued participation in the prosecution, after she had ostensibly recused herself, necessitates a new trial.
2. Whether Fuller erred by dramatically enhancing my dad's sentence based on unrelated conduct and conduct of which my dad was found not guilty.

The "victims" of the Alabama prosecutions of Siegelman arguably include some of the perpetrators. Republicans such as former White House adviser Karl Rove and Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Fuller of Montgomery took actions that, upon close scrutiny, ruin their reputations forever among decent people.

Federal appellate judge William H. Pryor, Jr. is in much the same position. A political fanatic with a seamy past, he was the state attorney general who initiated the all-out Siegelman probe in 1999. He now sits on the Atlanta-based federal appellate court overseeing the convictions. His appointment to the federal bench in 2004 was one of the most controversial in the past decade but provided only glimpses for the public of Machiavellian intrigues that Alabama insiders describe as involving him.

Former Alabama Gov. Bob Riley, below left, and the state's two current Republican Senators, Dick Shelby and Jeff Sessions, and have not yet reached that level of public infamy, mostly because as elected officials they can distance themselves from court procedures and related efforts handled by their allies.

Also, they collect so much in campaign contributions that they easily win re-election, providing respectability. Shelby reported $17 million in his campaign war chest during his most re-election campaign, in 2010. Defeatist-minded state and national Democratic parties contributed nothing to Shelby's rival, Bill Barnes, according to one of the Democratic primary winner's top aides. Bob riley

But Riley, Shelby, and Sessions are widely disparaged privately in political circles of both parties, locally and nationally, for greed, ruthless conduct, and suspected dishonesty.

In 2010, for example, Republican businessman Luther "Stan" Pate hired an airplane to fly back-and-forth over a Rose Bowl crowd with a banner "Impeach Corrupt Alabama Governor Bob Riley" while the University of Alabama football team played for a national championship. Pate also donated nearly $300,000 for the lawyer of Nick Bailey, a witness in the Siegelman case whom Pate felt was unduly pressured by prosecutors to give false testimony against Siegelman and Scrushy.

In a 2011 interview with me, Pate recalled that he told Bailey's lawyer, George Beck, that he was the most worthless lawyer in the state for letting federal prosecutors abuse Bailey, who was threatened with a long prison term unless he adapted his testimony to match the prosecution's theory. Prosecutors interrogated and coached Bailey up to 70 times before trial, with only a tiny few of those sessions reported to the defense, as required by law. Much of that intimidation occurred in the paramilitary setting of an Air Force base. Also, the witness was a slightly built reputed homosexual who especially vulnerable to sexual blackmail implicit in the threat of a long sentence. These factors are documented in the court record but rarely reported except by a few bloggers.

In mid-2011, President Obama showed his complicity by naming Beck to be Middle District U.S. Attorney in Alabama, thereby helping ensure the bipartisan cover-up of the Siegelman case. Obama had kept a Bush holdover, Leura Canary, in office for nearly two and half years.

Dick Shelby

The extent of federal disgrace should be measured not simply in the cruelty and money waste that office-holders inflicted upon Alabama. The damage includes also the template created in Alabama and Washington for similar legal outrages across the country enforced under federal authority.

The complicity and cowardice of Democratic Attorney General Eric Holder, former Solicitor General Elena Kagan, and President Obama similarly impacts their legacies, as I mentioned to the president's first two White House counsels during recent chance discussions in Washington, DC.

In previous columns, the Justice Integrity Project has documented how Democratic officials ruthlessly enforced institutional loyalty against defendants and whistleblowers in Alabama, partly to appease the state's powerful U.S. senators.

Holder and Kagan, for example, argued against Supreme Court review of the Siegelman frame-up, thereby helping ensure that Sessions, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, would merely oppose Kagan's Supreme Court appointment but not wage jihad against it in the Senate. More than 90 law school deans strongly endorsed the former Harvard dean and Obama colleague at the University of Chicago. As expected, the Senate confirmed Kagan, below left.

While foreseeing that result, our project opposed her confirmation on the basis that her actions opposing high court review of the Siegelman/Scrushy convictions helped illustrate that she was a opportunist who did not deserve a lifetime appointment. Another major factor in the project's opposition to Kagan was her decision in tandem with the administration to curry favor with the law enforcement community by arguing to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2009 that United States citizens lack a Constitutional right not to be framed. The case involved two black men from Iowa who served 26 years for a crime they did not commit. Prosecutors and investigators framed the suspects to solve a murder before election day -- a real-life reprise of The Front Page, a play written in the 1920s.

Elena Kagan In February 2009, Shelby asserted his muscle by placing a hold for nearly a month on every federal appointment in the new Obama administration. Shelby wanted a $34 billion Air Force contract for his allies, who included Alabama business interests and other constituents, Republican politicians, and European manufacturers, bankers, and political leaders at the Airbus, Rothschild, and Putin-Cameron level, respectively. Ultimately, Boeing received the contract to build a next generation of tanker airplanes. But the power play illustrates why few at the Justice Department or anywhere else dare differ when the two Alabama senators want something badly. 

The Obama administration's continued prosecution of Siegelman provided an early sign in 2009 that the administration would subordinate justice to politics, and also protect federal authority by fighting whistleblowers, leakers, and reporters both within the justice system and in other realms of government. 

was the headline for film director Oliver Stone's speech Aug. 12 to the Foreign Correspondents Club of Japan, thereby illustrating the kinds of attacks now being incurred by Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and former law professor.

My reflections below come from five years investigating the Siegelman case. I wrote many articles and a new book, Presidential Puppetry, that built on the efforts of other independent investigators of the nation's greatest lingering human rights scandal. The Siegelman prosecution has helped enable many other scandals, including election machine fraud and the growing police state nationally, as documented in the book.

Pam Miles Free DonOne of Siegelman's most stalwart defenders is Alabama Democrat Pam Miles, who founded a near-daily email bulletin that has reported for a decade to hundreds of recipients new commentary on his case and similar news events.

Portrayed at right with a "Free Don" sign, the former executive committee member of the state Democratic Party invited me to speak Aug. 22 about these issues and my book at her home in Madison, near Huntsville. The occasion was a political reception to raise funds for the New Democratic Majority, a spin-off from the financially troubled and political split state party.

The logistics suggested that it would be more practical to research this column for a wider audience and visit Alabama for follow-up discussions to any group. The Justice Integrity Project is non-partisan, and my book message of fighting corruption reaches so far across traditional divisions that I shared its message last week at the annual meeting of America's Survival, an ultra-conservative group.

What is most important now is to suggest practical methods for reform in this column and in future meetings. To get there, however, we must appreciate the full horror of the Siegelman-Scrushy prosecution.

A Dickensian Saga of Great Expectations Dashed

Nearly two centuries ago, Charles Dickens reported on Britain's Parliament before he became a novelist. Dickens thereby overcame the inherent limitations of journalism and portrayed his era vividly.

A Christmas Carol, his iconic tale of ghosts and redemption, began this way: "Marley was dead," Dickens wrote. "There is no doubt about it."

Don Siegelman in prisonIn that spirit, let me begin this case summary with: Siegelman was framed. There is no doubt about it -- except in legal circles that are ignorant at best, or else corrupt. These circles include most of those in Congress and in the nation's highest courts.

I did not use such blunt language when I began this research in 2008. I was a university research fellow probing the 2006 Bush administration purge of nine U.S. attorneys for political reasons. My reports used with standard journalistic hedge-words, such as "alleged" and "according to legal documents." These terms arose from my training as a metro newspaper reporter covering the Justice Department fulltime for five years. Then I became a law clerk to a distinguished federal judge and a practicing attorney for the past two decades in the nation's capital.

At this point, however, we need blunt language to describe shocking abuses.

Hundreds of investigative reports and commentaries have already revealed astonishing irregularities in the Siegelman and Scrushy convictions. Yet all courts rubber-stamp the convictions. Therefore, Siegelman's guilt has now become conventional wisdom for most readers and voters, who are understandably busy with other matters after 14 years of news coverage of corruption allegations against the defendant, shown at left in prison garb from a 2008 CBS 60 Minutes report that at one point seemed destined to help free him before the case was returned to his corrupt trial judge.

Dana SiegelmanA hardy band of supporters include his Siegelman's daughter, Dana, at left, and son, Joseph. In my experience talking wth them, each is thoughtful, civic-minded young professional who is still learning about the deviltry causing so much needless misery in their case and others like it.   

Below is a brief summary of the prosecution followed by a longer summary in the appendix. This column's main focus is on victims in addition to Siegelman, and suggested reform measures.

Siegelman is serving a 78-month-year prison sentence largely for his 1999 reappointment of Alabama businessman Richard Scrushy to a state board. 

Siegelman reappointed the Republican Scrushy to the board following Scrushy's service under three previous Republican governors, to whom Scrushy had made hefty political donations. Also, Siegelman successfully persuaded Scrushy to contribute to the non-profit Alabama Education Foundation, which Siegelman had helped start by guaranteeing a loan to jump-start its advocacy for a state lottery to improve Alabama public schools. 

At trial, prosecutors claimed that this routine reappointment was part of a monumental racketeering and bribery scheme. But they produced only implied and largely concocted evidence that Scrushy made the charitable donation to obtain reappointment to the unpaid board. Scrushy did not testify at his trial because of the mistaken belief that testimony was not necessary -- and his fear he would be impugned for matters irrelevant to the charges. He has told me and others that he did not even want the reappointment and never discussed a donation in exchange for an appointment that Siegelman sought so as to include one of his state's richest businessmen in his circle. Siegelman also was convicted of backdating a check to hide the gift of a motorcycle from a lobbyist who provided such gifts to many other officials.

The jury threw out most charges, including all charges against former Siegelman Chief of Staff Paul Hamrick and Transportation Commissioner Mack Roberts.

"We knew that we were innocent all along and knew it would come out like this," Roberts told Alabama's WSFA-TV after the jury verdict in 2006. Roberts added that his family has used up all of his savings and that, "we'll never recover financially." Hamrick said, "I'm angry at what has been done to my family. He said defense costs included "every asset we could scrape up and borrow." He added, "emotionally with two little girls, it's been unspeakable."

Scrushy, father of nine children, told me in an interview this week that the prosecution was a frame up. While Scrushy was imprisoned, Siegelman's former attorney Doug Jones teamed with Riley's son, Robert Riley, to a lead a class action suit against Scrushy that resulted in a $500 million award against Scrushy and HealthSouth Inc., a company Scrushy had founded. Alabama legal commentator Roger  Shuler has written hundreds of columns about inequities in the Siegelman case, with the most recent this week under the headline, Lawyer Doug Jones Charged Siegelman $300,000, And What Did The Former Governor Get For It? Jones has said he did the best he could under the circumstances.

Scrushy has said he was offered immunity if he would falsely testify against Siegelman, which he refused to do. As a major contributor to Republicans for many years, he said he was astonished that he and his company would be so ruthlessly targeted in the zeal to convict Siegelman. Fox News host Neal Cavuto has published several hard-hitting reports questioning why the government could so ruthlessly railroad a businessman for making a donation to a non-profit and receiving a routine appointment.

Other allegations of government pressure to frame Siegelman with perjured testimony comes from former Jefferson Country Commissioner Gary White and his wife, Judy, both Republicans.

White refused to testify against Siegelman, and was then convicted for what human rights lawyer and law professor Scott Horton called "petty" transgressions.

"Gary and I are certain," Judy White wrote me last week, "that his refusal to give false grand jury testimony against Don Siegelman, as solicited by the prosecution, resulted in the retaliatory, vindictive, and malicious prosecution, conviction, 10-year sentence and extremely abusive imprisonment of Gary." She has written many columns and given interviews to OpEd News reporting abusive Bureau of Prisons procedures. Among them are delay in cancer treatment for her husband, his placement in an Arkansas facility needless distant from Alabama, and repeated cruelty to prison visitors, including children.

McGregor was at least as outspoken in a phone interview with me last week.

"I've never met a more dishonest group in my entire life," he said of federal prosecutors and FBI agents who prosecuted him under the umbrella of the DOJ's Public Integrity Section, based in Washington but populated by holdovers from the prosecution of Siegalman and former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, the late Republican who was framed when prosecutors withheld evidence that could have cleared him in his 2008 corruption trial.

Both political parties have blocked expected avenues for relief of litigants with proof of corruption in the courts.

Our Justice Integrity Project has repeatedly reported that Justice Department internal investigative procedurs are highly political, and highly inclined to ignore or whitewash complaints. This includes the major Obama administration investigation of the U.S. attorney firing scandal. The investigation was run by a lawyer who herself had been chastized by a federal appeals court for suppressing evidence. She focused largely on one dismissal of New Mexico's U.S. attorney. She called no witnesses of the Siegelman prosecution or other abuses around the nation aside from New Mexico, and recommended no sanctions for the New Mexico abuses.

Similarly, House questions of Rove in July 2009 were restricted by a deal he cut with the White House to limit questions. The questioning itself, led by California Congressman Adam Schiff, was a whitewash that failed to box Rove in with focused focused questions.

Tamarah GrimesAlso in mid-2009, the incoming Obama administration fired Justice Department paralegal Tamarah Grimes, left, who had complained about serious unfairness and taxpayer waste during the department's long-running probe of Siegelman. A Republican in private life, she had been the senior DOJ paralegal on the prosecution team. Authorities threatened her with criminal prosecution following her complaints and closed ranks around the Bush administration prosecutors Grimes complained about. Like many whistleblowers in the case, she sought the opportunity to testify under oath in a congressional hearing but neither party shows any interest in probing such matters.

In general, Congress, bar associations, universities, and the news media have shown only mild interest in the kinds of mind-boggling abuses noted in this column and supported in many instances by sworn or other compelling evidence.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, a Democrat from Detroit, issued hard-hitting reports on injustices when he could attack the Bush administration. But Conyers became an ineffective figurehead after his party assumed office in 2009. Other factors: the Justice Department imprisoned his wife on federal bribery charges, and Democrats lost the House majority in the 2010 elections.

Alabama attorney Dana Jill Simpson played the major role in exposing the Siegelman prosecution in 2007 as a national scandal. A Republican opposition researcher and attorney for federal contractors, she courageously exposed relationships between Rove, prosecutors, the trial judge, and a nationwide pattern of similar political prosecutions, as well as such related crimes as tampering with electronic software to fix elections.

In September 2007, I met her just before she testified under oath to Congressional staff. Also, she outlined for CBS 60 Minutes the inner workings of how the Siegelman prosecution occurred. But Republicans and Democrats alike subjected her to unfair attacks without daring to undertake similar testimony and cross-examination. She learned (as have others) that the mainstream media are reluctant to investigate complex angles involving judges and other high-level officials, especially when multiple figures have ties to powerful intelligence agencies and contractors. 

The well-connected New York lawyer and Harper's columnist Scott Horton was one exception. Following up her tips, he wrote a number of columns that helped keep the scandal and others like it prominent from 2007 to 2009 until the Obama administration's opposition and adverse court rulings undercut public interest.

Roger ShulerAlabama bloggers Roger Shuler and Glynn Wilson helped keep the story prominent locally and nationally. Shuler, working in his spare time, paid a steep price. His daytime employer, the University of Alabama at Birmingham, fired him in reprisal after 19 years on the job. Shuler has filed a lawsuit documenting that he did not use university resources and that he undertook the blog in his spare time. Shuler named his blog, "Legal Schnauzer," after his late pet at right. He has published hundreds of professional-quality columns illuminating irregularities on the Siegelman case alone. His additional columns explore similar problems in the Deep South and around the natio.l   

Below is a list, amplified in an appendix, of Alabama victims in the Siegelman prosecution and the civic institutions they exemplify.

  • Co-defendants Richard Scrushy, Paul Hamrick and Mark Roberts (Business and government)
  • Attorney Dana Jill Simpson and private investigator Mark Bollinger (law)
  • Jefferson County Commissioner Gary White (government)
  • Prosecution witness Nick Bailey (government)
  • Justice Department whistleblower Tamarah Grimes (government)
  • University communications employee Roger Shuler, a blogger in his spare time (higher education and journalism)

The list shows the dimensions of the prosecution although it omits the victimization of the defendants' families and workplaces. Some may also find it overly inclusive for citing prosecution witness as a victim. But my view is that a fair prosecution would not have created such horrible burdens on him as evidenced in depositions released late June 2009. Even criminals should not have to undergo government-sponsored blackmail and other threats.

Another set of victims includes those federally prosecuted in Alabama(and elsewhere) who would have certainly encountered fairer treatment if wrongdoers at the Justice Department and elsewhere in government had been held accountable. This list is potentially very long but a representative sample reasonably includes:

  • Montgomery businessman Milton McGregor, a gambling/entertainment entrepreneur (business)
  • Mobile County Commission Stephen Nodine (government)
  • Many litigants before corrupt federal courts governed by Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Fuller of Montgomery (all segments of society)

The inclusion of a large but unkowable number of litigants before a particularly suspicious and powerful federal judge deserves some additional explanation here. My research from 2008 to 2009 into irregularities in the Siegelman case revealed similar kinds of aberrations in a range of the judge's other criminal and civil cases. I summarized these in a 2009 column for the Huffington Post and elsewhere.

The column illustrated that Fuller, like other federal judges, exercises vast and often unaccountable power over a range of important decisions that included election results, job security, and privacy. No one has ever held him accountable in any fashion despite a host of serious questions raised by his courtroom behavior, the filings in his divorce case, and scores of investigative commentaries. The University of Alabama Law School, in fact, whitewashed his record by inviting him to give a lecture on ethics, with similar honors accorded also by the Alabama Bar Association.

To assess such a complex, long-running, and controversial situation as the Siegelman case study and those like it, we are fortunate to be able to draw upon the insights of Dr. Cyril Wecht, a Pittsburgh forensic medical expert, former coroner and author who brings long experience and blunt talk to such discussions. He holds both law and medical school degree, and is one of the world’s leading forensic pathologist/lawyers. He is the author or co-author of 44 books, and more than 530 professional articles. He has served as president of both the American College of Legal Medicine and the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, and has appeared on many nationally syndicated television programs.

Also, he has been a victim of an unfair political prosecution. As he prepared his reelection campaign in 2006 for the part-time post of Allegheny County coroner, federal prosecutors indicted him on more than 80 felonies. More than half were for using a county fax machine to send 43 personal faxes during his two decades in office, with other offenses similarly trivial. Under the government's theory on the fax machines, government employees even on a local level could face felony charges for using government equipment for a personal matter. Under that thinking, a felony could just as easily occur if an employee used a government computer or phone for a personal call as a fax machine. Wecht needed two trials at a cost of $8.6 million to defend himself from a prosecutor, Laura Buchanan, who had led all of the nation's U.S. attorneys during the Bush Administration. President Obama retained her for nearly a year after his election, demonstrating his lack of interest in reform.

The hidden reasons prosecutors targeted Wecht remain unclear. Yet they surely involved his prominent position as an independent expert able to cast doubt, should his assessment of the facts mandate, on official accounts on deaths and other law enforcement forensic issues. He is a courageous skeptic of the Warren Commission findings on the JFK assassination, for example, and is hosting a conference in October in advance of the 50th anniversary of the assassination.

Imprisonment of medical school professor regarded as a world leader in his profession would warn those of lesser credentials in that field to adhere more carefully to the judgments of law enforcement colleagues on sensitive matters.

His expertise prompted me to request his words for an introduction to Presidential Puppetry, and are reprinted here:

The flagrant, unbridled abuse of governmental power by the DOJ and FBI in attempting to destroy an individual — (financially, professionally, socially, and sometimes physically) for personal and political reasons, and to an extent that is grossly disproportionate to any alleged act of criminality — is the hallmark of a totalitarian government.

Once a victim has been targeted there are no limits to the amount of time, energy, money, and use of personnel that the Feds will employ to pursue and persecute that individual. No charge will be considered too petty or unimportant in their efforts to coerce the victim into pleading guilty to avoid the frightening possibility of a lengthy jail term. “Select the victim / search for the crime” is a deplorable, dangerous prosecutorial tactic that all decent, fair-minded American citizens — liberal Democrats or conservative Republicans — need to let their voices be heard in denouncing, castigating, and rejecting.

What Can You Do?

"The President needs to engage his moral GPS. He needs to get his moral compass locked in -- while there's still a chance to recoup some value for himself and some legacy of his Administration that all of us can be proud of."

Earlier this month, I published, 3 Ways To Reform Our How To Reform Our Out-of-Control Legal System, I had joined New Orleans radio station WWL AM/FM host Garland Robinette to discuss the scandals. I  compiled a three-step action guide. The gist of my recommendation is for you as readers to learn the key facts about specific injustices or trends, and then join organizations willing to fight for the nation's historic liberties and their protections.

We are facing both the beginning of a police state, as illustrated by the nationwide evidence assembled here: New Book, Viral Video Focus on Police, Prosecution, Judicial Abuses. A new book on paramilitary police tactics underscores ongoing assaults on American civil liberties. Join this fight, and stop that abuse. Your freedom and your country depend on it.