Politics | 04/07/2009 6:25 pm

Eric Holder Explains Ted Stevens Case to Katie Couric (Video)

By The Staff at wowOwow.com

Katie Couric landed an enviable interview tonight when she sat down with Attorney General Eric Holder — his first since taking the office eight weeks ago.

In addition to discussing the increased drug violence spilling out of Mexico and Guantanamo Bay, Couric grilled Holder on the case against Ted Stevens, the Republican Alaska senator who faced — and then was cleared of — corruption charges. The prosecutors are accused of intentionally tarnishing Stevens’s name. Some claim that Holder’s office simply took too long, perhaps for political reasons, to look into potential misconduct.

But Holder insisted he and his team worked as fast as possible. Holder also told Couric all prosecutors, including his friend Brenda Morris, will "remain in place" unless he finds reason to believe they acted inappropriately.

Whatever the outcome of the Stevens situation, we’re sure Couric’s journalism friends are jealous of her incredible opportunity. We are!

Here’s the transcript of their Stevens-related conversation:

KATIE COURIC: He suggested that the department has dragged its feet, looking into the misconduct.

ERIC HOLDER: No, I don’t think anybody can say that, given the fact that, in this limited time that I’ve been — attorney general, I looked at the case, decided that mistakes had been made. And made the determination that the case had to be dismissed, looking at the totality of the circumstances. I’ve only been — attorney general for a little over eight weeks now. I don’t think that anybody can say that this department has dragged its feet.

KATIE COURIC: You’re reportedly close to the lead prosecutor, Brenda Morris, who’s under investigation for failing, among other things, to disclose crucial information to defense lawyers in this case. Another target of the investigation is, apparently, William Welch, who’s head of the office, ironically, of public integrity. Will you fire either one of them? Will they stay on during the course of these investigations?

ERIC HOLDER: Unless there’s some basis for me to decide if they have something wrong — they’ll remain in place.

21 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

I don’t think Holder dragged his feet on this one. Look how long it takes to bring a felon to justice. We have become a society of instant gratification and the wheels of the law just don’t turn that fast. But, I do believe, that if someone is hiding something, these same slow wheels will eventually turn in that person’s direction.

By Judy K. on 04/07/2009 7:53 pm

e-mail alert

He drug his feet until a new Senator was elected in Alaska…then it was safe to speak out….anyone can see right through this one….wink wink

By Libra Lady on 04/07/2009 9:15 pm

e-mail alert

Libra: anyone can see right through this one

Of course. Another sham. Then the Dems wonder why we distrust everything they do. The fact that this occured in Alaska just adds to the fraud… anything to make Alaska and its governor look like a corrupt backwater.

The AG’s office destroyed a man’s career and shifted the weight of the Senate to their favor, and no one is going to be held accountable. How sweet it is.

By Marjorie C. on 04/08/2009 6:01 am

e-mail alert

Marjorie, I agree. I hope this comes back to haunt the democrats. It was directly related to Sarah Palin in my opinion and now an innocent man, at the end of his career, has had his reputation destroyed. What’s next?

By deber B on 04/08/2009 8:30 am

e-mail alert

Let’s not forget it was the Bush Department of Justice that prosecuted this case. Also, it most definitely should be thrown out if it was mishandled, but that does not mean Stephens is innocent of corruption. Unfortunately, now we will probably never know the truth.

By DeBúrca obj on 04/07/2009 9:44 pm

e-mail alert

DeBurca

Didn’t the Bush Administration try to fire many of those lawyers? Wasn’t that one of the reasons that Alberto Gonzales got into so much trouble? Our government is so screwed up by partisanship because there is no bipartisanship. (I know I know)

Why wasn’t the press doing their job? Was it another instance of - "Oh, it’s a republican, he must be guilty." With no real mining of the truth? This is sad. If they can do it to repubs they can do it to dems and indies. No thanks.

Criminal probe of lawyers who botched Stevens case

Judge Dismisses Stevens Case, Orders Inquiry : NPR

And the most telling article by law.com (a bit long but explores the ramifications)

Law.com - Series of Errors Doomed Stevens Prosecution

By Frannie Em on 04/08/2009 2:32 am

e-mail alert

TO answer your first question Frannie—yes Bush did, and suceeded and packed the Justice dept with partisan evangelicals.

By f p on 04/08/2009 8:32 am

e-mail alert

Frank

I thought the fired lawyers got their jobs back? Funny, on this one I don’t remember the sequence of events - I think it was one of my sick of politics phases - will have to check it out. Thanks

By Frannie Em on 04/08/2009 1:30 pm

e-mail alert

The documents were held that could have found the testimony of the key witness less than credible…..this was a railroad job and what would have a REpublican staff had to gain from his conviction.

These prosecutors seem to be some that should have been fired with the others.

The descrpition of the document I read said that Stevens insisted he be given a bill to avoid any appearance of impropriety.

Chicago style politics ??? Looks like it to me and that seat was a pretty important one for the balance of power……

By S.J. Morgan on 04/07/2009 11:21 pm

e-mail alert

S J

This is shockingly shameful. He did accept some gifts, but not to any extent that he was being charged. If the justice system is this corrupt then we are in for it.

By Frannie Em on 04/08/2009 2:34 am

e-mail alert

WEll Frannie—we can thank the Bush Administration for corrupting the Justice department and loading it with lawyers—supposed lawyers—from Bob Jones U and other right wing evangelical so-called universities. And for the firing of reputable attorneys by Gonsalez.

By f p on 04/08/2009 5:47 am

e-mail alert

Frank

My outrage isn’t because a repub was the one in trouble, if it can happen to a repub it can happen to a dem. My outrage is because of the corruption. Stevens did accept gifts that now, due to willful corruption of those prosecutors, he will not be prosecuted on. It would seem to me what we should be upset about is the fact that certain prosecutors in the Justice Department believe they are above the law. There has been too much of that going around - Alberto Gonzalez, Eliot Spitzer etc. What are they thinking, are they so elite? It is amazing to me the lack of ethics.

Did you read the link I posted from Law.com which details the problems. It is stunning that they believe they are above the law. Now they will have to go back over other cases and review everything to see if they were conducted ethically. How much will they try to cover up? How much is it going to cost us? These asses are tearing our country apart.

By Frannie Em on 04/08/2009 1:39 pm

e-mail alert

Frank

Also, the judge in his decision stated that the actions by the prosecutors were motivated to destroy Stevens. He was a very influential member of congress and had power, they wanted him out of there to tip the balance. There is more here than meets the eye. How can we play tit for tat on this? Are you saying it was okay for them to do that because republicans have done it. Well then flip back a few years, and you will find dems did it, then flip back a few more years and more repubs. Of Course - it has always been that way, but that doesn’t mean it is right.

Doesn’t this kind of remind you of what Nixon and Haldeman did?

By Frannie Em on 04/08/2009 1:47 pm

e-mail alert

Frank

Here is another article which outlines more problems that need to be dealt with. Both sides of the aisle use the DOJ for their own purposes.

Fed judges are fed up - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com

By Frannie Em on 04/08/2009 2:54 pm

e-mail alert

Prosecutuin attorneys in question..

NICHOLAS MARSH: One of two Public Integrity trial attorneys on the case, Marsh handled much of the courtroom work during the trials of Alaska lawmakers caught up in the scandal. He has been part of numerous other public corruption investigations, including a scheme in Mississippi to defraud a $400 million fen-phen settlement. An FBI whistleblower accused Marsh of intentionally withholding evidence from Stevens and sending a witness back to Alaska during trial to prevent potentially damaging testimony. The prosecution team denies those accusations.

BRENDA MORRIS: A longtime prosecutor with the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, Morris now serves as its principal deputy. She helped supervise the investigation into disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff and has prosecuted corruption cases around the country. She teaches corruption investigations within the Justice Department and is a professor at Georgetown Law School. A graduate of Howard University law school, she served as the lead attorney in the Stevens trial, giving the government’s opening statement and cross-examining Stevens.

http://www.adn.com/news/politics/fbi/stevens/story/751622.html

By S.J. Morgan on 04/07/2009 11:39 pm