U.S. attorney: Richardson, others not exonerated
Gov. Bill Richardson (Photo by Heath Haussamen)
The fact that Gov. Bill Richardson and others won’t face criminal charges following a yearlong investigation into pay-to-play allegations doesn’t mean they should consider themselves exonerated, U.S. Attorney Greg Fouratt wrote in a letter sent to witnesses before the grand jury.
That’s according to the New York Times, which reported Thursday evening on the official letter.
“In the letter, Mr. Fouratt’s office said he would not pursue criminal charges, but it added that ‘pressure from the governor’s office resulted in the corruption of the procurement process’ and said that the letter ‘should not be interpreted as exoneration of any party’s conduct in that matter,’” the Times article states.
The newspaper did not release the letter or quote further from it, and did not elaborate on the allegation that pressure from the governor’s office corrupted the process of selecting a company for a state contract several years ago.
Richardson had a completely different take on the ending of the probe into allegations that CDR Financial Products received the lucrative state investment contract from the New Mexico Finance Authority in exchange for campaign contributions to Richardson and two political action committees he started.
“Governor Richardson has known all along that neither he nor any staff members committed any transgressions during their successful fundraising back in 2004,” Deputy Chief of Staff Gilbert Gallegos said Thursday in a statement released by the governor’s office. “The U.S. Attorney’s thorough and lengthy investigation has apparently determined the same thing — that no indiscretions occurred.”
The Times’ report didn’t say when Fouratt’s letter was sent to witnesses. As of Thursday, Richardson hadn’t been told that no charges would be filed.
“While the U.S. Attorney’s Office has not notified Governor Richardson about the completion of its investigation, it appears that no action will be taken as a result of the year-long inquiry,” Gallegos said in the prepared statement.
What’s clear: The case has been dropped
For weeks, sources have shared with me at times conflicting rumors about whether the case was proceeding toward indictments or being dropped and whether, as it gradually became clear that the statute of limitations was about to expire without action, officials in Albuquerque or Washington were behind the apparent decision to drop the case.
Early Thursday, The Associated Press quoted a source who put the decision to drop the case on officials in Washington.
“It’s over. There’s nothing. It was killed in Washington,” the AP quoted the source as saying.
The GOP was quick to raise questions about that. State GOP Chairman Harvey Yates Jr. asked whether the decision was made “contrary to the advice of experienced, non-political, career prosecutors and the FBI.”
Later Thursday, the Washington Post published a story quoting a source who concurred that the decision was made in Washington and said it was made by “career prosecutors” who “concluded that an indictment was not warranted.”
Then came the Times’ report about Fouratt’s letter. It’s noteworthy that the U.S. attorney’s letter apparently doesn’t back up the Post source who said prosecutors concluded an indictment wasn’t warranted.
In addition, the Times reported that the decision was Fouratt’s but that “top Justice Department officials concurred” with him.
The discrepancy, sources said, is likely indicative of intense behind-the-scenes wrangling between officials in Albuquerque and Washington, and the full details may never be known publicly.
What’s clear is that the case has been dropped. What isn’t entirely clear is why, and who exactly made the decision.
Update, 1:30 a.m.
The Albuquerque Journal has more details on the letter, which the newspaper says was written to defense lawyers in the case. Most noteworthy: The letter states that the decision to drop the case now “shall not preclude the United States or the grand jury from reinstituting such an investigation without notification if … circumstances warrant …”
9 Comments
Leave a Response
You must be logged in to post a comment.
My opinion does not require me to invoke the innocent until proven guilty standard. That’s for a court. As far as I’m concerned and in the matter of my vote/support for him going forward, he’s out.
The mafia leaders always kept enough distance, time and people between them and the acts they commissioned.
Believe me when I say they probably will be remembered by even the Dems who voted for them. I don’t think they will be crazy enough to vote for them again. At least I hope not.
We can only learn by our mistakes. If we make a mistake and repeat it, then we have no one to blame for our failures than ourselves.
I do not believe that justice has been served with Bill Richardson or with any of the people who have been investigated. I firmly believe that a double standard exists for Politicos and the common people. When we have a true ethics reform bill that brings these Politicos to task and gives them hard time as a common person would get, then I think the scales of justice will be balanced again.
Until New Mexico passes real corruption and ethics legislation this kind of thing will continue. It would be easy to write the bill, it would just say that it is illegal and a class A felony for any elected or appointed official to allow or approve any business to be done for the state by any person or business that contributes directly or indirectly (PACs) to any state elected officials. This would solve it, but as we all know no politician would vote for it.
Michael,
You are making the assumption that this is a balanced and fair site. This site is nothing but blog that prints innuendos and passes them off as facts. Richardson lost out on a Cabinet position post because of this investigation and he will probably never have that opportunity again. It probably cost him hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorney fees to defend himself. You really get the impression that they are disappointed that he did not get indicted.
I absolutely agree with Swickard.
Gosh, I hate to remind everyone: IN AMERICA A PERSON IS INNOCENT UNTIL FOUND GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW. Bill Richardson is innocent and no amount of innuendo can change that fact. Please report when and if Richardson is found guilty with the same tone of presumptive guilt now found in the media.
Also, If the media wanted to provide useful data, then: How many State of New Mexico contracts and appointments were made by Bill Richardson and what percentage came after a donation to Bill Richardson? I do not know the answer to this so Big Bill has no taint on him whatsoever at this time.
Finally, it would be nice to know the same answer for several neighboring states: how many contracts and appointments have been made by their governor and what percentage came after a donation to the governor? Then we could compare, if we so desired.
Well, this is sad. When we hoped for justice, it failed us. Bill, you have gotten your way – and you have showed us just how skilled a politician you are.
Dems have a stranglehold on our government. Look at the indictments. If the Dems think that they are innocent by the passing of this case, they need to think again… Rebbecca Vigil-Giron, Jerome Block Jr., Jerome Block Sr., Manny Aragon, Robert Vigil… Remember these people?