VA Governor Robert McDonnell: Guilty

[BayGBM]

Prosecutors Want Maureen McDonnell Sentenced to 18 Months in Prison

According to court documents obtained Friday by News4, prosecutors recommended former Virginia first lady Maureen McDonnell spend at least 18 months in prison.

Her husband, former Va. Governor Bob McDonnell, had been sentenced to two years in prison, but will remain free during his appeals process. Court document say based on the decreased sentence her husband received, a similar decrease was applied in turn to Maureen McDonnell.

"Because Mrs. McDonnell was a full participant in a bribery scheme that sold the Governor’s office in exchange for luxury goods and sweetheart loans, many of which she solicited personally, and because she repeatedly attempted to thwart the investigation through false representations, it would be unjust for her not to serve a period of incarceration for her crimes," documents said.

McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, were found guilty last year of accepting more than $165,000 in gifts, trips and loans from wealthy vitamin executive Jonnie Williams in exchange for promoting his products.

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Prosecutors-Want-Maureen-McDonnell-Sentenced-to-18-Months-in-Prison-291123441.html

[BayGBM]

Ex-Va. first lady gets prison term of a year and a day
By Matt Zapotosky

RICHMOND — Maureen McDonnell was sentenced Friday to a year and a day in federal prison after an emotional, hours-long hearing in which the former first lady of Virginia apologized publicly for the first time since she and her husband were accused of public corruption.

Reading from a prepared statement — her voice breaking — McDonnell acknowledged that she “started a chain of events that would bring embarrassment and pain on us all.” She said she had waited for the day when she could break her silence and asked U.S. District Judge James R. Spencer for mercy.

“Your honor, the cry of my heart is that I am sorry,” she said. “I blame no one but myself.”

Afterward, McDonnell embraced her husband, former Virginia governor Robert F. McDonnell (R), and he kissed her on the cheek. They left the courthouse separately; she made no comments, while he continued to assert their innocence.

“Sometimes juries get it wrong, and I believe with all my heart that the jury got it wrong in this case,” he said. “I look forward to aggressively pursuing this appeal.”

The McDonnells, both 60, were found guilty last year of conspiring to promote businessman Jonnie R. Williams Sr.’s dietary supplement in exchange for $177,000 in loans, vacations and luxury goods. The case marked the first time in history a former Virginia governor or first lady was convicted of a crime.

Robert McDonnell was sentenced last month to two years in prison and has been allowed to remain free on bond while he appeals the case. Spencer allowed Maureen McDonnell, too, to remain free during her appeal.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit is scheduled to hear arguments in Robert McDonnell’s case in May; the outcome almost certainly will affect the former first lady.

The legal process — which drew national attention — has been a painful one for the McDonnell family, but perhaps most acutely for its matriarch. Defense attorneys argued that the McDonnells’ marriage was broken and that the former first lady had developed something of a crush on Williams. They portrayed her as at times deceitful, at other times tyrannical, and often the driver of wrongdoing. Maureen McDonnell became close to Williams before her husband did, and she was the one who solicited some of the case’s most memorable gifts, including a New York City luxury clothing shopping spree and a Rolex watch for the governor.

Staffers who worked in the governor’s mansion said Maureen McDonnell was an intolerable boss; one acknowledged referring to her as a “nut bag.” Robert McDonnell testified that his wife ignored an entreaty to save their marriage. The McDonnells began living apart before the trial and are still doing so. They were indicted days after Robert McDonnell left office in 2013.

“It’s hard for me to imagine anything worse than what I’ve already endured,” Maureen McDonnell said during the sentencing.

At Friday’s hearing, eight witnesses painted an entirely different portrait of the former first lady.

This Maureen McDonnell was a kindhearted, generous person who cared above all about helping her husband succeed and building a strong family. She wanted to use her time as first lady to help others, particularly military families, but she was deeply uncomfortable with the public role and often anxious and overwhelmed.

“She didn’t want to let Bob down. She didn’t want to disappoint him,” said Mary Guy, a longtime friend who said that even as a young woman, McDonnell’s greatest ambition was to be a wife and mother.

“Houses, things, jewelry — they were never important to her,” Guy said. “If you ask me what I think she’s lost, she’s lost her life’s work.”

Rachel McDonnell, the couple’s daughter, said she learned about hard work from her mother, who had three part-time jobs when Rachel was an infant and Robert McDonnell was in law school. She said that her mother had not wanted her to testify but that she insisted on doing so to talk about her mother’s good traits.

Friends and family packed several rows of the federal courthouse in Richmond to show support for the former first lady, but the courtroom was noticeably less full than when the former governor was sentenced last month.

Then, supporters had formed a long line stretching down the seventh-floor hallway well before the hearing began, and even some close friends were relegated to an overflow room. All five of the couple’s children attended their father’s sentencing. Three attended their mother’s. Oldest daughter Jeanine Zubowsky, who gave birth to the couple’s first grandchild just weeks ago, did not attend. Nor did Sean McDonnell, one of their twin sons.

Lisa Kratz Thomas, a close friend who runs a program helping prisoners reenter society, said Maureen McDonnell has been humiliated by the events of the past year and rarely leaves her home. “She’s lost her dignity,” Thomas said.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Jessica D. Aber argued that a prison sentence was required to show a skeptical public that corrupt politicians — and those who assist them — will be dealt with seriously. She said that Maureen McDonnell repeatedly asked Williams for money and gifts over two years.

“This was not a mistake. This was not a one-time lapse in judgment,” she said. “This was a crime of opportunistic greed.”

Before announcing a sentence, Spencer mused at length about the trial and the dual portraits of Maureen McDonnell that he was forced to reconcile. On one hand, he said, McDonnell was a loving mother and wife who made significant accomplishments as first lady. On the other hand, he said, some of the unflattering portrayals of her were not inaccurate.

“It’s difficult to get to the heart of who Mrs. McDonnell truly is,” Spencer said.

Spencer also highlighted the defense’s trial tactic of putting responsibility on the former first lady. That strategy, if successful, might have resulted in acquittals for her and her husband. Maureen McDonnell is not considered a public official, meaning if jurors thought she alone had a relationship with Williams, they probably would not have been able to convict anyone.

Spencer called that defense “curious” and termed it, “Let’s throw mama under the bus.” He also noted some family members’ efforts to pin responsibility on Maureen McDonnell during her husband’s sentencing, calling those sentiments, “Let’s throw mama off the train.”

Maureen McDonnell, though, did not shy from taking blame. She thanked Spencer for showing mercy on her husband — who had similarly asked the judge to show leniency to his wife — and referred, in particular, to a comment the judge made about her letting a “serpent” into the governor’s mansion.

“That is true, and the venom from that snake has poisoned my marriage, has poisoned my family and has poisoned the commonwealth that I love,” Maureen McDonnell said.

Defense attorneys asked that Maureen McDonnell be sentenced to probation and 4,000 hours of community service; prosecutors wanted a sentence of 18 months. The year-and-a-day term allows her to get 54 days knocked off for good behavior.

Randy Singer, Maureen McDonnell’s attorney, said that she, like her husband, would appeal. “We still believe in Maureen’s innocence, and we intend to seek her complete vindication,” he said.

Still, prosecutors, at least, hailed Friday’s outcome as a sort of conclusion to the case.

“Today’s sentencing brings to an end an unfortunate chapter in Virginia state government,” U.S. Attorney Dana Boente said, “and an opportunity to move forward here in the commonwealth.”

[BayGBM]

"hard for me to imagine anything worse than what I’ve already endured"

Really?  Spoken like a princess from the land of entitlement.  I can think of several things off the top of my head.  How about:
• contracting ebola
• losing a child
• losing life, limb, or a child in a totally unnecessary war
• losing your job and home due to protracted unemployment
• losing your home to superstorm Sandy or hurricane Katrina
• I could go on...

This woman is so delusional it is laughable.  She gets a man (who is not her husband) to take her on a $20,000 luxury shopping spree even as that man tried to curry favor from her husband the governor yet she thinks she did nothing wrong.

And what about those kids?  They were old enough to know that what they were doing was wrong.  Receiving gift after gift and shopping trips knowing full well that they were not paying for any of it.... and mommy and daddy were not paying for any of it... but they never stopped to wonder if they would be getting all this largess if their father was not the governor?  They deserve a few months in jail and probation as well.

[BayGBM]

What Maureen McDonnell would have said, if the governor had his own trial
By Matt Zapotosky

Former Virginia first lady Maureen McDonnell was prepared to tell a jury that she assiduously hid her financial dealings with a Richmond area businessman from her husband because she feared Robert F. McDonnell would put a stop to them, but she was only willing to testify if she and the onetime governor were given separate trials, according to court papers.

The scenario, of course, is purely hypothetical. The affidavit, made public Wednesday, was prepared nearly a year ago when the couple were seeking to sever their trials — a request denied by U.S. District Judge James R. Spencer. Maureen McDonnell remained silent until the day she was sentenced.

But if a judge had agreed, Maureen McDonnell would have taken the stand at her husband’s trial and supported virtually every aspect of his defense, according to the affidavit. Sometimes gift by gift and action by action, she would have spoken of how she accepted lavish gifts and loans from Jonnie R. Williams Sr. and invoked her husband’s name to help Williams’s business interests — without the former governor ever knowing about it, according to the affidavit.

The McDonnells ultimately were convicted of public corruption for their dealings with Williams, after jurors concluded they conspired to use the governor’s office to help advance Williams’s dietary supplement company in exchange for $177,000 in loans, gifts and luxury goods. Robert McDonnell was sentenced to two years in prison, and his wife to a year and a day.

The declaration from William Burck, Maureen McDonnell’s defense attorney, is now a part of Robert McDonnell’s appeal. Among other things, the former governor is arguing that Spencer erred when he refused to order separate trials.

Maureen McDonnell has yet to detail the specific grounds on which she intends to appeal, though her attorneys did not object to unsealing the declaration and have indicated that the ruling against separate trials could also be a part of their case.

Even when they shared a defense table, attorneys for both Robert and Maureen McDonnell cast the former first lady as the driver of many dealings with Williams — an oft-talked about strategy that some have criticized as throwing Maureen McDonnell under the bus. But Maureen McDonnell would have been a powerful witness to support the former governor’s account. And the affidavit, signed March 25 last year, shows that she was willing to shoulder much of the blame long before the trial.

To be sure, jurors heard plenty of evidence that linked Robert McDonnell and Williams directly. The former governor enjoyed golf outings on Williams’s tab, and he took steps to help Williams — asking his health secretary to meet with the businessman, for example, and once pulling out a bottle of Anatabloc, Williams’s supplement, during a meeting with state human resource officials and touting its benefits.

But Maureen McDonnell could have buttressed key cogs of the former governor’s defense. She would have testified, for example, that “she and her husband were suffering significant marital communications problems during Mr. McDonnell’s term as Governor,” and that Williams “filled a void that she was feeling in her life, as he gave her both gifts and attention,” according to the affidavit.

Maureen McDonnell would have asserted that she never told Robert McDonnell that Williams funded much of a high-end shopping spree in New York City in April 2011, and she would have said she did not tell Robert McDonnell about a $50,000 loan that Williams gave her until after she had spent the money, according to the affidavit.

Of the Rolex watch, Maureen McDonnell would have said she told her husband it was a gift from “Santa,” and he did not learn it really came from Williams until March 2013 — when the investigation was well in hand, according to the affidavit.

Maureen McDonnell also would have testified that she invoked her husband’s name — without his approval — when e-mailing a member of his staff to check on studies that Williams wanted, according to the affidavit. And she would have testified that she told her staff that her husband wanted gift bags at a National Governors Association event to be stuffed with samples of Williams’s dietary supplement, Anatabloc, even though Robert McDonnell knew nothing about it, according to the affidavit.

If jurors had believed Maureen McDonnell had her own relationship with Williams — and she did not act in concert with her husband — it would have laid a path to acquittal. That is because Maureen McDonnell is not considered a public official, and prosecutors had to demonstrate that she and Robert McDonnell conspired to sell the governor’s office.

According to the affidavit, Maureen McDonnell was unwilling to testify at their joint trial because she feared a tangential obstruction charge that she faced alone, according to the affidavit. The former first lady figured that testifying about deceiving her husband might damage her credibility, and jurors would then convict her of obstruction, according to the affidavit. Jurors ultimately convicted her of that count anyway, but Spencer threw it out after the trial for technical, legal reasons.

The affidavit would not have bound Maureen McDonnell to take the stand if Spencer had separated the trials, and perhaps the notion of her testifying is pure fantasy. Burck indicated that though Maureen McDonnell was willing to testify at her husband’s trial, she would invoke her Fifth Amendment rights at her own.

That would have created an interesting quirk. If the former governor was tried first, prosecutors might have been able to use a transcript of Maureen McDonnell’s testimony at her trial, according to the affidavit. But Burck wrote that the former first lady felt the “negative impact” of that would be less than jurors hearing her in person.

A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Virginia declined to comment for this article. Lawyers for Robert and Maureen McDonnell could not immediately be reached.

[BayGBM]

Appeals judges pepper McDonnell defense with skeptical questions
By Matt Zapotosky

RICHMOND — A panel of three federal appeals court judges expressed skepticism Tuesday about Robert F. McDonnell’s bid to have his public corruption convictions overturned, peppering an attorney for the former Virginia governor with pointed questions and zeroing in on the instructions given to jurors in the case.

Although it is impossible to predict the outcome based on the hearing — and there were signs that the judges found some of McDonnell’s arguments plausible — defense attorney Noel Francisco did not appear to have an easy battle.

The judges focused most of their questions on the instructions jurors received about the law, and at least two of the judges expressed doubts that McDonnell’s team was on the right side of the debate. Judge Diana Gribbon Motz said flatly that some of what defense attorneys had wanted jurors to be told was “erroneous,” and Judge Robert B. King highlighted more than once a particular jury instruction that he thought was favorable to McDonnell.

“I don’t know how it could be any better for you,” King said.

Judge Stephanie D. Thacker seemed more sympathetic to Francisco’s points, but even she reminded him that the appeals hearing was not an opportunity to retry the case. “It sounds like you’re actually putting the facts to a jury,” she said, before advising him to talk specifically about how the jurors were instructed.

McDonnell (R) and his wife, Maureen, were convicted last year of public corruption. Prosecutors alleged that they had agreed to help Richmond businessman Jonnie R. Williams Sr. promote and seek state studies of his company’s dietary supplement in exchange for $177,000 in loans and gifts, including vacations and luxury goods. McDonnell was sentenced to two years in prison; his wife was sentenced to a year and a day.

The McDonnells have been allowed to remain free on bond while their appeals are pending, a sign that the judges think that the appeal raises issues at least worthy of their consideration. It could be several months before the court rules.

At Tuesday’s hearing of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, Robert McDonnell sat in the first row flanked by several of his children. Maureen McDonnell, whose case is proceeding separately, also attended, sitting in a second row that was reserved for family.

Federal prosecutors and Robert McDonnell’s defense team had submitted to the 4th Circuit hundreds of pages of written arguments detailing why the judges should either set aside the jury’s verdict — and possibly let McDonnell walk away a free man — or uphold it and order the former governor to report to prison. Tuesday’s hearing gave them the opportunity to make their arguments in person.

The judges were all nominated to the appeals court by Democratic presidents: Motz and King by President Bill Clinton, and Thacker by President Obama.

King, a former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of West Virginia, notably wrote the appeals court decision affirming all but one of the guilty verdicts against former U.S. representative William J. Jefferson (D-La.), who was also convicted of public corruption. Motz worked previously as a Maryland assistant attorney general and a state Court of Special Appeals associate judge. Thacker was an attorney in the Justice Department’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section.

Before Tuesday, defense attorneys had raised myriad issues that they say merit granting McDonnell a new trial or vacating the charges against McDonnell entirely. Francisco said Tuesday that the most significant of those issues were that the McDonnells neither promised to perform nor performed any “official acts” for Williams in exchange for gifts and loans, and that jurors were incorrectly instructed on the topic.

The former governor’s position on that front has been buttressed by a cadre of amicus briefs from high-profile supporters, including former U.S. and state attorneys general, White House lawyers, prominent business leaders and law professors.

Motz hinted that she could be sympathetic. At one point, she remarked that the “quo” — or what Williams received from McDonnell — was “much thinner” than the “quid” in the case, and she asked Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard D. Cooke whether he felt a strong quid did not require a similarly strong quo. She said that if McDonnell had performed only one of the so-called official acts for Williams, prosecutors might have chosen not to bring the case at all.

Cooke said that the quid — $177,000 in loans, vacations and luxury goods — had “evidentiary force” and that the timing of gifts in relation to official acts showed there was a connection between the two.

On the issue of how jurors were instructed, the judges at times seemed more favorable toward the prosecution’s arguments than the defense’s. Motz said some of the instructions proposed by defense attorneys would have been incorrect, and she noted that jurors were told the legal meaning of “official act.” She wondered, however, whether more instructions should have been provided to restrict what jurors could view as official acts.

King pointed out more than once that defense attorneys were awarded a generous instruction: that if jurors determined that the governor had acted in good faith, he could not be convicted of a crime.

“They gave you the ‘good faith’ instruction, which wrapped it all up,” he said.

The judges also looked into whether jurors were questioned enough about pretrial publicity, especially because they were not asked whether they had “formed an opinion” about the case based on media coverage. They asked both Francisco and Cooke about the jury-selection process, particularly about what questions the trial court judge, James R. Spencer, allowed the parties to ask prospective jurors.

Francisco said after the hearing that he was “very pleased with how the argument came out.” Former Virginia attorney general Andrew P. Miller, who watched the hearing and has joined in briefs supporting McDonnell, said it would be “presumptuous” to try to glean anything from the judges’ questions.

For his part, McDonnell said he has been working at a consulting job in Virginia Beach — where he moved recently — and hanging out with family, especially at graduation ceremonies for his children. As he has throughout the case, he asserted his innocence.

“There’s nothing that has been done here that violated the law,” McDonnell said. “I know that in my heart and in my soul.”

[BayGBM]

McDonnell and wife seen together at Virginia Beach show
By Patrick Wilson

After months of arriving to court separately and saying they were estranged, former Gov. Bob McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, sat with each other at a Saturday comedy show in Virginia Beach, giving some in attendance the impression they are together again.

The former first couple - with appeals of their corruption convictions pending and facing the possibility of prison - sat several rows back from the stage at the Sandler Center for the Performing Arts.

"When I saw them together, I said, 'Hmm, interesting,' " said state Del. Joe Lindsey, D-Norfolk, who sat two rows in front of the McDonnells. "They seemed to be very cordial, and there didn't seem to be detachment at all between them."

Norfolk Circuit Court Clerk George Schaefer, who has known the McDonnells since the early 1990s, said the two were laughing and talking to each other in a way that made it seem they were no longer separated.

"It's nice to see them together," Schaefer said.

Saturday's performance was the one-woman comedy "Sister's Summer School Catechism: God Never Takes a Vacation," a benefit presented by Virginia Musical Theatre and the Catholic Commission for the Arts, according to the theater's Facebook page.

A source close to the McDonnells who asked not to be identified, said it's a mistake to think they're reconciling.

Their twin sons are both moving soon, and the McDonnells have been spending time with their children and family, the source said.

They both planned to be at the Saturday event and decided to sit together with another couple they're friends with to be cordial publicly.

"I wouldn't read anything more into it," the source said.

Blois Olson, a crisis management specialist who has acted as a spokesman for Bob McDonnell during the appeal, said there was no comment from the governor or his attorneys.

During last year's trial, the McDonnells had little interaction and always arrived at court separately. As recently as May 12, when appeal arguments for Bob McDonnell were heard in Richmond, the couple arrived at the courthouse separately and did not sit next to each other.

The McDonnells' separation was first revealed publicly during their six-week trial on public corruption charges, when Bob McDonnell testified they were no longer living together.

He said Maureen McDonnell was living in the couple's Henrico County home and he had been staying with his priest since a week before the trial began in July 2014.

"I just didn't have the emotional ability to go home and revisit things every night with Maureen," he said.

He said their marriage became broken during his term as governor.

By late 2011, "we were not able to talk about anything of any substance," he testified, describing his wife as prone to outbursts of "uncontrollable anger."

Defense attorneys sought to show that the couple were so estranged that they couldn't have conspired to sell the influence of the governor's mansion in exchange for more than $177,000 in gifts and loans from business executive Jonnie Williams Sr., who had wanted state-backed research for a dietary supplement.

The defense claimed the first lady initiated many of the couple's interactions with Williams and that the governor was unaware of them.

Federal prosecutors introduced evidence to the contrary. Toward the end of the trial, lawyers even bickered over a detailed analysis of how many nights the McDonnells spent together. During a period from 2011-13, according to the FBI, they spent 90 percent of nights together.

A federal jury last year convicted each McDonnell of multiple bribery and corruption felonies, and Judge James Spencer sentenced Bob McDonnell to two years in prison and Maureen McDonnell to a year and a day. They were allowed to remain free pending an appellate decision from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Bob McDonnell was an assistant prosecutor and state delegate in Virginia Beach before becoming attorney general and then being elected governor in 2009. Beloved by fellow Republicans and popular as governor, he was considered a potential vice presidential running mate for Mitt Romney in 2012, but the gifts scandal ended that possibility.

McDonnell has said repeatedly that although he made mistakes in accepting gifts and loans, he does not believe he broke the law.

Longtime Virginia political analyst Bob Holsworth said it would not be surprising to him if the McDonnells reconciled, "given what he said about his commitment to family."

Holsworth also noted that Bob McDonnell attended his wife's sentencing hearing.

"The defense strategy of emphasizing their marital problems was ridiculous," he said. "What was more surprising was the cynical nature of the defense strategy... effectively throwing the first lady under the bus as the person who caused it all."

Maureen McDonnell did not testify during the trial.

"A decent interval has passed between what they did at the trial and what's happening now," Holsworth said.

Alan D. Albert, a former state government official who handles federal criminal defense, has known the McDonnells for years and said the broken-marriage defense was "always a trial tactic more than a reality."

The couple appearing together now is "unlikely to really be a significant issue in the appeal" because the appeal is focused on whether federal corruption law is too broad, he said.

But still, "I doubt any lawyer representing them would have advised appearing in public in this manner during the pendency of the appeal, because no good can come of it.

"You invite people to doubt the credibility of the defense you raised at trial."

[BayGBM]

Bob McDonnell loses appeal over public corruption convictions
By Matt Zapotosky

A federal appeals panel court on Thursday unanimously affirmed the public corruption convictions against former Virginia governor Robert F. McDonnell, writing in an 89-page opinion that the onetime Republican rising star "received a fair trial and was duly convicted by a jury of his fellow Virginians."

 The decision, authored by judge Stephanie D. Thacker and joined by judges Robert B. King and Diana Gribbon Motz, thoroughly rejects all of the arguments McDonnell raised about why his convictions should be thrown out — or why he should at least be given a new trial. It also brings to a close an important chapter in the story that emerged more than two years ago when the Washington Post first reported on the governor's strange relationship with a Richmond executive trying to promote his business.

While McDonnell's attorneys have vowed previously to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court — and his wife is pursuing a separate, ongoing appeal — it is now likely he will be sent to federal prison to start serving his two-year sentence.

McDonnell has been vigorously asserting his innocence since the day last year that he and his wife were charged with public corruption, and that effort did not stop when jurors decided in September that the pair corruptly lent the prestige of the governor's office to Richmond businessman Jonnie R. Williams Sr. in exchange for $177,000 in loans, vacations and luxury goods. McDonnell's wide-ranging appeal raised a myriad of issues, but most importantly, he asserted that he neither agreed to nor performed any so-called “official acts,” for Williams in exchange for bribes, and that jurors were instructed wrongly on the topic.

The appeals court panel disagreed, asserting that the government had “exceeded its burden” of proof on the topic of official acts. The opinion cited three particular ways in which McDonnell tried to use his office to help Williams: trying to get researchers to study Williams’s product, Anatabloc; trying to the state tobacco commission to fund studies of an ingredient in his product; and trying to get Anatabloc included in the health insurance plan for state employees.

They also wrote that U.S. District Judge James R. Spencer did not err in how he instructed jurors, and noted that in at least one instance, McDonnell's lawyers seemed to want to use the instructions as a “thinly veiled attempt to argue the defense’s case.”

 McDonnell's appeal had enjoyed broad and high-profile support — former U.S. and state attorneys general, White House lawyers, prominent business leaders and law professors had filed amicus briefs supporting him — but the appeals court had showed signs of skepticism. At a hearing in May, the judges peppered one of his lawyers with questions that seemed critical of his point of view.

In a statement, McDonnell said: “I am greatly disappointed with the Court’s decision today. During my nearly 40 years of public service, I have never violated my oath of office nor disregarded the law. I remain highly confident in the justice system and the grace of our God that full vindication will come in time. I remain very blessed to have the unwavering support of my family and great friends which continues to sustain me.”

His lawyers wrote they would “review the opinion carefully and continue to pursue all legal options.”

“The fight for justice for our client is far from over,” they wrote.

Attorneys for Williams and Maureen McDonnell declined to comment. A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia said officials were working on a statement.

[BayGBM]

McDonnell vows to continue legal fight despite appeals court defeat
By Shawn Maclauchlan

RICHMOND, VA (WWBT) -  Former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell remains confident he will be vindicated in court, despite another legal defeat Friday.

The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed McDonnell's conviction on Friday, saying in an 89-page ruling he "received a fair trial and was duly convicted by a jury of his fellow Virginians. We have no cause to undo what has been done."

McDonnell and his legal team released statements Friday expressing their disappointment and pledging to fight for innocence.

“I am greatly disappointed with the Court’s decision today. During my nearly 40 years of public service, I have never violated my oath of office nor disregarded the law," McDonnell said in a statement. "I remain highly confident in the justice system and the grace of our God that full vindication will come in time. I remain very blessed to have the unwavering support of my family and great friends which continues to sustain me.”

McDonnell still has the options to appeal to the full-court panel or to the U.S. Supreme Court and his legal team is vowing to continue the legal fight.

“We are disappointed with the Court’s decision affirming Governor McDonnell’s convictions," the legal team of Hank Asbill, John Brownlee and Noel Francisco wrote in a statement. "We will review the opinion carefully and continue to pursue all legal options.  The fight for justice for our client is far from over.”

McDonnell was allowed to remain free while his case made its way through the appeals process. The court ruled in January that McDonnell was not a flight risk or danger to the community and the appeal is "not for the purpose of delay and raises a substantive question of law or fact."

McDonnell was sentenced to 24 months in prison for corruption charges stemming from a political scandal involving gifts he and his wife Maureen McDonnell received from then-CEO of Star Scientific Inc., Jonnie R. Williams. McDonnell claims he was unaware of his wife's lavish New York City shopping spree, paid for by Williams, among other gifts the McDonnells received.

Williams resigned from Star Scientific amid the scandal, and later testified against the McDonnells. Cross examination revealed the government granted Williams immunity in July 2013, six months before the McDonnells were indicted.

During the trial, Bob McDonnell testified he and his wife Maureen were no longer living together and said they began living separate lives 20 years ago. He said their marriage began to fail as his political career began to take off.

Maureen McDonnell faces 12 months and one day in prison on her federal corruption charge.

[BayGBM]

Federal appeals court turns down former Va. governor McDonnell, again
By Matt Zapotosky

Former Virginia governor Robert F. McDonnell has but one avenue left — the U.S. Supreme Court — in his bid to overturn his public corruption convictions, and some experts say it is likely that he will have to pursue his challenge behind bars.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit on Tuesday turned down McDonnell’s request to have the entire court, or the three judges who previously rejected his appeal, reconsider the case. The decision was another resounding defeat for the onetime Republican rising star: None of the Richmond-based court’s 15 active judges voted in favor of a rehearing, though seven disqualified themselves and did not participate.

Experts say the decision could put McDonnell, who was allowed to remain free while his appeals were pending, in federal prison within a few months, though he can still fight to stay out. In statements issued late Tuesday, McDonnell and his legal team said they were “disappointed” by the court’s decision, and they vowed to press on to the Supreme Court.

“I look forward to the day when vindication is obtained and my family’s good name is fully restored,” McDonnell said.

McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, were convicted in September of public corruption for essentially lending the prestige of the governor’s office to Richmond businessman Jonnie R. Williams Sr. in exchange for $177,000 in loans, vacations and luxury goods. Jurors found unanimously that the couple helped Williams promote his dietary supplement company by arranging meetings for him with other state officials and allowing him use of the governor’s mansion in exchange for the businessman’s largesse.

The former governor was sentenced to two years in prison, his wife to a year and a day. Their appeals have been built largely around the argument that they neither performed nor promised to perform any “official acts” for Williams in exchange for bribes and that U.S. District Judge James R. Spencer defined the term too broadly for jurors. They asserted — and many legal observers agreed — that the case could have far-reaching implications, criminalizing routine dealings between politicians and wealthy benefactors.

Maureen McDonnell’s appeal is pending, with oral arguments tentatively scheduled for October. A three-judge panel from the 4th Circuit, though, unanimously rejected the former governor’s appeal last month. Some experts said the panel’s opinion and the court’s decision Tuesday not to reconsider the case leave McDonnell little hope of persuading the Supreme Court to intervene. And that likely means McDonnell will have to report to prison sooner rather than later, experts said.

“You never say never, but typically the Supreme Court is looking for a novel issue or split in the Circuit that would warrant considering this case, and the 4th Circuit adopted the view that the law was clear and the facts applied appropriately to the law,” said Jacob Frenkel, a white-collar criminal defense lawyer with the Shulman Rogers firm who is unconnected to the McDonnell case.

A spokesman for the U.S. attorney’s office in the Eastern District of Virginia declined to immediately comment on the decision.

Of the eight judges who voted against rehearing McDonnell’s appeal, six were nominated to their seats on the 4th Circuit by Democratic presidents and two were nominated by Republican presidents. Of those who disqualified themselves, four were nominated by Republican presidents and three by Democratic presidents. The judges did not specify the reasons for declining to weigh in. Experts said their disqualifications were not surprising, given that they might have had political or personal connections to the former governor.

Matt Kaiser, a white-collar criminal defense attorney with the Kaiser, LeGrand & Dillon law firm, said that although the Supreme Court agrees to hear very few cases each year, McDonnell’s had “more legs than most cases would.” He said the opinion of the 4th Circuit panel did seem to potentially criminalize routine political dealings, noting that even Donald Trump’s contention that Hillary Rodham Clinton attended his wedding in exchange for campaign contributions might be considered part of a federal bribery case under a broad interpretation of the decision.

“I think it’s not a terribly unfair reading of the law after the McDonnell 4th Circuit opinion to say really almost any politician violates that statute,” Kaiser said. He said if the Supreme Court justices were interested in the case, they would likely allow McDonnell to remain free while they considered it.

McDonnell almost certainly will try to remain free while the legal battle continues. Experts said he can first ask the 4th Circuit to stay the mandate of its decision — which is scheduled to issue automatically in seven days — and if that fails, turn to the Supreme Court to delay his having to report to prison.

University of Richmond law professor Carl Tobias said both efforts are a long shot to succeed; the 4th Circuit, he said, could turn down McDonnell in just days, the Supreme Court in maybe a month.

A lower court judge would then probably give McDonnell a date by which to report to prison, and federal officials would find a facility appropriate for the former governor. Frenkel said it is “reasonable to expect that he will be required to report to prison in the next 30 to 60 days, regardless of a likely attempt to appeal to the Supreme Court.” The former governor has 90 days to file a petition for a writ of certiorari, asking the nation’s highest court to consider his case.

Where McDonnell would go to prison is unclear. He had previously requested to remain near his home in the Richmond area, possibly at Federal Correctional Institution in Petersburg. Prison officials will consider that recommendation, McDonnell’s particular security concerns and the beds available at various institutions in selecting a spot for him.

[BayGBM]

McDonnell asks to stay out of prison as he takes legal battle to Supreme Court
By Matt Zapotosky

Former Virginia governor Robert F. McDonnell (R) on Thursday asked a federal appeals court to let him stay out of prison while he tries to convince the Supreme Court to throw out his public corruption convictions, arguing that his case still raises “substantial” questions despite his mounting losses throughout the legal process.

In a 23-page filing, McDonnell’s lawyers wrote that he had obtained experienced lawyers to take his case to the Supreme Court, and he asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit to stay the mandate in his case or to “clarify” that he can remain free while his lawyers prepare to take the case up the chain.

An appeals court panel last month rejected McDonnell’s challenge to his convictions — and the entire 4th Circuit declined to take up the matter just days ago — but McDonnell argued he should be allowed to stay out of prison nonetheless.

“After all, he remains neither a flight risk nor a threat to public safety, and the questions presented by his case remain ‘substantial,’ notwithstanding that a panel of this Court has rejected them,” McDonnell's lawyers wrote in the filing. “The Supreme Court should be given the same opportunity, and Gov. McDonnell should not be required to serve the bulk of his 24-month prison sentence before it has that chance.”

McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, were convicted in September of lending the prestige of the governor’s office to Richmond businessman Jonnie R. Williams Sr. in exchange for $177,000 in loans, vacations and luxury goods. He was sentenced to two years in prison, she to a year and a day. Their appeals have proceeded separately, and oral arguments are tentatively scheduled in Maureen McDonnell’s case for October.

Robert McDonnell has three months to file a petition asking the Supreme Court to take up his case, but experts say he could be in prison much sooner — perhaps in two months — if he is unable to convince a judge to let him keep his freedom while that is pending. If the Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit turns him down, though, McDonnell could still ask the Supreme Court to delay his reporting to prison. The appeals court had previously allowed McDonnell to remain free with his case pending.

McDonnell’s filing Thursday argued that it was likely the Supreme Court would take up his case because it raised “important, high-profile issues of constitutional dimension” and involved “political conduct that occurs routinely across the country.” The filing also argued that if McDonnell were to be sent to prison with the matter pending, he would likely have to serve the bulk of his sentence before the Supreme Court made a decision.

“Gov. McDonnell will never be able to recover that lost time,” McDonnell’s lawyers wrote.

McDonnell’s lawyers wrote that federal prosecutors intended to oppose their request, though they had not filed a motion as of Thursday morning.

McDonnell’s challenge to the Supreme Court will likely hinge on the notion that he neither performed nor agreed to perform any so-called “official acts” for Williams, and that U.S. District Judge James R. Spencer defined the term too broadly for jurors. His lawyers pressed that point Thursday and argued the appeals court’s decision conflicted with decisions in other circuits, increasing the likelihood the Supreme Court might take up the case.

They also argued his case would have far reaching consequences for politicians, giving prosecutors “the opportunity and basis to investigate and charge essentially any official they choose,” and that jurors in his case were not questioned thoroughly enough about pre-trial publicity.

The high court hears only about 75 or 80 of the roughly 10,000 petitions it receives each session, according to information on the court’s Web site.

[BayGBM]

Maureen McDonnell to appeals court: You can clear me and not my husband
By Matt Zapotosky

Former Virginia first lady Maureen McDonnell on Wednesday made her first bid to convince a federal appeals court that her public corruption convictions should be thrown out, even though her husband’s were allowed to stand, by stressing her “unique status as a non-public official” as a reason for her innocence.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit had requested the filing from Robert McDonnell’s wife to help its judges decide whether — and how — her case can be differentiated from her husband’s. A three-judge panel last month rejected the former Republican governor’s bid to have his public corruption convictions set aside, and the entire 4th Circuit declined to take up the matter further, leaving the Supreme Court as Robert McDonnell’s last hope.

Although she was tried with her husband, Maureen McDonnell is pursuing her case separately, and oral arguments before the appeals court are scheduled for October 29. Her lawyers argued Wednesday that while her husband’s appeal resolved many of the issues in her case, the federal bribery statute under which they both were convicted was unconstitutionally vague — at least when it came to the former first lady.

As the “high school-educated spouse of a politician,” her lawyers wrote, Maureen McDonnell could not have “knowingly and deliberately” conspired to break the law with her husband because she couldn’t have known his seemingly innocuous actions qualified as the basis for a federal bribery case.

"As the extraordinary number and types of amicus briefs attest, notable public officials with extensive legal training had no idea that those actions would violate federal law,” Maureen McDonnell’s lawyers wrote. “A citizen like Mrs. McDonnell, without any legal training or public office experience, could not possibly have known.”

Prosecutors are expected to respond to the former first lady’s filing next month.

Both McDonnells were convicted in September of lending the prestige of the governor’s office to Richmond businessman Jonnie R. Williams Sr. in exchange for $177,000 in loans, vacations and luxury goods. Robert McDonnell was sentenced to two years in prison, and his wife was sentenced to a year and a day. Both were allowed to remain out of prison while they appealed the case. Robert McDonnell is now asking the appeals court to allow him to keep his freedom as he pursues a challenge with the Supreme Court.

Experts have said it is extremely unlikely that Maureen McDonnell will get her convictions thrown out in light of the outcome in her husband’s case. Even her lawyers conceded that there existed “undeniably substantial overlap” in the couple’s appeals.

Like Robert McDonnell, Maureen McDonnell alleged that her husband neither performed nor promised to perform any “official” acts for Williams. (Maureen McDonnell could perform no such acts because she is not a public official.) And like Robert McDonnell, Maureen McDonnell alleged jurors were instructed wrongly on the topic.

Both McDonnells argued it was improper for them to be tried together, and both said prospective jurors were not questioned thoroughly enough, especially about pre-trial publicity.

In the filing Wednesday, Maureen McDonnell’s lawyers said they stood behind the arguments Robert and Maureen McDonnell had both raised, and said prosecutors hadn’t proven a conspiracy between the two. They asserted that the outcome of the case gave prosecutors too much leeway to charge non-office holders.

“The danger of unbridled prosecutorial discretion is particularly acute in a case like this one where prosecutors, in an unprecedented move, indicted not just the public official but also his spouse,” Maureen McDonnell’s lawyers wrote.

[240 is Back]

Appeals Court: Convicted Ex-Guv Bob McDonnell Is Going To Prison


Source: TPM

Nearly a year after his conviction on federal corruption charges, Virginia ex-Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) appears to be headed for prison.

A federal appeals court on Thursday rejected McDonnell's request to stay out from behind bars while he appeals his convictions to the Supreme Court.

The order states that the court's mandate will take effect in seven days, suggesting that McDonnell could be ordered to report to prison as early as next week. But the former governor's lawyers have suggested that he intends to ask the Supreme Court to grant him release pending that appeal, according to The Washington Post.

###

Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bob-mcdonnell-going-to-jail

[BayGBM]

Finally! 

[240 is Back]

Finally! 

 

I saw the headline and thought "oh, Bay is going to start his week with a smile!"

[BayGBM]

I saw the headline and thought "oh, Bay is going to start his week with a smile!"

Have you ever seen anyone try to weasel out of prison like this?  When former DC Mayor Marion Barry was convicted on drug charges, he hung his head in shame and went off to prison.  No appeals, no denials, no endless legal motions.  You do the crime you do the time.  It is as simple as that!

[240 is Back]

In an alternate universe, Robert McDonnell is running for president right now, battling with Jeb while they both court Trump for his endorsement and donor dollars.

[BayGBM]

What I find amusing and sad is that the disgraced governor is still insisting he did nothing wrong… even as a jury, and an appeals court have (twice) found him responsible for wrongdoing.  I refuse to believe he is a total moron; he must know that getting all those gifts and loans for himself, his wife, his children… staying in Williams’ vacation home and driving his Ferrari (while serving as Governor) was wrong.  So all his denials at this late stage just make him look even more craven.  And, of course, this is all coming from one of the religious types who like to lecture the rest of us on how to live our lives.

And to think it all started with them belittling the help: a former chef in the governor's mansion who turned the tables on them and blew the whole case wide open.  I should find that guy and buy him a drink! 

[BayGBM]

 

Thanks To Chief Justice Roberts, Bob McDonnell To Stay Out Of Prison ... For Now
The order is only temporary, and it could change once the court hears from federal prosecutors.
by Cristian Farias

In a short order issued Monday, Chief Justice John Roberts spared former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell from prison while he appeals his case to the Supreme Court.

The request from McDonnell's lawyers arrived at the Supreme Court on Friday in the form of a stay application -- a procedural request that, if granted, can put on hold a lower-court ruling while the case proceeds to a full-on appeal.

Roberts' order did not express an opinion on the merits of McDonnell's appeal.

In addition to granting the ex-governor's request, Roberts' order directed the federal prosecutors to file a response to it by Wednesday, after which the court could either issue a new order extending the stay or lift it altogether. If the court lifts the stay, McDonnell would have to report to prison.

Justices handle emergency requests such as McDonnell's by geographical location. Roberts is assigned to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, which covers Virginia. Last week, that court denied McDonnell's bid to keep himself out of prison while he took his case to the Supreme Court.

The 4th Circuit upheld McDonnell's multiple convictions for corruption and other charges in July.

[Straw Man]

What I find amusing and sad is that the disgraced governor is still insisting he did nothing wrong… even as a jury, and an appeals court have (twice) found him responsible for wrongdoing. I refuse to believe he is a total moron; he must know that getting all those gifts and loans for himself, his wife, his children… staying in Williams’ vacation home and driving his Ferrari (while serving as Governor) was wrong.  So all his denials at this late stage just make him look even more craven.  And, of course, this is all coming from one of the religious types who like to lecture the rest of us on how to live our lives.

And to think it all started with them belittling the help: a former chef in the governor's mansion who turned the tables on them and blew the whole case wide open.  I should find that guy and buy him a drink!  

there is a certain kind of christian who truly believes that our laws don't apply to them and that they are literally exempt.

I'm wondering if he suffers from this kind of delusion as well

[240 is Back]

US Supreme Court: Ex-Virginia gov to remain free for now


Source: AP

By LARRY O'DELL

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — Former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell will not have to go to prison while the U.S. Supreme Court considers whether to consider his appeal of his public corruption convictions, the justices ruled Monday.

The court issued a brief order overturning a lower court's decision on McDonnell's incarceration.

McDonnell made a last-ditch plea to the high court to stay out of prison shortly after the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond refused to grant the same request.

The Republican former governor was facing the possibility of having to report to prison within the next several weeks to begin his two-year sentence, handed down in January for doing favors for a wealthy businessman in exchange for more than $165,000 in gifts and loans.

FULL story at link.

Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/4ae61c50539e4bd98283ba32d276b51a/us-supreme-court-ex-virginia-gov-remain-free-now

[BayGBM]

Prosecutors call for ‘prompt resolution’ of Maureen McDonnell case
By Matt Zapotosky

Federal prosecutors on Tuesday pushed back against former Virginia first lady Maureen McDonnell’s request to put her appeal on hold, arguing the public has “significant interest in the prompt resolution” of the case.

In just a four-page filing, prosecutors urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit to reject Maureen McDonnell’s call to put her case in abeyance until the Supreme Court can weigh in on her husband’s. They argued both cases had already been briefed extensively, and the appeals court should not put off addressing the issues she raised separate from her husband.

Both Maureen McDonnell and her husband, former Virginia governor Robert F. McDonnell, were convicted last year of lending the prestige of the governor’s office to Richmond businessman Jonnie R. Williams Sr. in exchange for $177,000 in loans, vacations and luxury goods. He was sentenced to two years in prison; she to a year and a day. Though they were tried together, they appealed separately, with the former governor’s case proceeding on a slightly faster track than that of his wife.

Robert McDonnell’s lawyers are currently preparing a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to take up his case, having already been rebuffed at each lower level. He has been allowed to remain out on bond during that process.

Maureen McDonnell, by contrast, is still presenting her case to the federal appeals court, though its focus seems to have been narrowed to issues she is raising separately from her Robert McDonnell. Maureen McDonnell has argued that while the appeals court rejected Robert McDonnell’s appeal, they could still exonerate her, citing as a reason her unique status as a non-public official.

Maureen McDonnell’s attorneys are scheduled to deliver oral arguments to the appeals court on Oct. 29, though if her case is put on hold, those arguments would likely be put off for months. Her husband is not required to file his petition with the Supreme Court until Nov. 9 and prosecutors have many weeks after that to respond.

[BayGBM]

Bob McDonnell’s high-profile supporters urge Supreme Court to take case
by Matt Zapotosky

A bevy of high-profile supporters are urging the U.S. Supreme Court to throw out the public corruption conviction against former Virginia governor Robert F. McDonnell (R), McDonnell’s team announced Monday.

Eleven separate groups filed amicus briefs supporting McDonnell’s bid to have the high court review his case, among them 66 former state attorneys general, 31 governors and a collection of former high-ranking federal officials, including a retired judge, McDonnell’s spokesman announced. The filers hailed from both parties: Democratic state Sens. David W. Marsden (Fairfax) and Charles J. Colgan (Prince William) and Sen.-elect Scott A. Surovell (Fairfax), for example, joined, as did President Obama’s former White House counsel Greg Craig, the spokesman said.

The former governor had a similar collection of prominent supporters during his appeal, which was ultimately rejected.

McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, were convicted last year of lending the prestige of the governor’s office to Richmond businessman Jonnie R. Williams Sr. in exchange for $177,000 in loans, vacations and luxury goods. Specifically, prosecutors alleged — and jurors agreed — that McDonnell used his office to help Williams try to advance his dietary supplement business.

McDonnell is now trying to persuade the Supreme Court to take up his case, arguing that he did not use or promise to use the power of his office to benefit Williams, and that his conviction, if allowed to stand, would criminalize routine political dealings in the United States. He filed his formal request asking the high court to consider his case last month, and prosecutors have until Dec. 8 to respond.

McDonnell was sentenced to two years in prison and his wife to a year and a day. Both have been allowed to remain free while appealing their convictions. Maureen McDonnell’s case, which is at a federal appeals court, has been put on hold while the Supreme Court decides whether it will weigh in.

[BayGBM]

Bob McDonnell again urges Supreme Court to hear his appeal
By Andrew Cain | Richmond Times-Dispatch

Lawyers for former Gov. Bob McDonnell are reasserting their arguments that the U.S. Supreme Court should take up his appeal of his corruption convictions.

“Far from ‘unexceptionable,’ this prosecution is unprecedented,” McDonnell’s lawyers write. “It hinges on a novel, sweeping theory that puts every public official at the mercy of federal prosecutors.”

In September 2014, a Richmond jury convicted the former governor and former first lady Maureen McDonnell on corruption charges stemming from their acceptance of more than $177,000 in gifts and loans from Jonnie Williams, then-CEO of Star Scientific, in exchange for promoting the company’s dietary supplement, Anatabloc.

In July of this year, a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously upheld the former governor’s convictions.

On Oct. 13, McDonnell formally asked the United States Supreme Court to take up his appeal, saying the case raises issues of “extraordinary importance.”

Lawyers for the former governor wrote that the “sweeping decision” of the federal appeals court panel upheld his convictions endorsed a “limitless conception of corruption” under which “every elected official and campaign donor risks indictment.”

On Dec. 8, U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli urged the U.S. Supreme Court to turn down McDonnell’s bid to have the justices take up his appeal.

Government officials wrote, “The court of appeals upheld [McDonnell’s] convictions based on the unexceptionable proposition that a public official violates federal corruption statutes where, as here, he accepts personal benefits in exchange for his agreement to influence government matters.”

In a response filed Monday evening, McDonnell’s lawyers seek to rebut the government’s arguments. They write that the U.S. is seeking to rewrite its theory of the case “to pretend that the fundamental question of what counts as ‘official action’ [under the U.S. bribery statutes] is somehow not presented.

“But what actions are ‘official’ has been the central legal issue in this case since Day One; the viability of the prosecution and legitimacy of the jury’s instructions depend on it.”

McDonnell’s lawyers also reassert that review is warranted on the issue of jury questioning. They argue that in a case involving widespread pretrial publicity, a district court must go beyond collective questioning of prospective jurors and ask individuals whether they have formed fixed opinions about the defendant’s guilt

Former first lady Maureen McDonnell’s case is on hold in the appeals court while her husband’s case is before the U.S. Supreme Court.

U.S. District Judge James Spencer sentenced Bob McDonnell to two years in prison and sentenced the former first lady to a year and a day in prison. Both remain free pending the outcome of their appeals.

The Supreme Court will need to decide soon if it is to issue a final decision this term, as Bob McDonnell wants.

If the high court chooses to take the case, the court still would need to have a full briefing, oral argument and a written opinion by the end of June.

[BayGBM]

McDonnell’s legal limbo ends, for now
By Jenna Portnoy

RICHMOND — Former governor Robert F. McDonnell was glued to a computer screen Monday morning in Virginia Beach, watching for news of his fate from the U.S. Supreme Court.

Shortly after 10:30 a.m., the news appeared: By a unanimous vote, the court ruled in McDonnell’s favor.

Although there is a chance that federal prosecutors could seek to retry McDonnell, Monday’s decision marked an end of a lengthy period of legal limbo for a man who was once a rising star in the Republican party.

For McDonnell’s supporters, Monday’s Supreme Court ruling was an affirmation of the truth they knew all along: He may have exercised poor judgment, but did not break the law.

Bill Bolling, who served as lieutenant governor under McDonnell, lamented the years-long ordeal the McDonnell family went through to get to make it to Monday’s ruling.

“They didn’t deserve this, and thankfully the Supreme Court got it right,” he said. “But where do they go to get their lives back and restore their relationships and reputations? This is not the way the process is supposed to work.”

A jury in September 2014 found unanimously that McDonnell used the governor’s office to help Jonnie R. Williams Sr., a wealthy dietary supplement company executive, advance his business interests. In exchange, Williams gave McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, $177,000 in loans, luxury vacations and even a Rolex watch.

Four months later, a federal judge sentenced McDonnell to two years in prison — a precipitous fall for a man once considered a possible contender for president.

Outside the courthouse that day, McDonnell vowed to appeal the case — saying he “never, ever betrayed my sacred oath of office.” A deeply religious Catholic, he said that his “ultimate vindication” would come from Jesus Christ.

McDonnell argued that simply referring a constituent to another state official was not among the “official actions” that are barred by the federal law.

The Supreme Court agreed, ruling that setting up a meeting, talking to another official, or organizing an event, without a more specific action, is not “official action.”

Lawyers for Maureen McDonnell, whose separate appeal of her own conviction had been put on hold as her husband’s case played out, said his victory means she should also be vindicated.

William A. Burck of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, counsel to Maureen McDonnell, made the following statement upon the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision overturning Bob McDonnell’s conviction:

“This decision applies no less to our client Maureen McDonnell and requires that her conviction immediately be tossed out as well, which we are confident the prosecutors must agree with,” her lawyer, William A. Burck, said in a statement. “Mrs. McDonnell, like her husband, was wrongfully convicted. We thank the Supreme Court for unanimously bringing justice back into the picture for the McDonnells.”

McDonnell has relied on faith and friendships in the year and a half that he has waited for courts to determine his fate.

In that time he has returned to Virginia Beach to live, enjoyed life as a new grandfather four times over and immersed himself in work projects.

McDonnell, who turned 62 this month, started a firm with his sister advising several national clients on attracting sports franchises to cities. He has also worked to help set up international financing for an arena in Virginia Beach and has a contract with Bay Mechanical, a construction and maintenance company owned by a family friend, according to associates familiar with his professional dealings.

They describe a rich life spent visiting with friends and developing the personal relationships that were nearly impossible to sustain during the hubbub of a governorship. And he has forged deep bonds with others going through trying circumstances.

“It’s been amazing to watch,” said Jeffrey L. McWaters, a close friend and former state senator from Virginia Beach. “It’s been a blessing for me to be around him.”

The men are part of a small bible study group that meets in the early morning — sometimes a bit too early for McDonnell who often stays up late reading and working, McWaters joked.

“I know he’s had some bad days,” he said, “but his overall demeanor has been, ‘Let’s keep going here. I know who I am. I know what kind of person I am, no matter what the U.S. attorney says.’”

McDonnell has frequently stepped out in public, attending an election night event two weeks ago for U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes, who was defeated in a primary battle for the 2nd congressional district.

Redemption has been a theme in McDonnell’s life. As governor, he streamlined the process for felons to regain their voting rights and was constantly confronted by citizens grateful to him for a second chance, said Janet Vestal Kelly, a close friend who served in his cabinet as secretary of the commonwealth.

Kelly said she hopes her children learn from the example McDonnell has set for how to triumph through adversity.

“He could write a book about how to be graceful under pressure and stay strong under pressure when his whole world was falling down all around him,” she said.

The ordeal of the past three years has not left him bitter or resentful, she added.

“He prays for his enemies,” she said.

Despite being tried in federal court, McDonnell broke no state laws, prompting the General Assembly to tighten the state’s lax regulations for two consecutive years.

[BayGBM]

McDonnell may be in the clear with the Supreme Court, but the public is another story
By Petula Dvorak
Please, Governor Rolex, hold off on the smiles and celebration.

That conviction still stands in the court of public opinion.

Because seeing former Virginia governor Robert F. McDonnell’s life laid bare — the Ferrari rides, the shopping sprees, the private jets, the $300 golf rounds and that Rolex — did plenty to explain why American voters are so cheesed off with politics now.

Yes, the Supreme Court unanimously overturned McDonnell’s bribery conviction on Monday.

And, yes, the court made it harder to prosecute public officials for the kinds of grody shenanigans that their herd calls business as usual with its ruling.

But the victory for common people — the folks whose moral compasses spin whack-a-doodle when they hear about the ways 1-percenters conduct business — remains whole.

McDonnell was convicted of 11 corruption-related charges by a federal jury in 2014. His wife, Maureen, picked up eight.

The truth is Virginia didn’t need the verdict to know that McDonnell was wrong.

The ravenous way he devoured the shiny things dangled before him, the way he refused to acknowledge during his trial that his behavior was distasteful and the way he publicly degraded his wife during the trial was enough to show he’s guilty, guilty, guilty of moral transgressions far more weighty than those we regulate with law.

This all started when the McDonnells began taking more than $175,000 in loans and gifts from Richmond businessman Jonnie R. Williams Sr.

Williams was trying to get help marketing his company’s new product, a nutritional supplement that contains anatabine, a close relative of nicotine found in tobacco plants that may have some anti-inflammatory properties.

That company, Star Scientific, was launched in 1990 as a maker of discount cigarettes. But cigarette sales were flagging and Williams thought he’d found another way to make Virginia tobacco plants profitable again. He targeted the governor’s mansion as his ticket to success.

Williams showered the first family with attention and gifts.

He helped pay for their daughter’s wedding reception, flew them around on private planes, bought Maureen McDonnell designer clothes, loaned them money, took them on vacation. And, yeah, he helped Virginia’s first lady buy her man a Rolex.

In exchange, the McDonnells handed out his nutritional supplement in gift bags at the governor’s mansion, arranged meetings for Williams with state officials and held a luncheon in the governor’s mansion to help launch the supplement. They gave Williams a say over who would be at a governor’s reception for health-care leaders so he could have the right audience hear his pitch.

The McDonnells said they were simply promoting Virginia products.

Is it really that different from serving Virginia wine at mansion dinners or urging folks to eat the state’s oysters during the holidays?

It sounded shady to me.

And it probably sounds icky to business folks who would like support from the governor for their home-grown products but don’t have cash to throw at him or a Ferrari to let him drive.

But what the Supreme Court told us Monday is that this is pretty common for folks who aren’t commoners. It’s the way business is too-often done.

“Conscientious public officials arrange meetings for constituents, contact other officials on their behalf, and include them in events all the time,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote.

“The basic compact underlying representative government assumes that public officials will hear from their constituents and act appropriately on their concerns — whether it is the union official worried about a plant closing or the homeowners who wonder why it took five days to restore power to their neighborhood after a storm,” Roberts wrote.

In that light, sending McDonnell to prison for the favors he did for Williams “could cast a pall of potential prosecution over these relationships.”

The Supreme Court decided that it’s a complicated legal area, fuzzy enough to spare the McDonnells their impending prison sentences, giving a nod to the decent public servants out there who do good work for their constituents.

But hang in there, folks. Roberts totally gets why that Virginia jury — and the rest of us — are grossed out by this model.

“There is no doubt that this case is distasteful; it may be worse than that. But our concern is not with tawdry tales of Ferraris, Rolexes, and ball gowns. It is instead with the broader legal implications of the government’s boundless interpretation of the federal bribery statute.”

He said it. Tawdry.

And McDonnell knew it. Six months before he was indicted, trying to salvage his aspirations of a 2016 presidential run and avoid criminal charges, he hired a public-relations team and repaid the loans Williams gave him.

“I am deeply sorry for the embarrassment certain members of my family and I brought upon my beloved Virginia and her citizens,” McDonnell tweeted in summer 2013.

It was the first time he ever apologized for the scandal that consumed his final year in office. “I want you to know that I broke no laws and that I am committed to regaining your sacred trust and confidence,” he wrote. “I hope today’s action is another step toward that end.”

Once the indictment came down, he went back to saying he did nothing wrong or blaming his wife for what happened.

“Broke no laws”?

Nope. Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling, McDonnell did break laws. Unwritten ones.