Monday, March 03, 2008

Plea By Jim Clark, Frank Murkowski Chief of Staff, Means He's Helping Feds

Chiang Mai Time: March 4, 2008 1:50pm


Reading this ADN headline from Chiang Mai means everyone else knows a lot more about what's going on than I do.

Former Murkowski chief of staff pleads guilty to corruption



The charge to which he pleaded guilty, is relatively minor in the big scheme of things - charging $68,000 in political polls by Dave Dittman to Veco - but is bigger money than any of the three already convicted legislators saw.

Specifically, from the ADN link to the plea agreement, here's what he pleaded guilty to:



[NOTE: Double Click on the Images to Englarge Them]

For this, according to the documents, he's facing:

These are recommended sentences from the prosecutors. Nothing binds the judge, and all this is dependent on how well Clark cooperates, meaning how well he shares what he knows, testifies as a government witness in court, etc. The recommendation is for a three level downward departure from the sentencing guidelines. So far Judge Sedwick, in the one case of a cooperating witness in this series of cases - Bill Bobrick - has followed the recommendations of prosecutors.


From the ADN link to the Factual Basis for the Plea are more details:





More important, is that Jim Clark must have worked out a deal, meaning that he's been telling the FBI and Federal Prosecutors what he knows about the Murkowski administration. This could get interesting.

Thanks to the ADN for posting the court documents on their website.

3 comments:

  1. Welcome back. Not bad coverage, compared to Fairbanks and Juneau on this. Not bad at all.

    See ya at the Trials.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I believe that he is guilty as charged-- but do you think he would tell more and fib a bit and tell the FBI what they want to hear, as well?

    I thought that after Scott Ogan's accusations what was it? Five years ago? with Evergreen, that it was a very bad sign and that anyone involved in politics had better have just not even look like they were doing anything wrong-- just treated "corruption" that way you don't even make jokes at airports about anything that could be construed as bad.

    I remember talking to some Republican friends back then and saying that it was a warning that our public offices were being watched. They turned on Scott instead, no, he was arrogant, he had made mistakes. Scott wasn't the most pure guy, but he was the proverbial canary in the mine shaft.

    ReplyDelete

Comments will be reviewed, not for content (except ads), but for style. Comments with personal insults, rambling tirades, and significant repetition will be deleted. Ads disguised as comments, unless closely related to the post and of value to readers (my call) will be deleted. Click here to learn to put links in your comment.