The former No. 2 official in the Interior Department yesterday admitted lying to the Senate about his relationship with convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who gained the official's intervention at the agency for his Indian tribal clients.
J. Steven Griles pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court to a felony for making false statements in testimony before the Senate Indian Affairs Committee in November 2005 and in an earlier interview with panel investigators. He is the 10th person -- and the second high-level Bush administration official -- to face criminal charges in the continuing Justice Department investigation into Abramoff's lobbying activities.
Griles, 59, a gregarious former mining lobbyist, drew the wrath of environmentalists and his department's inspector general during a stormy four-year tenure at Interior. Standing before U.S. District Judge Ellen S. Huvelle, Griles said little beyond admitting guilt, though in a written statement distributed by his lawyer he apologized for his actions.
"I fully accept the responsibility for my conduct and the consequences it may have," he said in the statement. "When a Senate committee asks questions, they must be answered fully and completely and it is not my place to decide whether those questions are relevant or too personal."
Griles could receive up to five years in prison for obstructing the Senate investigation, but prosecutors agreed to ask for a sentence of 10 months in exchange for the guilty plea -- five months in jail and five months in a halfway house or in home detention. Huvelle set sentencing for June 26 and said she is not bound by the prosecution's recommendation.
Griles told the Senate panel and its investigators that his relationship with Abramoff was no different from that with any lobbyist. Griles's then-girlfriend, however, had introduced him to the lobbyist and then acted as a go-between. The woman, Italia Federici -- identified as "Person A" in court papers -- ran an advocacy group to which Abramoff and his clients donated $500,000.
"Abramoff occasionally sought and received -- both directly and through Person A -- defendant James Steven Griles' advice and intervention on issues within DOI that directly affected Abramoff and his clients," said the government's charging document. Griles was not accused of accepting anything of value in exchange.
The Abramoff corruption case continues on. While the WaPost story reports that the plea deal does not require Griles to cooperate with the Justice Department in the Abramoff investigation, I wouldn't be too surprised if the Justice Department lawyers offer a little time off of Griles' prison sentence in return for his cooperation. Griles' cooperation could help reveal details of the relationship between Abramoff and then-Secretary of Interior Gail Norton:
Griles was a controversial political appointee from the start of his tenure at Interior under then-Secretary Gale A. Norton. Environmentalists and the department's inspector general faulted him for keeping ties to energy and mining companies that were once his lobbying clients.
The guilty plea stems from his testimony on Nov. 2, 2005, before the Senate Indian Affairs Committee that "there was no special relationship for Mr. Abramoff in my office. It never did exist." He has now admitted that he had frequent contact with Abramoff through Federici, the founder of a conservative environmental group with close ties to Norton. Federici had served as an official on one of Norton's political campaigns in Colorado.
Abramoff and his lobbying team focused on the Interior Department because its actions affected their most lucrative clients: Indian tribes with casinos. Abramoff directed tribal clients to contribute to Federici's group, the Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy.
E-mails released as part of the Senate panel's Abramoff investigation detailed contact Griles had had with Abramoff or Federici.
Griles told the panel then that he had little to do with Indian affairs and never tried to help Abramoff's clients. But a former Interior Department lawyer testified that Griles inserted himself in tribal issues, including one that would determine whether a small Louisiana tribe, the Jena Band of Choctaw Indians, would be able to build a casino.
The Washington Post outlined in a March 2005 article how Abramoff enlisted the aid of numerous members of Congress and anti-gambling groups to crush the Jena effort because it could draw away casino business from his clients. Just as it appeared the department would grant the Jena's land claim anyway, Griles turned up with a binder full of congressional letters opposing the deal -- a binder prepared by Abramoff -- and pressed it on department officials.
[....]
Griles was criticized in a 2004 report from Earl E. Devaney, Interior's inspector general. Devaney found that Griles had used his official position in dealings with clients of his former firm even as he continued to receive payments from the firm amounting to more than $1 million.
Devaney's report did not draw conclusions about whether Griles broke laws or ethics rules, in part due to guidance from the Office of Government Ethics, which said that, with two possible exceptions, Griles did not violate ethics rules.
During the investigation, Norton's deputy chief of staff, Sue Ellen Wooldridge, provided ethics advice to Griles and advised Norton on the inspector general's allegations. She also sent a memo to the Office of Government Ethics about the case. Investigators learned after their report was issued that Griles and Wooldridge had been dating since February 2003, people familiar with the investigation said.
Wooldridge eventually became assistant attorney general for environment and natural resources. She resigned in January.
Devaney, in testimony last fall before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said his Griles probe faced what he called an "assault" from Norton and the Office of Government Ethics. He testified he was astonished at the ethics office's response and that Norton took no disciplinary action against Griles, declaring him "cleared."
What is interesting about this story here is that Norton was willing to protect Griles, even as Griles was helping Abramoff in opposing the Jena tribe's casino deal. There is a sense of cronyism taking place within the Norton Interior department, where Griles is helping Abramoff, Norton is protecting Griles, and both Griles and Norton are connected to Abramoff through Federici. The corruption here is either permitted, or overlooked, between these individuals because of their past personal, and political, relationships with each other.
No comments:
Post a Comment