From AL.com:

A Republican House member whose electronic voting machine was voted in his absence last week by a Madison County Democrat filed a formal complaint Tuesday with the House clerk.

Rep. Duwayne Bridges, R-Valley, said he was on a job recruitment trip to China and Korea when the House passed a proposed constitutional amendment to remove the state sales tax on groceries.

Bridges said he opposed the measure, even though the record showed him as voting for it.

House Minority Leader Mike Hubbard, R-Auburn, identified Rep. Randy Hinshaw, D-Meridianville, as voting Bridges’ machine.

On Tuesday, Bridges filed a dissent with House Clerk Greg Pappas, noting his opposition to the bill on the House’s official journal.

Good for Bridges. Hinshaw’s actions were reprehensible and he effectively disenfranchised the citizens who elected Bridges, not Hinshaw, to represent them.

Here’s the analogy I like to use for this story…

Imagine it’s summer and Hinshaw’s neighbors on either side of his house are taking a vacation. The neighbor to his left, we’ll call him Richard, asks Hinshaw to watch his house for him while he is out of town. Hinshaw agrees to feed the dog, bring in the paper, etc. The other neighbor, we’ll call him Duwayne, does not ask Hinshaw to watch his house. A couple of days into his vacation Duwayne realizes that he forgot to lock his front door. He’s only in Guntersville so he decides to make a quick trip home to lock up. Upon arriving at his home he notices that someone has been eating his food and leaving potato chip crumbs all over his recliner. He hears some splashing outside and goes into the backyard and finds his neighbor, state representative Randy Hinshaw, doing a cannonball in his pool.

In the real world Duwayne could call the police and have charges pressed against Hinshaw for his actions. However in the Alabama legislature people like Hinshaw gloat about their unethical behavior and thumb their collective noses at the people of Alabama because they don’t think we’ll do anything about it. I hope voters take notice.

From AL.com:

A prosecutor says first-degree theft warrants have been issued for state Sen. E.B. McClain of Midfield and a Leeds pastor over state money that went to a nonprofit organization run by the pastor.

St. Clair County District Attorney Richard Minor announced Friday the warrants were obtained against McClain and the Rev. Samuel Pettagrue.

The charges stem from the investigation of Alabama’s two-year college system.

You know, the same two year college system that the legislators say they should be in charge of.

Brett Blackledge first reported the gory details of how McClain earned this arrest warrant. I’ve heard that the community service grants - like the ones used by McClain - are going to be the next front in the investigation of corruption in the Alabama legislature. Expect to see more stories of legislators who used the taxpayer funded grants to fund organizations and foundations that in turn give the legislator a check.

Update: E.B. McClain’s alleged accomplice, Rev. Sam Pettagrue, has turned himself in. I was wondering how McClain, a legislator, be served with a warrant while the legislature is in session, but according to the B’ham News “McClain will be served with his warrant after the end of the legislative session in mid-May.”

More fun with Alabama’s leftists as they discuss the plight of disgraced New York governor Eliot Spitzer.

I was surprised and disappointed by New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s brief press conference yesterday, …

Me too. I hate to see a man (allegedly) do something like that to destroy his family. But wait, that isn’t the end of the sentence…

… in which he failed to deny reports that he was involved (as a client) in a prostitution ring.

Hold on now. So the leftists aren’t upset that he was (allegedly) engaging in illegal actions with a prostitute, but rather that he didn’t deny it! Forget that media reports indicate that there is damning evidence against him - deny it anyway.

But there’s more!

How could he do something so stupid?

Who knows? But I will say that sex seems to come naturally to a lot of people — maybe that’s why the human race has survived so long…

“Maybe” sex is why the human race has survived so long?! Just maybe!

What is interesting is that the leftist is professing the belief that Spitzer did, in fact, seek the pleasure of a hooker, something that is still officially an allegation. So despite freely admitting that they believe the allegations they still think he should have denied it!

Head over to The Daily Gotham if you want to read what Gov. Spitzer’s peeps, New York bloggers, think about this mess. It’s outside the mainstream, …

You’ll see why it’s outside the mainstream in a minute.

… but I think Liza Sabater’s post makes an interesting point: part of the problem is Spitzer hadn’t built, hadn’t needed to build, a grassroots network that would defend and support him through a scandal like this.

So his problem isn’t that he was (allegedly) cheating on his wife with a high paid prostitute, no sir, his problem is that he didn’t develop a network of loyal robots to defend him in the face of evidence so compelling that even those politically allied individuals presume guilt. Maybe, and I’m just shooting from the hip here, if politicians didn’t engage in illegal activities they wouldn’t need the network of sheep with megaphones. But I could be wrong.

Here is an excerpt from the New York blog quoted in the Left in Alabama post:

Yet if I it said once in my Op/Ed, I am going to say it again : The Bushites knew they could bag themselves a big game like Spitzer because he has nowhere to turn to but the other people who share his social and political bubble.

Again, more indignation that he got caught, not that he (allegedly) sullied his name, disgraced his family, and broke the law. They actually think Bush targeted Spitzer because he is some kind of foundation-less politico and just happened to catch him (allegedly) messing around with a hooker!

You wouldn’t believe who one of the sheep with megaphones might be (actually it isn’t at all surprising) - none other than Scott Horton! Like some kind of political Whack-A-Mole, if a Democrat is alleged to be corrupt by the U.S. Department of Justice Horton pops up to reflexively defend the person. Horton is rolling out his same, tired argument that Spitzer was the target of a politically motivated investigation. Just like the Siegelman case! And just like in the Siegelman case, Horton does not even bother to argue that the (allegedly) corrupt Democrat is innocent - he’s just upset that the (alleged) corruption was identified! He even argues that when Republicans are prosecuted it is actually “part of a broader pattern of going after Democrats.” My head is spinning.

Back to the local leftist’s post.

This reminds me of Don Siegelman’s predicament.

Somewhere Scott Horton is gently rocking a pocket watch to and fro.

He was vulnerable to allegations of corruption in part because he didn’t have a large, vocal group of people willing to stand up and defend him at the first sign of trouble.

Another way to look at it is that he was vulnerable to allegations of corruption because he was actually corrupt! And he wasn’t (and still isn’t) lacking in supporters.

The argument offered by the leftists is uncompelling and borders on rank depravity. By their own admission, they believe that Spitzer engaged in an illegal action. However, they think he should deny it and be defended simply because of his political affiliation.  Amazing.

The leftists then asked, ridiculously, why Spitzer’s (alleged) indiscretions were leaked to the media, presumably by the Bush Justice Department, while “Dave Vitter and Larry Craig get away with this for months and years.” I’ll type slowly so they can comprehend. Vitter was outed not as a part of a federal investigation, but because a smut magazine peddled the numbers of the “D.C. Madam.” Craig was able to keep his attempted gay escapade quite because it happened in an airport bathroom under the jurisdiction of local police. Like Vitter, he was not involved in a federal investigation so there was no way the Bush Justice Department could have leaked their stories.

Other scandals are beside the point, of course.  The leftists are just trotting Vitter and Craig out as a means of deflecting just criticism at a man who, until yesterday, was one of their rising stars.

Here is a letter to the editor from today’s Huntsville Times from a purported FBI veteran:

In response to Lee Roop’s Feb. 3 column regarding the arrest of Rep. Sue Schmitz, D-Toney, for federal fraud charges, I would like to respond to his column questioning the FBI’s arrest procedures.

As a 24-year career veteran Special Agent of the FBI, I can assure you that law enforcement at all levels practice a “standard operating procedure” when executing a plan that involves the arrest of an individual based upon the issuance of an arrest warrant.

Law enforcement, including the FBI, will always plan for the unexpected when lawfully performing the duties of which they are duly charged.

Having sufficient personnel such as numerous FBI Special Agents, a contingency plan, and standard procedures are done not only for the safety of the arresting agents but for the safety of the subject and the general public at large.

There are no “routine arrests.” When a subject is lawfully taken into custody, when Schmitz was arrested on Jan. 31, it was done upon an indictment returned from a federal grand jury based upon probable cause.

To underestimate the behavior of an subject whose life and liberty is interrupted by a lawful arrest is a dangerous mind-set to those law enforcement officers making the arrest.

You do not have to look very far in the past to see that the unpredictable erratic and violent response of an arrestee resulted in the brutal and senseless line of duty death of a Huntsville Police Department officer.

The issue here is the alleged fraud charges against Sue Schmitz and not the FBI arrest procedures.

The government classes she teaches includes the role of the accused in the judicial branch as outlined in our nation’s Constitution. That same Constitution will now work for her on her own behalf.

David K. Jernigan,

Madison, 35758

Sounds a lot like what I said a few days ago.

Local Democrats and many in the left side of the Alabama blogosphere have been all a twitter over the details of the arrest of Rep. Sue Schmitz.  Here is a link to a column by Lee Roop of the Huntsville Times recounting a story fed to him by Schmitz’s lawyers.

Agents arrived at 6:15 a.m. Thursday morning at Schmitz’s home in Toney. John Schmitz was moved outside to a porch “with no shirt on” while the arrest was made, Watson said.

The female agent asked Schmitz to describe the clothes she wanted to wear, and the agent retrieved them from her closet. She waited as Schmitz dressed.

Schmitz was then taken in handcuffs to the U.S. Marshals Office at the federal courthouse in downtown Huntsville. Watson said she was in a holding cell when he arrived “an hour and a half, two hours later.”

There were a total of six FBI agents sent to arrest her: five male, one female. 

I frankly don’t see what the big deal is.  Other than making an old man stand shirtless on the porch for some period of time I don’t even see any cause for getting upset.  U.S. Attorney Alice Martin says that arrests are standard procedure in public corruption cases.

Was sending a half dozen FBI agents to her house early in the morning unheard of?  No, the same number of agents were sent in the early morning to arrest a city government official in Pennsylvania just a couple of weeks ago.  I’m no law enforcement expert, but I think it makes sense to use a show of overwhelming force when arresting anyone, even a person who has said they will submit willingly.  You never know what will happen to someone’s state of mind when the moment of arrest comes and you don’t want to invite trouble by only having one or two arresting officers, which might give the upset suspect the false belief they can attempt to “take out” the small contingency and get away.  Very, very doubtful that Schmitz would act in such a way, but law enforcement officers have a dangerous enough job without taking any chances.

What about the agent retrieving Schmitz’s clothes, surely this was unreasonable?  No.  This argument also goes to the mental state of the suspect and safety of the arresting officers.  Where do a lot of people keep their firearms?  The closet.  If I’m arresting someone there is NO WAY I let them go into their closet to retrieve anything.  The odds in this case were vanishingly small - the Schmitz’s may not even own a gun - but law enforcement officers must always err on the side of caution.

Madison County Commissioner Roger Jones, a Democrat, responded to the arrest in a letter to the editor of the Huntsville Times in which he equated the arrest with what would happen in Nazi Germany.  Such an argument is both tired and absurd.  As I understand it suspects were not granted due process in Nazi Germany.  Schmitz on the other hand was handled in accordance with our laws and given the due process she lawfully deserves.

Many, well many Democrats, have argued that the charges against Schmitz are baseless and part of a Republican conspiracy.  I addressed such talk in a recent comment:

Look folks, these are not just manufactured charges or part of a Republican conspiracy. Back in March of 2007 it was reported that Schmitz was fired from her job for not producing evidence of performing sufficient work. Her superiors had been pressing her to produce proof of work since early 2006. Among what little work she actually did report included time spent fulfilling her legislative duties, which she is already paid by the state to do.

Read the article and think about this: just how poorly does a state legislator have to perform in her duties to get fired? I’m sure that her superiors were not eager to go down that road because they have no desire to make enemies in the legislature (some might speculate that they hire lawmakers for the exact opposite reason). Obviously enough people felt that her performance was so abysmal that she needed to be let go despite any negative ramifications that choice may cause.

It would appear that Johnson gave the Feds enough additional information about Schmitz’s employment to justify charges.

Schmitz should, of course, be presumed innocent until proven otherwise.  But these charges didn’t come out of thin air and aren’t not based on her simply being a poor performer.  Part of the allegations are that she fraudulently documented time she worked on the federally funded program.  It is to be determined whether she was simply a substandard employee or an employee with criminal intent.

In June of last year Brett Blackledge broke one of his many stories about the two-year college scandal in Alabama.  The story was about how an Auburn based contractor was engaged in a kick back scheme with then two year chancellor Roy Johnson.  The story involved the state board of education representative for the district I live in (Mary Jane Caylor), so I took particular notice.  My own research on the story pushed me deep into the murky waters of PAC-to-PAC transfers.  It has now taken me to the editor and publisher of an Alabama paper, The Montgomery Independent, and provides reasonable doubt about whether the owner is just an unbiased observer in the matter.

First some background…

Alabama Contract Sales was the Auburn contractor engaged in the kickback scheme.  It is (was?) owned by Tim Turnham, whose brother Joe is the Chairman of Alabama’s Democrat Party.  Turnham said in a plea deal that he “gave $7,500 to a political action committee, which then gave him checks written to Caylor’s campaign. Turnham said he gave the checks to Johnson so he could deliver them to Caylor.” 

I thought that it was a bit odd for an Auburn businessman to give money to a Huntsville mayoral candidate.  I thought it was downright suspicious that he would use PACs to obfuscate the source.  I set out to trace the money from Turnham to Caylor, which involved searching campaign finance documents from Madison county and the state.  I was able to determine how Turnham laundered the money (legally) through two PACs operated by a man named Jeffrey Archer Martin.  I also just recently learned that Martin is the son of Robert A. “Bob” Martin, the editor and publisher of the Montgomery Independent.

Jeff Martin, in addition to being a legal (for now) operator of multiple PACs, is also a Democrat activist in the state.  Martin was also the Executive Director of the Alabama League of Environmental Action Voters (AlaLEAVs) until about a year ago, although the group’s website still lists him as the ED.  Coincidentally Joe Turnham is the Founding Executive Director of AlaLEAVs.  One of Martin’s 21 PACs is the AlaLEAVs PAC.  It is the only one of his PACs that has been active within the last year.

The issue of why the money was given to Caylor hasn’t been solved.  Was Johnson just contributing to a friend and using Turnham as his personal ATM?  Or was this pay back for Caylor either supporting or turning a blind eye to Johnson’s antics?

Now is an appropriate time to briefly discuss PACs and how they operate.  A PAC is a Political Action Committee.  Virtually anyone can form one for any reason, as Dan showed us all last year, and they are great conduits for covertly contributing money.  The best analogy I have found is that PAC managers can be thought of as banks.  The numerous PACs that any one person might operate act as branches for the bank.  If you want to hide the source of money you might make two or three deposits in separate PACs.  You give your instructions to the PAC manager and he will make a withdrawal (or withdrawals) from whichever PAC he chooses and send the money to the intended recipient.  It doesn’t have to get passed directly through the same PAC because the manager can keep a ledger of who has made deposits and withdrawals over all the PACs he operates.  This is good for people engaged in unethical, illegal, or unpopular activities (like kickback schemes or gambling) as it allows candidates who receive the money to claim plausible deniability.  For voters, however, it makes it difficult to know where candidate’s loyalty lies.

Back to the story…

Surely Bob Martin is not oblivious to his son’s role in Roy Johnson’s efforts to defraud taxpayers, even if he was simply an unwitting participant.  As best I can tell with the blunt tool of a Google search Martin has written on the scandal directly three times in total, a rather paltry amount of ink dedicated to the biggest scandal this state has seen in quite a while.  Most recently he spent two paragraphs describing the participation of software company owner Winston Hayes in Johnson’s kickback scandal.  At the end of the second paragraph he writes:

[Johnson's driver] told prosecutors that he received cash from Hayes and an Auburn contractor, who has admitted paying kickbacks to Johnson and his family, and then gave the cash to Johnson or paid bills for the new house.

I wonder who that Auburn contractor could be and why Martin would pay them such cursory attention?

One might think that Jeff Martin’s role - even if he only served in the legal capacity of masking the money with his PACs - would be enough to cause his father to recuse himself from writing on the matter altogether.  Instead, Martin has chosen to go after the prosecutor (who is incidentally also named Martin) whose investigation could include questioning his his son to determine if he was aware that the money was tainted.  In a column published by the Randolph Leader Martin dredged up a 2003 allegation against U.S. Attorney Alice Martin for perjury that has not been resolved.  He insists that the situation would normally call for the dismissal of the prosecutor, but that Martin is well connected.  It should be noted that Bob Martin also publishes columns by Scott Horton, the rabid, semi-coherent, pro-Siegelman columnist for Harper’s, to run in his publication.  Horton has been doing his best to smear anyone and everyone associated with the prosecution and conviction of Don Siegelman.  If you’ve ever read one of Horton’s missives then you would certainly question Martin’s judgment or motives for running his slime - not to mention Horton’s sanity.

Now I am not defending Alice Martin on the issue of the perjury investigation.  I honestly don’t know enough about that particular accusation to ascertain whether it is legitimate or not.  I just question Bob Martin’s motives for bringing it up given his relationship to a person who could conceivably be questioned by Alice Martin to ascertain the extent of his role in the case.

Author’s Note: After I published the original post Jeff Martin and I corresponded offline.  He expressed concern that some of the language I originally used indicated that he was knowledgeable about Roy Johnson’s criminal endeavors at the time that Johnson and Tim Turnham sent the campaign contribution to Caylor through two of Martin’s PACs.  This was not the intent and there are no known facts that would support any such assertion.  I have modified parts of the original post to make this point clear.

Ben Lodmell, the darling of the regressives for unseating Jo Bonner in Alabama’s 1st Congressional District, was arrested Thursday night for soliciting prostitution.

Benjamin Reid Lodmell, the 36-year-old Democrat vying for U.S. Rep. Jo Bonner’s congressional seat, was arrested Thursday night in Baldwin County after allegedly agreeing to pay an undercover female cop $100 for sex, authorities said.

Lodmell, who was arrested at an undisclosed location on the Eastern Shore, was booked at the Baldwin County Corrections Center in Bay Minette shortly before 8 p.m. Thursday and was released about an hour later after posting the $5,000 bail, jail records show.

He was charged with soliciting a prostitute, a misdemeanor, said Maj. Anthony Lowery of the Baldwin County Sheriff’s Office. More details of the arrest will be revealed Monday, Lowery said.

I take no pleasure in seeing anyone - even someone I disagree with politically - charged with such a crime.  For the sake of his wife and two kids I hope the situation is an unpleasant misunderstanding.

I was particularly amused, as usual, by how the regressives handled the news.  One commenter on Left in Alabama dissected the arrest:

As I see it, there are two possibilities here.  Either this decent man, with good, productive ideas for Alabama and America, has proven himself to be human - and therefore fallible- and has made a terrible mistake, or he has been set up, framed and/or entrapped in Baldwin County, that most Republican bastion in the diatrict [sic].

Two possibilities: he either did or didn’t do it.  Wow, that is insightful.  It is funny how the commenter views solicitation of a prostitute as proof that Lodmell is human.  Was there any confusion among the leftists that he was human before this news broke?  I would be more apt to view it as proof that he is unfaithful to his wife.  Of course, there was the obligatory claim that it could be a set up.  Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t recall hearing or reading any regressives proclaim that Larry Craig’s arrest for soliciting sex from a man in a bathroom stall was a possible set up.  Are only Republicans capable of corruption?

Well, no.

The left’s views of allegedly corrupt politicians - well, those with a “D” by their names - is interesting.  One commenter said the following about state Rep. Sue Schmitz’s arrest:

When the current US Attorney for AL brings charges against a couple of Republicans, I’ll believe it isn’t ‘politically motivated’. Not until.

I knew Democrats were all about forced equality, but geez.  So, by their logic justice officials must always make an equal (or proportional?) number of arrests from each party regardless of actual facts.  In the particular case of corruption in our two year college system it is far more likely, though, that Democrats will face the lion’s share of arrests because of their notoriously cozy alliance with the AEA.  I think when all is said and done it will become clear - even if no AEA official is ever charged - that they were using phony jobs in the two year system as a favor factory for their preferred legislators.

Kudos to Dan for the Lodmell story.

From AL.com:

The federal corruption investigation into Alabama’s two-year college system reached into Madison County on Thursday with the indictment of a legislator accused of receiving more than $177,000 for work she did not perform.

State Rep. Sue Schmitz, D-Toney, a former high school government teacher, is accused of fraud in a nine-count indictment announced by U.S. Attorney Alice Martin in Birmingham.

You can read the indictment at Doc’s.

The arrest comes only two days after I spoke to the Madison County Delegation, including Schmitz, and asked them to pass a bill that would provide greater transparency into financial ties that legislators have to the state.  I also implored them to support Bradley Byrne as he cleans up the two year college system.  Schmitz had no response, although Parker Griffith was not pleased with my comments.  Little did I know that one of the legislators I was speaking to would be arrested the very same week on charges relating to their employment in the two year system.  I would have guessed Laura Hall if I were asked to pick one.  She has previously been accused of the same offenses that Schmitz is being charged for committing.

Some have rightfully asked why Schmitz was arrested on federal charges.  The “some” in this case are of course Democrats who are not as concerned with the federal government’s involvement as much as they are that it was a Democrat legislator arrested.  I happen to also view the involvement of the federal government in matters like this with a great degree of skepticism, although my position is a bit more principled.  The usual justification is that federal dollars, or in this case mail, were involved^*.  I would prefer to see some state and local authorities grab the bull by the horns so the feds don’t have to get involved.  Question for any legal minds: In cases involving state government officials is there precedent for federal involvement due to the understandably hesitant nature with which local authorities, who fall under the jurisdiction of the suspects, might pursue the case?

^*You really don’t want to get me started on the federal dollars thing.  The states long ago whored out many of their rights to the federal government in exchange for federal money - money taken from citizens of the states.  In addition to ceding a great many of their rights, they also open the door for increased federal intrusion into what should be strictly state matters.

From AL.com:

Roy Johnson, the fired chancellor of Alabama’s two-year colleges, is expected to plead guilty and cooperate with federal prosecutors leading the ongoing criminal investigation of the system.

U.S. Attorney Alice Martin has scheduled a press conference today “to announce a major development in the public corruption investigation” of the college system, although the news release announcing the event did not offer specifics about what she plans to discuss. Efforts to reach Martin and others on her staff for comment Wednesday failed.

…

Dozens of legislators, their close relatives and businesses received jobs in the system, and some of those arrangements are under federal investigation.

As Kristopher points out, there are some folks getting “real nervous” right now.

I’d like to remind readers who may have missed it the first time about the campaign contributions from a company that admitted to being involved in a kick back scheme with the two year college system to state school board member Mary Jane Caylor.  You’ll have to pay attention because it gets complicated since it involves the murky world of PAC to PAC transfers.  Read the original story here.

Reader’s Digest version:

Tim Turnham’s company, Alabama Contract Sales, overcharges the state for furniture.  They split the illicit proceeds with Roy Johnson, who was then the chancellor of the two year college system.  The operation gets busted.  Turnham admits his role and cooperates with authorities.  Among other things, Turnham said that he gave school board member Mary Jane Caylor $7,500 for her failed mayoral campaign in Huntsville (Turnham’s company is in Auburn by the way).  He said that Johnson hand delivered the money.

By researching campaign finance documents from the state and Madison County I identified the $7,500 that was funneled through PACs into Caylor’s campaign fund.  The money was transfered from the PACs to her campaign on the same day according to both sets of campaign finance documents, which bolsters the claim that the money was hand delivered - a claim that Caylor denies.

From AL.com:

A former senior civilian manager with the U.S. Army Space & Missile Defense Command pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court in Birmingham Monday to conspiracy to commit bribery, bribery and tax evasion charges stemming from an investigation of contract fraud.

Mike Cantrell had been arrested in November 2007. He is the former director of the Joint Center for Technology Integration and its successor, the Integrated Capabilities Management Directorate, from 2000 until April 2007.

…

At the plea hearing Monday, Cantrell admitted receiving about $1.6 million in bribes over a six-year period in exchange for giving preferential treatment to certain contractors, according to Martin’s office.

So far, the government has not named any contractors that might be implicated in the investigation.

That is when the fun will begin, ladies and gentlemen.

Related:

• Fraud alleged at SMDC in Huntsville