In a new development in the Don Siegelman case -- the Democratic Alabama governor who was prosecuted and jailed for bribery in a trial that is now largely viewed as political -- Karl Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, told MSNBC Monday that Rove would testify if called to subpoena under oath.
Rove has decried the allegations of Alabama Republican whistleblower Dana Jill Simpson, who says she witnessed his involvement in the takedown of the governor. Siegelman was voted out of office and replaced by Robert Riley, a Republican.
On Dan Abrams' show Monday evening, Abrams said: "We asked this question to his attorney: Will Karl Rove agree to testify if Congress issues a subpoena to him as part of an investigation into the Siegelman case? The answer we got -- 'Sure.'" (Hat tip: ThinkProgress).
These videos are from MSNBC's Verdict, broadcast April 7, 2008. The first is the Rove specific clip; the second is of Siegelman's fuller appearance on the show.
Transcript via closed captions
:: don seigelman is with us for the first live interview since the judge released him from prison just over a week ago. he has maintained he was only charged because he was a democrat. before we talk to the governor, background on the case.
:: former alabama governor was a rare breed, a democrat governor in a red state. after narrowly losing his re-election bid he was preparing his comeback and that's when alabama federal prosecutors stepped in and brought charges against him. charges which were quickly thrown out. then a year later again. and he was convicted on just 7 of 32 charges. the judge imposed sentence that day. he wanted to argue he was the victim of an orchestrated prosecution topped by karl rove.
:: then this republican came forward and said she heard rove talk about the involvement in the case.
:: he wanted me to follow mr. seigelman. he suspected he was cheating on his wife and wanted to challenge him.
:: that is being challenged. his friend was married to the attorney whose office brought these new charges, and two prominent alabama republicans, one a senator and neither the judge neither were investigated nor prosecuted, just the democrat.
:: democrats in congress chimed in demanding they investigate. and then he was released saying his apiece raises substantial questions of fact. this case is not over. he still stands convicted and is convinced that justice was far from blind. here with me live is the former alabama governor, don seigelman.
:: thank you, i want to thank you and encourage you for stepping out for your boldness and ask that you continue this fight until we find out who hijacked the department of justice.
:: how were you so convinced that karl rove was behind your prosecution?
:: his fingerprints were all over this case. we don't have the knife, but we have the glove. in 1994 when karl rove was in alabama trying to steal his first lexi election, i voluntarily testified against his client. in 1999 his client starts an investigation of me and this goes on until 2001 until bill canary, a business partner of karl rove, his wife is a federal attorney and she starts an investigation.
:: let me stop you one second. you are alleging that rove talks to his friend, bill canary who is married to the federal attorney and he effectively gets his wife to go after you?
:: the facts of this are that rove's fingerprints are all over this case because his client investigated me, one of his friends, social friends started an investigation and prosecution of me that was dismissed after just a couple of days in court. they went after me again, this time with the wife of bill canary -- the wife of karl rove rove's business client and political associate. it continues from there. when those investigations were faltering, the people who were holding back the investigation, a career department of justice employee was replaced, replaced with someone who was the wife of the campaign manager of one of karl rove's clients.
:: let me ask --
:: and then when that investigation was slowing down they were called to washington and told to go at siegelman again.
:: you know it's a serious allegation to say that karl rove was behind a political prosecution. his attorney has told us the following. he said, quote -- as mr. rove said, he did not speak with anyone in the white house or the justice department concerning the prosecution of governor siegelman.
:: i don't believe it. why would jill, a respected lawyer in her community come forward with information that implicates karl rove and bill canary. there was no reason for her to risk standing in the republican party to come forward. what we have are -- saying that karl rove is not involved of in my prosecution is like saying george bush is not involved in the war in iraq.
:: you're not hinging this all on dana jill simpson, because there are people who have questioned how she could be at certain meetings, where she was at the time, et cetera. your allegation -- you believe rove is behind this does not hinge entirely on the credibility of dana jill simpson, does it?
:: i think when you look at the totality of rove's involvement in alabama politics, his closeness with the two attorneys that brought charges against me, the fact that he was the political adviser to the attorney general who started the investigation and brought charges against me, the fact that the justice department went out of their way to ignore breaches of standards of ethics, violations of the law, someone was giving them an umbrella of protection, because we had investigators, assistant u.s. attorneys, the u.s. attorney herself, and we had representatives from the public integrity division of the with violations of impunity. there is no logical conclusion other than they had someone higher up than those people at the public integrity division was offering them protection. i'm saying that karl rove was definitely involved in this case.
:: as you know, karl rove's attorney has denied he spoke to anyone at the justice department though. this may come as news because we just got a response from his attorney. i know you called on rove to testify in front of congress under oath as did dana jill simpson. we asked this question.
:: putting that aside for a moment, he's saying sure. karl rove wouldn't testify in the u.s. attorney scandal. his attorney sounds like he's ready to testify in connection with your case.
:: let's don't waist waste any time. i think the house and jew udiciary community should subpoena him and have him put his hand on the bible and lie under oath or tell the truth.
:: are you saying you are surprised he would testify?
:: i would be surprised if he does. i wouldn't be surprised he would say that. we also need to call those people in alabama with political connections to karl rove. those people who are ought to be brought before congress and they, too, should be asked to swear under oath their relationships with karl rove and whether he influenced their decision to move forward with this case. that ought to be done before karl rove is called to testify.
:: governor, as you know, the u.s. attorney who prosecuted the case, lewis franklin issued many statements saying there is no influence. this is a statement from his office.
:: he has said again that karl rove had no influence on him and he never spoke to karl rove, et cetera.
:: i agree with that. he would have had no connections with karl rove.
:: he says he's a democrat.
:: also, what he's saying is not true. he did not make the decisions. we know the decisions were made in washington. when the u.s. attorney's office was not moving forward with this case, when they told my attorneys that they didn't think there was a substantial case there, it wasn't going to go forward, they were then called to washington to meet with know noel hillman who told them to go back to alabama and start over again. he was not in a position. karl rove's statement he did not influence anybody at the department of justice or in the white house leaves out many of the players we're talking about he had a relationship with, specifically bill canary and his wife here in alabama.
:: we have been talking about what may have motivated the prosecution. the critics would say, and anyone looking at the record would say, wait a second, you were convicted by a jury. 25 counts the jury said no, 7 counts the jury said yes. this is an ordinary jury. they said governor siegelman is guilty.
:: and we're talking about a political contribution to the education lottery and not one single penny of that money went into my pocket. what we said in the appeal was that the judge gave the wrong jury instruction and on "60 minutes" what was said was that the prosecutors knowingly offered false testimony that resulted in my prosecution.
:: you say a witness was coached again and again to get the story straight? you are convinced that's the only reason?
:: coached over 70 times and also -- not the only reason, but because of his testimony and because of a jury instruction which was in error, i believe that's what resulted in my conviction. if every -- dan, listen, if every governor or president was held to this standard, every single one of they will would be in prison. it doesn't make sense.
:: stay with us, we are going to take a break. we will ask you to stick around. coming up, i will ask you what it was like to be behind bars as a former governor and we will talk about why those two men who one of the witnesses reportedly reported some impropriety involving them, why were they not investigated?
:: we're back with our exclusive interview with former alabama governor don siegelman, con vigted of seven crimes, spent time in prison and a little over a week ago an appeals court overruled a federal judge letting him out saying there are substantial questions of law or fact that need to be addressed. let me ask you about serving time. a former governor of alabama, i have to believe many of your fellow prisoners knew who you were, what was that like?
:: i was treated like any other prisoner. it was not a pleasant experience. and the experience those men are going through is not pleasant for them either. if god had a purpose for me going through this, i think part of it is to fix what is wrong with our system and ensure that these kind of things don't happen to people in the future. we have to seek out the truth. i commend you and bush league justice for pushing this case forward. this case and circumstances will make watergate look like child's play if congress will dig into these things. you brought up something right before the break about two prominent republicans exposed during the course of this investigation but were not pursued. when my lawyers tried to subpoena the records of the national republican party and jack abramoff's funneling of millions of indian casino money --
:: wait, you are getting too many names here. let's keep it simple. the point is that these two republicans, one is now a senator and one is a federal judge, and reportedly one of the key witnesses against you made allegations against them, and they were not investigated or prosecuted, correct?
:: they were not investigated or prosecuted because the investigators were personal friends and former employees or current employees of either the attorney general or former attorney general who was the u.s. attorney. they weren't prosecuted because the prosecutors who were in the room either worked with them as chief deputy or as personal friends or married to them. it was an obvious conflict of interest ignored not only by the local people but by the two representatives of the department of justice and the fbi who were in that same room.
:: governor, it sounds like you are alleging corruption at so many levels. some people can accept the notion that there are certain republicans out to get you, but as we talk more about this, there are more people involved, and it sounds like the corruption here was pretty deep.
:: i'm saying that there was -- there is a connection, and that all of the roads lead to rove. all of the dots, when you connect the dots, they lead to karl rove. this case could be the mapquest that sets congress on a journey that will take them to karl rove if they will start looking at it.
:: let's assume -- congress, you know there is now an issue as to whether they should testify or not because i would think anything you say in front of congress can be used against you. you are appealing your case. one of your staunchest allies on capitol hill has said he doesn't think you should testify for fear you would hurt your own case. are you ready to go to capitol hill and testify?
:: i'm ready to go to capitol hill and give them whatever information i can. this is not about me. it is about america and finding out who has abusing their power and used the department of justice to subvert our democracy? it's bigger than don siegelman, georgia thompson and the other people abused by the department of justice, but congress owes it to the people of america. i will fully work it with congress to see that they have all of the information i have about this case.
:: before i wrap this up, any thoughts of still running for office again?
:: i have absolutely no thoughts of running for office at this point, but what i want to do is work with congress to try to fix some of the wrongs i saw while i was in prison. we have to stop the federal government from extorting testimony from known criminals to put innocent people in prison.
:: we have said this before. i said this about your case before your release, that i'm going to stay on top of it. i'm going to continue to stay on top of it. we will follow the facts of it and the legal proceedings. governor siegelman, thank you for coming on the program.
:: dan, thank you so much for what you have done for america.
:: what's your verdict? e-mail us. include your name, where you are writing from, and the po box.
