Posted on 07/19/2006 12:11:35 PM PDT by devane617
U.S. - Rep. Katherine Harris acknowledged Tuesday that investigators probing a bribery scandal have sought records from her Senate campaign, but she denied suggestions by a former top adviser that she is a target of the investigation.
Still, there were indications her campaign was increasingly involved in the investigation of former defense contractor Mitchell Wade, convicted of bribing a California congressman.
Since the beginning of April, campaign finance reports show, the Harris campaign has paid $35,806 to a high-powered Washington lawyer, Benjamin L. Ginsberg, who specializes in campaign finance law. Harris retained Ginsberg, of the firm Patton Boggs LLP, shortly after she was identified as having received illegal political contributions from Wade.
Former campaign consultant Ed Rollins, who recently was interviewed by Department of Justice investigators, said Tuesday that Harris is a subject of the investigation.
"There's no question they're focusing on her," he said.
Rollins said FBI agents and two lawyers from the Defense Investigative Service quizzed him on Harris' interactions with Wade in a two-hour interview two weeks ago at the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section. That section investigates allegations of corruption.
Wade's company, MZM Inc., stood to benefit from an "earmark" spending provision Harris unsuccessfully sought to slip into military spending legislation last year.
Harris Responds In a news release Tuesday, Harris countered, "The Department of Justice has informed me that I am not a target of the investigation concerning Mitchell Wade."
She said the department asked her campaign for information in May, which "we were more than willing to give."
But her cooperation with the investigation is "being exploited by people engaged in an unsuccessful, coordinated effort to end my candidacy for the United States Senate," Harris said.
The Harris statement did not provide any information on who was involved in that effort, what information the Department of Justice sought from the campaign or whether the request was a subpoena.
The campaign had no answers to those questions Tuesday night.
Campaign spokeswoman Jennifer Marks said she could provide no information on the reasons for the legal fees to Patton Boggs, and Ginsberg did not return a call seeking comment.
Harris said news reports about Rollins' interview with investigators "are not new, and I encourage his cooperation with the department."
As she has said often before, Harris noted that investigators said Wade did not tell her he had illegally repaid his employees for $32,000 in contributions to her 2004 congressional campaign and that she supported his project thinking it would "secure jobs and economic opportunities for the people of my district."
Harris has given a $50,000 donation to Habitat for Humanity, representing the $32,000 plus other MZM-linked contributions.
Harris' statement added: "From the beginning we have emphasized our willingness to continue to fully cooperate with the Department of Justice. … I look forward to a quick and favorable resolution of this matter."
Wade, who pleaded guilty to disguising illegal campaign contributions as donations from his employees, had dinner with Harris during which, prosecutors say, they discussed his fundraising for her and his desire for federal dollars to open an MZM-operated naval counterintelligence office in Florida.
Justice Contacted Rollins Rollins said investigators first asked him to come to the Justice Department six weeks ago.
"They wanted to know what I knew about her and Mitch Wade," Rollins said in a telephone interview Tuesday night. "They were already extremely knowledgeable. It was not a casual conversation. They didn't seem to be shocked by anything I said."
Channing Phillips, spokesman for U.S. Attorney Kenneth L Wainstein, declined to comment on the investigation or whether Harris was a target.
Bryan Sierra, a spokesman at Justice Department headquarters, noted that the advocacy group Common Cause has filed a complaint with the department requesting an inquiry into Harris' conduct. He would not say whether such an inquiry has taken place.
Justice Department officials have been known to send "clearance letters" to public officials who are involved in investigations but are not regarded as targets of the investigations.
Neither Sierra nor Harris campaign spokeswoman Marks would say whether Harris had received one.
"The statement we've issued is all we're going to say on the topic tonight," Marks said.
Wade is expected to be sentenced later this summer for bribing Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, a California Republican. Cunningham has been sentenced to seven years in prison for accepting money, antiques and other favors from Wade in return for helping to steer government defense contracts his way.
Way to control the message. Oh well, maybe we'll win NJ.
I reckon Ed Rollins is off the Katherine Harris Christmas card list, ay?
The Harris campaign is damaged beyond repair .There is still time to nominate a candidate that can win in November .
Oh, the pain! Someone stop the pain!
Katherine Harris PING!
Truthfully I am more interested in her health now. How did her medical appointment go on Monday? Hopefully she is fine. I was surprised not to see anything on that yet. It is sad that her campaign is done, but we should still care personally for her.
I'm voting for Harris hows that.
I hear she might have another voter somewhere in Fla., too.
"There's no question they're focusing on her," he said.
Harris Responds In a news release Tuesday, Harris countered, "The Department of Justice has informed me that I am not a target of the investigation concerning Mitchell Wade."
They both appear to be using words in their technical senses. Under the internal rules of the Department of Justice, anyone being investigated is either a "target," a "subject" or a "witness." A "target" is someone the prosecutor already intends to indict; a "witness" is someone the prosecutor believes did nothing wrong, but merely has evidence the prosecutor wants to use against someone else; and a "subject" is someone as to whom the prosecutor hasn't made his mind up yet-- they're not a target yet, but they might wind up as one as the investigation continues. So when Rollins says that Harris is a "subject," and she says she's not a "target," she's not really denying what he said.
I just spotted Katherine a little while ago in the U.S House coverage on cspan. Glad to see she's up and about.
This is what Katherine Harris considers good news. For conservatives who are serious about winning elections, good news from Katherine Harris would be her withdraw from the race, but it's not going to happen.
Nothing going on in Indiana? I'll bet your wife beats your ass
too.
I don't think she could even win the primary. I suspect in 2007, Katherine will be the TV talking head of some conservative think tank or even host her own MSNBC cable show, where she will bash Republicans for being RINOS.
Since signing on FR, I have learned a lot about politics. After reading many informative threads here, my personal politics have matured. When I first signed up here, I was a solid conservative. Jesse Helms was my idea of the perfect candidate. Now I am conservative who believes in welcoming people of various backgrounds into the GOP. Diversity only serves to strenghtened the Conservative Movement as well as society.
Since when do you think that YOUR personal politics have matured???
I would like to know the answer to this as well. She seems to be a solid conservative. Why is it that the GOP is so against supporting her?
Uh, not very topical.
But it's probably the best argument in favor of Katherine Harris.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.