New Jersey Corruption #2 (and unrelated corruption sentencing...)

Jersey city mayor is "public official 4" mentioned in one of the federal complaints.


And unrelated to the recent arrests, but interesting because it relates to sentencing of a public official for corruption, New Jersey's former Senator Bryant gets 4 years in jail.

(If Judge Munson looks to other jurisdictions to try to get some parity in sentencing, it's hard to imagine that Tim Villagomez will get anything like the 10 years mentioned in news reports as the presentence report recommendation. If he looks to sentencing here, though, he might consider that these high officials deserve more than the shmoe's in the utility reconnection scam got.)

Brief Reflections on the Trial of the Day

Ed Propst is reporting that the jury has already returned a verdict in the case against Lieutenant Governor Timothy Villagomez. According to Ed, guilty on all charges.

He says guilty on all charges in the cases against the co-conspirators, too. Confirmed. (thanks to Wendy for the cite).

I think we're all relieved. The rydlyme deal stank through and through, but that's not the same as being enough to convict on federal charges. There's also been a history of difficulty in getting guilty verdicts in cases involving corruption of public officials in the CNMI. We've seen others charged with cheating on construction contracts and such, and no convictions.

So I'm relieved that the jury was convinced by the evidence and strong enough to do what they found right.

I was most offended by the closing argument that included the phrase "choose the local mango." This was a thinly disguised attempt to turn back the clock to the time when being a Chamorro meant people owed you allegiance, especially against the US government. I'm glad that we have jurors who don't want a rotten mango at all, no matter what its origin.

I think the counsel for the accused (and now guilty) defendants seriously misjudged the mood of the jury and the people in the community. People are tired of powerful local politicians abusing their positions, enriching themselves, and causing the rest of us to suffer. Accusing Antonio Guerrero of being a patsy for the feds when he is just another regular guy being ill-used by them was incredibly offensive. The man was obviously working very hard to clear his guilty conscience. Describing FBI agent Dana McMahon as looking like a sheep but really being a wolf was another stupid ploy. She didn't testify and it was clear that the defendants were looking for any scapegoat they could get.

And the other closing arguments suggesting that the US federal government isn't "us" were also offensive. Just last November we elected a Delegate to serve in the US Congress. A record number of local men vied for the position--obviously not subscribing to the basic tenet that everything federal is bad. We're getting economic stimulus money from the US. We've been getting good press for our federally-declared national marine monument. We're heading into federal immigration and the US is respecting our wishes to have better dialogue and clear planning. We're seeing more US military in our neighboring island of Guam with spill-over tourism here.

Kudos to Eric O'Malley, who worked really hard and obviously came to court with his hammer and nails to close the lid on this mess.

(And if the reports of guilty on all charges are wrong or inflated, I still say kudos to Eric, and shake my head in disbelief and disapproval at the closing argument tactics of the defense counsel.)

Now we'll await sentencing. It's pretty clear that federal law will provide some real sanction for the wrongdoing, unlike CNMI law.

329. Impeach the Lieutenant Governor

I know. It's too late. Our Legislature has voted against such action.

But just as an exercise in futility, I've got opinions about this subject.

I wrote a response, hopefully informative, to the letter written by "Cristy Sablan of San Antonio," and my full response is posted at the Day In Court blog.

I'm frustrated by the ignorance of our Constitution and the willingness of people like Ms. Cristy Sablan to spout off nonsense, well, more aptly non-sequiturs, as if they were some logical argument against impeachment. Better if she simply said she likes the Lieutenant Governor and doesn't want to see him impeached.

But Ms. Cristy Sablan is presumably an ordinary citizen, so her failure to grasp the finer points may be excusable. (I don't know her and am not attacking her personally, just her expressed "argument" against impeachment.) Her confusion should not confuse the rest of us. So I deal with that in a nice manner, with legal cites and information to clear the air.

But I have more thoughts, less informational, more personal, more opinionated, that I'll ruminate on here.

What really frustrates and upsets me is the ignorance and LAME EXCUSES of our legislators.

LAME EXCUSE # innumerable--

Diego Benavente: "We will taint the trial."

Well, don't you think a lot of yourself. And don't you think very little of the voters who will be jurors. Do you really think we are incapable of understanding that there's a difference between criminal charges and the charges for impeachment? I have more faith in the ability of the average citizen to understand. I have more faith in our prosecutors and defense counsel to make sure the jurors grasp this distinction. Do you, as a Legislator, benefit from confusing and obfuscating issues and making sure the public really is as ignorant as you hope? Do you really think that what you do is so compelling that jurors are going to stop thinking, stop paying attention in a trial, and just follow your lead.

This fear that a Legislature doing what it should do to investigate an elected official for possible serious dereliction of duty and impeachable offenses is just bullshit. It's an excuse to keep on doing nothing.


LAME EXCUSE #beyond infinity--

Ralph Torres: “There's a reason why you're innocent until proven guilty,” said Rep. Ralph Torres. “Let's respect the Judicial Branch,” he said, adding that it's not a matter of turning away from the issue but respecting the system.

If you really respected the system, you'd know that what works in our government is EVERYONE doing their job. When our Legislators fail to do their job, we have a system that is not respected, not working.

As noted above, the judge, the prosecuting counsel, the defense counsel, and the jurors are very capable of understanding the finer issues, of thinking for themselves. Obviously, our Legislators have greater difficulty with this.

Tim Villagomez is innocent until proven guilty; but what does that have to do with whether the Legislature will take up the matter of impeachable offenses? He can still be guilty of impeachable offenses to the standard the Legislature uses and be found not-guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on the criminal charges. He could be guilty in both places. He could be not guilty of everything.

But Legislators CANNOT and SHOULD NOT abdicate their jobs to let the feds and the judicial system do all the heavy lifting. This is Lame Excuse nonsense, and simply put--cowardice.


LAME EXCUSE # same-old,same-old--

Joseph Deleon Guerrero: "Deleon Guerrero said he realizes that if the situation occurred in the States, the Legislature would more than likely proceed with such an investigation.

“I'm glad cultural sensitivities are still important,” he said. “It's not our culture to beat someone who is already down.”

Is it our culture to turn a blind-eye to wrong-doing by elected officials? If it is, perhaps we need to change our culture.

Is it our culture to never criticize someone accused of a crime? I hadn't noticed that when the criminal is poor, so perhaps our culture just employs a double-standard? Do we want that?

Is it our culture to consider that doing your job as a Legislator who investigates wrong-doing is "beating" someone up? If our Legislators are too timid to stand up for what is right, why did they take their jobs?

I realize that there are cultural issues that lurk beneath the surface of many things here. But I also believe that we do a disservice to real cultural issues when we use this word to cloak every decision we make.

So from my p.o.v., this is another LAME EXCUSE.


In the CNMI, in Saipan, we know people. It always seems "personal" when we talk about matters that involve real people. But we can move beyond this by thinking of principals, by examining things from a more philosophical point of view.

If our CNMI Legislators are not going to investigate an elected official for possible impeachment when federal authorities have obtained felony indictments against him for crimes that relate to honesty and integrity in office, when exactly will they think something is bad enough to investigate for impeachment?

Tim Villagomez exits federal court. Photo from Wendy's blog.

If Tim Villagomez is found guilty, will they then not want to impeach because he's going to jail anyway?

Where is the line?

We need a line.

We need a Legislature that does its work and stops making lame excuses.

272. Thinking about the News

Today's Tribune has the headline announcing Matt Gregory's resignation from the post of Attorney General. There have been occasional cries of discontent over Matt's handling of the post. There have been occasional rumors that Matt was being canned by the Governor. But mostly, there's just been Matt being very quiet in the job.

And I was surprised by the news of his resignation. The Governor has another 18 months in office. There doesn't seem to be any pressing reason to change Attorney General.

I read the news story looking for clues about the story behind the headlines. Matt's basic reason is a desire to return to private practice. Not every lawyer likes public service; and private practice is generally more lucrative. So this reason seems to cover the decision to resign completely.

But wait--in addition to this, Matt's statement announcing his resignation apparently mentions three specific topics:

1. the AG Office's commitment to fighting corruption (and their close working relationship with the feds in the case against Lieutenant Governor Tim Villagomez).

2. the AG's success in winning a lawsuit against the IRS and bringing in a "major monetary award" of $33 million.

3. the likely increase in tourism soon with an increase in flights, and the relatively small negative effect of federalization.

I find it interesting that Matt chooses these three particular items to highlight in his resignation statement. To me, it hints at stress and disagreements with the Governor.

The first --anti corruption--could almost be a white-wash. This government isn't any better at stopping corruption than any other has been; and in fact it seems wedded to the same corrupt practices of perks and nepotism that we've seen before. But Matt's quote on the bravery of his staff, who fight corruption "at severe career risk" suggests something else. It suggests a reality that the AG's office really is committed to enforcing the law and faces some pressure against doing their jobs.

The second tells us exactly what we've been asking--how much money is the Governor hiding from the CNMI Legislature in his budget projections? It seems that the Governor is funding the federalization lawsuit with public funds, and that he's not put those funds in any budget projection, but has them squirreled away, having received them as awards from litigation. Appropriations, however, are a congressional job, not an executive privilege. This money needs to be reported to the Legislature and subject to Congressional appropriation. Matt's mention of these funds is ammunition for the Legislature to use in getting control over all CNMI public funds.

The third is the most telling of all.

"While federalization has the capacity to damage the economy of the Commonwealth, we have increasing tourism numbers and you'll soon find out there is going to be a significant increase in flights. I believe we may see 19 additional flights in the next few months. So it's a couple steps forwad and one step back. Federalization is a negative but there are positives developing in parallel."

In other words, the doom and gloom disaster that Howard Willens has predicted isn't exactly an accurate portrayal of our likely future, from Matt's POV. And just the fact that Matt would suggest that federalization isn't the evil bogeyman that will send us into a tailspin from which we can't recover makes me think his resignation ties in to disagreements and stresses with the current Admininstration.

Of course, I could be wrong.


Now, I'm wondering who will be the new / next AG?
My predictions: AAG Greg Baka, AAG Tom Gorman, or Howard Willens.

259. The Fox in the Hen House-a small poll

The fox in the hen house won't leave voluntarily. He won't stop killing the chickens. And it's just useless to berate him because he is what he is. The only solution is to get him out and keep him out.

Who is the fox?

Lieutenant Governor Tim Villagomez

Mayor Juan B. Tudela

_______________________________ (fill in here with your suggestion).