Cooper admitted his involvement in the illegal visa scheme back in November 0f 2005 and cooperated with federal authorities in a sting involving Omega "Meg" Paulite, 36, a Philippine-born U.S. citizen. The sting took place in April of 2006, more than a year before Cooper was charged. This delay was due to the ongoing investigation of the Blunt administration's handling of the fee offices, which involved Cooper, according to assistant Federal prosecutor Jim Crowe.
Bud Cummings, who was handling the fee office investigation, cleared the Blunt administration of wrongdoing in the awarding of Missouri license office contracts. Cummins made this announcement in October of 2006, however, we learned later that Cummins was told in June of 2006 that he was to be replaced as part of several controversial resignations/firings of US Attorneys by the Bush Administration. It turns out Cummins replacement, Tim Griifin , a former aide to Karl Rove, began working in Cummins office in September of 2006. The announcement clearing Blunt was unusual and was requested by Blunt's attorneys. In a written statement Cummins explained, "In light of that unfortunate disclosure and the publicity it spawned, it is appropriate to confirm certain facts." Cummins was forced out of office in December of 2006 and he later stated he had been contacted on several occasions by an attorney for Matt Blunt during the investigation. Blunt's attorney was requesting information on the status of the investigation and whether Blunt himself was a target. Griffin resigned on May 30, 2007, less than 6 months after he took the position.
In a March 16, 2006 article which ran in the Los Angeles Times, Cummins was quoted as saying, "You have to firewall politics out of the Department of Justice. Because once it gets in, people question every decision you make. Now I keep asking myself: ’What about the Blunt deal?" After the article appeared Cummins stated he did not think that the Blunt investigation had anything to do with his firing and that the he didn't believe he said the words quoted above but that if he did it isn't what he had intended.
Going back to the case against Nathan Cooper, the women Cooper helped nab in the sting back in August of 2006, Omega Paulite, was indicted by the feds shortly after Cooper plead guilty in August of 2007. The government alleged Paulite was "a serious risk to threaten or injure a prospective witness," and "a serious risk to obstruct justice." Cooper is likely to receive a lenient sentence because of his cooperation in the sting. However, the charges against Paulite were dropped in October 0f 2007.
On September 17, 2007 a Democratic blog, Fired Up! Missouri, claimed,
Copper's younger brother (Ryan), a Springfield area resident, has apparently told interested individuals that they needn't worry about Nathan turning state's evidence against any of the political players who participated in the fee office scheme or other pay-to-play shams. His claim is that Cooper's former running buddies --such as James Harris, Jeff Roe, Garrett Lott and Andy Blunt--have assured him that he will receive a pardon in the final days of the George W. Bush administration so long as he stays mum in the meantime.In response, Ryan Cooper, wrote a column for the Sprindfield News-Leader's "Voice of the Day." Ryan Cooper wrote that the allegations made by Fired Up! were false and that he requested the author to issue a correction and an apology to no avail. Cooper went on to write:
Had Beale bothered to talk to me, his story would have been less titillating. Yes, I believe my brother deserves a presidential pardon, as mentioned in the story. He's not a violent criminal and should be allowed to earn a living without this error of judgment ruining his future. Beale's hatred for Gov. Matt Blunt and all things Republican overshadowed any attempt to find the truth. In his effort to expose imaginary ethical lapses of Blunt officials, he had to violate every ethical rule of journalism."
Cooper penned another column on November 5, 2007 titled "Blunt's chief of staff won't keep his job." The column was in regard to the ongoing controversy surrounding the Blunt administration's handling of public records. Cooper was anything but flattering to Blunt and predicted how Blunt would try to stop this from continuing to damage Blunt's chances for re-election. Rather than paint Blunt as an innocent bystander to the controversy, Cooper's portrayal of Blunt was that of a politician who is not worried about right or wrong ( e.g. Blunt will fire his Chief of Staff, Ed Martin, over the holidays when it will get less notice.) but instead cares only about saving his own neck.
Which again brings me back to Nathan Cooper. Sentencing had originally been scheduled for October 19, 2007 but, at the request of Cooper's lawyer, was moved to October 26, 2007 and then to November 21, 2007. However, at the request of assistant federal prosecutor Jim Crowe, the sentencing has been moved again to December 10, 2007. Crowe did not give a reason for his request to delay the sentencing and a spokesperson from the US Attorney's office indicated she did not know the reason.
How does all this relate? Maybe it doesn't but there are quite a few things here that raise questions:
- We know that some of the AGs who were fired by the Bush Administration have alleged they received pressure regarding some of their investigations which may have had political consequences. Did political considerations play a part in clearing Blunt? Could that investigation have been re opened? After all, Hanaway allowed Cooper to run for re election (he won) and continue to represent the citizens of Southeastern Missouri after he admitted his guilt in regard to obtaining illegal visas. Her assistant, Jim Crowe, claims the delay in charging Cooper (almost 2 years after he admitted guilt and over a year after his involvement in a sting operation) was because of Cummings' investigation into the handling of fee offices by the Blunt administration. however, Cummings cleared Blunt back in October of 2006, 8 months before Cooper entered his plea. If Hanaway allows a soon to be convicted felon to represent the resident of Missouri you would think the Blunt investigation had to be going somewhere. Maybe Cooper was cooperating in that investigation and Hanaway needed him to win re election. And why would they delay Cooper's sentencing for an additional 8 months after the Blunt investigation ended?
- Cooper is supposed to get a lighter sentence because of his cooperation in a sting operation which resulted in charges being filed against Omega Paulite. However, the charges against Paulite were dropped. Could this also indicate Cooper was involved in more than one sting?
- Cooper's brother, Ryan, initially writes a column claiming his brother deserved a presidential pardon and dismisses as imaginary the ethical lapses of Blunt officials. However, within weeks Ryan Cooper writes another column that painted a picture of Blunt as unethical. What happened? Could Ryan have been sending a message to Blunt? Or could it be that the end is near for Blunt? Or maybe Nathan just realized he won't be getting a pardon.
- Finally, why has Cooper's sentencing been delayed by the government? If everything is rapped up and there isn't an ongoing investigation there really isn't any reason for the government to delay a sentencing. Usually a request to continue a court date is accompanied by a motion explaining the reasons the date needs to be moved but no reason was given here. Maybe the investigation regarding the illegal visas isn't finished. Or maybe Cooper is cooperating in an investigation unrelated to the visa case.
I don't have answers to these questions but my gut tells me something is up here. Shortly after the Cooper story broke, Republican blogger John Combest had a post about Cooper. Combest wrote that "Nathan is probably too loyal to snitch on all the crooks he knows. But I wish he would." Maybe Cooper followed the advice.
No comments:
Post a Comment