Former Ala. Governor Turns Tables on Justice Department

Siegelman's assertions come as the Justice Department is vulnerable to allegations of politically tainted actions, given the departure last year of Gonzales and several of his top aides amid probes of White House interference in personnel matters. Puerto Rico's Democratic governor, after being indicted last month for allegedly violating campaign finance laws, has similarly accused prosecutors of being motivated by political considerations.

In response to the Siegelman accusations, Peter Carr, a Justice Department spokesman, said, "This case was brought by career prosecutors . . . based on the law and the evidence alone." Carr added that "after considering that evidence -- which is a matter of public record -- a jury of Mr. Siegelman's peers found him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of federal funds bribery, conspiracy to commit mail fraud, honest services mail fraud and obstruction of justice."

Prosecutors note that the Justice Department has targeted more than a dozen high-profile Republicans in Congress and the executive branch in public corruption prosecutions during the Bush administration, including former California lawmaker Randall "Duke" Cunningham and disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, a Rove ally.

Rove's lawyer, Robert D. Luskin, said that Rove "does not recall" ever meeting Simpson and "simply never had a conversation about targeting Siegelman. He didn't talk to anybody in the White House about it. He didn't talk to anybody in the Justice Department about it. . . . He had no role whatsoever in seeking the indictment."

Some independent groups have been wary of taking sides.

Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a nonprofit group that focuses on issues of government corruption and White House influence, said the allegations are murky and may merit further inquiry from the courts or Congress.

"It seems like something bad may have happened, but it also seems like Siegelman may have done something wrong," Sloan said. "He may not be a total innocent, but that doesn't mean that what appears to have happened is okay."

During an eight-week trial in 2006, prosecutors alleged that, while serving as governor, Siegelman steered a seat on a key hospital board to health-care executive Scrushy, in exchange for $500,000 in donations to a state education lottery that Siegelman had embraced.

Siegelman's lawyers have blamed the jury's decision on poor instructions from the judge. Legal experts say the fact that the appeals court released Siegelman before even hearing his argument could signal that the court may order a retrial.

"I'm not sure we can learn anything more until some folks from the White House or Justice Department loosen up on this and agree to testify or at least be interviewed," said G. Douglas Jones, a Democrat and former U.S. attorney who is advising Siegelman.

Among other issues, Jones wants more information on what he says a career prosecutor in Montgomery told him was a "top to bottom" review of the case conducted by Justice Department officials in Washington in December 2004, when Jones said the probe of Siegelman was stalled. Shortly after Jones heard about the review, he said, government investigators began issuing new subpoenas for witnesses and documents.

Former prosecutors say there is a less sinister explanation for those events. Public corruption cases involving lawyers from the Justice Department routinely undergo a review by career prosecutors in Washington, in which evidence and legal theories are tested. It is not unusual, the lawyers said, for investigators to seek additional or different evidence after such a meeting, to bolster the case before they seek an indictment.

In the interview, Siegelman pointed to what he called suspicious timing of the charges against him, beginning with a first, failed federal fraud case in 2004 on what he says was the final day such charges could be filed. A second indictment was returned in May 2005 and unsealed that October, nine months after Siegelman announced he would run against Riley the following year. His trial began in May 2006, one month before Alabama's Democratic primary, which he lost.

Key lawmakers, including Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), have asked Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey during questioning at oversight hearings to reopen the case. But Mukasey has so far responded that he will not consider such a step until the appeals process ends.

Last month, Mukasey issued an internal memo reminding prosecutors of their responsibility to "safeguard" the Justice Department's reputation. "Law enforcement officers and prosecutors may never select the timing of investigative steps or criminal charges for the purpose of affecting any election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party," Mukasey wrote.

Assertions of political motivation, however, could grow louder as the presidential election approaches and the end of the Bush administration nears. Federal prosecutors have made public corruption among their top priorities, and grand jury investigations of lawmakers including former Senate Appropriations Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) and House Appropriations panel member Alan B. Mollohan (D-W.Va.) could be resolved by the end of the year.

Research editor Alice Crites contributed to this report.