Uncategorized

Oh, the irony. The executive director of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission allowed illegal alcohol sales at a regional conference of state liquor cops in Austin,  according to a retired TABC supervisor,  and that could lead to criminal charges against the director and one of her cronies.  The agency also paid its deputy executive director more than $12,000 per month to attend a police academy full-time at government expense, even though his job does not involve any law enforcement duties (more on that below).

Darryl Darnell, a retired TABC supervisor who now works as a deputy constable, filed a complaint on November 7, 2016 against Executive Director Sherry Cook because the National Conference of State Liquor Administrators sold alcohol without a permit during its September conference.  That might not be a big deal but for two things: (1) as chairwoman of NCSLA’s southern region, Ms. Cook presumably was in charge of the conference; and (2) Ms. Cook’s agency sends regular people to jail for selling alcohol without a permit.

And then there’s what happened after Mr. Darnell filed his complaint. On Monday, TABC Captain Andy Pena called to speak with Williamson County Pct. 2 Constable Rick Coffman (Mr. Darnell’s current employer), but he was routed to Sgt. Leo Enriquez.  I spoke with Sgt. Enriquez yesterday, and he told me that Captain Pena said he was calling as a “professional courtesy” to let Constable Coffman know that Mr. Darnell had filed a complaint against Ms. Cook, whom he identified as the TABC executive director.

That phone call might be a felony.  According to Texas Penal Code § 39.06(b), “[a] public servant commits an offense if with intent to obtain a benefit or with intent to harm or defraud another, he discloses or uses information for a nongovernmental purpose that: (1) he has access to by means of his office or employment; and (2) has not been made public.” Mr. Darnell filed his complaint against Ms. Cook solely as a private citizen, and he made no mention of the fact that he worked for the constable. … Read more

This is a long post, but there’s some really juicy stuff in here, so get yourself a cup of coffee and settle in. We have news about the latest inductees to the Booger County Mafia, including Robertson County DA Coty Siegert and Hearne Interim City Manager John Naron, plus enormous and unexplained legal bills, international intrigue, and a federal investigation that could hook a former Hearne city manager, a former councilwoman, and other members of the Mafia.

First, Coty Siegert. For most of this year, my clients and friends have been telling me that Coty sold his soul to the Mafia and, for most of this year, I’ve been giving him the benefit of the doubt. No longer.

Two weeks ago I was contacted by the vice foreman of the Robertson County Grand Jury, and he confirmed what my friends have been telling me since January, namely that Coty is protecting Bryan F. “Rusty” Russ, Jr. and the other Mafia kingpins. In July, you may recall, I sent a letter to the grand jury because Coty was ignoring my request that he investigate Rusty for tampering with voter petitions.

While serving as city attorney for Hearne, Rusty had intercepted the petitions and held them in his office rather than allow the city secretary to turn them over to the county for certification.  The petitioners wanted to force a forensic audit of city finances, but Rusty wanted to block the election, apparently because he feared what the audit might reveal about him and his cronies (and now I’m wondering whether he was trying to hide the shady business deals that triggered the federal investigation).

In my letter to the grand jurors, I asked them to take matters into their own hands (as the law allows) and investigate Rusty, regardless of what Coty did or did not want.  According to the vice foreman, whom I’ll call “Mr. X”, Coty has been running interference ever since.  Mr. X said he told Coty after the August grand jury meeting that I needed to be brought before the grand jurors (as I had requested).  Coty replied that he could not subpoena me, although he would contact me by phone to see if I would appear.

What a load of bunk. Here’s an excerpt from a letter that I sent to Coty yesterday: … Read more

File this post under “not surprised.” Elizabeth Herman, the chief deputy bar prosecutor in D.C. who dismissed my grievances against Hillary Clinton’s lawyers, had previously donated to President Obama’s campaigns in 2008 and 2012.

On Friday, I received a letter from Ms. Herman explaining her refusal to investigate attorneys David Kendall, Cheryl Mills, and Heather Samuelson, and it prompted me to do a little digging about Ms. Herman.  According to Federal Election Commission records, she made two donations of $250 each to President Obama’s campaign during the 2008 election cycle, and donations of $200 and $250 during the 2012 election cycle. I think we can figure out which Presidential candidate she is supporting in 2016.

So what was Ms. Herman’s purported rationale for refusing to investigate Mrs. Clinton’s attorneys? Blind faith in the Obama Administration:

It appears that your concerns were investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”). The FBI and prosecutors declined to file charges against Ms. Clinton, her attorney, or those who allegedly assisted her in deleting the emails. We are satisfied that the misconduct alleged was properly reviewed.

That doesn’t pass the laugh test, so this morning I sent a letter to Ms. Herman’s boss, D.C. Disciplinary Counsel Wallace E. Shipp, Jr., and a letter to the D.C. Board on Professional Responsibility. Here’s the letter to Mr. Shipp: … Read more

This morning I appealed the Fifth Circuit Judicial Council’s order dismissing the misconduct case against retired U.S. District Judge Harry Lee Hudspeth of Austin.  In a letter to an appellate committee of the Judicial Conference of the United States, I also appealed the Fifth Circuit’s latest order concerning the sexual misconduct charges against retired U.S. District Judge Walter S. Smith.

As my regular readers know, I submitted evidence that Judge Smith grabbed and groped a female deputy clerk in his chambers, then Judge Hudspeth covered up the crime while he was serving as chief judge.  At this point, my appeal has less to do with Judge Smith or Judge Hudspeth than with the Fifth Circuit’s propensity to sweep judicial misconduct under the rug.  I’ve reprinted the entire letter below: … Read more

Since last year, I’ve blogged about the dirty cops at the Montgomery County Auto Theft Task Force who launched a televised raid on an auto auction in Anderson, Texas, seizing 56 vehicles without first determining whether any of them were stolen. Rather than admit their mistake, task force agents and Grimes County District Attorney Tuck McLain tried to cover up the incident by framing my clients on organized crime charges.  Now the whole thing is blowing up in their faces.

Yesterday Grimes County District Judge Donald L. Kraemer ordered the cops to release all 56 vehicles because, as we’ve said all along, not one of them was stolen (nor were there any “paperwork problems” as task force agents had claimed). You may recall that task force commander Joe Sclider and his crew arrested Les Shipman, Jerry Williams, and Israel Curtis on charges of engaging in organized criminal activity, a second-degree felony punishable by up to 20 years in prison.  Yesterday all charges were formally dismissed against Mr. Curtis, while Mr. Shipman and Mr. Williams pleaded no contest to a Class C misdemeanor charge of selling cars without a license. A Class C misdemeanor is the legal equivalent of a speeding ticket, punishable only by a fine of not more than $500.

Mr. Curtis’s case is probably the most egregious and the most tragic.  As I first reported in February, Mr. Curtis is a professional auctioneer who was hired to sell the 56 cars, he had never met Mr. Williams before the morning of the auction, and he had only met Mr. Shipman a month earlier when he signed a contract to serve as the auctioneer.* Mr. Curtis will testify that Lt. Sclider said he was arrested because the task force needed a third person in order to file an organized crime charge. In other words, Mr. Curtis showed up to do his job and ended up in jail with his business and reputation destroyed, all because some dirty cop wanted to file an organized crime charge against someone else. Yeah, and you thought you lived in a civilized country. … Read more

According to a letter that I received today from Arkansas’s top bar prosecutor, Stark Ligon, his office is running into obstacles in its efforts to investigate my attorney misconduct complaint against Hillary Clinton for destroying emails and lying to Congress:

As part of our investigation, this office is in the process of attempting to obtain further documentation from various sources about the conduct you complain of by Ms. Clinton. The amount of materials is large. To some extent, our efforts to date in this area have met with various confidentiality policies and rules at different organizations that possess such information… For one, we do not yet possess any complete transcript of FBI Director Comey’s appearance before the congressional committee in July 2016, or any full FBI report on these matters. if one has been released since July 5, 2016. We also do not yet possess any full transcript of the October 22, 2015 hearing at which Ms. Clinton testified at length about the Benghazi matter.

It’s pretty easy to find video of the Comey and Clinton testimony on Google, as well as unofficial transcripts (see, e.g., here and here) produced by media organizations. Even so, I sent a letter to House Government Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte encouraging them to give Mr. Ligon everything he needs.

Last week I reported that most grievance committees are trying to delay or bury investigations into Mrs. Clinton and her lawyers. I disagree with some of the statements in today’s letter from Mr. Ligon, but I don’t have time to write about that. I’m not a trust fund kid, so I have to keep working the day job.

Retired U.S. District Judge Harry Lee Hudspeth of Austin got away with it. To no one’s surprise, the Fifth Circuit Judicial Council in New Orleans shrugged off the evidence that Judge Hudspeth covered up the sexual misconduct of U.S. District Judge Walter S. Smith, Jr. of Waco while Hudspeth was serving as the chief judge for the Western District of Texas.

Back in May, I reported that Judge Hudspeth quietly retired while he was under investigation, apparently in an attempt to avoid judicial discipline.  Today’s order from the Fifth Circuit seems to confirm that:

In the light of Judge Hudspeth’s retirement from office, the Judicial Council is no longer able to impose any sanction under 28 U.S.C. § 354(a)(2)(A) or (B). Moreover, even assuming the allegations of the complaint are true, the Council concludes that they would not warrant recommending the extraordinary step of attempting the impeachment of a judge who is no longer on the bench.

Even assuming the allegations of my complaint are true? The order explains that the judicial council had held my complaint against Judge Hudspeth in abeyence (i.e., in limbo) while it investigated Judge Smith.  I happen to know, however, that judicial investigators did investigate matters related to Judge Hudspeth, but the judicial council apparently sat on the findings in order to give Judge Hudspeth an opportunity to retire quietly. That allowed the judicial council to shrug its shoulders and say, “Aw shucks, there’s nothing we can do.” … Read more

Donald Trump is right: the system is rigged. Bar prosecutors in Arkansas, D.C. and Maryland have violated their own rules and statutes in order to delay or prevent investigations about whether Hillary Clinton and her lawyers destroyed evidence (although bar prosecutors in New York might buck that trend). In related news, I’ve filed bar grievances against FBI Director James Comey and U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch (more on that below).

This morning I received an email from D.C. Deputy Disciplinary Counsel Elizabeth A. Herman informing me that her office would not act on my complaint that Clinton attorneys David Kendall, Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson, as well as Mrs. Clinton herself, destroyed emails from Mrs. Clinton’s private email server.  Normally, when a complaint states a facially-valid violation of the professional rules, Ms. Herman’s office asks the respondent attorney to respond in writing. In this case, Ms. Herman’s office will not even investigate my complaint, much less prosecute the offenders.

This seems to be a trend. Previously, the deputy director of the Arkansas Supreme Court’s Office of Professional Conduct, Michael Harmon, informed me that before deciding whether to file charges against Mrs. Clinton, he wanted to await the Justice Department’s decision on whether to prosecute her for lying to Congress. That’s just an excuse to delay action until after the Presidential election. As I told Mr. Harmon’s boss in a letter on Monday, “I think we both know that Mrs. Clinton has a better chance of being struck by lightning than prosecuted by the Obama Administration.” … Read more

To no one’s surprise, the U.S. District Court in Little Rock, Arkansas is trying to make my bar grievance against Hillary Clinton go away. I don’t intend to make that easy.

On Monday evening, I received a three-line letter from the court clerk stating that my bar grievance was being returned because Mrs. Clinton is an inactive member of the federal court’s bar. I called the clerk’s office yesterday morning and learned that my letter had not even been shared with the judges of the court, so I sent a letter directly to Chief Judge Brian S. Miller arguing that Mrs. Clinton’s inactive status was not grounds for rejecting the complaint. An hour later, I received an email from one of his clerks informing me that “this court is not the proper route” for filing an ethical complaint and directing me to file my grievance with the state disciplinary authority for Arkansas.

Well, that’s not what the court’s own rules say.  I’ve already filed a grievance against Mrs. Clinton with state officials (for the reasons cited on last week’s post, I don’t have much confidence in Stark Ligon, the executive director of the Arkansas Committee on Professional Conduct), and this morning I sent another letter to Chief Judge Miller explaining that the rules of his court do not give him the latitude to reject my grievance so casually. Local Rule 83.5(e) of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas adopts the Uniform Federal Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement, and the relevant disciplinary rule states as follows:

When misconduct or allegations of misconduct which, if substantiated, would warrant discipline on the part of an attorney admitted to practice before this Court shall come to the attention of a Judge of this Court, whether by complaint or otherwise, and the applicable procedure is not otherwise mandated by these Rules, the Judge shall refer the matter to counsel for investigation and the prosecution of a formal disciplinary proceeding or the formulation of such other recommendation as may be appropriate.

Uniform Federal Rule of Disciplinary Enforcement V(A). … Read more

I changed my mind. After lamenting two weeks ago that bar complaints against Hillary Clinton’s lawyers probably would be swept under the rug, I decided to file the grievances anyway. I also filed grievances against Mrs. Clinton herself.

State and federal bar rules uniformly prohibit perjury and destruction of evidence, and there is compelling evidence that Mrs. Clinton is guilty of both. We’ve known for months that Mrs. Clinton’s cronies deleted emails from her secret, home-brew email server. More recently, the chairmen of the Judiciary Committee and Government Oversight Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives referred Mrs. Clinton to the Justice Department for prosecution of perjury based on false testimony that she gave during the Benghazi investigation.

Mrs. Clinton’s friends in the Obama Administration control the Justice Department, which means they can and will block any attempt to prosecute Mrs. Clinton for perjury (or anything else). The same goes for her lawyers. But maybe – just maybe – her tentacles don’t reach into every state and federal bar.

In Mrs. Clinton’s case, I filed grievances with the Arkansas State Bar, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Mrs. Clinton is suspended from the Arkansas State Bar and the U.S. District Court for failure to comply with continuing legal education requirements, but she could reactivate her license at any time by taking the required credit hours. In the Eighth Circuit, however, she is still an active member of the bar, as is one of her attorneys, David “The Deleter” Kendall. I also filed grievances against Mr. Kendall and Mrs. Clinton’s other two lawyers, Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson, with the D.C. Bar and the Maryland Bar as well as the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. You can read the grievances by clicking the links above, and I’ve elaborated on the grievances below. … Read more