 |
|
| Email this article | Printer friendly page |
| For Immediate Release | |
| Nov 19, 1997 | Contact: Press Office 202-646-5172 |
|
Group found Huang Charges that Agreement Part of Reno/Justice Department Effort to Cover-Up Clinton Finance Scandal Opportunity to Address Court Requested for Sentencing Hearing Scheduled for 9:00 A.M. on Friday in D.C. Federal Court in Courtroom 12 Today, Judicial Watch, Inc, the public interest group that uncovered John Huang and the campaign finance scandal, intervened before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to argue that a plea agreement proposed by the Clinton Justice Department and Michael Brown be rejected by the judge, who has scheduled a sentencing hearing for 9:00 A.M. in courtroom 12 of the federal courthouse for this Friday, November 21, 1997. In its brief, Judicial Watch argues the following points. First, the plea should not be accepted because, as evidenced in publicly available information and sworn testimony, Michael Brown was part of a scheme to buy influence with his father, the late Commerce Secretary Ron Brown. Accordingly, the Clinton Justice Department's proposal to have him plead to a minor infraction of campaign finance law effectively sweeps substantiated allegations of bribing a Clinton Cabinet official under the table. See Byron York, "Michael Brown Goes Free," American Spectator, Nov. 1997. Second, pleading Michael Brown to a minor offense, will relieve the pressure which could be brought to bear on him to tell all the truth about the full extent of illegal campaign finance activities in the Clinton Administration. Michael Brown's father, Ron Brown, likely revealed details of this to him. Third, as Michael Brown was also part of a scheme to illegally launder monies into the campaign of Senator Edward Kennedy, and as Kennedy is typically not being charged with any crime, it sets a bad law enforcement precedent that certain people are exempt from the rule of law. Finally, it has been reported that the judge is a close friend of the Brown family. Without impugning the integrity of the Court, which Judicial Watch respects, to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest, Judicial Watch asked for the Court to consider stepping aside and allowing another judge to handle the matter if the reports are true, in whole or in part. |
|
