lewis, jerry Rep

===
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Lewis%E2%80%93_Lowery_lobbying_firm_controversy">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Lewis%E2%80%93_Lowery_lobbying_firm_controversy</a>

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Jerry_Lewis">http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Jerry_Lewis</a>

<h3>Duke Cunningham and Brent Wilkes</h3>

After the fall of San Diego Rep. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Randy_%22Duke%22_Cunningham" title="Randy "Duke" Cunningham">Randy "Duke" Cunningham</a> investigators began to look at other lawmakers who had ties to the same contractors -- in this case the San Diego-based <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Brent_Wilkes" title="Brent Wilkes" class="mw-redirect">Brent Wilkes</a>

-- alleged to have bribed Cunningham. Lewis was quickly determined to

be one of those lawmakers. The Redlands legislator had a history of

working with Cunningham to help secure contracts for Wilkes' Poway,

Calif. contracting businesses <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/ADCS,_Inc." title="ADCS, Inc.">ADCS, Inc.</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=PerfectWave_Technologies&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="PerfectWave Technologies (page does not exist)">PerfectWave Technologies</a>.<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20060512-9999-1n12lewis.html">[1]</a>

One San Diego military contractor called the Cunningham-Lewis duo

"pretty frightening" and stated that they were "exerting a lot of

control."<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20060512-9999-1n12lewis.html">[2]</a>

According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, three months after

Lewis became chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee he

received $17,000 from Wilkes and his associates. Wilkes was trying get a

contract from the Pentagon to digitize documents in the Panama Canal

Zone. However, the Pentagon did not want to give Wilkes' <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/ADCS,_Inc." title="ADCS, Inc.">ADCS, Inc.</a>

the amount of money that he was asking for. Wilkes issued Cunningham a

memo -- which was released in government documents along with

Cunnginham's guilty plea -- stating, "We need $10 m(illion) more

immediately . . . This is very important and if you cannot resolve this

others will be calling also."<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20060512-9999-1n12lewis.html">[3]</a>

The "other" names have been blacked out from the document although the

first letter of the first name begins with a "D" and the first letter of

the second name begins with a "J".<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/GovExhib15.gif">[4]</a> Educated guesses have led some to state that the blacked out names are <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Duncan_Hunter" title="Duncan Hunter">Duncan Hunter</a> and Jerry Lewis.<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/004166.html">[5]</a>

Both Lewis and Cunningham proceeded to cut funding for the F-22 fighter jet<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.afa.org/magazine/Feb2000/0200jerry.asp">[6]</a>,

which led the Pentagon to bow to their pressure and hand Wilkes the $10

million more for his document conversion contract. Later, when another

lawmaker would threaten the F-22's funding Cunningham would label them a

"socialist".<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20060512-9999-1n12lewis.html">[7]</a>

Lewis has received $88,252 from Wilkes and his associates. He is the third-highest recipient of campaign contributions from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Brent_Wilkes" title="Brent Wilkes" class="mw-redirect">Brent Wilkes</a> trailing only Cunningham and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/John_Doolittle" title="John Doolittle">John Doolittle</a>,

who is a self-professed friend of Wilkes. Lewis has stated that he knew

Wilkes "socially years ago" and took a trip to Guatemala with Wilkes.<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-wilkes8may08,0,6220306,full.story?coll=la-home-business">[8]</a>

Wilkes worked in the 1980s bringing congressmen to Central America to

meet with the counter-revolutionary militias that were "disappearing"

thousands of civilians while battling the Marxist Sandinistas.

<h3>Bill Lowery and Fall-out from Duke Cunningham Case</h3>

After the conviction of <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Duke_Cunningham" title="Duke Cunningham" class="mw-redirect">Duke Cunningham</a> on bribery charges, Lewis' ties to lobbyists and local defense contractors came under greater scrutiny. The San Diego Union-Tribune

reported that Lewis "has greenlighted hundreds of millions of dollars

in federal projects for clients of one of his closest friends, lobbyist

and former state Congressman <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bill_Lowery&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Bill Lowery (page does not exist)">Bill Lowery</a>."<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20051223-9999-lz1n23lewis.html">[9]</a>

Lowery's lobbying firm and clients contributed 37 percent of the $1.3

million raised by Lewis' political action committee for the last six

years. Lowery's business has boomed since Lewis' previous chairmanship

of subcommitte for Defense Appropriations. The firm's income tripled

from $1.58 million to $5.11 million and the client list multiplied from

28 to 101 since 1998. Many of the projects listed above were obtained

with the lobbying prowess of Lowery and his firm.<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20051223-9999-lz1n23lewis.html">[10]</a>

Creating greater problems for Lewis is the fact that one of those

clients that hired Lowery is implicated in the bribery case involving

Cunningham. The client, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Brent_Wilkes" title="Brent Wilkes" class="mw-redirect">Brent Wilkes</a> and his defense contracting empire, also contributed to Lewis' PAC.

On May 11, 2006 the Los Angeles Times reported that Lewis was

the subject of a federal investigation for his relationship with "a

Washington lobbyist linked to disgraced former Rep. Randy "Duke"

Cunningham". That "Washington lobbyist" was revealed to be Bill Lowery.

Of particular interest to investigators are the actions of Lewis' staff,

especially <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Jeffrey_Shockey" title="Jeffrey Shockey">Jeffrey Shockey</a><a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1160453,00.html">[11]</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Letitia_White&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Letitia White (page does not exist)">Letitia White</a><a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/02/15/MNG5CH8NRD1.DTL">[12]</a><a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/03/washington/03white.html?ei=5090&en=8028e0b0e0e4445b&ex=1306987200&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=print">[13]</a><a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000707.php">[14]</a>.

Lewis has vehemently denied any impropriety in his actions stating that

all of his earmarks were for "my constituents and my people." When

contacted about the investigation Lewis expressed shock, "For goodness

sake, why would they be doing that?"<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-lewis11may11,0,2817251.story?coll=la-home-headlines">[15]</a>

On June 1, the San Bernardino Sun reported that the City of

Redlands, Calif. and San Bernardino County, both clients of Lowery's law

firm, had been subpoenaed in the federal investigation into possible

lobbying and earmarking abuses by Lowery's firm and Lewis.<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.sbsun.com/news/ci_3886271">[16]</a>

Four days later it was revealed that two other clients of the law firm

had also been subpoenaed, Cal State University San Bernardino and

Riverside County, Calif.<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.rollcall.com/issues/51_131/news/13629-1.html">[17]</a> Investigators are paying particularly close attention to Jeffrey Shockey, who shuttled between Lewis' office and Lowery's firm.<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.rollcall.com/issues/51_131/news/13629-1.html">[18]</a> On June 6, three more cities, Loma Linda, Yucca Valley, and Twentynine Palms, stated that they had been issued subpoenas.<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.sbsun.com/search/ci_3902948">[19]</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.sbsun.com/news/ci_3906155">[20]</a> Yet another city joined them on June 14, as Highland announced it had been issued a subpoena.<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.sbsun.com/news/ci_3937778">[21]</a>

The total number of clients of Copeland Lowery Jacquez Denton &

White that have been issued subpoenas totals eight to date. <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.dailybulletin.com/news/ci_3897488">[22]</a>

On June 13, the city of Redlands was reported to be considering

terminating its' relationship with the lobbying group and on July 7th,

the city council voted unanimously to do just that.<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_D_redlands14.303ea.html">[23]</a><a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_S_lobby06.1c0f8c7.html">[24]</a>

After being subpoenaed, the San Bernardino Sun reported that the San

Bernardino Country released 3,500 pages of documents showing the

relationship between Jerry Lewis and the Copeland Lowery Jacquez Denton

& White lobbying firm. The documents show that the county used the

firm to create “strategies to get federal funding,” work on “problems

with endangered species,” and to “arrange meetings with senator and

Congressmen". This includes meetings with Congressman Lewis. <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.sbsun.com/news/ci_3957143">[25]</a>

On June 16, the Copeland Lowery Jacquez Denton & White lobbying

firm announced that it was splitting into two groups as a result of

increased media scrutiny. Partners Bill Lowery, Jean Denton, and Letitia

White comprised the group expected to lead the existing full service

consulting firm, while partners James Copeland and Lynn Jacquez left in

order to form a separate partnership. Each of the involved partners

remain focused on their client work, including discussing issues on

Capitol Hill and working with regulatory agencies. <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.sbsun.com/news/ci_3947930">[26]</a>

On June 29, it was reported that the Copeland Lowery Jacquez Denton

& White lobbying firm failed to report $2 million in lobbying fees.

Corrections were made once a federal investigation was launched, but

these 90 revised disclosures to Congress led to a realization that

figures had been misreported from 1998 to 2005. According to one legal

expert, the firm is in "serious trouble." <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001029.php">[27]</a>

On June 30, it was reported that clients of the Copeland Lowery firm

continued to give funds to Lewis just days after news surfaced of a

federal investigation into his relationship with them. Lewis got at

least $23,000 in donations from Copeland Lowery clients after this

point, mostly from defense contractors. <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001023.php">[28]</a>

===
nyt op ed

There

is yet another United States attorney whose abrupt departure from

office is raising questions: Debra Wong Yang of Los Angeles. Ms. Yang

was not fired, as eight other prosecutors were, but she resigned under

circumstances that raise serious questions, starting with whether she

was pushed out to disrupt her investigation of one of the most powerful

Republicans in Congress.If

the United States attorney scandal has made one thing clear, it is that

the riskiest job in the Bush administration is being a prosecutor

investigating a Republican member of Congress. Carol Lam, the United

States attorney in San Diego, was fired after she put Randy Cunningham,

known as Duke, in prison. Paul Charlton, in Arizona, was dismissed while

he was investigating Rick Renzi. Dan Bogden, in Nevada, was fired while

he was reportedly investigating Jim Gibbons, a congressman who was

elected governor last year.Ms.

Yang was investigating Jerry Lewis, who was chairman of the powerful

House Appropriations Committee. Ms. Lam and most of the other purged

prosecutors were fired on Dec. 7. Ms. Yang, in a fortuitously timed

exit, resigned in mid-October.Ms.

Yang says she left for personal reasons, but there is growing evidence

that the White House was intent on removing her. Kyle Sampson, the

Justice Department staff member in charge of the firings, told

investigators last month in still-secret testimony that Harriet Miers,

the White House counsel at the time, had asked him more than once about

Ms. Yang. He testified, according to Congressional sources, that as late

as mid-September, Ms. Miers wanted to know whether Ms. Yang could be

made to resign. Mr. Sampson reportedly recalled that Ms. Miers was

focused on just two United States attorneys: Ms. Yang and Bud Cummins,

the Arkansas prosecutor who was later fired to make room for Tim

Griffin, a Republican political operative and Karl Rove protégé.It

is hard to see what put Ms. Yang on the White House list other than her

investigation of Mr. Lewis, which threatened to pull in well-connected

lobbyists, military contractors and Republican contributors. Ms. Yang,

by all accounts, had a strong record. Alberto Gonzales hailed her as

“one of the most respected U.S. attorneys in the country.”

The

new job that Ms. Yang landed raised more red flags. Press reports say

she got a $1.5 million signing bonus to become a partner in Gibson, Dunn

& Crutcher, a firm with strong Republican ties. She was hired to be

co-leader of the Crisis Management Practice Group with Theodore Olson,

who was President Bush’s solicitor general and his Supreme Court lawyer

in Bush v. Gore. Gibson, Dunn was defending Mr. Lewis in Ms. Yang’s

investigation.Several

issues bear investigating. First, did Ms. Yang know or suspect that she

might lose her job, and jump ship to avoid being fired? That is not

hard to believe because Ms. Miers and Mr. Sampson were exchanging e-mail

about dismissing her in mid-September, and she announced her departure

in October. Ms. Yang served on the Attorney General’s Advisory

Committee, which Mr. Gonzales has called “a small group of U.S.

attorneys that I consult on policy matters.” That may have put her in a

position to be tipped off in advance.A

second possibility is that Gibson, Dunn dangled a rich financial

package before Ms. Yang to get her out, and to disrupt the investigation

of Mr. Lewis. Ms. Yang, who says she left her job purely for personal

reasons, may not have known she was being lured away by people with

close ties to Mr. Lewis and the White House, who were hoping to replace

her with a more partisan prosecutor.Another

possibility is that the timing of her departure was coincidental. That

would make her lucky indeed: after more than 15 years of working for

government, she decided to take a private sector job precisely when the

White House counsel was apparently trying to fire her.It

is impossible to know how much of a setback Ms. Yang’s departure was to

the investigation of Mr. Lewis. It could be that it slowed down after

she left. It could also be that it is going forward just as it would

have had she stayed. If it has not been affected, that could be because

the close attention Congress and the press are paying to United States

attorneys has prevented the White House from installing a “loyal

Bushie,” in Mr. Sampson’s famous phrase.United

States attorneys serve, as the White House likes to point out, at the

pleasure of the president. But if Ms. Yang, or any of the others, was

pushed out to prevent justice from being done in a pending criminal

matter, it would be a serious misuse of executive authority. It could

also be obstruction of justice.Congress

is conducting closed-door interviews with Justice Department officials.

That is important, but hardly enough. It is looking more and more as if

the United States attorney dismissals were managed out of the White

House. The way to put to rest the questions about Ms. Yang’s suspicious

departure, and the firings of the other prosecutors, is to require that

Ms. Miers, Mr. Rove and other White House officials tell what they know,

in public and under oath.
==