The World According to Nick
Politics, News, Photography, and Triathlons... What don't I talk about?
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
<< Stop Changing the Topic The Moment You've All Been Waiting For >>
So Why The Federal Charges?

Before I begin, I'll just point out two things immediately.  One, I'm not a legal expert, so please take this all with the appropriate amounts of salt.  Two, I'm not attempting in any way, shape or form to excuse the actions of Michael McGee.

Now with that little bit out of the way, why are there federal charges as well as state charges?  The federal complaint is now available online for you to read (the state complaint is currently sealed), and I find a few things to be of interest.  Everything I'm seeing says that they went through extra effort to make these charges federal.  For instance there is this (emphasis added):

As one example, on July 7, 2006, CW2 met with McGee for the purpose of paying him the $750 that McGee has previously requested.  According to CW2, because of McGee's position as a public official, CW2 felt compelled to provide the funds to McGee, fearing that refusing to pay McGee would jeopardize CW2's liquor license for CW2's business.  As part of this transaction, agents provide to CW2 a $750 United States Postal Money Order (#09284267924) with the payee line left blank.

I believe that they specifically chose a United States Postal Service Money Order because that then allows them to bring federal wire fraud charges, and potentially federal racketeering charges.  The use of any other form of payment (like cash or bank money order) would not have allowed federal charges to take place.  The rest of the indictment also makes reference to "interstate commerce" like this:

I am aware that at all times relevant to this affidavit, the City of Milwaukee has received in excess of $10,000 during a 12-month period under a federal program involving a grant, contract, subside, loan or other form of federal assistance.
...
Based on this investigation, I also am aware that the store owners mentioned herein operate, at least in part, in interstate commerce.  The store owners buy goods and services from entities outside the State of Wisconsin and the operation of the stores mentioned herein affect interstate commerce.

Of course, any business in this city, and any city in this country now falls within those parameters.

As I said, this is not meant to excuse his actions.  But federal charges seem out of line here.  What he did was a crime against the people in the City of Milwaukee, and the State of Wisconsin.  He should answer to those people... the people he actually wronged!  He should stand trial in Milwaukee.  Moreover, I dislike that members of the federal government basically tailored their method of investigation to guarantee the federal charges.  Somehow this seems to cheapen justice by taking the ability of the wronged parties to actually seek justice.  It also goes to show that if anyone in the federal government wants to accuse you of a federal crime, they can and will.  Federalism be damned.

This also proves that Michael McGee is a complete idiot.  Who takes a bribe in the form of a Postal Service Money Order anyway?  Seriously.  Wouldn't you look at that and get kind of suspicious?  Since when has bribery not been a cash business?

# Posted at 3:26 PM by Nick  |  Comment Feed Link 9 Comments  |  No Trackbacks

 Add to del.icio.us |  Digg this Post | Filed Under: Current Events

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 4:32:06 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
You did notice McGee just escaped a recall election because his "peers" re-elected him?

My guess is that the Feds don't trust a Milwaukee jury to convict.

As a matter of opinion, neither do I.

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 4:41:02 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
So guilty until proven innocent then right?

As a matter of principle I do not agree with shopping around jurisdictions until someone finds someone else who will give us the verdict we want, or the punishment that they think is fair. If you commit a crime in a particular jurisdiction, you should be held accountable there, and be punished there.

This is a local crime, that affected local people, and has local laws that McGee is subject to.

As a matter of reality, he would be tried not just be people in his aldermanic district, but also by people in the larger city, so I don't think using his recall election as a yard stick for convictability is fair either.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007 12:00:13 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
Would you have said the same thing in the 1960s when white juries were freeing people who lynched blacks?

There is a reason why we allow venues to be changed.

Sometimes the only way to achieve a fair trial is to seek a less biased venue.

I didn't say McGee wasn't guilty until proven innocent. My point is a large section of Milwaukee would declare McGee innocent regardless of his being proven guilty.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007 12:46:48 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
The businesses that are involved partake in interstate commerce which makes it a federal charge.
smt
Wednesday, May 30, 2007 1:36:19 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
I can't give you a statute or case history, but I'm pretty sure Congress made it a federal crime because local authorities can't be trusted to actually take political graft seriously.

if you have to justify it constitutionally, the interstate commerce part seems pretty legitimate. These businesses presumably, at least from time to time, did business with vendors, suppliers, etc. located in Illinois or elsewhere.

Let's not take it personally here in Milwaukee, this lack of trust the Feds have in us to take care of our own problems. The law was probably developed in response to southern racist prosecutors/cops ignoring civil rights violations, or local cops/prosecutors ignoring grave political malfeasance in Chicago...
Ben
Wednesday, May 30, 2007 1:37:27 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
Also... the feds tailor their investigation to fit
Wednesday, May 30, 2007 1:48:47 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
Frankly I think the "interstate commerce" aspect is bogus. Because realistically, there are no businesses that don't meet the definition they've created for "interstate commerce". Given the nature of business today, its impossible not to have some sort of interstate commerce tie in.

That phrase has lost all meaning.

As for not trusting local authorities to take this matter seriously, I think the fact that State charges are being filed proves that false on its face. In fact, the state charges (which I didn't post about because the complaint is currently sealed) sounds much more severe than the federal charges, with accusations of battery and assault. However, because federal jurisdiction supersedes state jurisdiction, there is a decent chance that a state trial for battery would come much later, if at all... meaning that people who were physically assaulted may never have their day in court. Where is the justice in that?
Thursday, May 31, 2007 3:37:53 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
By the way, I'm with you in your dislike of the "interstate commerce" excuse. More government intrusion in people's lives have been justified by "interstate commerce" than Michael McGee ever dreamed of.
Friday, June 01, 2007 11:00:12 AM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
My understanding of the case is the state charges focus on the
the conspiracy to assault and the alleged attempts at hiring a hit,
where the federal case focuses on the bribery & corruption.

It was the assault aspect that forced the arrest absent the threat of a
hit or an assault McGhee would probably be free yet and the investigation
still an unknown to the general public.

As to the Feds getting involved. Hmmm, we would have to look at how public
corruption at all levels came to be a federal situation. I would guess
the reasoning is governmental corruption tramples on equal treatment before
the law and therefore is a violation of the Constitution.
Comments are closed.


© Copyright 2012 Nick Schweitzer
Powered By newtelligence dasBlog 1.9.7067.0
Theme Based on Design By maystar