justice within these united states. i would especially like to thank jill simpson, the whistleblower i must tell you, though, the

selective prosecution of democrats is just as indefensible as racial bias. judge clemon can very well tell you that there were marches and you all know that people were killed for civil rights. these are our leaders. they make laws. they chose the life of servanthood. how can the average american in these united states expect to get a fair trial when the leaders cannot get a fair trial? how ridiculous is it that we have evidence of bias of u.s. attorneys, judges, where you can prove, where you can point to documents out of their own mouths that they had a personal bias. i will talk today about what we need to do as concerned citizens about restoring justice at the department of justice.

but it's also a rallying call to every citizen out there to understand how important this particular issue is. this has been a war against democrats. against democrats. need we say more about the damning statistical revelation that was given by donald shields, the professor at, i believe, it's missouri state university. there's a 1 in 10,000 chance that the department of justice would have gone after democrats more so than republicans. i will tell you that there were 268 democrats, 57 republicans and only 10 independents that were either investigated,

prosecuted, some were acquitted. but it went largely enknown, because this is a systemic problem. but the abuse today, we can point to. and i will highlight later on on the part of my father's case simply because we can point to very clear instances where something should have been done. justice recently, we warned the accuser a week and a half ago of a judge who my father fought back in 199, basically against his nomination to become judge. it was a very open and public debate. my father headed up the only government-funded civil rights organization in the city. the judge obviously didn't remember, but our attorney nathan dershowitz found on the

micro fische two articles that this was a coveted position for a judge and a major milestone in his career. still yet he didn't remember this young civil rights warrior came after him. but when evidence showed up, all of a sudden there was a change. there's some parallels in the siegelman case involving the u.s. attorney, their accuse e, this conflict of interest. whenever you have a u.s. attorney to poison the well, those who would drink from that well no matter who it is, even a new u.s. attorney, if they use that same information, they're poisoned as well. i can't begin to talk about what a judge can do. but i believe from a judge,

u.w.clemon has told us. we now that proof that the doj was politicizing republicans with ultraconservative views. we also know that a political pressure was used to coerce u.s. attorneys across the country to indict democrats. we know that most of the investigations were launched during the election cycle. we know that heavily democratic-leaning states were targeted. we know that major fundraisers of the democratic party were targeted. look at paul minor, david rosen. we know that democratic victims were high ranking, highly popular and considered a threat. we know that at least nine u.s. attorneys were fired because they did not pursue investigation on democrats. again, must we present super extraordinary circumstances or evidence to the department of justice to start these

investigations immediately? well, today we have decided to take the show on the road and to rally the troops. those of you all who are members of the media, please recognize that one of the things that we found in the shields report was that most of these investigations occurred up under the national radar. in cities where there were perhaps only one beat reporter. so therefore, many people in the nation never heard of what happened. and certainly they can not make the national connection. but as you know, i ran for congress in 2002 and i found that quickly that all politics is local. when i ran for office, bush, cheney, dennis hastert, rumsfeld, all came to my state to fight. all politics is local.

the gentleman who beat me in the democratic district became president of the freshman class. there's certainly a level of reward involving those in the political system. now, i will highlight this case because of the numerous and inconceivable outcomes and rulings that defy any logic, and more so any rule of law. and again, i'm talking about my father's case. sure, it's dare to my heart, but there's some very concise and clear things that we must understand. it's inconceivable to me that we would wait. the department of justice would not move immediately. first of all, as in the siegelman case, there was no crime. there was no crime. what started off as a political search for corruption and kwid

pro quo ended up being an investigation of my father's personal businesses. how did it get started? my father beat out the current governor of georgia sonny purdue, his friend for the senate majority position. he switched parties, and it is documented, because my father became senate majority leader. he held a press conference in front of our businesses and stated that my father was the poster child of cronieism and corruption and was the best friend of the governor then roy barnes. he ran for election. his friend then conducted an investigation on the current governor back then, roy barnes and three other top-ranking

democrats. during that time, an investigation was launched at the department of professional responsibility where they had concluded that he had abused his power for helping a political friend and ally by sending out press releases to help the governor. they let him resign. no action was taken. my father's case ironically went forward. now, how could that possibly happen? but it did. now today, the same governor who said he would create an inspector general's office out of his own mouth appointed a disgraced u.s. attorney richard thompson as administrative judge for the ethics commission in the state of georgia. how bold. can we make a link there can we connect the dots?

of course we can. have we not presented extraordinary circumstances and evidence of conflicts of interest? have we not proven there were personal motives who had agendas that went after siegelman, paul minor. were they not a threat to the establishment? of course they were. in my father's case, what turned out to be a motive of gambling turned out to be incorrect. they said he was going to atlantic city and he lost a significant amount of money and therefore he had to steal from a charity he had created and that we needed money. during the first day of the court proceedings, the government abandoned its theories because they checked his losses but not his winnings. the judge allowed testimony to be submitted to the jury even

though it was recanted during the trial and the record proves it was false. one of my father's colleagues senator nady ne thomas stated my father held up a very important bill with grady hospital, a federal-funded hospital. when she came to trial, she said it never occurred. she thought it had occurred. she looked up on the internet. he was never even a part of it. still yet, he was charged, and it went to the jury. perjured testimony documented. there were 142 count which is altogether represented five charges. listen to the charges. 98% of the things the initial article in the "atlanta constitution" which the government said prompted the investigation never made it through the grand jury. they said he stole proceeds from hot dogs, peanuts and popcorn

and snicker bar sales from a charity football game. this represented 30-something counts. but the jury acquitted him on tax evasion charges. they couldn't find the money. failure to file a timely financial disclosure, even though the state ethics commission had resolved him by giving him an ethics fine. it was a $25 fine. this represented 20-something counts. they said he overstated the readership and circulation of our local minority newspaper. not one newspaper in the united states of america has been charged with such. most matters of that nature are handled in civil court. he sent two $25 money orders to his nephews that were in prison. i can't tell you how many counts they charged him for that. most of the counts came from bills that crossed state lines that they considered mail fraud. now, let me tell you a little bit about the conflict of interest with the judge, because in the siegelman's case, we see

the prosecutor, we see the judge, and we see people in the doj taking their side. there's a web of conspiracy, but it is real. but who's listening? today you're here to take back to your family, friends and the media. you're here with the facts armed to be this agent of change that we so desperately need today. judge bowen, of course, recused himself based upon the fact that my father came after him. but during the trial, he refused to allow the defense to raise the issue of prosecutorial misconduct or selective prosecution. sound familiar? same in the siegelman case. he sequestered the jury over the memorial day weekend. you can't do that. people want to go home. the judges can tell you what that will do. he allowed perjured testimony. he did not sanitize the indictment after the government abandoned several of its

theories. he wanted to poison the well. he denied every single motion the defense counsel made. now, during the jury trial, based upon his, what we call his quest for revenge, we asked that our defense attorney thought that we should not ask him to refuse himself because they said he had a problem frwith my fath from the beginning. but he cleverly eck accused blacks that had knowledge of my father or voted for my father. blacks were ten times more likely to know who we were than most whites. he removed 40% of the selective white jurors and replaced them with black jurors. he consequently changed the complexion of the jury. it went from 65% urban black to 65% rural white where my father led the fight to change the state flag.

in south georgia is where there was so much confederate flag, it actually changed georgia democratic rule after 135 years. they stated that senator walker was so popular that government couldn't get a fair trial. the defense counsel came up with a stack of newspaper articles that came from the "augusta chronicle" that onef the judge's best friends, they grew up together, sat on the same pew, and was my father's fiercest political rival, and newspaper competitor. they used his articles to show that my father actually was too popular to be tried in the actual district where every article that they wrote was negative against my father. he didn't hold a hearing. he just said we're going to expand the venue to south

georgia. now come on. if my father could not get a fair trial. i mean, if my father was too popular in that particular area, then how about we consider in south georgia his popularity? that wasn't the plan. there was certainly no jury of his peers. i will tell you today that without a schad dp-- shadow of doubt the judge's decision was krit kl. he replaced four black jurors with four white jurors. one of the jurors that the defense counsel has stricken was a republican who had ran for office before. he said that we struck that juror was he was white. the law says it's a prima fascia case. we said it was because he was a

republican. the judge said well, i just don't believe that. he doesn't have that right to do that, yet he still did. the appellate court found that it was quite disturbing the judge's handling of the case. but still yet, they decided to defer to his discretion. i say today that the department of justice is deferring to someone's discretion, but whose discretion we do not know. but there is a different day, there's a different regime, and we are hopeful that things will turn around. but i will tell you that that stricken juror became the jury foreman and later we found out that he had received a check from governor perdue for $500,000, and we have it documented. still yet you can go to the appeals court, but once the poison is in the water, it is too late.

in closing, the law of the lapp land is what we live by. but when that law is violated we encounter a lawless society. there's a 1,600 pound gorilla at the department of justice. what will we do about it. the alliance for justice, revolution u.s. these are organizations that stepped forward today who have shown that they are courageous, that they are persistent and dedicated to the cause. we ask you all today to step up the fight. to direct your attention on one aim, one focus. and that is the department of justice. i ask you this question. what other extraordinary evidence must we provide. what other connection must we draw to show political tampering

and influence? we even had congressmen to fly up to washington, d.c. based upon the atlanta journal reporter's summation, to ask the disgraced u.s. attorney richard thompson to stay on the job, to finish his duty once opr recommended him. because they wanted him to finish dusting off my father. but if you can't get an audience with the judge to conduct a hearing it doesn't mean anything. this is a problem. people died fighting for their civil rights. people were hosed down. democrats have civil rights. moveon.org, democrats now, all the organizations out there, we need you. this is not just about my father. it is about justice for all.

for more information, you can reach out to politi politicalprosecution.org. go to info@politicalprosecution.org. i would give a phone number out. 706-951-2671.

>> while that may sound some what vague, isn't what tha what financial institutions, capitol market and financial regulationsre