From the Native heartland

I do recall an impressive array of US attorneys, both Republican and Democrat, saying that the prosecution was politically motivated and controlled.

That's not the same thing as "Siegelman is innocent." But prosecution of political officials does tend to be political and, once the feds are on the scent, they tend to stay at it until they get their man.

Let's not forget the Bush DoJ prosecution and conviction of Don Siegelman, a clear case of injustice.

I voted for Don Siegelman but I don't think there's much doubt that he was involved in shady dealings with Richard Scrushy. I am, however, as always, deeply skeptical of giving prosecutors unlimited time periods to find "something" with which to charge prominent individuals.

Dragon, when you watch a football game do you worry that the guys in the huddle are talking about you?

I see a Republican adminstration, mere weeks away from turning into a pumpkin, opening a lot of investigations of high level Democrats

A lot? What is there, other than Blago and Richardson?

I don't know much about the Richardson case, but frankly it would have been criminal not to go after Blagojevich.

Especially when it's a Republican administration that has a history of using corruption prosecutions for political purposes.

Doubtful, Dragon.
Think; Wouldn't it have been far better to do so prior to the election?

Well in Blago's case, the parts that made the news didn't happen until either after the election, or close enough to it that it wouldn't have been an option. But I agree, it's doubtful.

The timing in Blago was mostly because he was so sloppy about it post-election. The timing on Richardson is different, either they just got the evidence, or the search was prompted because of his nomination (or perhaps even when he was a Dem candidate).

Either way, it doesn't matter, he's either innocent or guilty, regardless of the motive of the investigators.