Skip to main content

The Whistleblower's Tale

It’s going to be difficult for the usual chatterers to make merry with Christine Ragaglia’s difficulties. True, she’s a Republican, and its always open season on Republicans in Connecticut. But she is also a woman who helped prosecutors put a nail in the devil’s tail. The Rowland prosecution likely would not have been possible without her grand jury testimony.

That testimony, put under seal by prosecutors, has now, thanks to some anonymous leaker, become public property. Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, according to an Associated Press report, is promising to “recover millions lost to Rowland-era corruption.”

Connecticut’s attorney general, who relies on co-operative witnesses and whistleblowers to secure his convictions, has vowed to “seek relief tailored to the individuals like Ragaglia and others who have betrayed the public trust.” The associated press reporter who was given access both to the sealed -- now, obviously unsealed -- grand jury testimony, as well as Ragaglia’s much sought after diary, wryly remarks in the AP report, “Because of grand jury secrecy, however, Ragaglia's 2004 testimony hasn't been filed in the state case.”

Perhaps Blumenthal can get the information he needs to prosecute Ragaglia, a federal informant, from the AP reporter who filed the story – and never mind that the publication of sealed grand jury information may make co-operating witnesses less likely to divulge information to prosecutors in future cases involving political corruption in Connecticut.

It is not yet known whether Blumenthal is seeking to recover funds from Regaglia’s former boss, Larry Alibozak, the sleezball whose grand jury testimony helped to drive a stake through former Governor John Rowland’s heart.

It’s difficult to predict at this remove what bit part some future Pulitzer Prize winning reporter – There are probably dozens of them banging away at computer terminals as I write -- will assign to Ragaglia. From the little that is know so far, she appears to be a woman more sinned against than sinning. Apparently, she suffered from an alcoholic problem, doubtless brought on by Alibozak’s attentions. And, of course, Rowland’s chief aide Peter Ellef and William Tommasso, both recently sentenced for peculation and incurable stupidity, would drive a saint to drink.

Like Mark Twain, Ragaglia told the truth mainly, when put upon her oath. She kicked both Rowland and Alibozak in the groin and shed her alcoholic problem along the way. According to reports I’ve heard from accomplished state fraud investigators, Ragaglia acquitted herself well as Connecticut’s chief fraud investigator and actually managed to facilitate the creation of programs that will save the state some money. Please note: Agency heads that are workaholics and save the state pennies almost always are forced to walk the plank by career leeches hungry for larger budgets. It’s just the way the state generally does business: What you don’t spend in 2006, you will not receive in 2007, and blessed are they who get and spend. Penny pinchers routinely are tossed overboard.

Of course, it is always possible that media folk on the prowl for past Rowland associates to put in their journalistic tumbrels may discover that some of Rowland’s associates were victims rather than perpetrators of a political corruption that appears to have been limited only to Republicans and Ernie Newton. Democrats never steer building projects to their friends and political associates; they never get tipsy; they do not keep diaries; they never go on junkets; they are masterful at warding off the baneful influences of political contributors; they have nothing to fear from federal prosecutors – and certainly they have nothing to fear from fellow Democrat Dick Blumenthal.

So, now the guillotine requires another warm body – this time Regaglia. If you crane your neck over the Democratic crowd of joyous onlookers, you will see her approaching the contraption in the tumbrel, hands tied behind her back, suitably disgraced, soon to get what is due her. It will all be over in a moment. It is no matter to justice that she has co-operated with her judges. Her foot will touch the stair. The blade will be drawn up; an anticipatory silence will follow – and then the crowd will emit a squeal of delight.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

PCBs, GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH

By Gerald and Natalie Sirkin c2007 A front-page story on PCBs in the March 9 News-Times is just wrong. The first thing to know about PCBs is that they never killed a single person nor did they ever cause cancer. The second is that although they are invariably called “cancer-causing,” that designation comes chiefly from a single rat study. The third thing is that the subject rats were exposed daily for 21 months to 100 parts per million (ppm) of PCBs containing 60% chlorine. (The 100 ppm was about 5,000 times the tolerable daily intake of PCBs set by FDA in 1973.) When rats were exposed to PCBs containing less chlorine, they developed no cancers. The fourth, that when the exposed rats were allowed to live out their lives, they had fewer cancers and lived longer than the unexposed rats. PCBs is a family of chemicals known as polychlorinated biphenyls. PCBs contain chlorine ranging from 12% to 70%. They were used in two General Electric plants that manufactured electrical equipmen...

Taking The Fifth, After Esty

Whether or not U.S. Representative Elizabeth Esty will serve the remainder of her term or resign immediately is very much an open question. But, in any case, the battle for Connecticut’s 5 th U.S. Congressional District has begun with a show of unexpected fireworks. For many years, the 5 th District was a toss-up proposition; both Republicans and Democrats have held and surrendered the seat. Geographically the 5 th District touches the border of New York from Connecticut’s northern-most point to Danbury in the southern quadrant and includes much of Litchfield county and parts of Fairfield, Hartford and New Haven counties. Party affiliation is competitive, in round figures, 30 percent Democrat, 25 percent Republican and 45 percent unaffiliated. Over the years, the Democrat Party in Connecticut has moved from the center to the left, but the 5 th District has been a moderate preserve. During the Obama presidential election, Republican moderates within Connecticut's U.S. ...