Roger Ailes Accused of Encouraging Judith Regan To Lie To Federal Investigators

Filings in Judith Regan’s pending lawsuit have revealed the identity of the person whom she says encouraged her to lie to federal investigators about her affair with former New York police commissioner, Homeland Security nominee and subsequent convicted felon Bernard Kerick. She previously described the person as a “senior fox executive” but papers revealed that she was referring to Roger Ailes, the chairman of Fox News.


Her former employee, HarperCollins, was owned by News Corp — as is Fox News. She was fired after publishing O.J. Simpson’s controversial book, “If I Did It.”

What is interesting is that Regan allegedly taped the call from Ailes where he allegedly encourages her to lie and conceal the affair. It is unclear why federal prosecutors did not pursue criminal charges if they knew about that evidence. Scooter Libby was sent to jail on counts for obstruction and perjury. If the allegations are true, prosecutors could have charged that Ailes clearly knew that there was a federal investigation and sought to obstruct that investigation and encourage false testimony. One would think that, at a minimum, prosecutors would want to know whether Ailes and Kerik had spoken by the alleged statements to Regan. Section 1622 criminalizes procuring or inducing another to commit perjury: “Whoever procures another to commit any perjury is guilty of subornation of perjury, and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both,” 18 U.S.C. 1622. The general obstruction provision states:

§ 1503. Influencing or injuring officer or juror generally
How Current is This?
(a) Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede any grand or petit juror, or officer in or of any court of the United States, or officer who may be serving at any examination or other proceeding before any United States magistrate judge or other committing magistrate, in the discharge of his duty, or injures any such grand or petit juror in his person or property on account of any verdict or indictment assented to by him, or on account of his being or having been such juror, or injures any such officer, magistrate judge, or other committing magistrate in his person or property on account of the performance of his official duties, or corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b). If the offense under this section occurs in connection with a trial of a criminal case, and the act in violation of this section involves the threat of physical force or physical force, the maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for the offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided by law or the maximum term that could have been imposed for any offense charged in such case.

Regan herself could also have faced charges in the controversy. It is not clear where the tapes were made and whether taping someone without their consent is also a crime. Moreover, if Regan did not reveal that tape, she was concealing evidence of potential obstruction of justice and even suborning perjury. Finally, if this allegation is untrue, Ailes could sue her for defamation since she is alleging a criminal act — a per se category under the common law. However, the statute of limitations could be an issue since court filings are generally privileged.

The most pressing question is whether the Justice Department investigated the allegations when Regan first stated that she was encouraged to lie. If they investigated and had a tape, it is unclear why charges were not pursued. If they did not investigate, it is difficult to understand why. I have seen far weaker cases in my career pursued doggedly by the Justice Department.

Source; Yahoo

24 thoughts on “Roger Ailes Accused of Encouraging Judith Regan To Lie To Federal Investigators”

  1. I have seen better cases than this covered up….all you need is key people to decide what to prosecute & what not to…

  2. No, no no. Mespo and Gyges assured me that the ABA disciplines attorneys that do naughty stuff – and that’s why they’re so much better than churches who have religious officials that do naughty stuff.

    See Yoo/Bybee for reference.

  3. “This one is easy–because there is one set of laws for the hoi polloi and another, completely different set of laws for our lords and masters.”

    And that will be their undoing.

    Cake anyone?

  4. Fox News: When it’s just too difficult to think for yourself.

    we report, we decide, you just listen.

  5. “If they investigated and had a tape, it is unclear why charges were not pursued.”

    This one is easy–because there is one set of laws for the hoi polloi and another, completely different set of laws for our lords and masters.

  6. I guess the one comment from the link MsB posted kind of says it all:

    “1. October 05, 2010 05:54 PM

    This tends to confirm what any defense lawyer already knows. Conduct that would get a defense lawyer, or any solo or small firm lawyer without political influence, disciplined by the court and State Bar, and violations of the special duties of prosecutors and government lawyers under the Constitution and specific professional disciplinary rules having the force of law, are routinely overlooked, tolerated, condoned, minimized in findings and sanctions, or swept under the rug. Elected prosecutors have, and their assistants participate in, a level of political influence with the judges hearing criminal cases, often former prosecutors recommended by their politician bosses or former bosses, and a halo effect among the voters, that defense counsel do not have. I am well aware of one particularly aggravated case in which an experienced assistant prosecutor was later discovered, and found by the court, to have obtained the conviction of the parents of a child for a murder that he knew the evidence he suppressed, including an excited dying declaration by the child, proved had never happened and the child had in fact been killed by a dog, proved but that defense counsel had been unable to prove this because he had withheld the evidence in clear violation of Constitutional and ethical duties. I know of other dishonesty on his part, some of which has to have been known to the same court, but that most egregious act eventually embarrassed the court and his boss. Except for being encouraged to resign that position of public trust, he has no public disciplinary record for that and is now advertising that he is a former prosecutor and practicing defense law in a larger city a couple of counties over from there. If that qualifies as good character and fitness to practice law in the eyes of the State Bar, nobody should trust them.

    — Peter S. Chamberlain”

  7. If the Justice Department has this information why hasn’t Ailes been charged? I think a Senate investigation is in order to uncover why Ailes is not doing the perp walk.

  8. Ailes was and always will be a pig at the trough of corrupt governance and public exposition.

  9. The head of FAUXNoize LIE?! You mean to say that their motto should be, “We report, you decide … if it’s the truth or not”?? Say it isn’t SO!!!!

    Well, that just totally changes my opinion of such a fine “fair & balanced!” network whose journalistic integrity is the envy of all! Where ever will I get such honest, unbiased and fair reporting from??!!

  10. Funny you mention Fox,channel surfing last night Hannity and his guest were mocking the coverage that the stations were giving to Wisconsin and what is going on in the Middle East and how they were comparing the people wanting to be free in their choices.Here it was the union busting tactics in Wisconsin.

    And out of the blue he said with that SEG that he has”the coverage is so one sided” WHAT???????

  11. mespo,

    I wonder which ethics camp teaches that one…. seems to be prevalent…

Comments are closed.