Why the FBI was allowed to hold Cliff Rosenberger under dark clouds for six years

David Axelrod is a partner at the Shumaker Law Firm, a criminal defense attorney, and a former federal prosecutor. He represented Cliff Rosenberger in the FBI investigation discussed in this article.

Cliff Rosenberger first became aware that he was under criminal investigation in March 2018, when he, then Speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives, learned that the FBI had questioned several of his employees.

Eventually, it became clear that the investigation was focused on whether Rosenberger had stymied the progress of a short-term lending reform bill, House Bill 123, in exchange for short-term lenders funding an official trip to London to attend a leadership seminar alongside lawmakers from other states. (He did nothing of the sort and actually supported short-term lending reform.)

A Speaker of the House of Representatives is attacked

The investigation triggered a flood of headlines.

On April 9, the administration served a grand jury subpoena to the House of Representatives seeking records related to Rosenberger’s business travel, including calendars, travel itineraries, travel companion information, emails, travel types, payment methods, meeting schedules, daily schedules, and travel itineraries.

Concerned that the investigation could distract the House from important business and hinder him in the performance of his duties, Rosenberger announced his resignation on April 10.

The following month, the government executed search warrants at Rosenberger’s home and offices, seeking similar information under federal laws criminalizing bribery of public officials.

Information about the search warrants leaked in advance, and both television and print media were present when the FBI executed the warrant at Rosenberger’s home. The contents of the warrants were widely reported, but the affidavit establishing probable cause for the searches was (and remains) sealed, so no one outside the court and law enforcement knows its basis.

Cliff Rosenberger was humiliated

No charges were ever brought against Rosenberger or anyone else connected with Bill 123, which eventually became law. There is a compelling argument that the investigation was the result of a “trap” set by political opponents.

On May 22 – more than six years after the investigation began – the government confirmed in a letter to the lawyer that the investigation had been finally closed.

The fear and stress that such an examination brings are immeasurable and hard to describe.

More:Federal authorities quietly close investigation into former Ohio House Speaker Cliff Rosenberger

Imagine having to face the prospect every day and every sleepless night of being arrested and prosecuted for something you didn’t do, and being dragged before a federal court to face charges headlined “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. (YOUR NAME).”

Imagine being an elected official forced out of office because of an investigation, and having to face your colleagues and constituents while under such dire circumstances. Imagine having to seek new employment under such circumstances.

Why was the government allowed to do this?

Why did it take so long for the government to acknowledge the end of the investigation, especially since the five-year statute of limitations for the possible crimes expired more than a year ago?

The simple answer is that the government is not obliged to always to acknowledge the end of an investigation and very rarely does this.

The Department of Justice’s manual states that termination of target status “may be appropriate” when a criminal investigation “has been terminated without charges being filed against the target.” However, it is clear that this type of notification is purely discretionary and that no justification is required for refusing to issue such a “closure letter.”

In other words, the government is free to remain silent even though a particular investigation will receive massive publicity and a closed investigation will cause severe collateral damage to the unaccused victim.

I am a “true believer.” After 40 years of practice as a prosecutor and criminal defense attorney, I am convinced that federal prosecutors almost always do what they believe is right, even when they disagree.

In this case, we are grateful that the U.S. Attorney for this district has exercised his discretion and certified in writing that the investigation into the Rosenberger case is indeed closed, allowing former Speaker Rosenberger to finally turn over a new leaf and move on with his life.

Related Posts

Oakland police seek suspect in kidnapping and sexual assault

1 dead after 2 men shot drive to Steak n Shake in Mobile, police say

Israeli MP defends alleged rape of Hamas prisoner as far-right protesters rage over arrest of IDF troops