AKRON, Ohio – As federal prosecutors announced charges Tuesday against Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder and others, accusing them of accepting more than $60 million in bribe money from FirstEnergy Corp., one name was noticeably absent from the indictment – FirstEnergy.
The federal criminal complaint doesn’t even mention Akron-based FirstEnergy by name, instead referring to “Company A” as the corporation that funded the conspiracy to secure a $1.3 billion public bailout for two Ohio nuclear power plants owned by FirstEnergy Solutions, now Energy Harbor.
“Everyone in this room knows who Company A is,” David DeVillers, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Ohio, said Tuesday during a news conference. “I will not be mentioning the name of Company A because of our regulations and rules. They have not, and no one from that company has of yet been charged, so I will be referring to this as Company A.”
The defendants include Householder, former Ohio Republican Party chairman turned lobbyist Matt Borges, prominent Columbus lobbyist Neil Clark, Householder aide Jeff Longstrenth, Columbus lobbyist Juan Cespedes and the group Generation Now.
But could FirstEnergy, or someone in its corporate leadership, ultimately be indicted? Are charges coming?
When asked that question Tuesday, DeVillers replied, “We’re going to continue to investigate this, and we’re going to investigate wherever it leads.”
DeVillers said there’s a “strong inference” in the complaint that Householder and his allies approached FirstEnergy, rather than the other way around.
“This enterprise went looking for someone to bribe them,” DeVillers said.
In a statement, FirstEnergy said, “This afternoon, FirstEnergy Corp. (NYSE: FE) received subpoenas in connection with the investigation surrounding Ohio House Bill 6. We are reviewing the details of the investigation and we intend to fully cooperate.” A company spokeswoman decline to comment beyond the statement.
House Bill 6 is the $1.3 billion ratepayer bailout of two Ohio nuclear power plants owned by FirstEnergy Solutions, now Energy Harbor. Householder helped push HB6 through the state legislature last year.
Michael Benza, a professor at Case Western Reserve University’s School of Law, has no special knowledge of this case, but offered a few reasons why prosecutors might have not charged “Company A” at this time. He expects prosecutors to announce more charges.
“In the federal system, once formal charges are filed, the prosecution is very limited in its ability to negotiate plea agreements and dismiss charges,” Benza told cleveland.com. “They may be holding back charges against what appear to be obvious possible defendants because they may want to work out a process by which they go by information, rather than indictment. … That’s basically the plea bargain system in federal prosecution.”
It’s possible, Benza said, that the U.S. Attorney’s Office is working on a plea negotiation with “Company A” rather than charging them at the beginning.
“They do this a lot, in these types of investigations,” Benza said. “They go to the person and say, ‘Here’s all the information we have, and here’s all the charges we’ll bring, and you’ll spend a million years in prison unless you agree to cooperate and plead guilty to this.’”
Another explanation for why “Company A” has not been charged could have to do with the investigation.
During his news conference, DeVillers said his office was unable to subpoena some people because it would have revealed the existence of the investigation before the government was ready to make it public. Those people now can be subpoenaed, he said.
“Getting to the financial records of Company A or of Generation Now would have tipped people off that the investigation was going,” Benza said. “They may not have wanted people to know about that until they had a significant amount of their investigation done. Now that it is public, issuing the subpoenas doesn’t reveal anything about the investigation.”
People with minor involvement in the operation might be inclined to assist investigators to avoid public prosecution, he said.
“One of the things that will happen because of the high-profile nature of the people being charged in this circumstance is that people lower down in the conspiracy might be willing to cooperate and go by way of information or other process to avoid being indicted and tried with the other defendants.”
———
©2020 The Plain Dealer, Cleveland