I am writing today to announce the closure of the New Mexico Independent. After three and a half years of operation in New Mexico, the board of the American Independent News Network, has decided to shift publication of its news…
While environmental activists played their part yesterday during demonstrations at the capitol building, going so far as to dress up as solar panels and to sing the tune of “You Are My Sunshine,” their counterparts, the anti-cap-and-trade contingency who has…
Roughly one quarter of University of New Mexico students are unimpressed with the state’s flagship public school, according to a survey that questioned college students about their higher education experiences.
For those of you who have heard about, but not seen the letter acting U.S. Attorney Greg Fouratt sent to defense attorneys last week, read it for yourself here.
Fouratt said in the correspondence that there’d be no criminal charges against Gov. Bill Richardson and former top aides following a year-long pay-to-play investigation. The probe scrutinized the relationship between the hiring of California-based CDR Financial Products Inc. in 2004 to provide services for the New Mexico Finance Authority and large campaign contributions made by the company and people associated with it to two political committees set up by Richardson.
Fouratt’s letter is short and to the point. And parts of it have been public for days, especially the part about how “pressure from the governor’s office resulted in the corruption of the procurement process so that CDR would be awarded such work” and also the part that says that the letter should not be viewed as an exoneration of anyone.
The last two paragraphs read in their entirety are intriguing as well:
This letter is limited solely to each party’s conduct in NMFA’s award of financial work to CDR in 2004. It is not to be interpreted as an exoneration of any party’s conduct in that matter, nor should it be interpreted to address other conduct that may be under investigation.
This notification shall not preclude the United States or the grand jury from reinstituting such an investigation without notification if, in the opinion of the United States or the grand jury, circumstances warrant such a reinstitution.
