Federal court rejects the appointment of the former homeowner of the House of Representatives in the bribe scandal

On Tuesday, a Federal Appeal Court in Cincinnati rejected appeals that had been submitted by the former spokesman for Ohio House, Larry Householder and former chairman of the Republican Party in Ohio, Matt Borges, and maintained her convictions.

The homeowner served in prison for 20 years and bores five years after they were convicted in connection with a 2019 draft law for the federal government's allegations of corruption in 2023.

The jury found that the two important parts played in a bribery scheme that included millions of setbacks for homeowners, which are promoting favorable laws for supply companies.

A federal prosecutor called it the largest corruption system in state history.

HEAR: The Power Grab -Podcast

The homeowner was convicted that the Firstergy Corp. Financed 60 million dollar briefing scheme for the election of allies, Secure Power, to save a rescue of $ 1 billion of two of his connected nuclear power plants and then defend the legislative template known as House Bill 6 from a cancellation.

The public prosecutor's office described Borges' main task in the program as the work of an election campaign for the abolition of the spoiled legislation. In particular, he was accused of paying 15,000 US dollars paid to someone who had helped effort to obtain insider information. In the end, the referendum could not hand over the ballot paper.

In a unanimous judgment, a three-judge committee of the US Court of Appeal rejected all elements of Borges' and homeowners.

In his calling, the homeowner claimed that it was not enough evidence to condemn him that the judge was biased that his judgment was too steep, the instructions of the jury contained mistakes that his right to advice was violated and the court had not admitted some evidence during the procedure.

Borges argued that his financial profit of $ 15,000 in the program was slightly.

Scott Pulin, a long -standing legal and personal advisor to the homeowner, said that the government had chosen the homeowner for activities who did other politicians, and called them a “sad and disappointing day” and “a sadger day for constitutional freedom of speaking and the rule of law”.

Homeowners and Borges have a few long legal options remaining, could request a review by the full sixth circle or what is known as Certiorari in front of the U.'s Supreme Court, hopes for the highest bank in the nation. Both types of inquiries are rarely granted.

News that applied for a comment for their criminal lawyers and a spokesman for the US public prosecutor's office in Cincinnati.

The homeowner said in November that he would get a forgiveness after President Donald Trump was elected. The homeowner was one of the first Republicans in Ohio, who advocated Trump in his first offer for the White House.

The 65-year-old homeowner had argued that the government was wrong when he had to be described as a bribe. Instead, he gave the money that flowed from Firstergy to a network of secret dark money accounts, which he controlled as legal campaign contributions.

The federal prosecutor accused the fact that the money was handed over to the homeowner against the adoption of House Bill 6 and made the necessary professionals illegal for his behavior.

The homeowner had also accused the US district judge Timothy Black in his calling and claimed that he had not properly instructed the jury that an agreement was necessary to prove bribery, and that the homeowner would have to agree that he would take action “against a specific and focused question or matter”.

The judicial plant said all of his claims failed.

The appeal of Borges depended on three technical legal points. Everything also failed.

The judge Amul Thapar, however, wrote in a unanimous opinion that each of the components of Borges cheats “difficult and unsolved topics in honest services.

“And here Borges has a good argument that his behavior fell into a cloudy middle: maybe to complain, but not clearly illegal,” he wrote. “However, until the Supreme Court revised its lawyer, we have to follow his precedent.”

The Associated Press has contributed to this story.