Get breaking news alerts via email

Click here to manage your alerts
(Trent Nelson | The Salt Lake Tribune) Utah Attorney General John Swallow announces his resignation, Thursday November 21, 2013 in Salt Lake City.
Some legislators say Swallow appeared headed for impeachment
Politics » Embattled attorney general resigned before the Utah House could act on the panel’s findings.
First Published Dec 27 2013 02:45 pm • Last Updated Feb 14 2014 11:50 pm

John Swallow could well have become the first statewide official in Utah history to be impeached had the former attorney general not stepped down earlier this month.

So say several House committee members, who, after sitting through two days of shocking revelations about Swallow’s conduct, reported they would have supported efforts to oust him from office.

Join the Discussion
Post a Comment

"I think, based on what we heard, we definitely would have been on course for impeachment," said Rep. Lee Perry, R-Perry, a member of the House Special Investigative Committee.

The $3 million probe would have had to run its course before making any conclusions, said Perry and others. The inquiry was cut short when Swallow announced he was leaving office, citing the personal and financial toll the multiple investigations into his conduct was taking.

Perry said he has little doubt Swallow saw the writing on the wall and that the House’s work forced him to leave. He notes specifically that the night before Swallow announced he would resign, his counsel asked for a copy of a sworn deposition from the office’s computer specialist. That witness testified Swallow told him to erase data from his office computers, contradicting Swallow’s claims that thousands of emails were accidentally lost.

House investigators said it appeared Swallow intentionally deleted data from multiple devices and fabricated other documents to mislead future probes into his dealings with Jeremy Johnson, the St. George businessman who founded I Works and now faces scores of federal fraud charges.

Rep. Mike McKell, R-Spanish Fork, said he, too, would have supported impeachment proceedings based on the findings of the abbreviated House inquiry.

"The evidence we produced and our findings were very clear, that John Swallow was absolutely not honest with the voters in the state of Utah," McKell said, "and that was true on many levels and on many fronts."

Rep. Jennifer Seelig, D-Salt Lake City, said the information she heard "definitely" would have been "strong grounds" to warrant impeachment, had Swallow not bowed out.

"I felt like we heard enough that if he hadn’t resigned, we certainly should have looked at" impeachment, said Rep. Lynn Hemingway, D-Holladay. "I do think we could have impeached him, given what we had and, if we’d gone a little further, there even could’ve been something criminal coming out of it."

story continues below
story continues below

Other committee members reserved judgment.

"Obviously, there are two sides to every story, and he resigned before we even got a chance to hear his," said House Majority Leader Brad Dee, R-Ogden.

Swallow declined to provide sworn testimony to House investigators, complicating the probe.

Without that information, Dee said, it is hard to draw definitive conclusions.

Rep. Rebecca Chavez-Houck, D-Salt Lake City, said she would want to consult with other committee members before she reached any conclusions on impeachment.

And Rep. Jim Dunnigan, R-Taylorsville, chairman of the House panel, said he never felt like it was his place to decide whether Swallow should be driven from office.

Rather, the committee’s fact-finding mission was expected to inform House members and let them make their own conclusions.

While the committee is still working — it is expected to meet in early January to discuss changes to state campaign laws and plans to issue a written report of its findings in about a month — Dunnigan said he will keep focusing on its original task.

"There certainly are areas that could bear additional investigation," he said. "Whether or not that is to be done by this committee or other investigations, I suppose that is the question, and it will be up to legislative leadership and perhaps ultimately the entire Legislature."

Most committee members would like to see investigators given more time — and resources — to conclude their work.

"Maybe if the whole House sees it, maybe if the Senate sees what we saw, maybe the whole Legislature needs to think about whether we continue this investigation," Perry said. "If there are things that aren’t right in our government in the state of Utah, we need to clean those things up."

Copyright 2014 The Salt Lake Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Top Reader Comments Read All Comments Post a Comment
Click here to read all comments   Click here to post a comment

About Reader Comments

Reader comments on sltrib.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Salt Lake Tribune. We will delete comments containing obscenities, personal attacks and inappropriate or offensive remarks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. If you see an objectionable comment, please alert us by clicking the arrow on the upper right side of the comment and selecting "Flag comment as inappropriate". If you've recently registered with Disqus or aren't seeing your comments immediately, you may need to verify your email address. To do so, visit disqus.com/account.
See more about comments here.
Staying Connected
Contests and Promotions
  • Search Obituaries
  • Place an Obituary

  • Search Cars
  • Search Homes
  • Search Jobs
  • Search Marketplace
  • Search Legal Notices

  • Other Services
  • Advertise With Us
  • Subscribe to the Newspaper
  • Access your e-Edition
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Contact a newsroom staff member
  • Access the Trib Archives
  • Privacy Policy
  • Missing your paper? Need to place your paper on vacation hold? For this and any other subscription related needs, click here or call 801.204.6100.