Tag: U.S. Attorney Purge

New Mexico U.S. Attorney Fired for Being a Vet

Trish

Only in the George Bush years could something like this happen.

The Office of Special Counsel, charged with enforcing both the Civil Service Act and the Hatch Act, is looking into the firing of New Mexico federal attorney and Navy Reserve Capt. David Iglesias. If you recall, Iglesias was fired after Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) called him at home and blasted him for not speeding up fraud prosecutions of Democrats before the 2006 elections.

The Office of Special Counsel is also responsible for protecting the job rights of National Guard and Reserve members who are called away for military duty. In that capacity, [Agency Director Scott] Bloch is looking into whether David Iglesias, one of eight U.S. attorneys dismissed earlier this year, was punished for missing work to serve in the Navy Reserve.

Iglesias, who was the U.S. attorney for New Mexico until he was replaced in February, was cited as an “absentee landlord” in a Justice Department document laying out reasons for his termination. William Moschella, the No. 3 official at Justice, told a House subcommittee in March that Iglesias was fired because he delegated too much responsibility to his deputy.

Good lord. How low can these people go?

Bush Did Not Watch Gonzo’s Testimony

Jon Ponder

Why would Pres. Bush bother with watching his attorney general’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee? He doesn’t care what the Senate thinks, including GOP apostates like Arlen Specter, the McCainite Lindsey Graham and now Tom Coburn, the most rightwing member of the body, who challeged Gonzales:

[REPORTER]: Dana, does Attorney General Gonzales’s testimony on Capitol Hill have any bearing whatsoever on his job status?

[WHITE HOUSE SPOKESPERSON DANA PERINO]: As I’ve said many times, the President has full confidence in the Attorney General. The Attorney General looked forward to the hearing that is taking place right now. Of course, the President has not seen any of that testimony. As I told you, he’s had a busy morning, and now we’re on our way to Tipp City, Ohio. And I haven’t seen any of the testimony, either. But clearly, we would hope that there were no preconceived notions, or canned talking points that the senators had in mind before they had this hearing. They said they wanted to get to the facts, and I’m sure that the Attorney General will be fully responsive to their request.

[REPORTER]: So is it fair to say that no matter what the testimony, no matter what the back-and-forth, that the President plans to stick with Attorney General Gonzales?

MS. PERINO: I think — yes. I think the President has full confidence in the Attorney General and whenever that changes for any public servant, we’ll let you know, and I see no indication of that.

There you have it. Even if they had caught Gonzales in a lie, Bush would still support him.

Gonzales Testimony Drinking Game – Down a Shot Every Time He Says ‘Improper’

Jon Ponder

It is 6:40 a.m. in West Hollywood as I write this, and I am celebrating the long awaited Senate Judiciary Committee testimony of Attorney Gen. Alberto Gonzales with a drinking game. My plan is to do a shot of tequila every time he uses the word “improper.” I am doing this strictly for your entertainment, dear read, but please feel free to play along at home.

On the substance, the truthy answers he memorized are working as intended. His talks and talks but says nothing — and yet his words seem to brim with content.

Let the games begin:

7:04 – Abu says he’s done nothing improper and therefore nothing improper has been done. Gimme two. Bottoms up! Yee-ha.

7:29 – Nothing was improper, I tells ya! I was not improper, nothing improper to see here, move along. Set up three more shots, tarbender!

8:41 – Abu: I don’t recall it but I do know it wasn’t improper. Just one, barkeep.

8:51 – Improper, I was not, says Abu, and improper was not done by me. Twofer. Line ’em up, good sir, two in row.

9:30 – They have broken for lunch. During Gonzo’s three weeks of practice sessions, the Rove people must have cued him not to over-use his catch phrases — more’s the pity for the game. I’ve only had eight ounces of liquor so far!

On the substance, the truthy answers he memorized are working as intended. His talks and talks but says nothing — and yet his words seem to brim with content.

11:47 – They’re back from lunch, and we have three impropers off the bat. Line ’em up!

11:54 – Just one. Urp!

12:10 – Sen. Whitehouse calls Gonzo on over-using the word “improper.” A dozen or so uses back and forth. A round for the house, my good man!

12:56 – Hatch gives Gonzo big improper love: Four in a row – ding, ding, ding, ding.

1:37 – Gonzo tells Schumer it’s up to accusers to prove he did something improper. Set me up!

1:46 – Early reviews of Gonzo’s performance are not good:

CNN’s Dana Bash:

Loyal Republican after loyal Republican in this hearing room, and more specifically, in private to CNN today have made it clear that they are frankly flabbergasted by how poorly they think the attorney general has done in this hearing. … During the lunch break, in private, several very loyal Republicans made it clear to CNN that they were really dripping with disappointment.

CNN’s Suzanne Malveaux:

[White House officials] believe Gonzales is in trouble. … Two senior White House aides here describing the situation, Gonzales’ testimony, as “going down in flames.” That he was “not doing himself any favors.” One prominent Republican describing watching his testimony as “clubbing a baby seal.”

1:55 – Game over. I’m not sure which is more wasted, me or Gonzo’s career.

Update: We should have been playing on the phrase, “I don’t recall.” Someone counted 71 of them. That would have been staggering.

Attorney Pay-Back Firing Goo Bound to Stick to White House

Trish

Damn good editorial in the Palm Beach Post on the Attorney General hearings, now set for Thursday.

The vice president, speaking on Face The Nation, pronounced the official White House spin: “This took place inside the Justice Department. The one who needs to answer to that and lay out on the record the specifics of what transpired is the attorney general.” But Mr. Cheney’s claim that “this took place inside the Justice Department” is ludicrous.

Cheney’s claim that “this took place inside the Justice Department” is ludicrous.

Even though hundreds of e-mails concerning the firings might be missing, enough exist to show that the White House was heavily involved…David C. Iglesias of New Mexico was fired after Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., complained to the White House about Mr. Iglesias’ failure to indict Democrats before last November’s elections. Before the firings were announced, Karl Rove assured the chairman of the New Mexico GOP that Mr. Iglesias “was gone.”

Not only does Mr. Gonzales have to claim that the White House didn’t play an improper role, he has to repeat the equally unbelievable claim that he didn’t play a central role – despite testimony to the contrary from his former chief of staff Kyle Sampson and Michael A. Battle, director of the office in charge of U.S. attorneys.

Even as Mr. Gonzales prepared last week for his testimony, another cover story was contradicted. Bush administration officials had claimed that no replacements for the attorneys had been chosen in advance. In fact, they had been. The White House wants to confine the scandal to Justice. But in all this, Alberto Gonzales clearly isn’t on his own.

The big question is, how much less approval can George Bush earn and still finish his term? We’re betting his ratings will go still lower, as even Republicans are repelled by his incompetence and deceit.

Our Nominee for Next Bush AG: Patrick Fitzgerald

Jon Ponder

Assuming Attorney Gen. Alberto Gonzales is asked to resign over the purge of U.S. attorneys, we would nominate the USA who is probably best known to the public: Patrick Fitzgerald of Chicago, the special prosecutor who successfully tried Cheney aide Scooter Libby for perjury in the CIA Leak scandal.

Fitzgerald is only deficient in quality required to serve Dear Leader: he is not a loyal Bushie.

Fitzgerald has all the qualities required to be attorney general in a GOP administration: legal knowledge and experience, political savvy and membership in the Republican Party.

He is only deficient in quality required to serve Dear Leader: he is not a loyal Bushie.

It’s this deficiency, however, that would make his nomination sail through the approval process in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

Even so, there is some new evidence Fitzgerald may have whiffed on going up the chain in the Libby trial. Either he didn’t know about Karl Rove’s secret email system, or he deliberately failed to subpoena all of Rove’s correspondence.

Update: In the comments, Greg Bacon suggests another candidate who would definitely clear the Senate: former Sen. Fred Thompson. As Greg points out, we know he can play a prosecutor on TV.

Evidence Mounts That Bush Is at Center of Prosecutor Purge

Jon Ponder

Sampson Says Bush Conferred with Gonzales on Firing US Attorney Iglesias

It is one of the foundational lies of the Bush era that the president doesn’t read polls. He reads them — he just doesn’t give a damn what they say. In fact, starting at the top, no one in the Bush administration cares about public opinion, especially including the opinions of the Democrats who control the Congress.

A group of USAs had to go to mask the firing of Carol Lam so Bush played his “l’etat c’est moi” card and added Iglesias, who, like Lam, had one of the best conviction rates in the country.

So why are the Bushies being so squirrely about the congressional investigation into the prosecutor purge? Why did Karl Rove delete months worth of secret emails? Why did it take A.G. Alberto Gonzales two weeks to memorize his testimony in the matter? Why did Monica Goodling, a Christian nationalist mole in the Justice Dept., say she would plead the Fifth out of fear she might be forced to lie under oath?

The answer: George W. Bush.

Unlike the Scooter Libby scandal, where the wagons were circled to protect Vice Pres. Cheney, it appears that Dear Leader himself is at the center of the prosecutor purge.

On Sunday, the Albequerque Journal reported that the president may have personally added the name of U.S. Attorney David Iglesias of New Mexico to the purge list at the behest of Sen. Pete Domenici, the state’s senior Republican:

In the spring of 2006, Domenici told Gonzales he wanted Iglesias out.

Gonzales refused. He told Domenici he would fire Iglesias only on orders from the president.

At some point after the election last Nov. 6, Domenici called Bush’s senior political adviser, Karl Rove, and told him he wanted Iglesias out and asked Rove to take his request directly to the president.

Domenici and Bush subsequently had a telephone conversation about the issue.

The conversation between Bush and Domenici occurred sometime after the election but before the firings of Iglesias and six other U.S. attorneys were announced on Dec. 7.

Today, the Los Angeles Times reports that Kyle Sampson, the top aide to Gonzales whom the Bushies tossed overboard like they did Libby, has confirmed Bush’s involvement in the firing of Iglesias:

[Sampson] told Senate investigators over the weekend that the attorney general told him in early March that he and Bush had discussed U.S. Atty. David C. Iglesias’ performance before the November election, Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-New York) said in a briefing with reporters.

This does not change the theory that the underlying motive in the purge was to put the San Diego federal prosecutor Carol Lam out of business in order to hobble investigations into Rep. Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., the ranking member on Appropriations, and his lobbyist cronies. A group of prosecutors had to be fired in order to avoid the appearance that Lam was being singled out.

Since a group had to go, Bush played his “l’etat c’est moi” card and added to the list Iglesias, who, like Lam, had one of the best conviction rates in the country. Now the Bushies must go to any extreme measure to protect their king, including trying to delay the endgame until the end of his term in 2009.

Three Fired U.S. Attorneys Signed Letter Critical of Justice Department Last Year

Trish

When 17 U.S. attorneys questioned the Justice Department last year about why it wasn’t using a shared law enforcement database, they didn’t know that three of them would soon be among eight fired.

In a letter dated Aug. 30, 2006, the federal prosecutors questioned why the department had not taken a greater “leadership role.” Three of the U.S. attorneys were later fired.

Amid the many revelations that will no doubt come from the investigation of the Bush administration pogrom of U.S. attorneys was this one.

And, as Sen. Bill Nelson (D – Fla.) pointed out this week, the department still isn’t following the 9/11 Commission’s recommendation to share information with other law enforcement agencies in the fight against terrorism.

“We learned the hard way from 9-11 that coordinated information-sharing is imperative,” Nelson wrote Wednesday to Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty.

The Florida Democrat’s request concerns a crime database called the Law Enforcement Information Exchange, or Linx…

Nelson’s letter follows the discovery of a pointed, written exchange last year between McNulty and a group of U.S. attorneys.

In a letter dated Aug. 30, 2006, the federal prosecutors questioned why the department had not taken a greater “leadership role” in promoting Linx. It was signed by 17 U.S. attorneys.

…Nelson and others in Congress have expressed concern over the exchange in 2006 — noting three of the U.S. attorneys who signed the letter to McNulty later were fired.

But — predictably — firing the critics didn’t solve the problem. And just as clearly, the Bush Justice Department is adrift in quibbles, incompetence, and heads up butts.

The 17 U.S. attorneys advocated an expansion of the system beyond its seven targeted regions, but doing so would require an agency other than the Department of Defense — which runs the program — to take the lead, said Mike Dorsey, head of the Linx program.

Dorsey said Thursday that the Justice Department has been supportive of the Linx program but attributed rifts about its future to debates on funding, control and turf wars.

Bush Claims Secret Emails Have Been Erased

Jon Ponder

Yesterday, after the White House announced that emails sent by Karl Rove and others on its secret off-site email system had been erased, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, and chair of the Judiciary Committee said this:

“They say they have not been preserved. I don’t believe that!” Leahy shouted from the Senate floor as the dispute over the firing of federal prosecutors continued at a high pitch. “That’s like saying the dog ate my homework. It doesn’t work that way.”

“You can’t erase e-mails, not today. They’ve gone through too many servers,” said Leahy, D-Vt. “Those e-mails are there; they just don’t want to produce them. We’ll subpoena them if necessary.”

It sometimes surprises computer users to learn that it is very difficult to erase data from hard drives. When a file is deleted, it is actually simply renamed. Typically, the first couple of letters in the filename are replaced with wild card characters, such as “$_.” Recovering the missing file can be as simple as changing the name back to what it was originally.

The only certain way to erase data is to wipe the disk clean by reformating it, for example. Knowing this White House, I would suspect that the drives that once held Rove’s emails are all clean as a whistle by now.

Abu in Trouble: Gonzales Failing Prep for Testimony

Jon Ponder

“He’s not ready,” Tasia Scolinos, Gonzales’s public-affairs chief.

Last week, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales cleared his calendar for nearly two weeks in order to memorize answers to questions he might be asked under oath when he testifies before Congress on April 17.

The problem is, DOJ lawyers have forbidden Gonzales to have any contact with other witnesses, and since everyone close to him is on the witness list, he’s having a hard time getting his story straight.

The challenge facing Abu, one of Pres. George Bush’s most loyal flying monkeys, of course, is that he can’t tell the truth under oath without either perjuring himself or implicating flying monkeys higher up in the food chain, including Karl Rove and Bush’s former secretary, Harriet Miers, and maybe the president himself, in the scandal around the firing of U.S. attorneys late last year:

[Even] his own closest advisers are nervous about whether he is up to the task. At a recent “prep” for a prospective Sunday talk-show interview, Gonzales’s performance was so poor that top aides scrapped any live appearances. During the March 23 session in the A.G.’s conference room, Gonzales was grilled by a team of top aides and [GOP bigwigs] about what he knew about the plan to fire seven U.S. attorneys last fall. But Gonzales kept contradicting himself and “getting his timeline confused,” said one participant … His advisers finally got “exasperated” with him, the source added. “He’s not ready,” Tasia Scolinos, Gonzales’s public-affairs chief, told the A.G.’s top aides after the session was over…

The problem is, DOJ lawyers have forbidden Gonzales to have any contact with other witnesses, and since everyone close to him is on the witness list, he’s having a hard time getting his story straight.

While the attorney general studies his lines 24/7, and his underlings are all legally constrained from talking with him or each other (presumably) the Dept. of Justice is leaderless and rudderless.