If the United States attorney scandal has made one thing clear, it is that the riskiest job in the Bush administration is being a prosecutor investigating a Republican member of Congress.
Carol Lam, the United States attorney in San Diego, was fired after she put Randy Cunningham, known as Duke, in prison. Paul Charlton, in Arizona, was dismissed while he was investigating Rick Renzi. Dan Bogden, in Nevada, was fired while he was reportedly investigating Jim Gibbons, a congressman who was elected governor last year.
Ms. Yang was investigating Jerry Lewis, who was chairman of the powerful House Appropriations Committee. Ms. Lam and most of the other purged prosecutors were fired on Dec. 7. Ms. Yang, in a fortuitously timed exit, resigned in mid-October.
Showing posts with label attorneys. Show all posts
Showing posts with label attorneys. Show all posts
Saturday, May 5, 2007
Lack of Diversity in Bush's Justice Department
John Conyers, while investigating Attorneygate, has learn there is a lack of diversity in the Justice Department. I am not surprised but I am syrprised that John Conyers is.
Congressman John Conyers: "They need someone to investigate them."
Since 2003...the criminal section within the Civil Rights Division has not hired a single black attorney to replace those who have left. Not one.
Out of fifty attorneys in the Criminal Section - only two are black.
The same number the criminal section had in 1978 - even though the size of the staff has more than doubled.
read more here http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0507/420376.html
Congressman John Conyers: "They need someone to investigate them."
Since 2003...the criminal section within the Civil Rights Division has not hired a single black attorney to replace those who have left. Not one.
Out of fifty attorneys in the Criminal Section - only two are black.
The same number the criminal section had in 1978 - even though the size of the staff has more than doubled.
read more here http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0507/420376.html
Friday, May 4, 2007
Harriet Miers focused on Debra Yang.
Ms. Yang was investigating Jerry Lewis, who was chairman of the powerful House Appropriations Committee. Ms. Lam and most of the other purged prosecutors were fired on Dec. 7. Ms. Yang, in a fortuitously timed exit, resigned in mid-October.
Ms. Yang says she left for personal reasons, but there is growing evidence that the White House was intent on removing her. Kyle Sampson, the Justice Department staff member in charge of the firings, told investigators last month in still-secret testimony that Harriet Miers, the White House counsel at the time, had asked him more than once about Ms. Yang.
He testified, according to Congressional sources, that as late as mid-September, Ms. Miers wanted to know whether Ms. Yang could be made to resign.
Yang's resignation, as has been discussed here before, found her land at the powerful Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher firm with a nice bonus. We don't know if they enticed her to leave public service or recruited her after the resignation, but as Cohen says, these questions should be asked under oath.
Well well With Ms Yang working at the Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher with a nice bonus and the firm defending Mr Lewis, I suppose she will tell all the evidence against Mr Lewis. So he should get off nice.
It must be nice to be Republican, have a brain like a Karl Rove, a nominess for Supreme Court who loves like a dove but is really a vulture while smiling, and an attorney general who cant remember, and a war with the insurgents "in their last throes" for 3 years.
Ms. Yang says she left for personal reasons, but there is growing evidence that the White House was intent on removing her. Kyle Sampson, the Justice Department staff member in charge of the firings, told investigators last month in still-secret testimony that Harriet Miers, the White House counsel at the time, had asked him more than once about Ms. Yang.
He testified, according to Congressional sources, that as late as mid-September, Ms. Miers wanted to know whether Ms. Yang could be made to resign.
Yang's resignation, as has been discussed here before, found her land at the powerful Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher firm with a nice bonus. We don't know if they enticed her to leave public service or recruited her after the resignation, but as Cohen says, these questions should be asked under oath.
Well well With Ms Yang working at the Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher with a nice bonus and the firm defending Mr Lewis, I suppose she will tell all the evidence against Mr Lewis. So he should get off nice.
It must be nice to be Republican, have a brain like a Karl Rove, a nominess for Supreme Court who loves like a dove but is really a vulture while smiling, and an attorney general who cant remember, and a war with the insurgents "in their last throes" for 3 years.
Rove's Hall of Infamy
WASHINGTON -- Following fresh allegations of partisan bias in the Justice Department, Sen. Arlen Specter (R., Pa.) said yesterday that the department was "dysfunctional" and would be better off without embattled Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales at its helm. Specter said it was President Bush's prerogative to fire Gonzales and refused to call for the attorney general's ouster. But the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee said there was a "likelihood" that Bush would act once the clamor from Congress abated.
"I think there's a distinct possibility, maybe probability, that the president will act on his own," Specter said in an interview. "I think the president is more likely to fire him if he's not being told what to do . . . if he didn't have the 'anvil chorus' coming down all around him and making it appear like he's yielding to pressure."
On Wednesday, the Justice Department announced that it was investigating whether Monica Goodling, former senior adviser to Gonzales, tried to determine the political affiliation of job applicants before they were hired as prosecutors. Such a determination may violate federal civil-service laws. The inquiry is part of a much wider-ranging probe by the House and Senate Judiciary Committees of the circumstances relating to last year's dismissals of eight U.S. attorneys.
Two of the dismissed attorneys, Paul Charlton of Phoenix and John McKay of Seattle, released statements Wednesday saying they were threatened by Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty's chief of staff before Gonzales testified in the Senate in January.
Charlton and McKay said that the chief of staff, Michael Elston, suggested that Gonzales would not discuss their dismissals in his testimony if the two men did not publicly speak about their firings.
Specter said he was concerned with these allegations. "That's dead wrong to try to silence these people from testifying and to issue a threat that if they do, there will be retaliation in Gonzales' testimony," the senator said.
"That's intimidation." Specter said he was also troubled with reports that Goodling used political affiliation in hiring decisions. "I want to take a look at what the Hatch Act says and what the civil-service requirements are," he said, referring to the federal statute that circumscribes political activity by federal employees.
In the ongoing investigations of why the prosecutors were fired and what role, if any, the White House played in the dismissals, it has been disclosed that Gonzales delegated to Goodling and D. Kyle Sampson, his former chief of staff, the hiring and firing of political appointees and senior executives who did not require Senate confirmation.
Specter said he was "infuriated" by this revelation, particularly since the attorney general has professed little, if any, knowledge about the dismissals. "I'm really angry about it. Outlandish," Specter said. "That guy would testify that he didn't know what was going on and he signed a written delegation of authority," he said of Gonzales. "I have grave questions about whether the attorney general can delegate that authority."
Despite all the accumulating accusations of political bias in the Gonzales-run Justice Department, Specter tiptoed up to the waterline of demanding the attorney general's ouster but would not plunge in. "The decision on whether to fire him or not is the president's," Specter said. "I'm not going to tell the president how to run the executive branch."
Carl Tobias, a constitutional authority at the University of Richmond Law School and an avid Specter-watcher, said the senator's position was not surprising, given the lack of cooperation by the Justice Department and the White House to provide "sufficient information" about what really happened. "Specter may also be exhibiting a healthy respect for the separation of powers and presidential prerogatives about the selection of cabinet members," Tobias said.
Specter said that he had given the president "all the facts" he knew about the case, as well as some advice, but he would not disclose what was said. Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D., Vt.) and Specter are drafting a letter to the Justice Department asking about the nature of the ongoing investigations and whether the U.S. attorneys were asked to resign because they were pursuing matters that headquarters didn't want them to pursue.
"It's a ticklish question to ask because of the confidentiality of those investigations," Specter said. "Now there's sufficient grounds to pursue this. . . . It's not just fishing. It has the potential to be a real blow-up."
Source: Copyright (c) 2007, The Philadelphia Inquirer. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.
Anyone knows Rove wanted these attorneys to investigate only Democrats. His thinking, people dont read the newspapers to compare corruption of Democrats or Republicans, they will just vote Republicans.
"I think there's a distinct possibility, maybe probability, that the president will act on his own," Specter said in an interview. "I think the president is more likely to fire him if he's not being told what to do . . . if he didn't have the 'anvil chorus' coming down all around him and making it appear like he's yielding to pressure."
On Wednesday, the Justice Department announced that it was investigating whether Monica Goodling, former senior adviser to Gonzales, tried to determine the political affiliation of job applicants before they were hired as prosecutors. Such a determination may violate federal civil-service laws. The inquiry is part of a much wider-ranging probe by the House and Senate Judiciary Committees of the circumstances relating to last year's dismissals of eight U.S. attorneys.
Two of the dismissed attorneys, Paul Charlton of Phoenix and John McKay of Seattle, released statements Wednesday saying they were threatened by Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty's chief of staff before Gonzales testified in the Senate in January.
Charlton and McKay said that the chief of staff, Michael Elston, suggested that Gonzales would not discuss their dismissals in his testimony if the two men did not publicly speak about their firings.
Specter said he was concerned with these allegations. "That's dead wrong to try to silence these people from testifying and to issue a threat that if they do, there will be retaliation in Gonzales' testimony," the senator said.
"That's intimidation." Specter said he was also troubled with reports that Goodling used political affiliation in hiring decisions. "I want to take a look at what the Hatch Act says and what the civil-service requirements are," he said, referring to the federal statute that circumscribes political activity by federal employees.
In the ongoing investigations of why the prosecutors were fired and what role, if any, the White House played in the dismissals, it has been disclosed that Gonzales delegated to Goodling and D. Kyle Sampson, his former chief of staff, the hiring and firing of political appointees and senior executives who did not require Senate confirmation.
Specter said he was "infuriated" by this revelation, particularly since the attorney general has professed little, if any, knowledge about the dismissals. "I'm really angry about it. Outlandish," Specter said. "That guy would testify that he didn't know what was going on and he signed a written delegation of authority," he said of Gonzales. "I have grave questions about whether the attorney general can delegate that authority."
Despite all the accumulating accusations of political bias in the Gonzales-run Justice Department, Specter tiptoed up to the waterline of demanding the attorney general's ouster but would not plunge in. "The decision on whether to fire him or not is the president's," Specter said. "I'm not going to tell the president how to run the executive branch."
Carl Tobias, a constitutional authority at the University of Richmond Law School and an avid Specter-watcher, said the senator's position was not surprising, given the lack of cooperation by the Justice Department and the White House to provide "sufficient information" about what really happened. "Specter may also be exhibiting a healthy respect for the separation of powers and presidential prerogatives about the selection of cabinet members," Tobias said.
Specter said that he had given the president "all the facts" he knew about the case, as well as some advice, but he would not disclose what was said. Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D., Vt.) and Specter are drafting a letter to the Justice Department asking about the nature of the ongoing investigations and whether the U.S. attorneys were asked to resign because they were pursuing matters that headquarters didn't want them to pursue.
"It's a ticklish question to ask because of the confidentiality of those investigations," Specter said. "Now there's sufficient grounds to pursue this. . . . It's not just fishing. It has the potential to be a real blow-up."
Source: Copyright (c) 2007, The Philadelphia Inquirer. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.
Anyone knows Rove wanted these attorneys to investigate only Democrats. His thinking, people dont read the newspapers to compare corruption of Democrats or Republicans, they will just vote Republicans.
Now aint Rove surprised by the outcome of the 2006 election and now his cartel is being investigated. Rove wanted the Republican Party to be remembered and be in control for as long as time. Well, Republican Party is going to be remembered. I am sure the printing presses are in full swing. Rove wanted the Republican Party in control but of what?? Well the Republican Party is in control, in control of missdeeds, missteps, and misfires.
Long live the Republican party in the Halls of Infamy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
