The Plan To Fire US Attorneys
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in General Politics, LawNo wonder Hillary Clinton is calling for Alberto Gonzales’ ouster. Because when you read the following, you’ve gotta think that Alberto saw this “plan” too.
Here it is, step-by-step…
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Justice Department laid out an elaborate, five-step plan for firing seven U.S. attorneys on Dec. 7.
Entitled, “Plan for Replacing Certain United States Attorneys,” the step-by-step instructions were sent by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’ chief of staff, Kyle Sampson, as an attachment to an e-mail. Sampson resigned Tuesday. The e-mail was released Tuesday by the House Judiciary Committee.___
Steps 1 and 2: On Dec. 7, the Justice Department was to simultaneously notify the Republican home-state senators of the impending dismissals, as well as those dismissed.
In his calls to the prosecutors, Mike Battle, who oversees all 93 U.S. attorneys, was to say that the administration is grateful for their service but decided to “give someone else the opportunity” to serve in the post starting in Jan. 31, 2007, according to the memo.
Step 3 was prescient, its title underscored: “Prepare to Withstand Political Upheaval.” It predicted the fired prosecutors would make “strenuous” efforts to save their jobs by appealing to other officials in the Bush administration. The memo contained responses to likely questions from those fired.
“Recipients of such ‘appeals’ must respond identically,” the memo said, as follows:
“-What? U.S. attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president (there is no right nor should there be any expectation that U.S. attorneys would be entitled to serve beyond their four-year term).
“-Who decided? The administration made the determination to seek the resignations (not any specific person at the White House or the Department of Justice).
“-Why me? The administration is grateful for your service, but wants to give someone else the chance to serve in your district.
“-I need more time! The decision is to have a new acting or interim U.S. attorney in place by January 31, 2007 (granting “extensions” will hinder the process of getting a new U.S. attorney in place and giving that person the opportunity to serve for a full two years).”
Steps four and five directed Justice Department officials to name replacements and submit them for Senate confirmation.
Honestly, Hillary said it best yesterday…
“The buck should stop somewhere,” Clinton told ABC News senior political correspondent Jake Tapper, “and the attorney general â€â€? who still seems to confuse his prior role as the president’s personal attorney with his duty to the system of justice and to the entire country â€â€? should resign.
The more I read about this story, the more I agree with those calling for Alberto to step down. These were embarrassingly partisan moves on the Attorney General’s part, and he knew full well what was going on.
Still, will he step down? Will he be asked to resign? In this administration?
And then this tidbit from Sully…
Are you sitting down? The Specter staffer who inserted the clause into the Patriot Act giving the president new power to by-pass the Senate in appointing U.S. Attorneys … was rewarded by becoming a U.S Attorney!
Nice.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, March 14th, 2007 and is filed under General Politics, Law. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
March 14th, 2007 at 9:54 am
I’ve been reading stories that Clinton got rid of 93 of the US attorneys in 1993. Anyone able to explain the difference in outrage between the 2 stories? Is it because Clinton was just coming into office where Bush is closer to the end of his? I’m confused as to why one is acceptable and non partisan where the other isn’t.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:12 pm
Monica - There is none. It is a non-story. The best they can some up with is the “timing” issue. Listening to the Democrats is much like fishing with my 5 yr. old daughter, the slightest bite, if the wind barely moves the line, she’s got Moby Dick on the hook. Its funny. Once they realize that this story has ZERO traction with anyone but themselves and serves only as masterbatory reassurance of their own fake political righteousness - it will disappear.
March 15th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
I have not read the white house emails, however did pay attention to the attorneys’ testimony in that the majority of the 8 realized their jobs were threatened if they 1. weren’t more aggressive on following the White House agenda; 2. they didn’t cooperate to specifically find dirt on Democrats before the election, and the most striking 3. they were being retaliated against for prosecuting Republican Senators–Duke Cunningham (for accepting bribes in assigniing military contracts), and in preventing future agressive investigations into more Republicans such as into DoLittle, Lewis and Dusty Faggo. or, 4. simply because Rove wanted to install a croney. Given Rove’s history and tactics, I would suspect that a buddy of Rove in Hillary’s home state would be there as an instrument to specifically find dirt on her. There is also indication that the attorneys who did not get fired might have been less likely to prosecute cases fairly. What that means, is that if you are a friend of the Executive office, are put on trial, the prosecution might overlook their Judicial duty, overlook evidence, over look the rule of law, and instead follow the dictate of the WhiteHouse. Yes, they are appointed and fired on the “pleasure” of the president, however, their behavior and job is to follow the Constitution and rule of law, not a punk chicken hawk dictator. A self-described decider who fills his office with Iran Contra characters and other shady characters. We must have a honest, non-partisan Justice System. Remember, failures in the courts are responsible for him being in office. (Florida) Being of an educated, open liberal, mind, welcome rightwing comments, and any clarification of the facts that you might find helpful. Clinton had his faults, but did not endanger our country to this extent, didn’t abuse our Civil rights, and did not trash the Constitution. The Articles of Impeachment drawn on Nixon are just as applicable here.
Rightwings might reference http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Arlen_Specter
(Republican)
Allowing for unapproved U.S. Attorneys
On January 17, 2007 a spokesperson admitted that Specter made a last minute change to a bill in 2006 that would allow for the Executive to install U.S. Attorneys without the approval of the Senate. The Administration, shortly after the bill was passed, began to replace U.S. Attorneys with new, unapproved, ones.
This is part of the Patriot Act, and might have been done by Specter’s aide, however it was under his name.
Prior to this, Congress reviewed and approved replacements. Checks and Balances being dismantled so that King George can reign. If this doesn’t bother you, you need to study more.
April 2nd, 2007 at 3:13 pm
Firing U. S. Attorneys 04.02.2007
It is important to realize the current firings of the U. S. Attorneys are just the tip of the iceberg of the corruption in the Bush White House and Department of Justice. Many Republican Congressmen have for years delved into illegal, immoral and corrupt activities to further the agenda of supporting wealth Republican political supporters.
The primary tactic used by the Department of Justice in protecting these Republican Congressmen from investigation and prosecution has been to ignore and delay investigations into obvious abuses of power and corruption allegations hoping those requesting investigations will tire and just go away.
One of the projects to repay wealthy financial and political Republican supporters was the fraudulent closing of MCAS El Toro in Orange County, California. MCAS El Toro did not meet any of the of the BRAC criteria to be closed and the 1993 BRAC Commission Report to the President listed five totally false and misleading reasons why the base was being closed. Even though there is significant evidence that MCAS El Toro was specifically closed to benefit Donald Bren, a Southern California Developer and one of the richest men in the world, the U. S. Justice Department has continually refused to initiate an investigation to look into these allegations or to mitigate damages.
When MCAS El Toro was closed the U. S. Taxpayers lost at least $13.8 Billion dollars of assets and closing costs, the U. S. Marine Corps lost a primary and much needed jet base and 2,400 young Marine families were kicked out of their military housing onto the very expensive and unaffordable Southern California economy.
The primary facilitator in getting El Toro fraudulent closed to benefit the 100% Bren owned Irvine Company was none other than Congressman Christopher Cox, current chairman of the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Cox, whose wife was on that 1993 BRAC Commission that fraudulently voted to close El Toro, was Chairman of the Orange County Corporations Department of Latham and Watkins from 1978 to 1986. Latham and Watkins defended Donald Bren in major corporate management lawsuits during those years.
The illegal actions that placed former Congressman “Duke� Cunningham of San Diego in the Tucson Federal Prison were minuscule compared to actions taken by Christopher Cox to secure this base closing for Bren and The Irvine Company.
Early on, we contacted the FBI and presented them with the allegations we had concerning the very questionable closing of MCAS El Toro. The FBI responsibly took our allegations to the U. S. Attorney and then gave us two reasons why the U. S. Attorney was not going to launch an investigation into Cox’s activities related to the closing of MCAS El Toro.
1. The five year statute of limitations from the actions of the 1993 BRAC Commission had expired.
2. The U. S. Attorney did not have jurisdictional authority to launch such an investigation.
Our response to the five year statute of limitations statement was simple and straight forward:
• The same people who worked to perpetrate the actions of the 1993 BRAC Commission were still actively working to ensure MCAS El Toro was closed.
• Even if the statue of limitations had expired did not the Department of Justice have a duty to mitigate the damages of an illegal act perpetrated against the U. S. Taxpayers? This in itself should be enough to justify an investigation if there was significant evidence to indicate such. Neither the FBI nor the Justice Department ever told us we had insufficient evidence.
If the Justice Department or the U. S. Attorney did not have the jurisdictional authority to launch such an investigation then who did? This question was never answered.
In America we need to get used to the fact that Republican Congressmen can do pretty much whatever illegal activities they want in support of their wealthy donors. The U. S. Department of Justice does not feel that they have the jurisdictional authority or proclivity to investigate such.
http://www.eltorotoday.com
http://www.eltorotoday.com/Executive%20Summary,%20081106.doc
http://www.eltorotoday.com/docs/betrayed.html
http://www.eltorotoday.com/docs/generals.html
Bill Turner
http://www.eltortoday.com
bill@eltorotoday.com
PO Box 2323
Costa Mesa, CA 92628
(949) 735-5432