The Latest DOJ Scandal: Gonzalez Fires Good Attorneys For Political Reasons
Why Have So Many U.S. Attorneys Been Fired? It Looks a Lot Like Politics
Yes, indeed! Most of the government, at least at the highest levels, is exempt from many of the laws that protect workers. Congress is exempt from almost all labor laws and can fire, hire, mistreat, abuse or, as has been the case in some instances, sodomize pages without consequence, unless, of course, other congress critters choose to censure or impeach such conduct. The White House is exempt in regard to these laws in terms of all senior staff and officials, including cabinet members, military personnel and advisors serving on such things as the National Security Council. As is reported in recent newspapers and mainstream media, so too is the Department of Homeland Security exempt from dealing with employees in a decent, humane and fair manner.
But the issues reported regarding the US Attorneys serving districts around the nation are clearly unjust. All of the attorneys fired had excellent work records, excellent conviction records, had been praised for running operations that netted excellent results and put away some serious bad guys... including some major GOP figures associated with scandals and pursuit of cases that were not necessarily all that pleasing to the White House or Alberto "Nut Case" Gonzalez, the most ill-informed, un-lawyerly and unprepared Attorney General we've had throughout history.
That last statement is saying something of great significance because we have had some "doosies" in that office. We had Edwin Meese that was so obsessed with pornography that he sought to manipulate the findings of several empirical studies that demonstrated so-called "soft porn" was no major threat to our societal values or fabric so that he and the DOJ could go on a witch hunt against anyone that even looked at a naked picture or watched a sexually explicit scene in a movie. Despite mounting evidence that over 50% of our population--including women that were once considered inherently opposed and repulsed by pornography--engaged in some form of pornographic enjoyment, Meese doctored his now famous report on how pornography affected our hearts and minds. Meese also went after the violence we see in movies rather than solving the violence we see in our streets and the covert violence our nation commits against other nations. Meese also entangled himself in the Iran-Contra Affair and was the target of at least two investigations by special prosecutors for alleged misconduct.
Of course we have John Ashcroft, who almost rises to the level of entrenchment, incompetence, partisanship and idiocy achieved by Gonzalez, but is just a tad shy of Gonzalez's success at being the worst we've ever had. Ashcroft, like Meese, was so ultra-conservative and so embarrassed by nakedness of the human form that he was offended and outraged because a statue of classical literary figures in front of our national offices--a statue that had been there for a long time and would not have violated the sensibilities of our forefathers and framers because of their education in the classic, literature and art--that he ordered over $8,000 of our hard-earned taxes to cover up a statue with a large set of drapes... all because he saw himself in the newspapers standing near a naked bronze breast of a woman. The whole affair made me wonder if Ashcroft wasn't hiding something in a closet somewhere. The social worker and clinical counselor in me saw all sorts of red flags about his sexual identity, possible history of familial abuse, and/or repressed sexuality, but without a series of clinical interviews and a complete psycho-social history I dared not jump to any conclusions. Ashcroft is also noted for being a member and defender of the Council of Conservative Citizens (CoCC), an organization reputed to be a group of high-end white supremacists and neo-confederacy, with an ultra-conservative agenda that literally seeks to bring our country back to the "good old days" when white men were kings of the south and ultra-conservative Christianity is the only version of religion allowed in the US. Ashcroft came to the defense Dr. Charles T. Sell, an alleged associate or member of the CoCC who was charged with "health care fraud, attempted murder, conspiracy, and solicitation to commit violence," including an attempt on the life of an FBI agent (major case reports regarding Sell). Ashcroft also proposed and supported Operation TIPS, the Carnivore Project, and several other measures that have infringed upon civil liberties and promoted the rapid growth of fascism in the current Bush administration. Additionally, Ashcroft provided opinions--both official and advisory--that supported the Bush Doctrine and the basis for ignoring the Geneva Conventions and other treaties incorporated into our Constitution by virtue of the "treaties clause" that is part of the "supremacy clause" contained therein. Of course, like most rich and powerful politicians, as soon as Ashcroft resigned from governmental service he entered the ever-revolving door open only to those willing to sell out the citizens of the United States to big business, all-powerful corporations and agents of foreign governments and became a political consultant and lobbyist, complete with direct access to the White House and his previous colleagues in the Congress.
Of course we have the Watergate Era/Nixon Administration Attorneys General, Elliot Richardson, John Mitchell and Richard Kleindienst. Richardson is most notable for the Saturday Night Massacre, in which Richardson and William Ruckelshaus resigned because they were ordered by Nixon to fire Archibald Cox, the special prosecutor appointed to investigate the Watergate Scandal and coverup. Richardson's sense of ethics and decency, as well as that of Ruckelshaus, brought the infamous figure of Robert Bork to the limelight. Of course, Bork being the entrenched ultra-conservative he is and was, did not hesitate to take the opportunity to rise to fame and fire Cox. Kleindienst had the decency to resign when the stink of Watergate first began to garner the attention of the people of the United States, divorcing himself from the entire affair.
Mitchell, on the other hand, climbed to ultra-conservative fame by seeking to prosecute dissidents voicing opposition to the Vietnam War, civil rights advocates, and deliberately directed the DOJ against involvement in civil rights and civil liberties cases. The FBI and CIA under the Mitchell era as AG were found to be involved in domestic spying activities that included wiretapping without warrants or probable cause. Mitchell was deeply involved in the Watergate Scandal not only as the Attorney General, but also as a key player of "CREEP," the Committee to Re-Elect the President. Mitchell was found guilty of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury and was sentenced to 2.5 to 8 years in federal prison. Despite being a decorated war veteran, Mitchell forgot that his oath of office, and his oath as a Naval Officer, required an allegiance and defense of the Constitution, not a corrupt president, the GOP, or the rich, influential and powerful.
Not to be out done, the Democrats have Janet Reno. While Reno had accomplished a hell of a lot of good in her career, she became a lightning rod for cultural war controversies and demonstrated that she was a better prosecutor and investigator than a high-level manager of the complex DOJ. Her decisions surrounding the ATF/FBI assault at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas were unsound and resulted in the deaths of law enforcement officers, many Branch Davidian practitioners, many children of those practitioners, and David Koresh, the whacko of Waco. Reno also suffered criticism related to the fallout of the Ruby Ridge incidents, which she inherited. Reno became an easy target for the ultra-conservatives, as well as one of the major figures in dealing with the indiscretions of her boss, William "Wet My Willie" Jefferson Clinton, who embroiled himself in numerous scandals for dipping his quill in company ink (as well as several stray inkwells) when his wife, Hillary, was not looking.
But Alberto Gonzalez takes the all-time prize for being an incompetent lawyer, leader and top cop of our nation. He has adopted many of the attitudes, platitudes and positions of many of the ultra-conservatives that preceded him, as well as making many of the same mistakes of his predecessors. He makes Mitchell, Ashcroft and Meese look like patriots and scholars. He doesn't seem to understand the Constitution places limits upon him or his boss, George W. Bush. He doesn't believe that the oath to support and defend the Constitution applies to himself, Bush, the DOD, or to our troops in the field, or to anyone the Bush administration declares hostile. Like Meese and Ashcroft, he will not hesitate to ignore and/or violate the Fourth Amendment at will. He has supported the concept of "signing statements" as an exemption from adhering to the law on the part of the executive branch. He has engaged in warrantless domestic surveillance under the false notion that the Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) against terrorists applies to whatever domestic operations he, the CIA, NSA or FBI determine is appropriate, without oversight by the FISA Court (as required by statute), Congress (as required by the Constitution), or the Posse Comitatus Act. During his tenure on the Supreme Court of Texas he forgot to read the Constitution of Texas or the US Constitution, preferring ideological decisions over the rule of law, just as he does today.
But beyond his entrenched ultra-conservativism is his penchant for retaliation against those that offend his notions of politics, dissidence or political loyalty, which is why so many attorneys working for the DOJ, and directly for Gonzalez, were ousted without reasonable cause or rationale. The attorneys dismissed under his reign as "royal prince" in the despotic absolute monarchy of George W. Bush were innocent of any wrong-doing and had an exemplary record of performance.
It is clear, from even a precursory review of the facts, that these US Attorneys were dismissed for purely political and/or narcisstic reasons that challenged Gonzo Gonzalez's entrenched ultra-conservativism, ego-centric notions regarding his authority as Attorney General, or the notions of empire and exaggerated executive power that he has supported for all of the current Bush administration. Gonzalez, like Bush, has cast aside reason, fairness, decency and justice in favor of absolute maniacal authority over those he supervises and those he rules...er, serves.
No More Denials, Please
Dismissed U.S. Attorneys Praised in Evaluations
REFERENCES:
Wikipedia: List of Attorneys General
Biographies of Attorneys General of the United States
Carol Lam, the former United States attorney for San Diego, is smart and tireless and was very good at her job. Her investigation of Representative Randy Cunningham resulted in a guilty plea for taking more than $2 million in bribes from defense contractors and a sentence of more than eight years. Two weeks ago, she indicted Kyle Dustin Foggo, the former No. 3 official in the C.I.A. The defense-contracting scandal she pursued so vigorously could yet drag in other politicians.
In many Justice Departments, her record would have won her awards, and perhaps a promotion to a top post in Washington. In the Bush Justice Department, it got her fired.
Ms. Lam is one of at least seven United States attorneys fired recently under questionable circumstances. The Justice Department is claiming that Ms. Lam and other well-regarded prosecutors like John McKay of Seattle, David Iglesias of New Mexico, Daniel Bogden of Nevada and Paul Charlton of Arizona — who all received strong job evaluations — performed inadequately.
It is hard to call what’s happening anything other than a political purge. And it’s another shameful example of how in the Bush administration, everything — from rebuilding a hurricane-ravaged city to allocating homeland security dollars to invading Iraq — is sacrificed to partisan politics and winning elections.
U.S. attorneys have enormous power. Their decision to investigate or indict can bankrupt a business or destroy a life. They must be, and long have been, insulated from political pressures. Although appointed by the president, once in office they are almost never asked to leave until a new president is elected. The Congressional Research Service has confirmed how unprecedented these firings are. It found that of 486 U.S. attorneys confirmed since 1981, perhaps no more than three were forced out in similar ways — three in 25 years, compared with seven in recent months.
Yes, indeed! Most of the government, at least at the highest levels, is exempt from many of the laws that protect workers. Congress is exempt from almost all labor laws and can fire, hire, mistreat, abuse or, as has been the case in some instances, sodomize pages without consequence, unless, of course, other congress critters choose to censure or impeach such conduct. The White House is exempt in regard to these laws in terms of all senior staff and officials, including cabinet members, military personnel and advisors serving on such things as the National Security Council. As is reported in recent newspapers and mainstream media, so too is the Department of Homeland Security exempt from dealing with employees in a decent, humane and fair manner.
But the issues reported regarding the US Attorneys serving districts around the nation are clearly unjust. All of the attorneys fired had excellent work records, excellent conviction records, had been praised for running operations that netted excellent results and put away some serious bad guys... including some major GOP figures associated with scandals and pursuit of cases that were not necessarily all that pleasing to the White House or Alberto "Nut Case" Gonzalez, the most ill-informed, un-lawyerly and unprepared Attorney General we've had throughout history.
That last statement is saying something of great significance because we have had some "doosies" in that office. We had Edwin Meese that was so obsessed with pornography that he sought to manipulate the findings of several empirical studies that demonstrated so-called "soft porn" was no major threat to our societal values or fabric so that he and the DOJ could go on a witch hunt against anyone that even looked at a naked picture or watched a sexually explicit scene in a movie. Despite mounting evidence that over 50% of our population--including women that were once considered inherently opposed and repulsed by pornography--engaged in some form of pornographic enjoyment, Meese doctored his now famous report on how pornography affected our hearts and minds. Meese also went after the violence we see in movies rather than solving the violence we see in our streets and the covert violence our nation commits against other nations. Meese also entangled himself in the Iran-Contra Affair and was the target of at least two investigations by special prosecutors for alleged misconduct.
Of course we have John Ashcroft, who almost rises to the level of entrenchment, incompetence, partisanship and idiocy achieved by Gonzalez, but is just a tad shy of Gonzalez's success at being the worst we've ever had. Ashcroft, like Meese, was so ultra-conservative and so embarrassed by nakedness of the human form that he was offended and outraged because a statue of classical literary figures in front of our national offices--a statue that had been there for a long time and would not have violated the sensibilities of our forefathers and framers because of their education in the classic, literature and art--that he ordered over $8,000 of our hard-earned taxes to cover up a statue with a large set of drapes... all because he saw himself in the newspapers standing near a naked bronze breast of a woman. The whole affair made me wonder if Ashcroft wasn't hiding something in a closet somewhere. The social worker and clinical counselor in me saw all sorts of red flags about his sexual identity, possible history of familial abuse, and/or repressed sexuality, but without a series of clinical interviews and a complete psycho-social history I dared not jump to any conclusions. Ashcroft is also noted for being a member and defender of the Council of Conservative Citizens (CoCC), an organization reputed to be a group of high-end white supremacists and neo-confederacy, with an ultra-conservative agenda that literally seeks to bring our country back to the "good old days" when white men were kings of the south and ultra-conservative Christianity is the only version of religion allowed in the US. Ashcroft came to the defense Dr. Charles T. Sell, an alleged associate or member of the CoCC who was charged with "health care fraud, attempted murder, conspiracy, and solicitation to commit violence," including an attempt on the life of an FBI agent (major case reports regarding Sell). Ashcroft also proposed and supported Operation TIPS, the Carnivore Project, and several other measures that have infringed upon civil liberties and promoted the rapid growth of fascism in the current Bush administration. Additionally, Ashcroft provided opinions--both official and advisory--that supported the Bush Doctrine and the basis for ignoring the Geneva Conventions and other treaties incorporated into our Constitution by virtue of the "treaties clause" that is part of the "supremacy clause" contained therein. Of course, like most rich and powerful politicians, as soon as Ashcroft resigned from governmental service he entered the ever-revolving door open only to those willing to sell out the citizens of the United States to big business, all-powerful corporations and agents of foreign governments and became a political consultant and lobbyist, complete with direct access to the White House and his previous colleagues in the Congress.
Of course we have the Watergate Era/Nixon Administration Attorneys General, Elliot Richardson, John Mitchell and Richard Kleindienst. Richardson is most notable for the Saturday Night Massacre, in which Richardson and William Ruckelshaus resigned because they were ordered by Nixon to fire Archibald Cox, the special prosecutor appointed to investigate the Watergate Scandal and coverup. Richardson's sense of ethics and decency, as well as that of Ruckelshaus, brought the infamous figure of Robert Bork to the limelight. Of course, Bork being the entrenched ultra-conservative he is and was, did not hesitate to take the opportunity to rise to fame and fire Cox. Kleindienst had the decency to resign when the stink of Watergate first began to garner the attention of the people of the United States, divorcing himself from the entire affair.
Mitchell, on the other hand, climbed to ultra-conservative fame by seeking to prosecute dissidents voicing opposition to the Vietnam War, civil rights advocates, and deliberately directed the DOJ against involvement in civil rights and civil liberties cases. The FBI and CIA under the Mitchell era as AG were found to be involved in domestic spying activities that included wiretapping without warrants or probable cause. Mitchell was deeply involved in the Watergate Scandal not only as the Attorney General, but also as a key player of "CREEP," the Committee to Re-Elect the President. Mitchell was found guilty of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury and was sentenced to 2.5 to 8 years in federal prison. Despite being a decorated war veteran, Mitchell forgot that his oath of office, and his oath as a Naval Officer, required an allegiance and defense of the Constitution, not a corrupt president, the GOP, or the rich, influential and powerful.
Not to be out done, the Democrats have Janet Reno. While Reno had accomplished a hell of a lot of good in her career, she became a lightning rod for cultural war controversies and demonstrated that she was a better prosecutor and investigator than a high-level manager of the complex DOJ. Her decisions surrounding the ATF/FBI assault at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas were unsound and resulted in the deaths of law enforcement officers, many Branch Davidian practitioners, many children of those practitioners, and David Koresh, the whacko of Waco. Reno also suffered criticism related to the fallout of the Ruby Ridge incidents, which she inherited. Reno became an easy target for the ultra-conservatives, as well as one of the major figures in dealing with the indiscretions of her boss, William "Wet My Willie" Jefferson Clinton, who embroiled himself in numerous scandals for dipping his quill in company ink (as well as several stray inkwells) when his wife, Hillary, was not looking.
But Alberto Gonzalez takes the all-time prize for being an incompetent lawyer, leader and top cop of our nation. He has adopted many of the attitudes, platitudes and positions of many of the ultra-conservatives that preceded him, as well as making many of the same mistakes of his predecessors. He makes Mitchell, Ashcroft and Meese look like patriots and scholars. He doesn't seem to understand the Constitution places limits upon him or his boss, George W. Bush. He doesn't believe that the oath to support and defend the Constitution applies to himself, Bush, the DOD, or to our troops in the field, or to anyone the Bush administration declares hostile. Like Meese and Ashcroft, he will not hesitate to ignore and/or violate the Fourth Amendment at will. He has supported the concept of "signing statements" as an exemption from adhering to the law on the part of the executive branch. He has engaged in warrantless domestic surveillance under the false notion that the Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) against terrorists applies to whatever domestic operations he, the CIA, NSA or FBI determine is appropriate, without oversight by the FISA Court (as required by statute), Congress (as required by the Constitution), or the Posse Comitatus Act. During his tenure on the Supreme Court of Texas he forgot to read the Constitution of Texas or the US Constitution, preferring ideological decisions over the rule of law, just as he does today.
But beyond his entrenched ultra-conservativism is his penchant for retaliation against those that offend his notions of politics, dissidence or political loyalty, which is why so many attorneys working for the DOJ, and directly for Gonzalez, were ousted without reasonable cause or rationale. The attorneys dismissed under his reign as "royal prince" in the despotic absolute monarchy of George W. Bush were innocent of any wrong-doing and had an exemplary record of performance.
It is clear, from even a precursory review of the facts, that these US Attorneys were dismissed for purely political and/or narcisstic reasons that challenged Gonzo Gonzalez's entrenched ultra-conservativism, ego-centric notions regarding his authority as Attorney General, or the notions of empire and exaggerated executive power that he has supported for all of the current Bush administration. Gonzalez, like Bush, has cast aside reason, fairness, decency and justice in favor of absolute maniacal authority over those he supervises and those he rules...er, serves.
No More Denials, Please
It is time for the Justice Department to stop issuing rote denials that are becoming increasingly hard to believe about the suspicious firing of eight United States attorneys. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should appoint an impartial investigator to get to the bottom of this unfolding scandal.
Just this week, David Iglesias, one of the eight fired United States attorneys, charged that he was dismissed for resisting pressure to begin a politically charged prosecution before the 2006 election. His allegation came shortly after performance evaluations came to light that throw considerable doubt on the Justice Department’s claim that the United States attorneys were fired for poor performance.
United States attorneys, the highest federal prosecutors at the state level, must be insulated from politics. Their decisions about whether to indict can ruin lives, and change the outcome of elections. To ensure their independence, United States attorneys are almost never removed during the term of the president who appointed them.
The Bush administration ignored this tradition, and trampled on prosecutorial independence, by firing eight United States attorneys in rapid succession, including one, Carol Lam of San Diego, who had put a powerful Republican congressman in jail. Mr. Iglesias, who was the U.S. attorney in New Mexico, says two members of Congress called him last October and urged him to pursue corruption charges against a prominent Democrat before the November election. He did not. He was dismissed.
Dismissed U.S. Attorneys Praised in Evaluations
Internal Justice Department performance reports for six of the eight United States attorneys who have been dismissed in recent months rated them “well regarded,” “capable” or “very competent,” a review of the evaluations shows.
The performance reviews, known as Evaluations and Review Staff Reports, show that the ousted prosecutors were routinely praised for playing a leadership role with other law enforcement agencies in their jurisdictions.
The reviews, each of them 6 to 12 pages long, were carried out by Justice Department officials from 2003 to 2006. Each report was based on extensive interviews, conducted over several days with judges, other federal law enforcement agencies and staff members in each office.
It had been known that the reports were mostly favorable, but the reports themselves had not been made public.
Over all, the evaluations, which were obtained from officials authorized to have them, appear to raise new questions about the rationale for the dismissals provided by senior Justice Department officials. The officials have repeatedly cited poor job performance to explain their decisions to oust the eight prosecutors, all of them Republicans appointed by President Bush in his first term.
On Saturday, Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, who has led a Congressional investigation into the dismissals and has been briefed on the evaluations, said the reports showed that new legislation was needed to keep the Justice Department from politically motivated firings.
“As we feared, the comprehensive evaluations show these U.S. attorneys did not deserve to be fired,” Mr. Schumer said. “To the contrary, they reveal they were effective, respected and set appropriate priorities.”
In response, a senior Justice Department official said the reviews, which focused on management practices within each United States attorney’s office, did not provide a broad or complete picture of the prosecutors’ performance.
The official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the confidential nature of personnel information, said, “The reviews don’t take into account whether the U.S. attorneys carried out departmental priorities.”
Referring to the 94 United States attorney’s districts, the official said, “You can’t have 94 different sets of priorities,” suggesting that the dismissed prosecutors had failed to follow priorities set by the Justice Department in Washington.
However, each case report included a statement that each of the ousted prosecutors had established strategic goals set by the Justice Department in high priority areas like counterterrorism, narcotics and gun violence.
Of the dismissed prosecutors who have spoken publicly, all have said they were given no reason for their dismissal. At first, most appeared willing to leave quietly with the understanding that they were presidential appointees who could be replaced at any time.
But their willingness to step down without complaint changed abruptly when Paul J. McNulty, the deputy attorney general, said at a Senate hearing earlier this month that most of the dismissals were carried out to correct performance problems, according to associates of several prosecutors.
In recent days, several of the prosecutors have described conflicts with the Justice Department over death penalty cases and pending political corruption investigations as a possible factor in their firings. Justice Department officials have denied such issues were a factor.
REFERENCES:
Wikipedia: List of Attorneys General
Biographies of Attorneys General of the United States
posted by Jim Downey at 7:46 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home