Banned
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by reconmike
Excellent Host style, cut and paste some op piece from some anti-Bush writer and call it an article. I am sure I can find a op piece with a google seach thats states Rove already has his seat next to Jesus already on reserve.
|
uhhhh.....these are news reports, just as more than 90 percent of the rest of what I've ever posted on this forum, are:
Quote:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/print?id=2954988
E-Mails Show Rove's Role in U.S. Attorney Firings
White House Says E-Mails Are Consistent With Its Original Statements on the Controversy
By JAN CRAWFORD GREENBURG
March 15, 2007 — - New unreleased e-mails from top administration officials show that the idea of firing all 93 U.S. attorneys was raised by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove in early January 2005, indicating Rove was more involved in the plan than the White House previously acknowledged. The e-mails also show how Alberto Gonzales discussed the idea of firing the attorneys en masse while he was still White House counsel -- weeks before he was confirmed as attorney general.
The e-mails put Rove at the epicenter of the imbroglio and raise questions about Gonzales' explanations of the matter.
The White House said Thursday night that the e-mails did not contradict the previous statements about former White House counsel Harriet Miers' role. The e-mail exchange, dated January 6, 2005, is between then-deputy White House counsel David Leitch and Kyle Sampson at the Justice Department. According to a senior White House official who has seen the e-mail exchange, "It's not inconsistent with what we have said."
Justice Department spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos said Gonazales "has no recollection of any plan or discussion to replace U.S. attorneys while he was still White House counsel." She said he was preparing for his attorney general confirmation hearing and was focused on that.
"Of course, discussions of changes in presidential appointees would have been appropriate and normal White House exchanges in the days and months after the election as the White House was considering different personnel changes administration-wide," Scolinos said.
The e-mail exchange is dated more than a month before the White House acknowledged it was considering firing all the U.S. attorneys. On its face, the plan is not improper, inappropriate or even unusual: The president has the right to fire U.S. attorneys at any time, and presidents have done so when they took office.
What has made the issue a political firestorm is the White House's insistence that the idea came from Miers and was swiftly rejected.
White House press secretary Tony Snow told reporters Tuesday that Miers had suggested firing all 93 attorneys, and that it was "her idea only." Snow said Miers' idea was quickly rejected by the Department of Justice.
The latest e-mails show that Gonzales and Rove were both involved in the discussion, and neither rejected it out of hand.
According to the e-mails, Rove raised the issue with Leitch, prompting Leitch to e-mail Sampson, who was, at the time, a lawyer in the Justice Department. Sampson moved over to the Justice Department after working with Gonzales at the White House.
Sampson responded to Leitch that he had discussed the idea with Gonzales two weeks earlier, and that they were considering several different options.
|
Here is am image of the email described in the preceding news article, note the mention of Rove at the bottom, and earlier in the email, note the "loyal Bushies" description of the still employed US Attorneys:
<center><img src="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/files/1173998679Leaked%20email%20-%20Sampson%202005%20copy.jpg"></center>
....and reconmike, in today's news:
Quote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070406/...ed_prosecutors
By LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer Fri Apr 6, 7:41 PM ET
WASHINGTON - A top aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales abruptly quit Friday, almost two weeks after telling Congress she would not testify about her role in the firings of federal prosecutors.
Monica M. Goodling, the Justice Department's liaison to the White House, gave no reason for her resignation. Since she was at the center of the firings, Goodling's refusal to testify has intensified questions about whether the U.S. attorney dismissals were proper and heightened the furor that threatens Gonzales' own job.......
|
Quote:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/...opinion-center
Bush's long history of tilting Justice
The administration began skewing federal law enforcement before the current U.S. attorney scandal, says a former Department of Justice lawyer.
By Joseph D. Rich, JOSEPH D. RICH was chief of the voting section in the Justice Department's civil right division from 1999 to 2005. He now works for the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.
March 29, 2007
THE SCANDAL unfolding around the firing of eight U.S. attorneys compels the conclusion that the Bush administration has rewarded loyalty over all else. A destructive pattern of partisan political actions at the Justice Department started long before this incident, however, as those of us who worked in its civil rights division can attest.
<b>I spent more than 35 years in the department enforcing federal civil rights laws — particularly voting rights.</b> Before leaving in 2005, I worked for attorneys general with dramatically different political philosophies — from John Mitchell to Ed Meese to Janet Reno. Regardless of the administration, the political appointees had respect for the experience and judgment of longtime civil servants.
Under the Bush administration, however, all that changed. Over the last six years, this Justice Department has ignored the advice of its staff and skewed aspects of law enforcement in ways that clearly were intended to influence the outcome of elections.
It has notably shirked its legal responsibility to protect voting rights. From 2001 to 2006, no voting discrimination cases were brought on behalf of African American or Native American voters. U.S. attorneys were told instead to give priority to voter fraud cases, which, when coupled with the strong support for voter ID laws, indicated an intent to depress voter turnout in minority and poor communities.
At least two of the recently fired U.S. attorneys, John McKay in Seattle and David C. Iglesias in New Mexico, were targeted largely because they refused to prosecute voting fraud cases that implicated Democrats or voters likely to vote for Democrats. click to show
This pattern also extended to hiring. In March 2006, Bradley Schlozman was appointed interim U.S. attorney in Kansas City, Mo. Two weeks earlier, the administration was granted the authority to make such indefinite appointments without Senate confirmation. That was too bad: A Senate hearing might have uncovered Schlozman's central role in politicizing the civil rights division during his three-year tenure.
Schlozman, for instance, was part of the team of political appointees that approved then-House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's plan to redraw congressional districts in Texas, which in 2004 increased the number of Republicans elected to the House. Similarly, Schlozman was acting assistant attorney general in charge of the division when the Justice Department OKd a Georgia law requiring voters to show photo IDs at the polls. These decisions went against the recommendations of career staff, who asserted that such rulings discriminated against minority voters. The warnings were prescient: Both proposals were struck down by federal courts.
Schlozman continued to influence elections as an interim U.S. attorney. Missouri had one of the closest Senate races in the country last November, and a week before the election, Schlozman brought four voter fraud indictments against members of an organization representing poor and minority people. This blatantly contradicted the department's long-standing policy to wait until after an election to bring such indictments because a federal criminal investigation might affect the outcome of the vote. The timing of the Missouri indictments could not have made the administration's aims more transparent.
This administration is also politicizing the career staff of the Justice Department. Outright hostility to career employees who disagreed with the political appointees was evident early on. Seven career managers were removed in the civil rights division. I personally was ordered to change performance evaluations of several attorneys under my supervision. I was told to include critical comments about those whose recommendations ran counter to the political will of the administration and to improve evaluations of those who were politically favored.
Morale plummeted, resulting in an alarming exodus of career attorneys. In the last two years, 55% to 60% of attorneys in the voting section have transferred to other departments or left the Justice Department entirely.
At the same time, career staff were nearly cut out of the process of hiring lawyers. Control of hiring went to political appointees, so an applicant's fidelity to GOP interests replaced civil rights experience as the most important factor in hiring decisions.
For decades prior to this administration, the Justice Department had successfully kept politics out of its law enforcement decisions. Hopefully, the spotlight on this misconduct will begin the process of restoring dignity and nonpartisanship to federal law enforcement. As the 2008 elections approach, it is critical to have a Justice Department that approaches its responsibility to all eligible voters without favor.
|
Quote:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...ck=1&cset=true
Cummins fears corruption investigation led to his firing
By Richard A. Serrano, Times Staff Writer
March 16, 2007
WASHINGTON — Still uncertain exactly why he was fired, former U.S. Atty. H.E. "Bud" Cummins III wonders whether it had something to do with the probe he opened into alleged corruption by Republican officials in Missouri amid a Senate race there that was promising to be a nail-biter.
Cummins, a federal prosecutor in Arkansas, was removed from his job along with seven other U.S. attorneys last year.
In January 2006, he had begun looking into allegations that Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt had rewarded GOP supporters with lucrative contracts to run the state's driver's license offices. Cummins handled the case because U.S. attorneys in Missouri had recused themselves over potential conflicts of interest.
But in June, Cummins said, he was told by the Justice Department that he would be fired at year's end to make room for Timothy Griffin — <b>an operative tied to White House political guru Karl Rove.....</b>
|
...and another politically motivate prosecution falls apart:
Quote:
http://www.madison.com/tct/mad/topst...128250&ntpid=1
Thompson freed; judge chides prosecutors
Doyle taint lifted?
By David Callender and Judith Davidoff
.......In an interview, Michelle Jacobs of the U.S. Attorney's Office in Milwaukee denied that the prosecution was politically motivated.
"I can tell you that from our perspective it was not, but that is as far as I'm going to go," said Jacobs, a first assistant U.S. attorney.
The charges against Thompson were a central part of the gubernatorial campaign last year, in which Doyle defeated Republican challenger Mark Green. One TV ad sponsored by a Republican group showed a personnel chart leading from Thompson to former Administration Secretary Marc Marotta to Doyle's Chief of Staff Susan Goodwin to Doyle himself. Other GOP-linked ads compared Doyle to former President Richard Nixon, who resigned in disgrace over the Watergate scandal.
During a Capitol press conference Thursday, Doyle hailed Thompson's release and charged that the veteran civil servant, who was hired during the administration of Republican Gov. Scott McCallum, had been made a "political football."
Doyle said Thompson would be entitled to resume her $75,000-a-year job as well as receive back pay and other benefits. He also said she could be eligible to have her legal bills paid, since state employees who face legal action in performing their official duties are eligible for reimbursement.
"Can you imagine the horror of this? She's doing her job and then she gets caught up in all this," he said. "Millions and millions of dollars were spent by my political opponents trying to make this woman appear to be a terrible criminal."
In arguments Thursday on her appeal, the panel of 7th Circuit judges called the charges unfounded.
"It strikes me that your evidence is beyond thin," Judge Diane Wood told prosecutors. "I'm not sure what your actual theory in this case is."
The court then acquitted Thompson on the spot and ordered her immediate release......
|
Quote:
http://www.kstp.com/article/stories/s39841.shtml
Updated: 03/23/2007 05:53:12 PM
Was U.S. Attorney's swearing-in ceremony too extravagant?
When Rachel Paulose was sworn-in on March 9th as U.S. Attorney for Minnesota, she had already held the job for more than a year. The White House named Paulose to take over on an interim basis early in 2006, when Tom Heffelfinger resigned. In December, the U.S. Senate confirmed Paulose to hold the job permanently.
Paulose's investiture was the first ever held outside the Federal courthouse. Due to the large number of invited guests, the ceremony was held in the atrium at the University of St. Thomas law school.......
Quote:
http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/myfox...Y&pageId=1.1.1
Exclusive: Shake Up at the U.S. Attorney's Office
Last Edited: Thursday, 05 Apr 2007, 9:35 PM CDT
Created: Thursday, 05 Apr 2007, 9:11 PM CDT
Controversy Surrounding MN U.S. Attorney
U.S. Attorney General Talks to FOX 9
Attorney General Says Adoption Agency Didn't Deliver
MINNEAPOLIS -- It’s a major shakeup at the offices of new U.S. Attorney Rachel Paulose.
Four of her top staff voluntarily demoted themselves Thursday, fed up with <b>Paulose, who, after just months on the job, has earned a reputation for quoting Bible verses and dressing down underlings.</b>
Deputy U.S. Attorney John Marty is just one of the people dropping themselves in rank to simply a U.S. Attorney position. Also making the move are the heads of Paulose’s criminal and civil divisions and the top administrative officer.
The move is intended to send a message to Washington – that 33-year-old Paulose is in over her head.
Paulose was appointed before the 8 U.S. Attorneys were given their pink slips, but she has deep connections to the scandal.
She was a special assistant to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, worked as a senior counsel for deputy attorney general Paul McNulty <h3>and is best buds with Monica Goodling – the assistant U.S. Attorney who recently took the Fifth rather than testify before Congress. ....</h3>
|
Quote:
http://www.twincities.com/allheadlines/ci_5610028
Paulose shakeup spills into national controversy over U.S. attorneys
BY SHANNON PRATHER
Pioneer Press
Article Last Updated: 04/06/2007 06:38:15 PM CDT
Minnesota U.S. Attorney Rachel Paulose tried Friday to downplay the resignations of three top aides, but she couldn't keep the shakeup from getting drawn into the furor over the hiring and firing of the nation's top prosecutors.
Three of Paulose's ranking assistants surrendered their management posts Thursday to become rank-and-file prosecutors, expressing frustration with her dictatorial management style and priorities, according to sources familiar with the situation. ....
|
Quote:
http://www.startribune.com/462/story/1104033.html
3 federal prosecutors quit manager posts
They left their management jobs with the Minnesota U.S. Attorney's Office and will go back to prosecuting cases.
By Dan Browning and Pam Louwagie, Star Tribune
Last update: April 06, 2007 – 3:22 PM
In a surprising move, three top lawyers in the Minnesota U.S. Attorney's Office resigned their management positions Thursday and will return to prosecuting cases.
The resignations of the first assistant U.S. attorney, who is second in command, and the chiefs of both the criminal and civil divisions of the office, were communicated internally late Thursday afternoon, according to a source with direct knowledge of the events. The job changes followed a visit to the office by a representative from the Executive Office of the U.S. Attorney in Washington, D.C.....
|
|
The_Jazz.....consider that my post is relevant because it provides unequivocal and thorough support (from sources that are exclusively news reporting....)for the accusations and opinions against Karl Rove in the "article" that Astrocloud posted. The points here are that Rove has done too much damage to the nation to be celebrated by the blindly partisan or the uninformed, or simply scorned without additional comment....because the damage he has inflicted by designed, is so troubling, far reaching, and so significant in it's scope and detail. Do we even have a fair DOJ existing today, thanks largely to Rove?
Last edited by host; 04-06-2007 at 07:46 PM..
|