Well, That's That...

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
Post Reply
User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Well, That's That...

Post by Lord Jim »

DOJ: Prosecutor firing was politics, not crime

By MATT APUZZO and PETE YOST, Associated Press Writers Matt Apuzzo And Pete Yost, Associated Press Writers – 30 mins ago

WASHINGTON – The Bush administration's Justice Department's actions were inappropriately political, but not criminal, when it fired a U.S. attorney in 2006, prosecutors said Wednesday in closing a two-year investigation without filing charges.

The decision closes the books on one of the lingering political disputes of the Bush administration, one that Democrats said was evidence of GOP politics run amok and that Republicans have always said was a manufactured controversy.

Investigators looked into whether the Bush administration improperly dismissed nine U.S. attorneys, and in particular New Mexico U.S. Attorney David Iglesias, as a way to influence criminal cases. The scandal added to mounting criticism that the administration had politicized the Justice Department, a charge that contributed to the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

In 2008, the Justice Department assigned Nora Dannehy, a career prosecutor from Connecticut with a history of rooting out government wrongdoing, to investigate the firings.

"Evidence did not demonstrate that any prosecutable criminal offense was committed with regard to the removal of David Iglesias," the Justice Department said in a letter to lawmakers Wednesday. "The investigative team also determined that the evidence did not warrant expanding the scope of the investigation beyond the removal of Iglesias."

Prosecutors also said there was insufficient evidence to charge someone with lying to Congress or investigators.

Iglesias was fired after the head of New Mexico's Republican Party complained to the White House that Iglesias was soft on voter fraud. He asked that Iglesias be replaced so that the state could "make some real progress in cleaning up a state notorious for crooked elections."

Harriet Miers, then White House counsel, told lawmakers that presidential political adviser Karl Rove was "very agitated" over Iglesias "and wanted something done about it." Rove has said he played no role in deciding which U.S. attorneys were fired, that the firings weren't politically motivated and that he never sought to influence prosecutions.

Dannehy faulted the Justice Department for firing Iglesias without even bothering to figure out whether complaints about him were true. That indicated "an undue sensitivity to politics on the part of DOJ officials who should answer not to partisan politics but to principles of fairness and justice," the Justice Department wrote in its letter.

But that was not a crime, and was not an effort to influence prosecutions, the letter said.

Gonzales' lawyer, George Terwilliger, called the conclusion long overdue.

"Those who made unwarranted allegations to the contrary owe him an apology," Terwilliger said. "After having spent months cooperating with inquiries that produced no evidence of his wrongdoing, Judge Gonzales is pleased to be free to resume a career marked to date by service to the public."

Former Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., also became a focus of the investigation because he made three phone calls to the attorney general and one to Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty complaining about Iglesias. McNulty didn't mention Domenici's phone calls when questioned by Congress, leading to accusations over a coverup.

Dannehy concluded that Domenici's push to have Iglesias fired was in part politically motivated but did not violate the law.

Iglesias also said Domenici called him and pressured him to bring charges in a public corruption case before Election Day 2006. The Senate Ethics Committee said Domenici created an appearance of impropriety with that phone call, and he apologized.

Dannehy said there was not enough evidence to show that phone call was either an attempt to pressure Iglesias to accelerate the case or a threat that if he didn't, he'd lose his job.

"The Justice Department has now confirmed what I have always said and believed: I never attempted to interfere with any government investigation," Domenici said. "I am glad that this matter has concluded."

The nine prosecutors who were fired were: Daniel Bogden of Nevada, Paul Charlton of Arizona, Margaret Chiara of Michigan, Bud Cummins of Arkansas, Todd Graves of Missouri, Carol Lam of California, John McKay of Washington, Kevin Ryan of California, and Iglesias.
It's funny....

Of all the accusations of criminality that were recklessly and constantly hurled at the Bush Administration by the Mouth Frothing Bush Haters, this was the one that I thought might actually have some merit....

Apparently not...
ImageImageImage

Andrew D
Posts: 3150
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 5:01 pm
Location: North California

Re: Well, That's That...

Post by Andrew D »

The Bush administration's Justice Department's actions were inappropriately political ....
OK, so those actions weren't criminal. (That assumes, of course, that the investigation into whether they were or were not criminal was itself untainted by political objectives.)

But what should we make of the phrase "inappropriately political"?

How about "The Shrub administration did not commit a crime by firing Iglesias, but the evidence does show that the Shrub administration fired him because he did not suck up to the Shrub administration's political agenda, which the Shrub administration elevated over all considerations of professional competence and the like"?

That seems a fair assessment.
Reason is valuable only when it performs against the wordless physical background of the universe.

liberty
Posts: 4616
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:31 pm
Location: Colonial Possession

Re: Well, That's That...

Post by liberty »

How about this:
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 58430.html

President Obama's Justice Department continues to stonewall inquiries about why it dropped a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party.

The episode—which Bartle Bull, a former civil rights lawyer and publisher of the left-wing Village Voice, calls "the most blatant form of voter intimidation I've ever seen"—began on Election Day 2008. Mr. Bull and others witnessed two Black Panthers in paramilitary garb at a polling place near downtown Philadelphia. (Some of this behavior is on YouTube.)

One of them, they say, brandished a nightstick at the entrance and pointed it at voters and both made racial threats. Mr. Bull says he heard one yell "You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker!"

In the first week of January, the Justice Department filed a civil lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party and three of its members, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring voters with the weapon, uniforms and racial slurs. In March, Mr. Bull submitted an affidavit at Justice's request to support its lawsuit.

View Full Image

Associated Press

Attorney General Eric Holder
When none of the defendants filed any response to the complaint or appeared in federal district court in Philadelphia to answer the suit, it appeared almost certain Justice would have prevailed by default. Instead, the department in May suddenly allowed the party and two of the three defendants to walk away. Against the third defendant, Minister King Samir Shabazz, it sought only an injunction barring him from displaying a weapon within 100 feet of a Philadelphia polling place for the next three years—action that's already illegal under
I expected to be placed in an air force combat position such as security police, forward air control, pararescue or E.O.D. I would have liked dog handler. I had heard about the dog Nemo and was highly impressed. “SFB” is sad I didn’t end up in E.O.D.

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 8905
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: Well, That's That...

Post by Sue U »

Liberty, your (and the frothing right-wingnut brigade's) obsession with all things "racial" is disturbing and bordering on pathological.

As I said at "the other place" at the time it happened:
Sue U wrote:
Bosco wrote:
Sue U wrote: Hahahahahahahahaha! Faux News!

"We can't find anyone who's actually been intimidated by anything but there are BLACK PEOPLE AT THE POLLING PLACE! AND ONE OF THEM'S A POLL WATCHER!"

Too funny!!!


Edited to correct spelling 'cause I was laughing too hard to type straight.
One black guy with a billy club.

You really are clueless.

ETA: did you ACTUALLY view the video clip?
Yes, I watched the video clip. That's why I could see this was a manufactured "incident" for the benefit of Faux News.
Lord Jim wrote:
Sue, you really made yourself look foolish on this one....
*Ahem ... *:
***

But police and an investigator from the district attorney's office went to inquire and found no evidence of intimidation, according to spokespeople for both offices.

Lovida H. Coleman Jr., a Republican attorney working with the McCain campaign, said she uncovered no evidence of voters being denied their right to vote, although she thought the Panthers should not have been allowed access to voters.

***

The initial allegation came from a University student, who had been serving as a poll watcher.

***

The police made at least one more visit to the polling place on Fairmount Tuesday, this time to ask FoxNews to leave for getting too close to the polling place.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/break ... _stir.html

Let's see, no one was denied access to the polling place (including the GOP operative featured on the video, even though he was not a poll watcher or voter in that district), there was no evidence of any actual voter intimidation, no one was arrested for anything, and police had to ask the Fox "News" crew to leave because they were becoming a problem. In short, some college kid sent to be a GOP poll watcher in the Richard Allen Homes project in North Philly got freaked by a guy in a Panthers beret and called the cops. (BTW, if you've never been to the Richard Allen Homes, until recently it was fairly comparable to the "Towers" housing project featured in the HBO series "The Wire." The city has been demolishing it piece by piece and replacing it with new semi-detached style units.)

And I look foolish?

Lemme tell ya, if you out-of-towners want to see a black man with a stick in Philly, better to pick Ryan Howard or Jimmy Rollins.

:D :D :D
At worst in this case there was some posturing assholery by some dude claiming to be a "New Black Panther" and total douchebaggery by some jerkoff suburban Republican college kid looking to stir up trouble at a polling station in the projects.

This is a total non-story in Philadelphia and everywhere else in the world EXCEPT for the racist division of the wingnut blogosphere. It is notable that this whole "controversy" was generated by Andrew Breitbart and Fox News, who just yesterday were shown to be unspeakable slithering media vermin intent on manufacturing and inflaming "racial" issues.
GAH!

Post Reply