Lawmakers Urge Investigation Into Administration’s Prosecutor Purge In Abramoff Case
Lawmakers Urge Investigation Into Administration’s Prosecutor Purge In Abramoff Case
In recent weeks, Congress has investigated the Bush administration’s recent purge of qualified, well-respected U.S. attorneys. But one former prosecutor — Frederick A. Black — has received little attention. The administration fired Black shortly after he began investigating Jack Abramoff’s dealings in Guam.
Today in a letter to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, Reps. George Miller (D-CA) and Nick Rahall (D-WV) urge Congress to investigate “the potential political manipulation by Jack Abramoff and his allies in Congress and the Administration” in the Black case:
At the time, we viewed the replacement of the Acting U.S. Attorney as an example of the overly zealous and improper, if not illegal, conduct by the now disgraced and convicted lobbyist, Jack Abramoff.
In light of more recent revelations about political interference with the work of other U.S. Attorneys, however, it is necessary now to re-examine the case as it may represent the beginning of a pattern of behavior by some members of Congress and officials in the Bush Administration to politicize the work of U.S. Attorneys and to quash their independence.
In 2002, Black launched an investigation into Jack Abramoff’s “secret arrangement with Superior Court officials to lobby against a court reform bill then pending in Congress.” On Nov. 18, 2002, Black issued a grand jury subpoena to the Guam Superior Court to turn over all records involving the lobbying contract with Abramoff. The administration swiftly punished Black:
A day later, the chief prosecutor, US Attorney Frederick A. Black, who had launched the investigation, was demoted. A White House news release announced that Bush was replacing Black.
The timing caught some by surprise. Despite his officially temporary status as the acting US attorney, Black had held the assignment for more than a decade.
An internal Justice Department investigation concluded that the White House did not improperly retaliate against Black for raising allegations against Abramoff. But the probe into Abramoff’s activities in Guam died shortly after Black stepped down.
(Full letter from Miller and Rahall HERE.)
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
82 Responses to “Lawmakers Urge Investigation Into Administration’s Prosecutor Purge In Abramoff Case”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
For more on the White House connection and all the latest news, hearings, legal filings and other essential documents on the Bush DOJ prosecutor firings, see:
March 13th, 2007 at 3:57 pm“The U.S. Attorney Scandal Documents.”
And it just keeps on getting better and better. These crooks have gotten caught with their pants down. For all the world to see, even the few neocon faithful. If they come out and back the administration now, then you know they don’t like America. Anyone backing Bush and Co. would in essence, be admitting they want a dictatorship. The game is up.
March 13th, 2007 at 3:58 pmYeah, I remember this, and thought at the time…
ROVE STINK????!~
March 13th, 2007 at 4:00 pmIt somehow seems a cosmic act of comedy that the Stardust casino was imploded today… mirroring the gathering collapse of the current regime…
March 13th, 2007 at 4:00 pm…and now we have more clues about why Alberto is so busy….
March 13th, 2007 at 4:02 pmProbably half the U.S. attorneys have been intimidated or compromised, we just don’t know about it.
March 13th, 2007 at 4:06 pmHow is that different than when President Carter replaced the US Attorney who was investigating the kickbacks at the Hahneman Hospital in Philadelphia, because a local Democratic politician asked him to? What part of “serving at the pleasure of the President” are you having trouble understanding?
March 13th, 2007 at 4:08 pmIs anyone outraged yet with Busch and Co.?
March 13th, 2007 at 4:09 pmI don’t drink Anheuser-Busch.
March 13th, 2007 at 4:11 pm#6 Jake,
please please, get this straight just because someone, anyone, republican, democrat or green has done something similar in the past doesn’t make it right…please stop making excuses with history as an example. It was wrong then, it’s wrong now…
March 13th, 2007 at 4:14 pmWow, Jake!
You had to go all the way back to Carter to find an excuse??? Can’t even blame this one on Clinton???
Pretty lame.
March 13th, 2007 at 4:15 pmIsn’t this fun having the Dems in charge of Congress? So many things happening. I don’t know which story to read next. Its like a rotten onion. each layer inward gets more and more rancid.
March 13th, 2007 at 4:15 pmHow is that different than when President Carter replaced the US Attorney who was investigating the kickbacks at the Hahneman Hospital in Philadelphia, because a local Democratic politician asked him to?
Comment by Jake
How did that situation end up? I found a blurb about it but I can’t find anything about the end result.
March 13th, 2007 at 4:19 pmbush& co are suffering a death from a thousand cuts. It seems a day can’t go by without another scandal coming out.
Now, will anything come of it? The people are simply tired and overwhelmed, and the so-called opposition party seem to huff and puff but don’t really do anything. They act like if we just hold our breath and close our eyes it will all be over in two years and holding anyone actually accountable would just upset things.
TO HELL WITH THAT!!!
I don’t now what it will take for some meaningful action to be taken, but it seems we passed the breaking point a long time ago. For those political junkies that have been aware of the injustices we’ve been screaming and beating our collective heads against the wall for, oh, so long.
This case seems to be one of the least grievous but hopefully it’s accumulation on top of the others may mean that finally the walls may crumble and the truth of what this criminal government has been doing will spill forth.
March 13th, 2007 at 4:21 pm“How is that different than when President Carter replaced the US Attorney who was investigating the kickbacks at the Hahneman Hospital in Philadelphia, because a local Democratic politician asked him to? What part of “serving at the pleasure of the President†are you having trouble understanding?”
Comment by Jake — March 13, 2007
Can we go back to James Buchanan or Millard Fillmore for justification too?
-GSD
March 13th, 2007 at 4:23 pmyes Alberto,while you reassess the powers of the presidency shred the constitution and stack the courts as ideologically to the right as possible, wave the flag , sing the star spangled banner and find a good lawyer ,if there is any justice ,your gonna need one !
March 13th, 2007 at 4:26 pmOh and one more thing Mr Gonzales,
THERE IS NO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ON WAR CRIMES !
smokes, Peter, diet, and GSD:
I spent the Schumer-Gonzales thread posting examples from Reagan and Clinton — so, I thought maybe this example from Carter would help SOMEONE see that political appointees get fired for political reasons all the time — I didn’t have a problem with it back then and I don’t now.
March 13th, 2007 at 4:27 pmStop the freakin investigations. You libs are hurting our war effort in Iraq. You can do all the investigations when the surge is over. Right now, winning means all, or they’ll be speaking Arabic in Iowa. Do you libs get that?
March 13th, 2007 at 4:27 pmHow is that different than when President Carter replaced the US Attorney who was investigating the kickbacks at the Hahneman Hospital
Comment by Jake
Well from what I have read so far the difference is that Carter wrongly dismissed one US attorney for political purposes. Bush wrongly dismissed eight US attorneys for political purposes.
What was the question again?
March 13th, 2007 at 4:28 pmcool. I mentioned Black getting purged, stopping the Abramhoff investigation assosicated with Guam, in an earlier thread. Seems that little issue is now being addressed, finally.
Now we are finding out why Bush did not want congressional oversight.
March 13th, 2007 at 4:30 pm[…] in Bush Administration, GOP, Government at 12:33 pm by LeisureGuy ThinkProgress: In recent weeks, Congress has investigated the Bush administration’s recent purge of qualified, […]
March 13th, 2007 at 4:32 pmCan we go back to James Buchanan or Millard Fillmore for justification too?
-GSD
Comment by GSD
But Polk . . .
March 13th, 2007 at 4:33 pmStop the freakin investigations.
Comment by firehead
Spoken by someone who is afraid that their neocon world is crumbling before their very eyes, LOL
If you can’t stop pissing your pants, you should get a box of depends, firehead
March 13th, 2007 at 4:34 pm. . . so, I thought maybe this example from Carter would help SOMEONE see that political appointees get fired for political reasons all the time . . .
I guess not : (
March 13th, 2007 at 4:34 pmFor a complete archive of Jack Abramoff/Tom Delay scandal documents and news, see:
“The Abramoff/Delay Scandal Documents.”
For the latest news, hearings, legal filings and other essential documents on the Bush DOJ prosecutor firings, see:
March 13th, 2007 at 4:34 pm“The U.S. Attorney Scandal Documents.”
After reading firehead’s comment, I’m ready to declare “Mission Accomplished” on the political front.
We got the Repubs on the ropes, and we’re still swingin’ baby!!!
Oh, what a wonderful day!
March 13th, 2007 at 4:35 pmHow is that different than when President Carter replaced the US Attorney who was investigating the kickbacks at the Hahneman Hospital
Comment by Jake
How does Carter doing something wrong excuse Bush? Please explain.
2 wrongs never equal right.
March 13th, 2007 at 4:36 pmI’d like to see everything investigated, right down to the last Goddamned decision to grab that extra earmark for toilet tisssue in the executive bathroom. These walking, talking turd balls are exasperating enough to make me advocate homocidal tendencies and not feel any remorse. I’d like to see them all spend thier last days in a maximum security prison, along with thier wives, children and parents. F* ‘em, all!
March 13th, 2007 at 4:37 pmRight now, winning means all, or they’ll be speaking Arabic in Iowa. Do you libs get that?
Comment by firehead —
We get that you’re a coward, willing for others to fight the fight you think so important . . .
Speaking Arabic in Iowa?
They’d better to learn Spanish first, or they won’t be able to communicate with todays Iowans.
March 13th, 2007 at 4:37 pm#17- I think Arabic is a lovely language. It’s flows off the tongue, like nectar. Mmm…
March 13th, 2007 at 4:38 pmIt doesn’t matter to me. Next time there’s a Democrat in the White House, however, we will remember this new and “improved” standard for firing political appointees . . .
March 13th, 2007 at 4:39 pm#17…firehead…[ Right now,winning means all, or they’ll be speaking Arabic in Iowa. Do you libs get that?]
First: What does the story of Attorney Gonzalez has to do with the war in Iraq?
Secondly: You are mistaken here….In most Arab countries they teach English beside their own language…That is education.
I wish we do teach another language/languages in our schools…may be our look and understanding of other cultures without a doubt will improve.
Your fear is unfounded about Iowa speaking Arabic…
March 13th, 2007 at 4:46 pmRove needs you and he loves people like you…scared to death,beyond logic.
They’d better to learn Spanish first, or they won’t be able to communicate with todays Iowans.
Comment by barfly
Como Esta?
hehe
here is a new phrase for firehead
Exaltado es un cobarde ( Hothead is a coward. )
March 13th, 2007 at 4:51 pmDid Carter’s people lie to Congress, which is a crime, and under oath, which is also a crime, about the reasons the attorney was fired?
I have no problem holding future Presidents to the same standards, just as I wouldn’t have had a problem holding Carter to the standard if I weren’t in grade school at the time.
Feel free to keep griping about our lack of concern, Jake.
dlet, while we’re off-topic, Jake/his source misspelled “Hahnemann”.
March 13th, 2007 at 4:53 pmhahahaha CARTER???
The trolls are in full out four alarm damage control mode and not just here.
Six years of crimes are about to make beautiful synergy together.
This is going to make an awesome display at the Chimps library.
I’m still laughing..CARTER!?!?
BWAhaaahahahahah!!!!
March 13th, 2007 at 4:53 pmIt doesn’t matter to me.
Comment by Jake
obviously it does since you posted about it.
March 13th, 2007 at 4:54 pmNice way to avoid explaining why 2 wrongs make a right. Troll.
if it does not matter to you, shoo go away.
Que pasa? Exaltado es un cobarde! Buenas dias, senor.
March 13th, 2007 at 4:57 pmHow is that different
Comment by Jake — March 13, 2007
How is this different than when John Wilkes Boothe felt it necessary to shoot Abraham Lincoln, another republican, because he was so frustrated by his policies?
March 13th, 2007 at 5:00 pmExaltado es un cobarde! Si!
March 13th, 2007 at 5:01 pmI’m still laughing..CARTER!?!?
BWAhaaahahahahah!!!!
Comment by mparker
yeah, hillarious!
next they will be digging up FDR for some lamo excuse.
March 13th, 2007 at 5:01 pmdlet, while we’re off-topic, Jake/his source misspelled “Hahnemannâ€.
Comment by Aaron G. Stock
Thanks Aaron. I tracked some info down on the Carter issue. Like you I was knee high when this happened but from what I read it was definately a stupid and wrong thing to do. What I can’t find is that if Carter did this with knowledge that the two Democratic Congressmen were doing criminal activity. I can’t find anything that says Carter knew this and tried to directly help them by getting rid of the attorney. Apparently this was not the case since they were investigated anyway.
March 13th, 2007 at 5:01 pmfirehead :
“Stop the investigations …”, because we’re “… hurting the war effort … “?
WTF? So by your logic if crimes are being committed, and only investigations can judge that, and if you have nothing to worry about you’d welcome investigations, but we have to stop any action to bring any criminals to justice until they finish their crimes. That’s like saying if you come across a bank robbery in progress you should wait until they finish the job before you intervene.
Than we have this so-called war. To start there is ever reason to believe that those that started this so-called war should be tried for Crimes Against Humanity for starting an aggressive war against both the UN charter and the Nuremberg charters. Not to mention they have had 4 years to “get it right” and I would challenge you to mention one thing they’ve gotten right.
YET, you want to give these incompetent fools the benefit of the doubt and that against all the best advice from military leaders that we need to find another way, you STILL follow the fools so that we may “win”.
Win what? What the hell are you talking about? We got Hussien. We supposably have “won” already. Need I even bring up the non-existent WMD’s? What we’ve unleashed is a civil war. What are we suppose to do? Pick sides? Who? Which side?’ Than what? You haven’t a clue.
Ah, the hell with it! Not being capable of an original thought I expect you’ll run back to one of your wing-nut blogs for the “talking points” that fit into your disjointed logic. It boggles the mind that anyone with the IQ above room temperature can still support these fools.
March 13th, 2007 at 5:04 pmStop the freakin investigations. You libs are hurting our war effort in Iraq. You can do all the investigations when the surge is over. Right now, winning means all, or they’ll be speaking Arabic in Iowa. Do you libs get that?
Comment by firehead — March 13, 2007 @ 4:27 pm
How will we know when we’ve won the war? Who will surrender? Are the Iraqis supposed to surrender to us? I thought they were our friends. Are the terrorists going to surrender? Since WAR has not been officially declared how will we know when it’s over?
March 13th, 2007 at 5:05 pmHere’s a clue - it will never be over until Bush is out of office because he doesn’t know how to end it. There will be one surge after another, this surges has already exceeded the 20,000 troup surge by 5,000. Tell us what will determine a win and then we’ll know what we’re waiting for.
I guess it’s ok for me to rob a bank or shoot someone! It’s been done before so by Dale’s logic it’s ok to do now!
March 13th, 2007 at 5:06 pmHow does Congress keep up? Our country is drowning!
March 13th, 2007 at 5:07 pm#6 Jake
What part of “serving at the pleasure of the President†are you having trouble understanding?
So you think that the expression “serving at the pleasure of the president” means that the president can kill an investigation if it threatens to expose a good friend to federal prosecution, or threatens to expose members of Congress from his own party to prosecution, or threatens to expose the White House or even himself to proescution?
Is that what you think it means? Jesus H. Christ, you right-wing idiots haven’t got an ethical bone in your body, do you! You’re just flat-out clueless when it comes to abuse of power and corruption. Don’t come here and argue right and wrong if you don’t know the difference between the two.
March 13th, 2007 at 5:13 pmThank you, Reps. Miller and Rahall! I was hoping somebody would go back and dig this one up, since the Republicans went to all that effort to bury it.
March 13th, 2007 at 5:15 pmIraq Oil Law Runs into Opposition
The next ten days or so could be critical…
March 13th, 2007 at 5:18 pmYou want to look at a case of real serious abuse? Google Sibel Edmonds.
There’s new evidence coming forth that may awaken this GIANT of a case that makes most of these others seem trivial.
The selling of state secrets, drug trafficking, high treason, collusion with terrorists prior and after 9/11 and espionage by some of the highest placed politicians in office. And it’s all documented with hard evidence. Unlike this harder to prove dismissal of judges case.
The government has tried every trick in the book to silence Sibel Edmonds. I urge everyone to call Rep. Waxman and demand that public hearings be held immediately.
March 13th, 2007 at 5:27 pmExcuse me, could you plee-ease hand me a tiss-sue? I just heard about the terrible things everyone is saying about Abramoff, Gonzales and Rove. It’s enough to break me heart.
March 13th, 2007 at 5:27 pmserving at the pleasure of the President†are you having trouble understanding?
Gannon.
March 13th, 2007 at 5:38 pmserving at the pleasure of the President†are you having trouble understanding?
Gannon. Comment by PI COT HORI — March 13, 2007 @ 5:38 pm
Obstruction of justice - are you having trouble understanding?
March 13th, 2007 at 5:59 pmThe gossip in San Diego is former US Attorney, Carol Lam did a GREAT job on the Cunningham case - but she was deplorably weak on the “border”. When you see the increased lawlessness due to our “neighbour to the South”, you begin to understand what happens when a drug cartel runs a country. FYI - Contemporary news reports make the films “Traffic” and “Scarface” look tame.
March 13th, 2007 at 6:06 pmgossip in San Diego ???
March 13th, 2007 at 6:15 pmDo you hear the gossip in your weekly coffee clatch with the neighbor ladies?
Stop the freakin investigations. You libs are hurting our war effort in Iraq. You can do all the investigations when the surge is over. Right now, winning means all, or they’ll be speaking Arabic in Iowa. Do you libs get that?
Comment by firehead — March 13, 2007 @ 4:27 pm
Ooooo. Afraid of the big bad terrorists invading and taking over the USA? You are an idiot. Watch out when you go to the supermarket the next time, fool. There may be a terrorists just waiting to take you out in the fruit section.
March 13th, 2007 at 6:15 pmI spent the Schumer-Gonzales thread posting examples from Reagan and Clinton — so, I thought maybe this example from Carter would help SOMEONE see that political appointees get fired for political reasons all the time — I didn’t have a problem with it back then and I don’t now.
Comment by Jake — March 13, 2007 @ 4:27 pm
So it’s just fine and dandy with you for a President to fire an attorney to get him off the back of someone under investigation for a criminal act.
Thanks for supporting the rule of law, loser.
March 13th, 2007 at 6:17 pmNice try, firehead, but Patrick1 still beats you in the dumbest-troll-ever contest.
March 13th, 2007 at 6:17 pmyou begin to understand what happens when a drug cartel runs a country. FYI - Contemporary news reports make the films “Traffic†and “Scarface†look tame.
Comment by valiant venus
I agree that Bush is so corrupt that it is like a drug cartel running the country.
March 13th, 2007 at 6:20 pmSo Bush is running drugs? Thought that was just Jeb, his brother that was friends with drug runners. Learn something new every day.
RUCerious
Shouldn’t that be “neigbours” (must spell like the Europeans, you know, to appear more intellectual, though of course you must never find the Europeans attractive in any other manner).
I’m not sure is should be “clatch” either, but I won’t go there.
March 13th, 2007 at 6:23 pmThe gossip in San Diego is former US Attorney, Carol Lam did a GREAT job on the Cunningham case - but she was deplorably weak on the “borderâ€. Comment by valiant venus — March 13, 2007 @ 6:06 pm
Ah, more Ann Coulter gossip. You’re plagiarizing the plagiarists - too funny!
Once again, politics rules the roost for the relative-moralist wimpy GOP. The party that’s so impotent they can’t help but make Gay jokes to deflect their feelings of inadequacy. I suggest therapy for both your eating disorder, and feelings of low self esteem Aphrodite/Anorexia. That “Self-Esteem-Industry” exists for just such worthless individuals as yourself, you know!
When you see the increased lawlessness due to our “neighbour to the Southâ€, you begin to understand what happens when a drug cartel runs a country. Comment by valiant venus — March 13, 2007 @ 6:06 pm
You’re referring to the CIA of course? It gets expensive doing those black ops you know!
FYI - Contemporary news reports make the films “Traffic†and “Scarface†look tame. Comment by valiant venus — March 13, 2007 @ 6:06 pm
Contemporary society makes you look lame, tiresome and st*pid. But then again, doesn’t everything?
March 13th, 2007 at 6:26 pmWhy do firehead and Jake hate America. Why oh why????
March 13th, 2007 at 6:28 pm(also off-topic) good searches from Google (”Carter eilberg marston”) and time.com (”eilberg”, for Joshua Eilberg)
Don’t be sidetracked: the handling and outcomes of the Carter Administration’s firing of Marston (and alleged obstruction of the Eilberg investigation) is quite different than the handling and outcomes of the Bush Administration’s handling and firing of the attorney investigating Abramoff in Guam.
Certainly, I would admit that Carter’s handling was a little fishy, but there didn’t appear to be coordination between the White House and the Attorney General (Griffin Bell) on Marston’s firing, and, though I can’t know for certain if Bell committed obstruction of justice, the government’s investigation of Eilberg continued after/despite Marston’s ouster and resulted in Eilberg’s guilty plea in 2/1979 (source: time.com, “Rogues’ Gallery”, 2/18/1980).
Contrary to Carter’s 1976 campaign pledge to avoid politics in such decisions, Bell had admitted that some politics was involved in firing Marston. Both Bell (link) and Carter (link), however, noted substantive problems with Marston, although one of Bell’s accusations seems at best poorly phrased and at worst wrong, based on my reading of all the time.com articles.
Here’s one TIME unsigned editorial that is most critical of Carter: link.
March 13th, 2007 at 6:36 pmIn my reply to VV about Jeb being involved with Drug runners, as I always back up statements, here is a link to a Mother Jones story:
Bush Family Value$
Enjoy…..
March 13th, 2007 at 6:52 pmThanks Wayne, for the info - but I see you’re missing the MoJo article on Bill and Rogers’ drug use. One of their biggest suppliers is a certain ruthless Chicken rancher in Springdale Arkansas. But I’m certain you already knew that….
March 13th, 2007 at 8:53 pmThanks Wayne, for the info - but I see you’re missing the MoJo article on Bill and Rogers’ drug use. One of their biggest suppliers is a certain ruthless Chicken rancher in Springdale Arkansas. But I’m certain you already knew that…. Comment by valiant venus — March 13, 2007 @ 8:53 pm
Whatever, you pile of sh*t from Ann Coulter’s *ss. You CONs have been using illegal drugs to fund your terrorism for decades. Your moralizing is hollow, and just makes you look like the st*pid c*nt everyone knows you to be.
You really shouldn’t hate the feminine so much, just because you’re so skinny you look like a 12 year old boy. That kind of envy just makes you an ugly t*rd.
March 13th, 2007 at 8:56 pmRight now, winning means all, or they’ll be speaking Arabic in Iowa. Do you libs get that?
Comment by firehead —
First of all, friedbrains, Iraq hasn’t been trying to invade the US.
March 13th, 2007 at 10:12 pmSecondly, with all the debt the Bushevik administration has chalked up to pay for this war of choice (while cutting taxes for the richest Americans), you ought to be more concerned about the US becoming a colony of China and people learning to speak Mandarin in Iowa.
The Cheney Bush strategy continues to work, commit so many crimes that no single one can stay in focus long enough to lead to impeachment.
March 13th, 2007 at 11:00 pmCOVER-UP COVER-UP COVER-UP COVER-UP COVER-UP
March 14th, 2007 at 12:20 amOOPS!
Sir, YOUR ASS is SHOWING!
Say, AREN’T Ya Bushland Uber Allies, the Nazi-Fascist Beasts?
I Thought So…COME HERE, YOU(COLLARS Bushland Uber Allies and DRAGS BEFORE THE HIGH COURTS OF THE WORLD)!!!!!
cool. I mentioned Black getting purged, stopping the Abramhoff investigation assosicated with Guam, in an earlier thread. Seems that little issue is now being addressed, finally.
Now we are finding out why Bush did not want congressional oversight.
Comment by wayne
I mentioned it several times about a year ago, and have been wondering ever since when it would get some attention.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:54 am[…] Read more Purge […]
March 14th, 2007 at 7:23 amCheck it out — probably where the WaPo and Weekly Standard got the scoops:
http://www.madcowprod.com/
March 14th, 2007 at 8:48 amhttp://www.madcowprod.com/10102005.html
http://www.madcowprod.com/10272005.html
Check out the second article at the following URL for info about Abramoff that the US press/media is not conveying to US:
http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=47405
=
See the second article at following URL for more about Abramoff which the US press/media is conveying to US:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=47405
===
Here are two excellent posts from Consortium News on this very subject:
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/122305a.html
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/010706a.html
March 14th, 2007 at 8:49 am[…] There was, for example, the decision by United States Attorney Chris Christie of New Jersey to open an investigation of Senator Bob Menendez just before his hotly contested re-election last November. Republicans, who would have held the Senate if Mr. Menendez had lost, used the news for attack ads. Then there was the career United States attorney in Guam who was removed by Mr. Bush in 2002 after he started investigating the superlobbyist Jack Abramoff. The prosecutor was replaced. The investigation was dropped. […]
March 14th, 2007 at 10:30 am[…] what about carol lam’s investigation of rep. jerry lewis? what about the u.s. attorney in guam, whose case against jack abramhoff evaporated once he was fired? what other cases fit this […]
March 15th, 2007 at 3:53 pm[…] Jerry Lewis3-14-07 Purge of U.S. Attorney May Have De-railed Abramoff Investigation in 2002Purging a U.S. Attorney Instigated by Jack Abramoff3-1207 Bush Legal Adviser, Harriet Miers, Recommended Firning All 93 U.S. Attorneys3-12 George […]
March 15th, 2007 at 9:59 pmPerhaps it’s time to purge Congress?
Become a Purger; start your own Purge Team.
March 19th, 2007 at 7:14 pmDiet Secret Star
‘%KEYWORD%’ and more about weight loss
March 17th, 2008 at 2:30 ambathroom wc
Nice Post… do you know what is the first? Maybe You can se My Post Here
March 28th, 2008 at 5:04 pmGay Incest Old Gay Men Gay Male Galleries
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 30th, 2008 at 10:23 amGay Incest Gay Cumshots Gay Jock
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 6th, 2008 at 9:55 amfree government housing grants
How you doin? Just read your info. Gotta say - you have great info on your site. You need to visit my government grant guide listing page if you have a minute.
April 8th, 2008 at 1:14 pmAss Thick Ass Babes Kick Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 11th, 2008 at 7:54 am