NYT: Congress should broaden attorney probe.
By on Mar 14th, 2007 at 10:30 am
NYT: Congress should broaden attorney probe.
From its editorial today:
Congress should broaden the investigation to determine whether any other prosecutors were forced out for not caving in to political pressure — or kept on because they did.
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.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
more from illinois:
Former Sen. Fitzgerald recalls pressure over appointment
By Andrew Zajac
March 14, 2007
WASHINGTON — In an illustration of the political sensitivities involved in the appointment of a federal prosecutor, former Sen. Peter Fitzgerald (R-Ill.) said Tuesday that White House political advisor Karl Rove told him in the spring of 2001 that he should limit his choice for U.S. attorney in Chicago to someone from Illinois.
According to Fitzgerald, who was determined to bring in a prosecutor from outside the state, Rove “just said we don’t want you going outside the state. We don’t want to be moving U.S. attorneys around.”
Fitzgerald said he believes Rove was trying to influence the selection in reaction to pressure from Dennis Hastert, who was then speaker of the House, and allies of then-Gov. George Ryan, who knew that Fitzgerald was seeking someone from outside Illinois to attack political corruption.
Fitzgerald said he announced his choice, Patrick Fitzgerald (no relation), a New Yorker, on May 13, a Mother’s Day Sunday to pre-empt any opposition.
A year or so later, according to Peter Fitzgerald, Rove “said to me that Fitzgerald appointment got great headlines for you, but it ticked off the base.”
Peter Fitzgerald said he believes the “base” Rove referred to was Illinois Republican insiders upset at Patrick Fitzgerald’s vigorous assault on political corruption.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/ne…ll=chi-news- hed
March 14th, 2007 at 10:41 amCertainly the overt firings should be investigated, but the issue gives rise to just how many judges remained free from the purge because they did agree to the demands of Bush&Co.
March 14th, 2007 at 10:41 amThere are so many scandals in this White House that any one of them should be enough to bring them down, but their army of toadies is strong — and the sheer number of scandals keeps changing the focus of attention. Many have been lost in the continuum.
What should also be investigated is how this provision became law:
http://luttonsquare.blogspot.com/2007/03/quid-pro-whoa.html
(h/t to various TPM Muckraker commenters)
The prosecutor purge scandal seems to gravitate around some very interesting machinations involving the candidates for United States Attorney for the District of Utah.
When the position opened up in early 2006, two candidates–one from the executive branch and one from the legislative–surfaced. A former White House staffer and then Chief of Staff for the Attorney General, Kyle Sampson, was favored by White House and Department of Justice officials, while influential Utah Senator and former Senate Judiciary Chair Orrin Hatch preferred former Utah federal prosecutor and Judiciary staffer Brett Tolman.
President Bush finally nominated Tolman for the position in June, 2006, after the renewal of the USA PATRIOT Act in early March. According to then Senate Judiciary Chair Arlen Specter, Tolman arranged for the Patriot Act renewal to include–via Senator Specter’s chief counsel, Michael O’Neill–the now infamous clause allowing the president to appoint US Attorneys indefinitely while bypassing the Senate confirmation process.
With two candidates, one a White House pick and the other a Senators’ pick, the White House gets new power to indefinitely appoint future US Attorneys, while the Senators’ get their guy the post in Utah.
Quid pro quo? You decide…
March 14th, 2007 at 10:45 amBy ALL means, continue the “non-political” probe!! That way, Dem and progressive voters won’t notice the Dems aren’t doing ANYTHING to end the war.
March 14th, 2007 at 10:53 amCongress should broaden probe of everything the Bush Regime has done and continues to do. Then after the probes, impeachment for Bush and Cheney.
March 14th, 2007 at 10:58 am“Somebody needs to ask Chuck Schumer a question: If a Democrat is elected president, say hypothetically Mrs. Clinton in 2008, are you telling us that she will not be free to fire any United States attorney because to do so would be political? Is that the standard now?”–Rush Limbaugh
March 14th, 2007 at 10:59 amyou are just so hot and steamy, vv, I think I love you… meet me at the Kuiper for a Belt?
March 14th, 2007 at 11:01 amNo scumbags. WE ARE AT WAR. This kind of invesigation makes me hope the President sends all the libs to forced labor camps. And I really mean that, because I don’t want Arabs taking over the US and flying the Cresant flag over the capitol. Jihad is coming libs. Find safety in our President.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:02 amI like this editorial better.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009784
March 14th, 2007 at 11:06 amLooking for safety in the person of the current pResident is incomprehensible.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:06 amAnyone who collects his own excrement for fear of secret agents finding out what he had for dinner is incapable of protecting anyone.
re: Patrick.
Yes, she will be free to clean house, at the beginning of her term. Just like BUSH did. She will not be free to fire SA’s it cover up criminal behavior in her party, like BUSH did. She will not be able to fire SA’s for not investigating political cantidates from opposing parties during an electon season, like BUSH did. Is that plain enough for you, or do you need pictures?
Until further notice, assume ALL republicans are corrupt.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:06 amUnitl further notice, assume ALL republican trolls will try to change the subject.
can firehead be any more pathetic?
March 14th, 2007 at 11:07 amAha! Hold your noses.
Another troll meme has wafted this way: How dare we progressives spend ANY energy in bringing to light the blatant and unprecedented politicization of the judiciary by the Bush administration? Don’t we know that energy should be going to fight terrorists?–or, should be going to do “ANYTHING to end the war?”
…as if one couldn’t do both at the same time.
But, I forget, Bush apologists are used to having to support an administration that can’t seem to fart and chew gum at the same time. It’s all about priorties, boys! ;)
Sorry, Venus. The progressive message is a breath of fresh air, because it emphasizes how we can have accountable government AND prosperity; we can have prosperity AND safety.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:09 amCan you answer the question?
March 14th, 2007 at 11:15 amComment by bob (not the hacker) — March 14, 2007 @ 11:06 am
Until further notice, assume ALL politicians are corrupt.
There bob (not the hacker), I fixed it for ya’.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:15 amComment by firehead — March 14, 2007 @ 11:02 am
C-R-E-S-C-E-N-T
Learn something — start with learning about that which you’re so frightened.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:17 amCan you answer the question?
Comment by Patrick1
I can, but I won’t.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:18 amThat is Karl Rove’s MO, is it not? To orchestrate investigations into his political opponents just before the elections.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:26 amMessage to Democrats from an IT professional. All White House emails reside on numerous servers and office computers throughout the country. The Bushsies didn’t hand over the really incriminating emails, they deleted them, but they still exist inside mail servers and backup servers on the host and client machines. Go get ALL of the emails which have left Rove’s computer and you will nail that son of a bitch to the wall.
firehead sez:
Do you kool-aid swillers actually revel in your stupidity and ignorance?
I’d like to institute a requirement that all prospective voters be subjected to a basic intelligence test before being allowed to vote. (And I’m talking real basic here…along the lines of ‘one of these things is not like the other’, ‘which peg fits in which hole’, and ‘where’s Waldo’.) I’m betting that such a test would eliminate most of the 29%ers, our backward little buddy fireplug included.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:28 amThe thread above this one has vanished?
March 14th, 2007 at 11:30 amUS Attorneys are political appointments who can and have been removed for any reason. This is leftwing insanity based on their inablility to come to grips with the fact that Islamo Fascism is at war with their hated United States.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:30 amWhat happened to the thread above?
March 14th, 2007 at 11:32 amWhere did the “White House standing behind Rove” thread go…..
March 14th, 2007 at 11:33 am(oh, maybe they changed their mind…)
“No scumbags. WE ARE AT WAR. This kind of invesigation makes me hope the President sends all the libs to forced labor camps. And I really mean that, because I don’t want Arabs taking over the US and flying the Cresant flag over the capitol. Jihad is coming libs. Find safety in our President.
Comment by firehead — March 14, 2007″
Ah yes. The truth comes out. Cowering in fear of a handfull of relgious zealots hiding in a cave in Afghanistan.
Boo-hooo……..
All those rightwing talking points about 9/11 changing everything? Just what Bin Laden wants, to get inside the heads of cowardly Americans and make them act like scared lambs.
Nice work Osama, you have the chickens in America flying around the roost in fear.
-GSD
March 14th, 2007 at 11:33 amBushit & KKKarl, you need to go now.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:33 amGonzo, start the Limo & head it toward Texas.
Time for Spring cleaning at the White House.
Global Warming Bush
1. Comment by linda — March 14, 2007 @ 10:41 am
Linda thanks for the great post. And the republican governor and some of his cronies were supsequently found guilty. I believe he is out of prison pending appeal but I can’t remember for sure. Of course he got to finish his second term before his trial started. Grrgh
March 14th, 2007 at 11:34 amPatrick Star,
Try not to be so frightened.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:34 amIt makes your appendages shrivel.
I’m sure you’ve noticed by now….
Patrick1
Our country is in far graver danger from the conservo fascism you support. You and your moronic ilk are damaging this country. If you really believe that the danger to our country is over in Iraq, why aren’t you over there fighting? You are either a lyer or a coward. or both.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:35 amI don’t know, Zooey…I hope it returns.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:35 amThe Rove thread is back.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:36 amDon’t know Lady Z, It dissapeard when I posted a caption contest post…Rove practising for bush’s return..Me bad/ no apolegy….Sorry I am having a day to remember again..Blessings
March 14th, 2007 at 11:37 amKarl Rove must of demanded that TP remove the thread above this one. Time for blogs and the press to tell Bush Regime to go to Hell.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:37 am“US Attorneys are political appointments who can and have been removed for any reason. This is leftwing insanity based on their inablility to come to grips with the fact that Islamo Fascism is at war with their hated United States.”
No, they haven’t been. This has been made possible as a new provision via the Patriot Act. And if what you say is true, then why are they scurrying like cockroaches to dispell any idea of malfescence?
Why don’t they have your “courage” Patrick1, the courage to simply hold a press conference and say “We can do what we want, we can fire whomever whenever we want and for whatever reason, so kiss our asses?”
Why aren’t they saying that, Patrick1? Why did he fire his chief of staff?
You Bushies can conjure all of the self-satisfying conspiracy theories you want to. The more plausible answer is they crossed the line and they know it.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:38 amComment by valiant venus — March 14, 2007 @ 10:53 am
YAWN
March 14th, 2007 at 11:38 amPatrick1, If Bill Clinton had told Janet Reno to fire a US Att. investigating Ted Kennedy would that be OK with You?
March 14th, 2007 at 11:38 amPatrick sez:
Listen up Patrick. I’m typing this as S-L-O-W as I can:
The issue is not whether the President can arbitrarily dismiss U.S. Attorneys. He can. The U.S. Attorneys serve at the President’s pleasure.
The issue is that there is a provision in the PATRIOT Act that eliminates the requirement for Senate approval when the President appoints a replacement for the aformentioned position. This removes a vital check the legislative branch had on the President, greatly mitigating his ability to use his ability to arbitrarily dismiss U.S. attorneys and appoint replacements for partisan political ends.
In short, the President is not misusing his power to dismiss and appoint U.S. attorneys…he’s misusing the power the Patriot Act gives him to do it without oversight of any kind, for political gain, instead of fighting terrorism, as it was ostensibly supposed to do.
Do you get it now, Patrick? Please prove me wrong about you and say you do.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:38 amI’ve been noticing some hilariously ignorant posts from right wing trolls here lately. Is someone putting us on? By creating fictitious right wing troll posts? Because the majority of the posters here at ThinkProgress are very intelligent, then you contrast their posts with those of the trolls and it is both hilarious and sad that there are such ignorant, uninformed right wingers in this country of ours.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:38 am#21 Patick,
so you arree that bush removed the US atts. to cover up criminal behavior by republicans. Thank you for that admission. Now, if you can continue to remove your head from your a$$ you can see the other scandels your presididn’t has created.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:38 amIs that the standard now?â€â€“Rush Limbaugh
Comment by Patrick1 — March 14, 2007 @ 10:59 am
Rush Limbaugh? Hahahahahahahaha…gasp…hahahahaha
March 14th, 2007 at 11:40 am8. President sends all the libs to forced labor camps
Comment by firehead — March 14, 2007 @ 11:02 am
Its great to see the NEOCON VISION FOR AMERICAN explained so clearly.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:42 amThe investigations should be opened wide and followed to thier end. If Capone was finally charged with tax evasion, maybe this will prove to be the undoing of some personalities that need to be charged with SOMETHING. It stands to reason that Harriet and Alberto are implicated, since they were/are the “protectors of the law”. It also stands to reason that Karl is implicated, because of his official capacity as advisor and confidant to Chimpy. So- Let’s get to it, Congress.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:42 amShane,
Don’t laugh at Patrick’s god.
*cough*
*clearing throat*
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Sorry, couldn’t hold it in. :D
March 14th, 2007 at 11:44 amcan firehead be any more pathetic?
Comment by bob (not the hacker) — March 14, 2007 @ 11:07 am
NO – he’s at critical mass. Kaboom!
March 14th, 2007 at 11:45 amATTORNEY GENERAL SEEKS RESIGNATIONS FROM PROSECUTORS
By DAVID JOHNSTON
Special to The New York Times
1112 words
24 March 1993
The New York Times
Late Edition – Final
WASHINGTON, March 23 — Attorney General Janet Reno today demanded the prompt resignation of all United States Attorneys, leading the Federal prosecutor in the District of Columbia to suggest that the order could be tied to his long-running investigation of Representative Dan Rostenkowski, a crucial ally of President Clinton.
Jay B. Stephens, the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, who is a Bush Administration holdover, said he had advised the Justice Department that he was within 30 days of making a “critical decision” in the Rostenkowski case when Ms. Reno directed him and other United States Attorneys to submit their resignations, effective in a matter of days.
While prosecutors are routinely replaced after a change in Administration, Ms. Reno’s order accelerated what had been expected to be a leisurely changeover. Says He Won’t Resist
At a news conference today only hours after one by Ms. Reno, Mr. Stephens said he would not resist the Attorney General’s move to force him from office, and he held back from directly accusing her of interfering with the Rostenkowski inquiry.
But Mr. Stephens left the strong impression that Ms. Reno’s actions might disrupt the investigation as he moved toward a decision on whether to seek charges against the Illinois Democrat, who is chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.
“This case has been conducted with integrity,” Mr. Stephens said, “and I trust the decisions in this case will not be made based on political considerations.”
Nonetheless, lawyers who have followed the investigation have said that Mr. Stephens has been concerned that the Democratic Administration might try to upset his investigation.
Has Denied Wrongdoing
Mr. Rostenkowski has repeatedly denied wrongdoing, and he has not been accused of any impropriety. But if he is indicted, he would be forced by House rules to relinquish his chairmanship, a development that some lawmakers have said could seriously jeopardize Mr. Clinton’s efforts to steer his economic and health-care proposals through Congress.
Mr. Stephens and his prosecutors began the investigation that led them to review Mr. Rostenkowski’s activities in mid-1991, focusing initially on low-level employees at the House post office who absconded with money. There have been several guilty pleas as prosecutors have worked their way up the ranks at the mailing operation.
Mr. Rostenkowski has been under scrutiny since last year, when his office records were subpoenaed in an inquiry into whether someone in his office used his expense account fraudulently to obtain cash from the post office. Since then, some of his aides have testified to a grand jury and investigators have examined his use of campaign funds. Denies Any Connection
In announcing her order at her first news conference as Attorney General, Ms. Reno denied there was any connection between her action and the Rostenkowski case and said Mr. Stephens had been treated like other United States Attorneys.
Ms. Reno said United States Attorneys “are absolutely integral to the whole success of the Department of Justice,” and her aides said today that she did not intend to immediately remove any whose presence was required to complete an investigation.
One official suggested that even Mr. Stephens might be asked to stay on until a successor is named, saying Ms. Reno had made no decisions about who she may choose on an interim basis.
All 93 United States Attorneys knew they would be asked to step down, since all are Republican holdovers, and 16 have resigned so far. But the process generally takes much longer and had usually been carried out without the involvement of the Attorney General. Battles of the Past
Ms. Reno is under pressure to assert her control over appointments at the Justice Department. She was Mr. Clinton’s third choice for Attorney General and arrived after most of the department’s senior positions were already filled by the White House.
The comments of Ms. Reno and Mr. Stephens evoked the pitched battles of the past, when independent United States Attorneys resisted removal by new administrations.
In 1969, for instance Robert Morgenthau, now the Manhattan District Attorney, resisted efforts by the Nixon Administration to replace him as United States Attorney in New York until he was given what he called an “ultimatum” by President Richard M. Nixon to leave office.
In 1978, Attorney General Griffin B. Bell removed David W. Marston as United States Attorney in Philadelphia, provoking charges, never proved, that a lawmaker under scrutiny by Mr. Marston’s office had urged President Jimmy Carter to remove the prosecutor.
Four-Year Terms
United States Attorneys are appointed to serve four-year terms at the pleasure of the President. It was unclear whether Ms. Reno initiated the request for resignations or whether it was pressed on her by the White House. The Attorney General said it was a “joint decision.”
Ms. Reno said she wanted the resignations “so that the U.S. Attorneys presently in position will know where they stand and that we can begin to build a team.”
Some Administration officials dismissed Mr. Stephens’s veiled assertions about the Attorney General’s motives as “absurd,” as one put it, saying that what was surprising was that it had taken so long before the Justice Department could begin putting its own appointees in place. Abortion Clinic Violence
On other topics, Ms. Reno said she would work with Democrats in Congress to prepare legislation to give Federal agencies a larger role in protecting abortion clinics.
Her comments came after she had ordered a review of current law, which she said was inadequate “to prevent or to help prevent physical interference with access to abortion clinics.”
She also ruled out a Federal inquiry into the death of Dr. David Gunn, a physician who was shot to death as he entered an abortion clinic in Pensacola, Fla., apparently by a man who said he was an anti-abortion activist. “Florida law on this subject is more effective than Federal law,” said Ms. Reno, a former Florida prosecutor.
Ms. Reno also said she had not decided whether to replace William S. Sessions, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, who has been found to have violated ethics rules.
Photos: In her first news conference as Attorney General, Janet Reno said she had asked all United States Attorneys to offer their resignations. (pg. A1); Jay B. Stephens, United States Attorney in Washington, suggested that the move to replace all United States Attorneys might be tied to his investigation of Representative Dan Rostenkowski. (Jose R. Lopez/The New York Times) (pg. A17)
March 14th, 2007 at 11:49 amSomebody also needs to take a look at the original (aggressive) prosecutor that was going after Rush Limbaugh. He was promoted out of his job…and replaced with somebody that gave Rush a nice ol’ reacharound.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:52 amJihad is coming libs. Find safety in our President.
Comment by firehead — March 14, 2007 @ 11:02 am
I’m working on getting you an apartment here in Chicago. Its at Cabrini Green, a housing project where you’ll be safe from radical Islamists. You’ll be surrounded by plenty of guys with hand guns and automatic weapons. They’d notice an Arab coming from miles away and will immediate go check him out. And there’s a police station on the corner. Hope you’ll feel safer.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:57 amDon’t laugh at Patrick’s god.
*cough*
*clearing throat*
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Sorry, couldn’t hold it in. :D
Comment by Zooey — March 14, 2007 @ 11:44 am
Did you catch your breath yet? I think Patrick is trying to kill us!
March 14th, 2007 at 12:00 pmZooey look at #44. Peadick1 has learned how to cut and paste.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:02 pmImpressive.
Comment by Patrick1 — March 14, 2007 @ 11:49 am
Nice cut-n-paste, Patrick. Three questions.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:05 pm
The removal was political. So according to lefty logic is somehow illegal.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:11 pm#44- What day is it, Patsy? Do you know where you are?
March 14th, 2007 at 12:13 pm#50- Was it meant to undermine the law of the land in any specific manner, to achieve an “end” for corporate, financial gain; i.e., war profiteering?
March 14th, 2007 at 12:15 pmImpressive.
Comment by Shane
No doubt.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:16 pmPatty must have sprained a finger on that one.
Answer my questions, Patrick.
March 14th, 2007 at 12:17 pmThe White House prosecutor purge is less about supposed voter fraud than carrying out the Republican strategy for suppressing the Democratic and independent vote. For the full story, see:
“The Link: Purging Prosecutors – and Voters.”
For the latest news, hearings, legal filings and other essential documents on the Bush DOJ prosecutor firings, see:
March 14th, 2007 at 12:19 pm“The U.S. Attorney Scandal Documents.”
Jihad is coming libs. Find safety in our President.
Comment by firehead — March 14, 2007 @ 11:02 am
Let us hear you say that when a Democrat is President.
Q: Why are right-tards so dense?
A: All their talking heads tell them to stop thinking and repeat the party line.
March 14th, 2007 at 1:05 pm[...] (HT: TP reader Linda) [...]
March 14th, 2007 at 1:33 pmThe removal was political. So according to lefty logic is somehow illegal. Comment by Patrick1 — March 14, 2007 @ 12:11 pm
Considering the dismissals involved cases either investigating corruption or involving election issues – they very well could be obstruction of justice. Or hadn’t you thought of that – useful idiot?
March 14th, 2007 at 3:12 pmWIDEN and DEEPEN the GAPING WOUND in the SOFT UNDERBELLY of Bushland Uber Allies, MAKE THIS THE MORTAL WOUND THAT WILL DESTROY THESE NAZI-FASCISTS LED BY Der Fuhrer CHIMPya!!!!!
March 14th, 2007 at 3:58 pm[...] ongoing cases disrupted by the firings? what about carol lam’s investigation of rep. jerry lewis? what about [...]
March 15th, 2007 at 3:53 pmAccounting Financial Financial Success
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 24th, 2008 at 10:02 pm