Gonzales: U.S. Attorneys With ‘Management Issues’ Should Be Fired, Unless They’re Loyal Bushies
Gonzales: U.S. Attorneys With ‘Management Issues’ Should Be Fired, Unless They’re Loyal Bushies
In Thursday’s testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales admitted that in Nov. 2006, he approved the firings of several U.S. attorneys “without ever looking at [their] performance reports.” He also admitted that at the time, he didn’t even know why two of the prosecutors — Daniel Bogden in Nevada and Margaret Chiara in Michigan — were on the hit list.
At the hearing, Gonzales told Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) that he later learned Chiara’s office suffered from “poor management issues” and a “loss of confidence by career individuals,” which justified the firing:
BROWNBACK: Margaret Chiara, the Western District of Michigan?
GONZALES: Same issue. She’s the other person, quite candidly, Senator, that I don’t recall remembering — I don’t recall the reason why that I accepted the decision on December 7th. But I’ve since learned that it was a question of similar kinds of issues: poor management issues, loss of confidence by career individuals.
We had to send someone out from main Justice to help mediate some kind of personnel dispute. So it was a question simply of someone not having total control of the office.
Gonzales’s explanation seems to be nothing more than a false excuse. Four top staffers to Rachel Paulose, the U.S. attorney in Minnesota, recently voluntarily demoted themselves in protest of Paulose’s “highly dictatorial style” of managing. According to news reports, the staffers’ dramatic moves were “intended to send a message to Washington — that 33-year-old Paulose is in over her head.” Additionally, the Bush administration unsuccessfully tried to prevent the resignations by sending a “top justice official to Minneapolis” to mediate.
Yet Justice Department has not fired Paulose, even though her office has the same problems that Gonzales said Chiara’s office suffered. Instead, it put out a statement of support, stating it was “confident” Paulose was “dedicated to leading an effective U.S. attorneys office in Minnesota.”
A look at Paulose’s background may explain why she is still in her job. A Bush administration loyalist, Paulose was “a special assistant to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, worked as a senior counsel for deputy attorney general Paul McNulty and is best buds with Monica Goodling.”
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) called Gonzales’s explanations “a stretch,” adding that he thought the prosecutors were fired because of “made up reasons.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
yes… and?…
lies or incompitence… or both…
April 21st, 2007 at 3:21 pm… I don’t recall remembering… – gonzo
i’m gonna try to remember that one…
April 21st, 2007 at 3:23 pmI don’t recall remembering… – gonzo
Comment by katy
Gads, that sounds like a Bush quote…..
“Makes sense tome, don’t it?” — GW Bush — 06/06/06
April 21st, 2007 at 3:29 pmWith the exploding scandals at the Justice Department and the World Bank enveloping his administration, President Bush voiced “full confidence” in Alberto Gonzales and Paul Wolfowitz this week. But as history has shown, there is no more certain confirmation of the criminality, ethical-wrong doing or imminent departure of a Bush team player than the President’s expression of confidence in him.
For the details, see:
April 21st, 2007 at 3:34 pm“President Bush, Confidence Man.”
“….total control of the office.”
I take that to mean that they either towed the party line or they were out on their behinds.
April 21st, 2007 at 3:34 pmClinton, Carter, etc.
April 21st, 2007 at 3:39 pm“I have no memory” — Alberto “Speedy” Gonzales
April 21st, 2007 at 3:41 pmi fould this on another thread… maybe you’ve seen it…
worth another look… it says so much…
including why the two of them are sounding alike, wayne…
heh…
http://static.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/gonzo_bush.jpg
April 21st, 2007 at 3:43 pmThe Republicans will need more than “loyal Bushie” State’s Attorneys and mountains of Abramoff cash to keep Norm “Rubber Stamp” Coleman in his Minnesota Senate seat. To say Paulose is in over her head is pretty telling since her former boss Gonzales is clearly and obviously in WAY over his head and intellect.
April 21st, 2007 at 3:43 pmThese subjects, Bush, Cheney, Rove, Gonzales were not properly toilet trained. They exhibit manifestations of messianic disorder. Their mothers were overbearing and abusive, that is evident.
April 21st, 2007 at 3:46 pmexcellent point, here!
ms. paulose — a good federalist society
member, she — has, in fact been promoted
for much the same sort of “performance”. . .
astonishing!
now — i would be grateful if every reader
here would be on the look-out for any statement
by republican rep. lamar smith, the ranking minority
member of the house judiciary committee, as to
alberto gonzales’ fitness for his office, dated
after april 19, 2007. i’ve put out a virtual all-
points-bulletin on this (more under the link, above)
as he seems willing to subpoena monica goodling
only if alberto gonzales DID NOT quell his critics
completely on thursday. . . i know what the nation
thinks about that — and, you know what mr. bush thinks. . .
well — we WANT to know what rep. lamar smith thinks, right?
let me know if you’ve seen annything.
i’ll check back here — or, leave a comment
at my shop if you like. . . thanks!
– nolo
April 21st, 2007 at 3:46 pmseems to be the last hurdle in
We really can’t take 21 more months of this corrupt administration. Time to Impeach.
April 21st, 2007 at 3:55 pmYet another incompetent crony.
Paulose is just as bad as her lying boss Alberto.
April 21st, 2007 at 4:12 pmLook at the moustache on her.
Jeez, Gonzo can sure pick ‘em.
April 21st, 2007 at 4:13 pmAh, Simone darling…you are so correct, but you see the democrats have an even worse disorder. It is cowardidice. That Dennis Kucinich boy does not seem to have this terrible disorder, we must seek his assistance.
April 21st, 2007 at 4:13 pmPaulose is pretty hot!
–
April 21st, 2007 at 4:16 pmmatthews.frank@gmail.com
Tom3, Gonzales is projecting the image of his mother onto Ms. Paulose. Do you see how ill they are.
April 21st, 2007 at 4:18 pmTom3, I think we can find plenty of real flaws in Ms. Paulose’s record and qualifications without taking potshots at her looks.
April 21st, 2007 at 4:22 pmi fould this on another thread… maybe you’ve seen it…
worth another look… it says so much…
including why the two of them are sounding alike, wayne…
heh…
http://static.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/gonzo_bush.jpg
Comment by katy
LMAO
here is another good pic, for the McCain “Bomb, Bomb Iran” gaff
from C&L also
April 21st, 2007 at 4:27 pmhttp://static.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/stmccain-warmongers.jpg
Paulose is pretty hot!
Comment by Frank Matthews
Only in a “I’ve been in prison for 10 years and haven’t been laid yet” sort of way.
April 21st, 2007 at 4:30 pmanother good pic, for the McCain “Bomb, Bomb Iran†gaff…
Comment by Wayne — April 21, 2007 @ 4:27 pm
i saw that earlier… pretty good photoshop job!
i thought it was great that C&L linked to the original
http://paulwilliams.com/brianwilson.jpg
comic relief – gotta have it!
April 21st, 2007 at 4:37 pmYou libruls are awful, denigrating someone for their looks. She just needs a new coiffure.She’ll never keep a man with that hair. That’s it, I’m going to call her right now and force her to go to my beauty parlor. I’ll have them make her look just like me.
April 21st, 2007 at 4:48 pmFascistFrank has terrible taste in women… someone pointed out that Paulose seems to be the love child of Gonzo and Condi – ugh!
April 21st, 2007 at 4:48 pmI’ll have them make her look just like me.
Comment by Phyllis Schlafly
Sorry Phyllis, they should make her look more like me.
April 21st, 2007 at 5:10 pmThey say I am a hottie
Tell me that in the picture up above that Rachel Paulose doesn’t look like the Little Drummer Boy from the Christmas special…. go on, tell me she doesn’t.
I think we have a “separated at birth” thing going on here.
April 21st, 2007 at 5:26 pmI don’t recall remembering that I remembered the unknown unknowns that aren’t known.
April 21st, 2007 at 6:07 pmI wrote to the FBI in Denver and complained that I was imprisoned wihout being found to have commited contempt in the presence of the court, without being indicted, without an evidentiary hearing, without a government prosecutor, without a trial, etc. I was in jail at the direction of federal judge Edward Nottingham, apparently a Bush appointee, without a trial for over 4 months. There was no term and no bail. I was told that I wasn’t entitled to a lawyer and that I wasn’t entitled to an evidentiary hearing. My husband and I wrote to the FBI several times, and called them and asked them to investiage the crimes of conspiracy to deprive rights, unlawful imprisonment, RICO, witness intimidation, and ex parte defense court conferences, unrecorded except inadvertently, while I was in jail and my life was being threatened , and they wouldn’t even acknowledge our communications. I have no criminal record and am a U.S. citizen. In what we wrote to the FBI, we quoted U. S. Title 18, the criminal code, and we couldn’t understand why the FBI didn’t write back but now with this expose it is clear that what the FBI has been doing and not doing is controlled by financial interests, in many instances. In this case, foreign insurance companies, not registered to do business in Colorado, had a percieved financial advantage in violating my rights. They were Lloyds of London, TIG Insurance, and Mutual Insurance of Canada. Later I applied for habeas corpus and Judge Nottingham defaulted.
April 21st, 2007 at 7:38 pmThe pukes produce “the shit” and then step in it. Nothing changed! They love it.
April 21st, 2007 at 7:58 pmThey Republicans just love their shithouse.
Caption contest:
“I serv(ice) at the pleasure of…
…whomever in the WH will have me… SERIOUSLY!”…
April 21st, 2007 at 9:18 pmtell you what, either the dems impeach NOW or we form a third party to defeat dems and repugs in ‘08!
WTF! Impeach them already! WHAT do they have to do to make you act on what you KNOW is happening here?
chebush has morphed into our “shadow” government. who really knows what they plan to do next?
We cannot wait, impeach or start the Mother of all 3rd parties!
April 21st, 2007 at 9:24 pm“She is the same person that I dont recall remembering”?????What kind of talk is this?? These Senators are dumber than Gonzo.Bush and Rove were probably rolling on the floor laughing at this.If Specter and Leahey had a brain between them they would have held him in contempt of congress.Bring on the third party before it is too late,if it isnt already.
April 21st, 2007 at 10:26 pmDoes Gonzales still have pants? Or have they burned away completely by now?
April 21st, 2007 at 11:18 pmAmerica’s going belly up financially…
…the Bushites are flooding the DOJ…
…the Bush family are CIA connected…
…the rich NOW have Blackwater AND the Patriot Act…
…America is in dangerous territory…
…DELUDE yourselves at your own risk…
April 22nd, 2007 at 12:01 amEither we are the most stupid people on the planet or the think we’re the most stupid.
Gonzo: “I’m an eye witness. I didn’t see a thing.”
Please, after 9/11 when the same people that will illegally spy on us and keep our records of communication tell us that they can’t find their own, they either think you a fool or you are a fool.
We don’t have any time to waste. We’ve already have gone too far. Not only do we have to convict these criminals ASAP, we need to work overtime to repair
April 22nd, 2007 at 12:05 amThe truth … I have no hope.
If someone of this low a caliber can become AG of the USA … there is no hope.
April 22nd, 2007 at 12:33 amKay Sieverding, that is awful.
April 22nd, 2007 at 1:22 amNot in our name!
I hope to see some resolution in your case…
Loyalty befor competence…shameless.
April 22nd, 2007 at 1:28 amComment by SKdeA — April 22, 2007 @ 1:22 am
Don’t be taken in by Kay’s story. Google her name and you will that she has esculated a zoning dispute with a neighbor into an assault against the local government, local officials, the local, state and federal courts and many others including the bar.
She was jailed for contempt of court regarding abuse of process. She and her husband are complete kooks. They lost their zoning dispute and decided to take it out on everyone in sight. A restraining was issued to the neighbor involved in the zoning dispute because of repeated harrassment.
They sued the bar because they couldn’t get a lawyer to take up their obviously frivolous cause.
She and her husband filed dozens of lawsuits pro se that are filled what one judge called “verbose, prolix, and impossible to understand†language. Talk about sore losers!!!
April 22nd, 2007 at 7:13 am“dixie blood” The articles are all placed by persons associated with Mutual Insurance of Bermuda, which sells defamation and liability insurance but is not registered with any state insurance commission that I can find. A restraining order was issued on me by Colorado Judge Garrecht on his finding that I “molested” Jane Bennett. Judge Garrecht specifically found that I did not “harass” Jane Bennett. However, “molestation” was not in the complaint and I was not allowed to cross examine anyone as to whether or not I “molested” Jane Bennett. She testified under oath that there was no offensive touching. At the “zoning” hearing by Judge Joel Thompson, later accused by the DEA of living with a cocaine dealer, it was determined that my copy of the city code was ‘improperly certified”. The city council president, his lawyer from the Klauzer and Tremaine Steamboat Springs law firm, and the former city planning services commission all refused to let me borrow their “certified” copy of the city code. They said that I didn’t have standing as an adjoining neighbor to enforce the zoning and development laws. The defendants say in various forums that my complaint was “impossible to understand” but when challenged they don’t ask for clarification of a single sentence. Her criminal charges were dismissed and the Routt County Colorado district attorney’s office refuses to say why they were pursued. I was followed by the police for going to Walmart, waiting for a red light to change, and passing out government corruption flyers in Steamboat Springs, CO. We estimated our economic, non personal., damages at $400,000 and they did not dispute our itemization.
April 27th, 2007 at 8:48 amMy experience with the federal courts:
10/27/04 “revise letters to Judge Tunheim; discussion with M. Chester and J. Walborn (former clerks for Judge Tunheim)†(e35 Jon Borger Faegre to Schaefer at O’Brien Bulter McConihie and Schaeffer in D.C.)
However, it is forbidden for ex clerks to have meetings about how a judge may react. The judge is Minnesota federal judge Tunheim. They wrote and asked him for an ex parte phone call.
“David Brougham has advised me that in the event that plaintiffs obtain service upon any of the municipal defendants he will be the attorney for such defendants. In light of that fact, I will direct that Mr. Brougham also attend the status conference†p. 7 “order setting status conference 1/10/03 Magistrate Schlatter†Colorado 02- 1950 document 9
April 27th, 2007 at 8:55 ammy experience with federal courts continued:
“When Federal Magistrate Schlatter was asked “Do you think that if any attorney knowingly lies in court to hurt you and succeeds, that they should be liable for that? His answer was “No†…Judge Schlatter said “Even if the lawyer gives a false statement of law or a false statement of the facts, I would have to sit here and look at you and say no claim†and “if any attorney makes up something that you think is a lie, there’s some likelihood that no they’re not liable for that if they’re representing a party that is opposed to your interest†Asked again “If an attorney makes a knowing false statement of law, you think they should have no liability?â€, Magistrate Judge Schlatter responded “You have no claim against them for that†05-01283 complaint p. 33. (transcript on record)
April 27th, 2007 at 8:56 ammy experience with federal courts continued
On 2/12/03,:“Review new letter from Sieverding to Tremaine regarding Jane Bennett and may city defendants. Telephone call to Dave Brougham—discussed pleadings from Wisconsin court and Sieverding letter. Conference call to Magistrate Schlatter. Further discussion with Brougham on notice letter to Sieverding.â€(e86, Lettunich to City)
That’s a verified bill for a long distance three way ex parte conference between city of steamboat springs colorado city attorney Anthony lettunich and David Brougham, attorney representing Lloyds of London, and former federal magistrate O.E. Schlatter.
April 27th, 2007 at 8:58 ammy experiences with federal court continued:
“Telephone call from Dave Brougham (defense attorney for government defendants) advising me that the Clerk for Magistrate Schlatter advised that no Reply would be necessaryâ€. 6/24/03 (e88)
On 4/14/03, “Confer with Slezak regarding case assignment, Review fax regarding sameâ€. Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, c/o Lord, Bissell & Brook, Attm Walter Slezak, 115 S. LaSalle St. Chicago, IL 60603-3901 claim 6603013-1896 (e57)
After the conference with Walter Slezak in his role with Underwriters at Lloyds of London our lawsuit d of Colorado 02-1950 was transferred in Oct 2003 from Judge Matsch to Judge Edward Nottingham. No health reason was given and the transfer order was not signed by the court administrator as is standard
April 27th, 2007 at 9:01 ammy experiences with federal court continued:
.) 2/12/03 “Confer with court clerk regarding new pleadings from plaintiffsâ€. (e60 David Brougham bill to CIRSA)
42.) 2/28/03 “Telephone call from David Brougham regarding new pleading from Sieverding and review pleading with Brougham as to most significant allegations. Telephone call with….and Clerk’s office†(e73 Lettunich)
43.) 3/21/03 “Confer with court clerk regarding possible re-filed amended complaint†(e10 David Brougham to Colorado Intergovernmental risk Sharing) Note, the amended complaint was not filed until 3/31/03.
44.) 3/24/03 “Confer with city attorney regarding status of amended complaint and service issue, telephone call to federal court clerk regarding same†(e61-62 Brougham to Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing)
45.) 3/31/03 “telephone calls to and from Lettunich regarding new filing, telephone call to federal court regarding sameâ€(e62 Brougham to CIRSA)
46.)4/23/03 Telephone call to court regarding status of recent orders†(e64)
47.) 5/2/03 “Review actual court file re co-defendant’s answerâ€. () but the other records show that the co-defendants were emailing their filings so the “actual court file†must have had additional information not sent by the co-defendants. On 5/6, Brougham’s wording was “review Colorado Bar’s motion to dismissâ€. (e70 Brougham’s bill to CIRSA)
48.) 5/6/03 “Confer with court clerk regarding status of defendant responsesâ€(e67)
49.) 6/11/03 “Telephone call to court regarding response to motion to compel†(e67 Brougham to Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing)
50.) 6/16/03 “Telephone call to court regarding 6/15 filing†(e68 David Brougham to Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing)
51.) 6/16/03 “Telephone call to court regarding status of plaintiffs’ response regarding motion to dismiss†(e68 Brougham to CIRSA)
52.) 7/2/03 “Telephone call from clerk regarding certain motions†(e72) ….
55.) 7/30/03 “Telephone call to Court regarding latest filings†(e75)…
8/4/03 “Telephone call to court regarding filings by plaintiffs since (7/31) orderâ€. (e75 David Brougham to Colorado Intergovernmental)
59.) 8/11/03“Telephone call to court clerk regarding post 7/31 filingsâ€e46
60.) 8/14/03“Confer with court clerk regarding status of ruling on motions†e76 (Brougham to CIRSA)
61.) 8/15/03 “Confer with court regarding status of pending motions and timing of rulingâ€. (e58 Brougham to Underwriters at Lloyd’s London)
62.) 9/8/03 “Telephone call to court regarding status of pending motions†(e76 Brougham to CIRSA)
63.) 9/09/03 “Confer with court regarding status of motions†(e77)
64.) 9/24/03 “Confer with Lettunich and court clerk regarding status of pending motions†(e78 Brougham to CIRSA)
65.) 9/24/03 “Confer with court regarding status of pending motions) (e58 Brougham to Underwriters at Lloyd’s London)
65.) 10/07/03 ‘Confer with court clerk regarding rule status’ (e78)
66.) 10/10/03 “Telephone calls to court clerk regarding new filingsâ€(e78)
67.) 10/14/03 “Confer with court clerk regarding filing of recommendation regarding pending motions†(e78, Brougham to CIRSA). That recommendation was issued 10/20.
68.) 10/24/03 “review 13 additional ‘motions’ filed by plaintiffs. Telephone call to court regarding status and acceptance or rejection of same.†(e79-80, Mr. Brougham, Hall & Evans to CIRSA)
69.) 10/27/03 “Confer court clerk regarding filing dates and plaintiffs’ latest filings†(e 80 Brougham to CIRSA
69.) 10/31/03 “Review actual court file regarding most recent pleadings, ‘striking’ majority of same, confer with court clerk regarding same†(e80, Brougham to CIRSA)
70.) 11/21/03 “confer with court clerk regarding status of pleadings†(e81)
71.) 12/2/03 “telephone call to court clerk regarding status of 50 or more filings†(e81)
72.) 12/11/03 “Review actual court file†“confer with clerks regarding case status, pending motions†“Further conference with court staff regarding motion status†(e82, Brougham to CIRSA)
73.) 1/07/04 “Confer with court regarding status of plaintiff pleadings, pending motions, etc. Analyze motion to enjoin grounds, etc.†(.40) (e82, Brougham to CIRSA)
74.) 2/11/04 “â€Telephone call to court regarding Plaintiff’s latest filings.†(e83, Brougham to CIRSA)
2/17/04“Confer with court clerk regarding status of recent plaintiff filings.â€(e83, Brougham to CIRSA)
76.) 3/23/04 “confer with Court Clerk, city attorney, and Merrill regarding latest plaintiff filings†e85 (Brougham to CIRSA)
There are copies of the bills quoted here for ex parte conferences posted on D of Colorado 02-1950 Pacer on 4/12/07-4/31/07. Anyone can download the bills for ex parte conferences with federal judicial personnel for 8 cents a page. If you email me at kaysieverding@aol.com, I will email them to you.
April 27th, 2007 at 9:05 am“On December 8, 2005….Mrs. Sieverding filed an entirely new pro se lawsuit…Kay Sieverding v. WorldWest Limited…attached as Exhibit A….As a result the Newspaper Defendants also request that the Court require (Mr.) Sieverding appear and show cause why he should not be held in contempt of court for assisting (Mrs.) Sieverding†Respectfully submitted this 12th day of December …ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS WorldWest Limited Liability (attached.)
“the case from the D of Kansas remains pending. That’s Sieverding v. WorldWest Limited Liability Company 05-cv-2510…the Court’s order to the U.S. Marshals Service is that she will be taken into custody and held….she will not be released until we have certified copies of the dismissals of these cases…†CO Judge Nottingham 02/02/06 p. 7-8 closed case 02-cv-1950 D of Colorado…
“So you’ll stay out of jail if all these cases are dismissed in time for me to vacate the hearing. Otherwise the next time you show up, you pack your toothbrush, because you are going to jail.†Judge Edward W. Nottingham to Mrs. Sieverding 2/16/06 closed CO case 02-cv-1950 p.14
“Are the defendants suggesting that the plaintiff be jailed?†Judge Edward W. Nottingham 2/16/06 p. 6 D of CO closed case 02-cv-1950
“You attached a consolidated motion to withdraw under duress of jail…and you include the Kansas Case …you have 7 days to do this and furnish to this court that you’ve done that and serve that proof on the defendants….I will check out and make sure that you have dismissed all those cases.†Judge Edward W. Nottingham 2/16/06 p. 10-13 closed CO case to Mrs. Sieverding about open KS case.
“…a bench warrant should issue for her arrest†Christopher P. Beall, representing WorldWest LLP p.5. 02/02/06 closed case CO 02-cv-1950
“The first case is the …D of Minnesota case filed by Mr. and Mrs. Sieverding against the newspaper defendants and my law firm, Feagre & Benson. (p. 6.)….we seek an order requiring the plaintiffs, Mr. and Mrs. Sieverding, to show cause why they should not be held in contempt (p. 11.)…they do not have the right to counsel. They do not have the right to a jury trial. They do not have the right to a full and complete evidentiary hearing. (p. 14.)…nothing short of incarceration will make them stop, and that’s an appropriate†(p. 18.) Christopher P. Beall representing WorldWest LLP 9/2/05 closed case CO 02-cv-1950
“You will file on your behalf a motion to voluntarily dismiss (p. 32)…If you fail to withdraw those lawsuits, the next time you’re in this court you better be prepared with your toothbrush, because you will be going to jail. (p.33.)†Judge Edward W. Nottingham, 9/2/05 closed case CO 02-cv-1950.
April 27th, 2007 at 9:07 am