Gonzales plans to ‘tighten the leash’ on attorneys.
By on Jun 17th, 2007 at 10:04 am
Gonzales plans to ‘tighten the leash’ on attorneys.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales “recently proposed tightening the leash on the men and women who prosecute federal crimes across the nation. Gonzales described what he delicately calls ‘a more vigorous and a little bit more formal process’ for annually evaluating prosecutors. What that means, as he explained it, is hauling in every U.S. attorney for a meeting to hear, among other things, politicians’ beefs against the prosecutor.” The Chicago Tribune’s Andrew Zajac writes, “If that should happen, expect the fair-mindedness and independence Americans still count on from their Justice Department to slip.”
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
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Hannity
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Maddow
McCain
Media
Military
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Public Plan
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
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
Nice “de facto” attempt at doing your job, Gonzo! Too bad it’s some 6 years too late! You’d better be counting your days….because the longer you remain in office, the more Republican’s hopes and dreams you shatter…..You and the War will tank the entire GOP before all is said and done. Only a fool like Gonzo would remain in office when everyone has totally lost confidence in him and have seen him perjure himself.
June 17th, 2007 at 10:09 am…..so he can slip a few more attorneys in and out while Congress is not looking??
June 17th, 2007 at 10:10 amDo Americans count on fair-mindedness and independence from the DOJ? Not so much anymore…
June 17th, 2007 at 10:11 amfrom the article:
Gonzales could have maintained the tradition of reserve by repudiating the firings as an overreach. Instead he apologized only for bungling them so badly that they’ve become a public issue.
If you listen very carefully to any of the apologies coming from this administration whenever any ethically questionable action is exposed, they rarely apologize for what they did. Instead, they apologize because it became public.
In other words, they’re not sorry for what they did, they’re sorry that you found out about what they did.
And when it comes to blatently illegal things being uncovered, again they don’t apologize for acting illegally. Instead they come down hard on the person who revealed their illegal activities.
Ironically, they are such a sorry crew for not being sorry about what they do.
June 17th, 2007 at 10:22 amHmm, it seems Domenici et al’s ‘beefs’ to DOJ prosecturs were highly inappropriate and coercive…the first time. How will allowing more (already unallowed) specific politicians to lambast specific prosecutors help insulate american justice in any way? Only Committee-wide objections to the direction of a DOJ operation/division (ie Civil Rigts Division) should be allowed.
June 17th, 2007 at 10:29 amp.s. i (}> GAO
I’m no lawyer, but I assume this is an attempt to draw a legal veil over the politicization of the Justice Department.
Wayne is right: It’s probably ‘a more formal process’ for claiming privilege and keeping the ‘ethically questionable action’ hidden.
June 17th, 2007 at 10:39 amI’m no expert, but doesn’t ” hauling in every U.S. attorney for a meeting to hear, among other things, politicians’ beefs against the prosecutor.†” somehow violate the separation of powers among the legislative, judicial, and executive? What a mess!
June 17th, 2007 at 10:42 amlaughable!
June 17th, 2007 at 10:46 amThis is more proof that KKKarl Rove is calling the shots, not only in the White House, but the Justice Department, and he is not college graduate, much less an attorney. They are flipping the bird at America and telling us that they are going through with the politization of the Justice Department to steal the election in ‘08 but every election in the future. The only way conservatives can win.
Q: What is wrong with conservatism?
June 17th, 2007 at 10:49 amA: Conservatism is incompatible with democracy, prosperity, and civilization in general. It is a destructive system of inequality and prejudice that is founded on deception and has no place in the modern world.
Be mindful what you ask for, Gonzo……….
June 17th, 2007 at 10:51 amYou may get a blowback no amount of VO5 will hold your hair down.
Unless these “beef-fests” are conducted in secret, this policy may backfire–some Gooper politicians may be stupid enough to air their beefs about a USA failing to gin up fake voter-fraud charges against their opponents on-the-record.
June 17th, 2007 at 10:54 amI would strongly suggest that the prosecutors take their lawyers with them for these meetings and demand a transcript. Bush’s toady is not to be trusted for a milisecond.
June 17th, 2007 at 11:00 amBecause of that traditional circumspection, U.S. attorneys have been replaced en masse only at the beginning of a new presidential administration. Once appointed and confirmed, they’ve rarely been fired and usually only for serious ethical or legal lapses. Such lapses were not alleged among the nine prosecutors sent packing last year.
Gonzales could have maintained the tradition of reserve by repudiating the firings as an overreach. Instead he apologized only for bungling them so badly that they’ve become a public issue.
Gonzales seems intent on making sure they’re viewed as a precedent, a handy club for himself and future attorneys general to, depending on your viewpoint, either make sure prosecutors hew to the administration’s priorities or make sure they factor political considerations in their deliberations.
But it would be naive to think this newfound flexibility would not also find uses in a Democratic administration. Then how eager would Republicans be to defend it?
This is all about Bush, Rove and Gonzo trying to make their obstruction of justice appear casual and rational. In the larger picture they have been electioneering throught the justice department and taking a big dump on the justice dept and the constitution.
June 17th, 2007 at 11:02 amThis is typical Bush gang. They get caught in blatantly illegal activity attempting to completely circumvent our Constitution and set up a permanent one-party state using federal prosecutors to rig elections to favor their party, as part of an overall effort to completely politicize the federal bureaucracy and install “loyal Bushies.”
Instead of scurrying off like a cockroach when the light’s turned on, they keep bulling forward and try to find ways to use the crisis caused by their own malfeasance to advance the ball!
They say “ok, we acknowledge there’s a problem (now that you’ve caught us red-handed), and we accept responsibility. Accepting responsibility means – “forget all about everything we did, that’s all in the past now that we’ve said the magic phrase ‘I accept responsibility.’”
Now we just need to “move forward” and in order to do that we need to formalize “new procedures” so that in future, we can say “we were following the normal, routine, Justice Department procedures” when we were organizing meetings so that Republican politicians at all levels could tell DOJ prosecutors to indict their political opponents and bring federal prosecutions designed to rig elections!
It’s just like with the Abu Grahib and wire-tapping scandals. When they’re exposed they just try and change then law so that everything they did is now “legal.”
Problem solved.
June 17th, 2007 at 11:06 am“But it would be naive to think this newfound flexibility would not also find uses in a Democratic administration. Then how eager would Republicans be to defend it?”
This is a question that Republics refuse to answer. It is a question I have posed to trolls on this blog several times challenging them to answer it. But, alas, none have. I wonder why.
So, I’ll do it again. Trolls on TP, please answer the question posed above. How would you react if it was a Democratic administration that was politicizing all departments in our government?
June 17th, 2007 at 11:14 amCugel,
June 17th, 2007 at 11:14 amIt was not illegal. It is still not. At the time of these firings the Bush administration snuck a provision into the Patriot Act allowing them to appoint prosecuters without senate confirmation. There is even a quote by Gonzales where he says, and I paraphrase, “well the law IS THERE so we may as well use it”.
So the firings began and the appointment of cronies, without senate confirmation, also began.
Legitimizing politicizing. Priceless!
I’m starting to like the idea of torture being legal if we can apply it to every republican scumbag in this country (yes, I know, ‘republican scumbag’ is a redundant statement). How can so many sociopaths continue to be in charge of this country? And where is our collective conscience?
June 17th, 2007 at 11:20 amKate Henry,
I don’t always like the Democrats, but I really don’t think the Democrats are capable of this type of behavior. I personally am not. It’s devious. But not only that, it is not necessary for Dems to do this. A majority of Americans like justice the justice department the way it IS. Therefore there is no need to change or exploit it.
The Republicans, however, have been trying to increase their power through tactics like this. It’s a bully minority who gained brief power through 911 and they’re trying to maintain that power after the 911 hangover wears off.
In short, Dems don’t need to electioneer through the justice department. Repubs do because they are a permanent minority.
June 17th, 2007 at 11:22 amComment by LandSurveyor — June 17, 2007 @ 11:14 am
Are you really a Land Surveyor? What state? I also work in the trade in WA.
June 17th, 2007 at 11:22 amNot an RPS or RPLS. I do construction machine control robotics, etc.
June 17th, 2007 at 11:29 amCAD tech Carlson, Terrmodel. I know how to find iron rods, though. ; ).
I work for the government…Civil 3D. Sr. CAD Tech.
June 17th, 2007 at 11:32 amWhere are you located?
expect the fair-mindedness and independence Americans still count on from their Justice Department…
Fair-mindedness?
Independence?
From the DoJ?
From “political appointees”?
For months now we’ve been told that the DoJ is staffed with political appointees who serve at the pleasure of the president.
We’ve been told that the Attorneys General currently on the job are considered “Loyal Bushies.”
We’ve been told that this is nothing new; every president politicizes the DoJ.
We have been told not to expect “fair-mindedness and independence” from the Department of Justice.
With this latest move, Gonzales is finally being up front with us. The Attorneys General will be made to account for their actions in the political arena. Senators will finally have the opportunity, on a regular basis, to see whether or not the Attorneys General in their State are upholding the will of the Party.
After all, what good is it to be the Party in Power if you cannot use the resources of the Federal Government to prosecute your political opponents?
June 17th, 2007 at 11:37 amTexas. It’s easier to become a civil engy than a damn RPLS in Texas.
June 17th, 2007 at 11:42 amI usually get my electronic drawing in Microstation, import to ACAD or TM. My final product is 3D Roads in TM, w/ templates.
I make more $ than my RPLS buddies, however ;). And I certainly have less stress. :)
the “”‘tighten the leash’”" needs to be completed on Gonezales.
IE……Fire him now.
The Cat, the LION
June 17th, 2007 at 11:48 amInductive ~ Deductive LOGIC
If Democrats get a seat at the table and get to chew out USAs, what’s the problem?
But do you think Abu Gonzales will give them a seat at the table?
June 17th, 2007 at 11:55 amYes, I can see how corrupt politicians (aka Republicans) would love having a system where they can get investigators fired for simply doing their job.
Nobody does corruption like Republicans. Nobody.
June 17th, 2007 at 11:55 amThere’s only one thing more important than truth, justice and the American Way – and that’s wielding absolute political power. Thank god the Republican Party understands that.
June 17th, 2007 at 12:27 pmYou know, I think this would be a really good thing for Gonzalez to do – IF the entire meeting was videotaped and copies sent to House and Senate judiciary committees. Because, after all, Gonzo has serious memory problems and this way he wouldn’t have to worry about remembering what to forget.
June 17th, 2007 at 12:45 pm“…hauling in every U.S. attorney for a meeting to hear, among other things, politicians’ beefs against the prosecutor.”
Does anyone here think that the term “politicians” in that sentence refers to Democrats as well as Republickers? Is anyone that naive?
June 17th, 2007 at 1:04 pmBriseadh wrote:
For months now we’ve been told that the DoJ is staffed with political appointees who serve at the pleasure of the president.
Hi, Bris,
I think a major part of the problem we are having in this area just might be in a misinterpreatation of that phrase “serves at the pleasure of the president.” I think that the Bush administration feels that it means to serve the president at his pleasure, rather than to serve the people at his pleasure. The correct interpretattion, of course, is that they all serve the people, and that they do it at the pleasure of the president. But with all the people there expected to be “loyal Bushies” (to borrow a term used by one of them), I think that some of the ones who hired and fired people thought that they were supposed to be serving the president at his pleasure.
I could be wrong, but I think this might explain in part how we got into this mess. That and the fact that some of the people in charge were completely unqualified (or ill-suited) to do the jobs for which they were hired.
June 17th, 2007 at 1:08 pmComment by xaxnar — June 17, 2007 @ 12:45 pm
I like the way you think. Document the meetings on audio and video media (you don;t just want still shots) and store them in a secure location. Then, if a question arises, just “go to the video tape” and see what actually happened.
Oh, and one other thing, it should be a major felony to alter those recordings in any way. Can’t give them a way out of it by letting them destroy the tapes with impunity.
June 17th, 2007 at 1:11 pmTrolls on TP, please answer the question posed above. How would you react if it was a Democratic administration that was politicizing all departments in our government?
Comment by Kate Henry — June 17, 2007 @ 11:14 am
Well, that all depends.
Would the newly appointed officials be capable of providing the top notch, reliable, beneficial service that we have come to expect from the Rep. appointees?
June 17th, 2007 at 1:58 pmOh to be a fly on the wall in the meetings where the next plan of attack is decided. Heads low. Smirks and laughs. Yea, great idea Karl! We got Carol Lam, and that’s what we wanted. Now a new guy in L.A.will protect Jerry Lewis. Let’s just pretend it is business as usual, and call all the folks in to face their detractors. Yea! We don’t want any more scandals, and we have an election to think about. That will do it! Go AG! Hee hee hee.
June 17th, 2007 at 2:15 pmWould the newly appointed officials be capable of providing the top notch, reliable, beneficial service that we have come to expect from the Rep. appointees?
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES — June 17, 2007 @ 1:58 pm
The “service that we have come to expect from the Rep. appointees” has been neither “top notch”, “reliable” nor “beneficial”. So I think the Deocrats could easily do better than the Republicans. The main difference is that the Dems want it to be done right, the Rep’s don’t.
June 17th, 2007 at 2:40 pmThe current DOJ/USA system is broken. Karl Rove and Harriet Miers hacked it. The DOJ has been infected by a political virus. We need to patch the code. Gonzo’s idea of documenting the bug as a feature is not what I have in mind. The USAs need to be given more job security by statute. Or else if this is to be so political, maybe it needs to be made an elective office. Short of that I’m not sure I see any way to put Humpty Dumpty back together again.
June 17th, 2007 at 3:08 pmEverything’s political. Complaining about politicizing DoJ is just naive.
June 17th, 2007 at 3:15 pmWe are talking here not just about politicization of the DOJ, but of the electoral process. Everything is not political, there are some places we expect political differences to go away, e.g. the military, the IRS, and in the counting of our votes. That is why DOJ itself has a regulation forbidding the bringing of certain sorts of cases just prior to an election. Here we are seeing evidence that USAs were fired for failing to bring cases to influence elections and promote voter suppression. So you may call the complaints naive, but I call them constructive.
June 17th, 2007 at 3:54 pmEverything’s political. Complaining about politicizing DoJ is just naive.
Comment by MAF54 — June 17, 2007 @ 3:15 pm
Not so, moose breath…show me where it mentions politics in the constitution. Show me where it says anything about it. You are believing the lies of the thugs in the crime family.
June 17th, 2007 at 5:32 pmThis makes perfect sense. As you know, the problem all along has been that GOP members of Congress didn’t have a formal avenue for pressuring the Justice Department to get rid of U.S. Attorneys who weren’t sufficiently partisan in the conduct of their duties. They used to have to go to Karl Rove or one of his underlings and have them try to get Gonzo to take care of it. Now they can go straight to Gonzo. Problem solved!
June 17th, 2007 at 6:28 pmAND ALMOST ZERO OF ANY OF THIS IS MAKING IT’s WAY INTO AMERICA’s LARGEST DAILY PAPERS. Reading the L.A. Times since it was bought out has become like an exercise is dumbing yourself down.
June 17th, 2007 at 7:55 pmAmerica, your courts are tainted, your electoral process is hacked, rigged and suppressed, your “free” press is a fascist exercise in modern propaganda and your republic no longer exists.
June 17th, 2007 at 7:57 pmWhat are you going to do about it…? Sit on yopur asses at your computer screens and type like the wind, or just pass wind?
Never before have US Attorneys been beholden to politicians. Some politicians believe they are way above the law. They should all be impeached. But a good question is if the administration was Democratic, would the minority put up with this crap? Don’t think so. They all took an oath to uphold the constitution. Many aren’t doing that. That is the question we should ask all of our senators and representatives. No excuses.
June 17th, 2007 at 7:59 pmApparently, the formality of adhering to the laws of the land as they existed before Gonzo’s appointment was not quite formal enough.
June 17th, 2007 at 10:20 pmGonzo will follow the direction of Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. As for teaching other attorneys will Gonzo will teach time how to say ” I don’t recall” and how to lie under oath and make a fool out of themselves. Gonzo is a disgrace to the Justice System. Now Gonzo told Congress that he wouldn’t appoint any attorney yet again he lied under oath.
June 17th, 2007 at 10:50 pmI retired as an AUSA after nearly 30 years with the Department of Justice, and worked under seven US Attorneys in two districts in Democratic and Republican administrations. Never did I see or feel the slightest political pressure in the exercise of my responsibilities. Does it happen? Sure, but not in the blatant and arrogant manner espoused by this administration. Who doesn’t know that Gonzales doesn’t issue mandates or orders? He simply and blindly follows Rove’s instructions and could care less that the DOJ’s once laudable reputation sinks lower by the week. What I don’t understand, though, is why the truly dedicated DOJ employees haven’t called for a work stoppage or aren’t subtely sabotaging the goddamn political appointees whenever they get the chance. Roger
June 17th, 2007 at 11:27 pmThe one think ol’ Berto forgot is that as Atty General he is not the President’s Lawyer, not Bush’s Lawyer and not the RNC’s Lawyer. He is the People’s Lawyer.
June 18th, 2007 at 2:35 pmIt’s ok for Chuck Shumer when he pressured Fitzgerald!
Fascist liberals!
June 22nd, 2007 at 7:20 am