McNulty: Domenici call key to Iglesias’ firing.
McNulty: Domenici call key to Iglesias’ firing.
On Oct. 4, 2006, Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) called former Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty to complain about his state’s then-U.S. Attorney David Iglesias. In testimony yesterday, McNulty confirmed that the call “was a significant factor” in Iglesias’ firing last year:
When McNulty found out that Iglesias’ name was on the list of U.S. attorneys to be fired, he said that Domenici’s call came back to him and was key in his decision to support Iglesias’ ouster.
“That was a significant factor in my thinking as to not - as to why I did not object, yes,” McNulty said on March 30. McNulty confirmed that statement under questioning on Thursday.
Domenici, who is being investigated by the Senate Ethics Committee, also “personally appealed” to both President Bush and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales for Iglesias to be fired.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
68 Responses to “McNulty: Domenici call key to Iglesias’ firing.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
No worse than when Carter and Clinton fired U.S. Attorneys investigation their political friends.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:03 pmHey Congress whatever you do, make sure you don’t do anything!!!!
All the evidence in the world wont make you guys actually start making heads roll will it? WHAT MORE DO YOU NEED?!?!?!?
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:03 pmJake, again, wrong century. Your senility is unwanted here.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:04 pmMcNutty just admitted that Iglesias was fired for political reasons.
That’s against the law.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:06 pmElizabeth Edwards scheduled to speak at Gay Pride event
Very smart move by the Edwards.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:07 pmPresident decides what’s the law.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:07 pmWe need to get the likes of Domenici and Grassley out of office. They are just so old that they can’t think about anyone but their own goals. It is time the rest of Congress also starts to do things for the American people and not for themselves or their party. You can just figure that Domenici and Grassley are saying all the republican lingo only to get financial support from the repubican donors.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:09 pmNo worse than when Carter and Clinton fired U.S. Attorneys investigation their political friends.
So now it’s “Clinton and Carter Did It Too…”?
I would congratulate you on doubling your rhetorical library, but all you’ve really done is double the amount of horse manure to throw.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:10 pmYou know the Repuke trolls are losing when they whine, “B-b-but Clinton did it too”.
Its still illegal and wrong.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:10 pm#
President decides what’s the law.
Comment by MAF54 — June 22, 2007 @ 12:07 pm
Where in the constitution did you see that dumbass?
You need a good whooping.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:13 pmBarbarian:
President Clinton was actually the first President of our new millenium, so, no, I am not in the wrong century. Nonetheless, if it is illegal for Bush to fire U.S. Attorneys for political reasons, then it was illegal when Clinton and Carter did it, right?
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:14 pmGlad you finally made it to the board, Jake! Did you sleep late after “meeting†last night?
You wore me out, lover!!!
XOXOXO
Forever,
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:14 pmTrolls always hang themselves if they have enough rope.
“President decides what’s the law.” Only in a tinhorn dictatorship,you fascist traitor.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:17 pm#10: Constitution? There are well set precedents that in a time of war the President runs the show and the Congress does whatever he asks for.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:18 pmFor the record,
It doesn’t matter if the President was trying to stack the DOJ with partisan hacks. It doesn’t matter if his campaign team, and one of the guys that got hired to replace one of these attorneys, was performing illegal voter caging in Florida in 2000 and 2004 and now its coming out and must be covered up. It doesn’t matter that two high ranking members admitted to breaking the law when hiring employees based on their political affiliations.
He’s the president, he decides what is legal and what isn’t.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:18 pmI did have fun last night MAF54!
Let’s see if Rudy wants to join in tonight.
XOXOXO
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:18 pmPresident decides what’s the law.
In your DREAMS, Nazi azzhole-licker of AWOL coward TRAITOR Bush.
Bush is a WAR CRIMINAL who needs to HANG for his crimes…
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:19 pm#14. There’s a war going on?
War on drugs?
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:21 pmWar on homelessness?
War on the Constitution?
Constitution? There are well set precedents that in a time of war the President runs the show and the Congress does whatever he asks for.
Comment by MAF54
He’s the president, he decides what is legal and what isn’t.
Comment by Jake
You guys are gonna be pleased as punch when a Democrat president exercises all that power. Thanks for your support.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:21 pmMAF
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:21 pmyou are incredibly illinformed. We are NOT “at war” War has NO been declared so stop using that lame excuse. We are illegally occupying a country. The prez does NOT make law, the fact that he thinks he does and his idiot minions agree show only that he is a FACIST dictator and you are one of his lemmings. Raise your hand and salute your leader you brown shirted moron.
We are at war. The muslim world declared it on us on 9/11.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:22 pm#19: There will not be a democratic president. Mark my words.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:22 pmTrekkie:
I’m simply trying to get the ground rules straight (especially for the next President — no one is above the law): if it is illegal for Bush to fire U.S. Attorneys for political reasons, then it was illegal when Clinton and Carter did it, right?
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:23 pm#19.
Great point. The first act of the Democratic president should be to track down the trolls on TP and try them as traitors for their support of the traitors in the Executive.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:23 pmPresident decides what’s the law.
Comment by MAF54 — June 22, 2007 @ 12:07 pm
F*ck. Does this mean we have to refight WW2?
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:23 pmJustice:
The AUMF is the legal equivalent to a declaration of war — no magic word is required.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:24 pmZooey,
You obviously don’t understand that the President will do what is necessary to make sure that doesn’t happen. He will continue to illegally stack the DOJ with Republican party faithful, and he will continue to disenfranchise minority voters to insure a Republican win. The Democrats in Congress are to wimpy to stop any of this. They are asking the wrong questions, which is exactly what the Republicans need them to keep doing!!
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:24 pmVet:
Shouldn’t the “first” act be to prove the President is a traitor?
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:25 pm#28.
Nope. The new president just needs to say it, and it’s true, right???
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:26 pmI don’t give a rat’s ass what Clinton and Carter did. If Clinton fired a US Attorney to obstruct justice, as Chimpy clearly did, then he broke the law too.
“But Clinton did it too” won’t hold up in court, dumbass.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:26 pm#28: It’s useless to talk sense to them. They’re in the “let’s purge anyone who is not pure enough a progressive!” mode here. If they manage to get to the power, they’ll do what the Red Khmers and Lenin’s thugs did: hunt down every dissenter.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:27 pmHooray!
The Bush envoy has negotiated one on one with the north Koreans and has said that the North Koreans will shut the reactor down in a “few months”. This after the US “rewarded bad behavior” and released $25 million dollars in cash from a Macao bank.
What a pack of asswipes.
Betcha the North Koreans will come up with another reason not to close their nuke plant in a few months.
They are outwitting the stupid Chimp at every turn.
-Chimpy negotiates with Axis of Evil member!
-GSD
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:28 pmJake,
“if it is illegal for Bush to fire U.S. Attorneys for political reasons, then it was illegal when Clinton and Carter did it, right?”
Question…. Do you think it SHOULD be legal? I’m curious your answer to this. I think that both sides of the aisle should be concerned that stacking the DOJ to insure some level of political bias be included in our justice system (which I think we can agree is a bad thing) might not be what the founders had in mind.
Do you think it is right to hire people in those very powerful positions in hopes that they will bring politically based charges against your political opponents?
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:28 pmif it is illegal for Bush to fire U.S. Attorneys for political reasons, then it was illegal when Clinton and Carter did it, right?
The word is IF Carter or Clinton did it.
We KNOW that Bush had the attorneys fired in violation of the law.
McNulty has just CONFIRMED it.
So, show us HOW Clinton or Carter did it, and that it was done ILLEGALLY.
Then, if it is true (it is NOT, of course, you are lying trolls), have the Attorney General’s office PROSECUTE THEM.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:30 pmThat’s what’s going to happen to TRAITOR Bush the MURDERER COXUCKER PUNK.
“We are at war. The muslim world declared it on us”
Jeez, this troll is delusional AND a racist bigot.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:32 pmresident Clinton was actually the first President of our new millenium, so, no, I am not in the wrong century. Nonetheless, if it is illegal for Bush to fire U.S. Attorneys for political reasons, then it was illegal when Clinton and Carter did it, right?
Comment by Jake — June 22, 2007 @ 12:14 pm
Jakey, what US Attorney did President Clinton fire for political reasons in the new millenium?
Take your time…
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:33 pmWhy do you guys even respond to Jake the Fake and MAF54 the Pervert…Jake is a known liar, and MAF54 is well, just a sick, sick person. Neither one is worth responding to in any way shape or form.
IGNORE THE TROLLS - Debate good, Jake the Fake and MAF54 the Pervert suck
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:35 pm#35: Delusional? 9/11, Madrid, Bali and now the nuclear threat both from Iran. I don’t quite know how more concrete the threat should be so that you’d agree with us.
Does it require a suitcase nuke going off in one of our cities?
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:36 pm#38. Nice. Do you seriously get your news from 24?
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:38 pm# 37 Buck Fush is right. I’m guilty. They just present such an inviting target — like a fat bird with a hurt wing on the lawn must look to a housecat.
The thing is, they’re so gone they don’t even respond to facts and clear thinking. They just go on their merry way, unaware that their other wing has been torn off.
Can we get some higher-level trolls in the game to replace these two? These guys are pathetic.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:39 pmWhen Domenici has the ear of the president, he has the ear of the president. Therefore Bush is directly involved by either his decision or indecision on this matter as he is the executive in charge.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:41 pm#39: So, what you’re saying is that there is no danger from nuclear terrorism or terrorism in general?
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:43 pm#39: So, what you’re saying is that there is no danger from nuclear terrorism or terrorism in general?
Comment by MAF54 — June 22, 2007 @ 12:43 pm
I mean, really, what kind of thought process does this show? Give us a break, Congressman Foley.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:45 pm#39: So, what you’re saying is that there is no danger from nuclear terrorism or terrorism in general?
Comment by MAF54 — June 22, 2007 @ 12:43 pm
LOL MAF54 is a scared little pedophile. Your security is more at risk from your governments actions over the last 6 years than ANY terrorism on US soil. Twit!
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:51 pmNo worse than when Carter and Clinton fired U.S. Attorneys investigation their political friends.
Comment by Jake — June 22, 2007 @ 12:03 pm
The pedophile MAF54 and yourself are traitors to your country, and traitors to humanity. You root for the very machine that is taking over.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:52 pmDomenici & Wilson should both immediately be assigned to night shift with the border patrol…weekends, holidays, & family birthdays.
These two assclowns are right in the middle of the immigration issue, yet are more consumed with pushing Party over People.
Pete, Heather, suit up! We’re going on patrol. No, we won’t find any terrorists, but we may be able to shoot some brown people.
Pete, keep up! Heather, quit whining. You both did nothing but whine while you were elected; now it’s time to earn your keep, creeps.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:53 pm#45: What machine? The one that protects us from islamic terror, actually upholds some moral standards (keeps obscenities like stem cell research, abortion and gay marriage at bay) and believes in a strong military?
Yeah. I’ll vote for them.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:58 pmWho are you to speak of moral standards? Your comments are absurd.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:59 pmkeeps cell research, abortion and gay marriage at bay).
Yeah, like gayboy Ken Mehlman, former RNC CHAIRMAN.
And LYING and MURDERING one’s fellow man (Iraq), while the mastermind of 9/11, Osama, TRAITOR Bush’s buddy, is FREE?
And screw NATIONAL SECURITY by exposing a COVERT CIA spy who specialized in WMD?
MORALS?? TRAITOR Bush the MURDERER coxucker PUNK??
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
June 22nd, 2007 at 1:03 pmMAF54,
“upholds some moral standards (keeps obscenities like stem cell research, abortion and gay marriage at bay) and believes in a strong military?”
Don’t you find it peculiar that the President would veto the stem cell bill, on ‘maoral’ grounds, but then doesn’t oppose it if privateers do it. So killing the unborn is ok as long as big Pharma can make a buck off it?
June 22nd, 2007 at 1:07 pmCrump’s Brother:
Yes, it should be legal (and, since Bush gave that power back to the Senate, it should take it’s confirmation obligation as to these positions seriously).
June 22nd, 2007 at 1:26 pmJake,
James Madison disagrees with you. It was his idea that the confirmation process would be the check on this happening. But he always stated that the President should not fire an otherwise meritorious officer or face impeachment.
“the president can displace from office a man whose merits require that he should be continued in it. What will be the motives which the president can feel for such abuse of his power, and the restraints that operate to prevent it? In the first place, he will be impeachable by this house, before the senate, for such an act of mal-administration; for I contend that the wanton removal of meritorious officers would subject him to impeachment and removal from his own high trust. “
June 22nd, 2007 at 1:32 pm#50: No, not at all. The government should not hinder the business. That’s what the communists used to do.
June 22nd, 2007 at 1:37 pm#50: No, not at all. The government should not hinder the business. That’s what the communists used to do.
Comment by MAF54 — June 22, 2007 @ 1:37 pm
So, then you have no problem with abortion being provided, as long as it’s a private business doing it. Great. Welcome aboard.
June 22nd, 2007 at 1:42 pmMAF54,
Are you really this dumb?
“The government should not hinder the business. That’s what the communists used to do.”
He didn’t veto the bill on market principles, he vetoed it based on his superstitious beliefs. His laughable “pro-life” stance is the reason he vetoed it. You yourself said it was a moral stand in your earlier post. If you think that, then how can you feel fine with private business doing it? Hypocrisy much?
June 22nd, 2007 at 1:51 pmJake, you ignorant, misguided slut. Between 1979 and 2006 (prior to the Bush purge) there were a grand total of THREE (3) US Attorneys fired other than for proven corruption. This includes the Reagan and Bush I Presidencies as well. What you spew out about Carter and Clinton is not just wrong, it’s literally impossible.
June 22nd, 2007 at 2:09 pm#55 Crump -
Looks like we have a troll here (MAFoley54) who has had one too many Rove/BushCo NeoCon Kool-aid enemas. He has been TOTALLY addicted to their narcotic and may be beyond detoxification help.
June 22nd, 2007 at 2:19 pmI never ever respond to anything that Jake the Fake or MAF54 the Pervert post, everything they post is pure crap and not worth responding to. They are simply total losers in real life that are hated by everyone, so they come here to disrupt threads and get you guys to respond to them. I don’t even read their posts anymore, because it is pure crap.
If it says Jake or MAF54 don’t even bother reading the post, it will only be crap meant to get at you emotionally.
IGNORE THE TROLLS - Debate good, Jake/MAF54 suck
June 22nd, 2007 at 2:31 pmCrump’s Brother:
Jaywalking “subjects” the President to impeachment if the opposition party has enough votes in the House. So?
June 22nd, 2007 at 3:09 pmPresident decides what’s the law.
Comment by MAF54 — June 22, 2007 @ 12:07 pm
June 22nd, 2007 at 3:14 pmExactly what I would expect from a moron who has to get his talking points from FAUXNOIZ or the lard assed, drug addled, gas bag because you are unable to use the brain God gave you. Morons on the reich march in lock step because they are unable to think for themselves. 26%ers are not very smart just annoying.
P.S. I disagree with Madison’s position on slavery as well. But, when the next (Democratic) President engages in “wanton removal of meritorious officers” I hope you are as vociferous in your opposition.
June 22nd, 2007 at 3:15 pmFor anyone really interested in whether previous dismissals of U.S. Attorneys were done by Democratic Presidents (OTHER THAN AT THE BEGINNING OF THEIR TERMS — as if that makes this suddenly horrible procedure of wantonly dismissing meritorius officers O.K.?) for political reasons, you don’t have to believe just me:
http://www.time.com/ time/ magazine/ article/ 0,9171,945941,00.html
http://www.time.com/ time/ magazine/ article/ 0,9171,916110,00.html
http://www.time.com/ time/ magazine/ article/ 0,9171,919302,00.html
http://www.time.com/ time/ magazine/ article/ 0,9171,915957,00.html
June 22nd, 2007 at 3:21 pmJake,
I don’t think your links are working the way you want
June 22nd, 2007 at 3:27 pmJake, nobody has ever fired attorneys to stack the deck to fix elections, prior to the cirme family. Caging of votes has been restricted of the GOP since the ’70s. They violated a court order restriction. Carol Lam was in the process of putting some wingers under the jail house.
Your lies might work better with the reichwingnuts.
June 22nd, 2007 at 3:31 pmwhen the next (Democratic) President engages in “wanton removal of meritorious officers†I hope you are as vociferous in your opposition.
Comment by Jake — June 22, 2007 @ 3:15 pm
And I hope you are as dogged in his (or her) defense.
June 22nd, 2007 at 3:54 pmI would like to take this opportunity to apologize to everyone on this board for my bad behavior. I am not really as retarded as I seem when I post. I promise to do better in the future.
June 22nd, 2007 at 4:04 pmTry these:
http://www.time.com/time/ magazine/ article/ 0,9171,945941,00.html
http://www.time.com/time/ magazine/ article/ 0,9171,916110,00.html
http://www.time.com/time/ magazine/ article/ 0,9171,919302,00.html
http://www.time.com/time/ magazine/ article/ 0,9171,915957,00.html
June 22nd, 2007 at 5:18 pmNope, I guess that must be more of that infamous TP censorship.
June 22nd, 2007 at 5:19 pm