“Montana’s senators angrily reacted to a report in today’s Washington Post that acting Associate Attorney General William Mercer worked to alter federal law so that he and a handful of other senior Justice officials could escape residency requirements that governed their assignments as U.S. attorneys.”

The change, approved by Congress in 2006, allowed Mercer to continue serving as U.S. attorney for Montana while working there just three days a month and spending the rest of his time as one of Gonzales’s top aides at Justice Department headquarters in Washington.

The legislation was added to the USA Patriot Act reauthorization — at Mercer’s request — on the same day that Gonzales told Montana’s chief federal judge that Mercer was not in violation of federal residency requirements.

“For months, I gave Bill Mercer the benefit of the doubt that he was shooting straight with me and with the people of Montana,” said Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), who called on Mercer to resign his position as U.S. attorney. … “Mr. Mercer was operating outside federal law, so he had the law changed. That might work in Alberto Gonzales’ Justice Department, but it’s not how we do business in Montana.”

Via Instaputz, here’s National Review’s Victor Davis Hanson today:

The war will be won or lost, like it or not, fairly or unjustly, in the next six months in Baghdad.

Victor Davis Hanson three months ago:

I hope there is that sense of urgency in both Washington and at Centcom, a sense that the ante has been raised and that our success or failure in the next six months will determine the course of our policy and of the region for years to come.

The Washington Post notes that the internal Justice Department investigation of former Gonzales counsel Monica Goodling, which was first reported today, may interfere with her ability to testify before Congress:

The Goodling revelations raise uncertainty about whether she will testify before the House Judiciary Committee, which offered her limited immunity from prosecution last week in exchange for her testimony about the firings. Goodling, who resigned last month, has invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in refusing to answer questions from Congress.

Such an immunity deal requires approval from the Justice Department, which must agree that her testimony would not interfere with an ongoing criminal probe, according to administration and congressional officials. Although the joint probe into the attorney firings by Inspector General Glenn A. Fine and OPR is not criminal, the allegations against Goodling raise the possibility that a crime may have been committed.

Fired U.S. Attorney David Iglesias says he believes that Goodling holds the “keys to the kingdom” in terms of uncovering the roots of the attorney purge. Will the Justice Department allow her to testify?

UPDATE: Sandy Levinson at Balkinization: “So let’s get this straight: It is up to the DOJ to decide whether Congress will be able to give immunity to Ms. Goodling. Whom, if anyone, would ‘we’ trust in the current DOJ to make that decision? … Isn’t it clear that an independent prosecutor should be appointed (but by whom and under what authority) since everyone in the DOJ is hopelessly conflicted out?”

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) “walked away from a question about embattled Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ) at the end of a press conference today.” A reporter “stopped Boehner on his way out of the room and asked whether Renzi, who has not gotten much public support from GOP leaders as he faces a corruption scandal, should retire or resign. Though he seemed to have heard the question clearly — he was only about a foot away — Boehner turned and walked out, rather than answer. It seems to be part of a new strategy — Boehner’s spokesman didn’t return phone calls Tuesday about Renzi, either.”

Iraq war veteran and VoteVets chairman Jon Soltz takes on Rep. Shimkus. (Background HERE.)

Number of Iraqis who reject “establishing isolation walls…to reduce sectarian violence.”

Late last month, the FBI raided the home of Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ) as part of its “two-track investigation” into the congressman “regarding a land deal, as well as a piece of legislation he helped steer that may have improperly benefited a major campaign contributor.” The House Ethics Committee has signaled that it too may now investigate Renzi.

Renzi’s case was opened by former U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton, who was fired as part of the Bush administration’s purge. In Oct. 2006, word leaked to the media about the investigation. Renzi’s top aide, Brian Murray, then called Charlton’s spokesman Wyn Hornbuckle to inquire about the investigation. Such calls are highly improper and potentially illegal.

Yesterday in an interview with Phoenix’s KPNX, Renzi spoke for the first time since the FBI raid and said that he believes he is being smeared by the Justice Department. He refused to take any responsibility for the land deal, instead charging — without any evidence — that the leaks on the investigation were “lies.” He added that “to make that up and put that out means the Department of Justice was engaged in electioneering and that needs to be investigated.” Watch it:

Renzi also defended Murray’s phone call to Charlton’s office, even though calls from lawmakers and their staffs to U.S. attorneys about ongoing investigations are potentially illegal. “All he’s doing is calling the public relations department and saying what is this? What’s going on here? He left a message on a telephone machine,” he stated. Two other ousted U.S. attorneys — John McKay and David Iglesias — also received phone calls from federal lawmakers pressuring them on investigations.

He added that for “anyone to conjure up that this somehow affected Mr. Charlton being fired, is just political theater.”

Digg It!

Transcript: Read more