Archive for the ‘Justice Department’ Category
 Monday, September 29th
QuestionGirl September 29th, 2008 - 6:22 pm
Attorney General pursues possible criminal charges in U.S. attorney firings.
3 Comments Email Post
Toggle Meta
Wednesday, June 25th
Buck June 25th, 2008 - 9:06 am
Wow. A group of republicans involved in illegal activities. The sky must be falling!
Actually, news like this is getting old. Does the author of this report really think anything will come of it? Does he believe justice will be served? We all know it won’t. Oh, sure, Wexler or Reid will write a letter of purse-clutching proportions, but it will end there.
To combat evil, there has to be good. To combat those that would do evil, there has to be an empowered group that gives a damn. And since we don’t have any of those, we simple folk are shit outta luck.
Justice Weeds Out Liberals, Report Says
WASHINGTON (June 24) - Ivy Leaguers and other top law students were rejected for plum Justice Department jobs two years ago because of their liberal leanings or objections to Bush administration politics, a government report concluded Tuesday.
In one case, a Harvard Law student was passed over after criticizing the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. In another, a Georgetown University student who had previously worked for a Democratic senator and congressman didn’t make the cut.
Even senior Justice Department officials flinched at what appeared to be hiring decisions based — improperly and illegally — on politics, according to the internal report.
“Individuals at the department were rejecting any of our candidates who could be construed as left-wing or who were perceived, based on their appearances and resumes and so forth, as being more liberal,” Kevin Ohlson, deputy director of the department’s executive office of immigration review, complained to Justice investigators.
PS: To all those everyday little people out there who still insist republicans are the way to go; the next time someone robs you of all of your possessions, burns down your house, and kidnaps your children, please don’t ask me to give a damn about your plight, okay? For I won’t. I refuse to. The rules of the game have changed and you clearly condone it. So, FU!
PPS: Another thought to consider (if you haven’t already); If this shit is allowed to continue in government, how long before we start seeing it in our places of business? Will you lie on your application?
Leave a ReplyEmail Post
Toggle Meta
Monday, June 16th
QuestionGirl June 16th, 2008 - 12:07 pm
Sources in Washington tell me that the year-long probe of the Bush Administration’s decision to fire a still-undetermined number of U.S. Attorneys for political and improper reasons is “substantially completed” and that it remains the subject of wrangling in a fairly transparent effort to slow down its release.
The probe is a joint effort between the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) and Inspector General (OIG), though it seems clear that in this case, as in plenty of others, OIG has been the accelerator pushing the matter forward and OPR has been the brake coming up with a seemingly endless number of limp excuses and complications designed to frustrate it.
First Up: Former Bush Justice Official Bradley Schlozman Evidence that the probe is winding up can be found in this morning’s Wall Street Journal:
Justice Department lawyers have filed a grand-jury referral stemming from the 2006 U.S. attorneys scandal, according to people familiar with the probe, a move indicating that the yearlong investigation may be entering a new phase.
The grand-jury referral, the first time the probe has moved beyond the investigative phase, relates to allegations of political meddling in the Justice Department’s civil-rights division, these people say. Specifically, it focuses on possible perjury by Bradley Schlozman, who served a year as interim U.S. attorney in Kansas City, Mo.
It wasn’t clear which of Mr. Schlozman’s comments prosecutors are focusing on. He has declined to be interviewed by investigators since leaving the department. One possibility focuses on Mr. Schlozman’s 2007 testimony to Congress, one part of which he later retracted. Indeed, the evidence uncovered on Schlozman’s political machinations while at Justice is stunning, leading one to wonder exactly which angle prosecutors may have decided to start with. As one of his colleagues put it in an interview with the Washington Post, “everything Schlozman did was political. And he said so.”
More from Scott Horton at Harpers
3 CommentsEmail Post
Toggle Meta
Wednesday, April 9th
QuestionGirl April 9th, 2008 - 10:44 pm
You can watch the video of this hearing at Senator Nelson’s website. Following was in an email I received from his office. Senator Bill Nelson doesn’t always vote the way I’d like him to, but he’s got this one right, and hopefully congress will do something to correct this injustice. It’s so very shameful.
Women Tell Of Brutal Assaults In Iraq That Go Unpunished
——————————————————————————–
Washington, D.C. - The federal government hasn’t tried any cases involving sexual assaults against women who work for contractors in Iraq or Afghanistan, despite a 2000 law giving that authority to the Department of Justice.
That information emerged this morning in often-emotionally charged testimony before a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations panel headed by Florida Democrat Bill Nelson. Since last fall, Nelson has been pressuring federal agencies about unpunished sexual assaults in the war zones, following a Florida woman’s report that she was attacked while working in Iraq for a defense contractor.
Another disturbing piece of information that emerged in testimony this morning was that the victims of sexual assault in the war zone felt pressured to sweep the incidents under the rug.
“I am unaware of any measures to date being taken against the KBR employee or the member of the U.S. military who attacked me,” Dawn Leamon said in remarks presented to the subcommittee. “I hope that by telling my story here today, I can keep what happened to me from happening to anyone else.”
Leamon, who has two sons who served as soldiers in the war zones, worked for Halliburton’s former subsidiary KBR. She says she was sexually assaulted just two months ago by a KBR coworker and a U.S. soldier at a remote military base near Basra, in Iraq. Her testimony marked the first time she has identified herself in public. Leamon was one of two victims to testify today.
Read more »
2 CommentsEmail Post
Toggle Meta
Monday, April 7th
QuestionGirl April 7th, 2008 - 5:54 pm
Original Siegelman segment on 60 Minutes
A follow up on Don Siegelman’s release from prison. All roads lead to Rove.
Leave a ReplyEmail Post
Toggle Meta
Saturday, March 8th
Buck March 8th, 2008 - 9:33 am
From Slate’s “All Roads Lead To Rove“:
And even while the fired attorneys were themselves testifying to Congress last spring, e-mails were flying back and forth between the White House and the Justice Department about how to spin earlier lies. “How do I answer whether we think it was inappropriate for lawmakers to call U.S. Attorneys?” a panicky Dana Perino wrote to Deputy White House Counsel Bill Kelley as Iglesias was testifying. (Um, do you mean “illegal,” Dana?)
“Can’t we just say that we’ll leave it to Congress to examine these questions?” shot back Kelley.
“I could try,” said Perino. But then Bud Cummins, the fired U.S. attorney from Arkansas, was already testifying about an e-mail he’d written about a call from Chief of Staff and Counselor to the Deputy Attorney General Mike Elston, threatening to talk trash about the U.S. attorneys if they spoke out. “What about this Bud Cummins e-mail?” wrote Perino. “This is bad.”
“Very bad,” chimed in Tasia Scolinos, the DoJ spokeswoman, who promptly went to working spinning Elston’s threats as “a collegial conversation” twisted by “former disgruntled employees.”
|
The US Attorney scandal is not dead. Per Iglesias; “former bosses may shred the e-mails, sack the bumblers, obstruct Congress and-quoting Sampson again-try to gum this scandal to death, the truth will come out, eventually.”
David Iglesias’ IN JUSTICE is available at Amazon.com
|
1 CommentEmail Post
Toggle Meta
Monday, February 25th
QuestionGirl February 25th, 2008 - 10:36 am
From WKRG:
Our family grows more and more outraged with each revelation showing that - for 8 years - my father has been targeted for political reasons -. America should never lose sight of the tragic fact that while the world is just now discovering the corrupt tactics used by the Justice Department in their pursuit of Don Siegelman, our Dad is in a Federal Prison where he has been for eight months. He has not been allowed to be free while he appeals his case and he remains unable to appeal his conviction because there is no trial transcript - even though his trial ended over 600 days ago.
The new revelations by “60 minutes” sit on top of the mountain of evidence already in existence that shows the Justice Department illegally targeted my father. Testimony before the House Judiciary Committee showed that the prosecutors in Alabama were not going to prosecute my father but were told by the Justice Department to do whatever it took to bring Dad down. Adam Zagorin at TIME Magazine reported that during the investigation, prosecutors discovered - and ignored - evidence against a Republican US Senator and Alabama’s Republican Attorney General. Most egregious in this episode is the fact that the Justice Department officials and investigators involved in that investigation continued to pursue Dad in the face of their blatant conflicts of interest that should have removed them from the case. In the Siegelman case and in other Alabama cases, affidavits and information has come to light showing that investigators threatened, intimidated, and coached witnesses to incriminate Don Siegelman. The revelations in the “60 Minutes” report cries out for an independent investigation of this case and the immediate release of my Dad.
My family’s question to the Congress is “how much evidence will be enough?”. The US Attorney apparatus in Alabama is corrupted and only an outside, independent investigation will right this grievous wrong.
Read more »
1 CommentEmail Post
Toggle Meta
QuestionGirl February 25th, 2008 - 9:15 am
I missed this myself……. am going to watch it today.
From Scott Horton at Harpers:
CBS aired its long-awaited feature on the prosecution and imprisonment of former Alabama Governor Don E. Siegelman this evening at 7:00. In a stunning move of censorship, the transmission was blocked across the northern third of Alabama by CBS affiliate WHNT, which is owned by interests of the Bass Family. Those who were in the zone of censorship or who missed it, can catch the whole segment here8 CommentsEmail Post
Toggle Meta
Monday, December 10th
QuestionGirl December 10th, 2007 - 8:57 am
This will be another case of no consequences. Of course this administration is going to continue to do whatever they want, be it morally, ethically or criminally wrong……why wouldn’t they? There are NO consequences to them personally. WE, as a nation, will pay in so many ways, but not them. Thanks for the try Biden. But it won’t happen.
A Senate Democratic leader said Sunday the attorney general should appoint a special counsel to investigate the CIA’s destruction of videotaped interrogations of two suspected terrorists.
Sen. Joe Biden, a Democratic presidential candidate and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, cited Michael Mukasey’s refusal during confirmation hearings in October to describe waterboarding as torture.
Mukasey’s Justice Department and the CIA’s internal watchdog announced Saturday they would conduct a joint inquiry into the matter. That review will determine whether a full investigation is warranted. “He’s the same guy who couldn’t decide whether or not waterboarding was torture and he’s going to be doing this investigation,” said Biden, who noted that he voted against making Mukasey the country’s top law enforcer.
“I just think it’s clearer and crisper and everyone will know what the truth is … if he appoints a special counsel, steps back from it,” said Biden, D-Del.
That view was not shared fellow Democratic Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who said Congress can get to the bottom of the matter. “I don’t think there’s a need for a special counsel, and I don’t think there’s a need for a special commission,” he said. “It is the job of the intelligence committees to do that.”
More at the Washington Post
Leave a ReplyEmail Post
Toggle Meta
Tuesday, December 4th
QuestionGirl December 4th, 2007 - 11:46 am
Lock em up!
A New York Times Editorial:
Congress and the White House appear to be headed for a constitutional showdown. The House of Representatives is poised to hold Joshua Bolten, the White House chief of staff, and Harriet Miers, a former White House counsel, in contempt for failing to comply with subpoenas in the United States attorneys scandal. If the Justice Department refuses to enforce the subpoenas, as seems likely, Congress will have to decide whether to do so. Washington lawyers are dusting off an old but apparently sturdy doctrine called “inherent contempt” that gives Congress the power to bring the recalcitrant witnesses in - by force, if necessary.
What we know that Congress has learned in its investigation of the purge of nine top federal prosecutors is disturbing. Cases appear to have been brought against Democrats and blocked against Republicans to help Republicans win elections. The stakes have grown steadily: it now seems that innocent people, like Georgia Thompson, a Wisconsin civil servant, may have been jailed for political reasons. Congress has a duty to find out what happened.
Read more »
1 CommentEmail Post
Toggle Meta
Thursday, November 15th
Buck November 15th, 2007 - 7:28 pm
Oh, God! Bush promises to rebuild Justice Dept. Departments built up by Chimperz are known to be filled with sinister and incompetent personnel. Does the Justice Dept. have to go through this again? Hasn’t it gotten a big enough black eye under Bush’s watch all ready?
 New Attorney General Michael Mukasey speaks during his ceremonial swearing-in ceremony. Bush made the statement during the ceremonial oath-taking of new attorney general, Michael Mukasey. Mukasey promised to make sure the Justice Department follows an “unswerving allegiance” to the law and the Constitution.
My job involves not only an oath, but also a pledge, which I now give you. And that is to use all of the strength of mind and body that I have to help you to continue to protect the freedom and the security of the people of this country, and their civil rights and liberties, through the neutral and evenhanded application of the Constitution and the laws enacted under it.
-Michael Mukasey, new attorney general
Mr. Mukasey, I hope you’re being sincere. This country has been though enough. Take a few moments to reflect on the actions, and the eventual consequences, of the previous attorney general.
Leave a ReplyEmail Post
Toggle Meta
Friday, November 2nd
QuestionGirl November 2nd, 2007 - 10:18 am
|
Patrick J. Leahy
CHAIRMAN, D-VERMONT
Edward M. Kennedy
D-MASSACHUSETTS
Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
D-DELAWARE
Dianne Feinstein
D-CALIFORNIA
Russell D. Feingold
D-WISCONSIN
Charles E. Schumer
D-NEW YORK
Richard J. Durbin
D-ILLINOIS
Benjamin L. Cardin
D-MARYLAND
Sheldon Whitehouse
D-RHODE ISLAND
|
Arlen Specter
R-PENN. Ranking Member
Tom Coburn
R-OKLAHOMA
Orrin G. Hatch
R-UTAH
Charles E. Grassley
R- IOWA
Jon Kyl
R- ARIZONA
Jeff Sessions
R-ALABAMA
Lindsey Graham
R-SOUTH CAROLINA
John Cornyn
R- TEXAS
Sam Brownback
R-KANSAS
|
Democratic Phone: (202) 224-7703
Democratic Fax: (202) 224-9516
Republican Phone: (202) 224-5225
Republican Fax: (202) 224-9102
That they are even considering confirming a man who can’t bring himself to state that waterboarding is torture is not acceptable. We don’t need more of the same. Let your voice be heard.
10 CommentsEmail Post
Toggle Meta
Wednesday, October 24th
QuestionGirl October 24th, 2007 - 11:25 pm
Mike Mukasey, Bush’s nomination for attorney general, answering (or not) questions regarding whether waterboarding is constitutional. He claims not to know what waterboarding is, then when told what it is, he claims not to know if it’s torture or not, therefore he doesn’t know if it’s constitutional or not. Like Jonathan Turley stated, either way he’s no good. If he’s really that stupid as to not know what waterboarding is (and no one believes he is) then we don’t want him. If he’s lying (which anyone with a brain knows he is), then we don’t want him.
2 CommentsEmail Post
Toggle Meta
Tuesday, October 23rd
Buck October 23rd, 2007 - 1:44 pm
Politics should never play into a decision to prosecute. [S]adly, that appears to have been so in the case against Dr. Wecht.
-Dick Thornburgh, former Attorney General
Which reminds me, has anyone heard from Fredo lately? I wonder how he’s getting along…
Former Attorney General Raps White House
WASHINGTON (AP) — A Republican U.S. attorney general from the first Bush administration told a House panel Tuesday he thinks the Justice Department had political aims in prosecuting a high-profile Democratic coroner from Pennsylvania.
Dick Thornburgh, whose law firm is representing coroner Cyril Wecht in the pending trial and who acknowledged speaking as an advocate for Wecht, said the outspoken Democrat was “an ideal target for a Republican U.S. attorney trying to curry favor with a (Justice) Department which demonstrated that if you play by its rules, you will advance.”
[...]
Republicans shot back that Thornburgh was simply trying to help his client in a public forum where he knows the Justice Department cannot discuss the case, which is still awaiting trial.
“Your testimony to be blunt is the most pathetic example of … hearsay and innuendo that I’ve heard in my seven years on this committee,” said Rep. Ric Keller, R-Fla. “It’s so far fetched that I’m almost embarrassed being an attorney listening to it.”
BEN EVANS, Associated Press
Source: AP
Leave a ReplyEmail Post
Toggle Meta
Sunday, September 16th
Jim Swanson September 16th, 2007 - 11:58 pm
By DEB RIECHMANN,
Associated Press
WASHINGTON - President Bush has settled on Michael B. Mukasey, a retired federal judge from New York, to replace Alberto Gonzales as attorney general and will announce his selection Monday, a person familiar with the president’s decision said Sunday evening.
Mukasey, who has handled terrorist cases in the U.S. legal system for more than a decade, would become the nation’s top law enforcement officer if confirmed by the Senate. Mukasey has the support of some key Democrats, and it appeared Bush was trying to avoid a bruising confirmation battle.
The 66-year-old New York native, who is a judicial adviser to GOP presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani, would take charge of a Justice Department where morale is low following months of investigations into the firings of nine U.S. attorneys and Gonzales’ sworn testimony on the Bush administration’s terrorist surveillance program.
Key lawmakers, Democrats and Republicans alike, had questioned Gonzales’ credibility and competency after he repeatedly testified that he could not recall key events.
The White House refused to comment Sunday. The person familiar with Bush’s decision refused to be identified by name because the nomination had not been officially announced.
read more HERE
Leave a ReplyEmail Post
Toggle Meta
|
|
|
