Discourse.net

Jealous

How come Pakistan gets to force its President into a resignation under threat of impeachment?

Help Is On the Way

America’s Finest News Source, Bush Tours America To Survey Damage Caused By His Presidency

Don’t miss the map.

Dark Doings at the Pentagon

Scott Horton, Jim Haynes’s Long Twilight Struggle.

I wish we had more journalism like this.

Bush Scandals: 300 and Counting

Hugh’s List of Bush Scandals — 300 strong.

And, a printout of Hugh’s list displayed in an mall

Enjoy the State of the Union tonight. I’m taking a pass on it - like much of the rest of the country I’m pretty tired of that voice and that face.

Lies, Lies, Lies

Lies abound.

• Lies, Damned Lies, a Searchable Database of Lies — links to and describes a new database of Bush administration lies about Iraq
• Computers piece together millions of shredded Stasi documents — unraveling Communist lies
• Why similar forensics may be needed here in the USA: Plame Investigation and Missing Emails: Analysis on Emails

Disgusting

Bush Admin. admits to destroying e-mails from start of Iraq War, Leak of Valerie Wilson’s name and DOJ investigation of leak

Gov 101: comply with Presidential Records Act.

Bush 101: Lie like a rug. CREW’s list of Previous White House Statements that Conflict with Yesterday’s Filing:

• January 23, 2006 Letter from Patrick Fitzgerald (pdf)
• Video of April 13, 2007 White House Press briefing with Dana Perino
• Transcript of April 13, 2007 White House Press Briefing with Dana Perino
• CNN story from April 13, 2007 on missing White House emails
• December 20, 2007 Letter from Rep. Henry Waxman to White House Counsel (pdf)

They Can't Even Wiretap Properly

Our wiretap-happy government didn’t pay its wiretap bill.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Telephone companies have cut off FBI wiretaps used to eavesdrop on suspected criminals because of the bureau’s repeated failures to pay phone bills on time.

A Justice Department audit released Thursday blamed the lost connections on the FBI’s lax oversight of money used in undercover investigations. Poor supervision of the program also allowed one agent to steal $25,000, the audit said.

In at least one case, a wiretap used in a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act investigation “was halted due to untimely payment,” the audit found. FISA wiretaps are used in the government’s most sensitive and secretive criminal investigations, and allow eavesdropping on suspected terrorists or spies.

Lots more where that came from.

Be Thankful

Even when it’s difficult.

Worst. President. Ever.

George W. Bush has set a new record of unpopularity:

Bush reached an unwelcome record. By 64%-31%, Americans disapprove of the job he is doing. For the first time in the history of the Gallup Poll, 50% say they “strongly disapprove” of the president. Richard Nixon had reached the previous high, 48%, just before an impeachment inquiry was launched in 1974.

This seems as good an occasion as any to re-open the debate started here almost two years ago. In Discourse.net: Worst President Ever? I asked if GWB was the worst President ever. Readers were pretty persuasive that he was only a runner-up to James Buchanan.

But a lot has happened in two years: torture, politicization of every office of government, beating drums of war with Iran, poor management of relations with Pakistan, the dollar collapse, the deficit, the increasing inequality, the vetoes, the quagmire in Iraq (and the stop-losses), the forgetting of Afghanistan and New Orleans, one could go on and on and on.

So now I am prepared to remove the question mark.

What say you all?

500 Days To Go

By my count, a new administration will be inaugurated in ‘just’ 500 days. I count differently from some of the popular countdown clocks, because I know that inaugurations happen at noon, not midnight.

Political Prosecutions & the US Attorney Mess

Scott Horton, in the conclusion to an article on the parts of the US Attorney mess that we don’t think enough about:

Biskupic, Canary and Martin, among the group of U.S. Attorneys who have sold their professional souls, need to be put in a jail cell for thirty days to read Robert H. Jackson’s “The Federal Prosecutor.” It’s still the best statement of the ethical and professional responsibilities of a prosecutor that we have, and this crew make plain from their conduct that they haven’t an inkling of what their obligations to the country are. At this point I don’t know how many rotten eggs are out there, but one thing’s for certain: it’s not the dozen cashiered prosecutors we need to be worried about, but the more than eighty who were retained.

IDoTears.com

“I do tears.” - President George W. Bush

Yes, it’s enough to make you cry.

Iraq Vets Ask Bush to Stop Blocking Tillman Investigation

A group of Iraq War veterans invites you to sign on to their letter asking Bush to stop blocking the investigation into the death of Cpl. Pat Tillman.

Full text of the letter below.

President George W. Bush The White House
Washington, DC

Mr. President, Sir:

On behalf of the veterans of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, and those troops still in theater, we implore you to reconsider your decision to invoke claims of executive privilege in refusing to share vital documents regarding the death of Corporal Pat Tillman with the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

As you know, this week the Associated Press obtained the medical examiner’s finding at the time of his death that Corporal Tillman’s fatal wounds seemed to indicate shots fired from ten yards away, or less. The doctors who examined Corporal Tillman urged a criminal investigation into his death be opened at that time, and were refused. Since that time, the Department of Defense has put forth two explanations for the death of Corporal Tillman, the first of which was proven false, and a second which now seems to have been proven to be a lie, as well. In both cases, the White House has actively pushed these false findings to the public.

Your administration has faithfully shared a number of documents with the committee, but has withheld a number of requested documents under the specious argument that sharing the documents would violate confidentiality among you and your staff. For instance, the Committee has requested a number of communications between senior administration officials and the Pentagon, which may offer important details into the death of Corporal Tillman, and if there was an attempt to cover them up, by some in the Executive Branch.

Respectfully, Sir, when it comes to outright lies conveyed to the public about the death of a soldier - especially one like Corporal Tillman whose service was used as a recruiting poster for the military - there is nothing which cannot be shared with the Legislative Branch or the people.

Confidence in the institution of the military from those within is at stake, the longer you withhold information. The longer questions remain about the death of Corporal Tillman and possible White House involvement in an ensuing cover-up, the more our troops will question whether this government will properly honor their sacrifice and let their families know the truth, if they are killed in action. It is simply impossible for the military to function, if those in its ranks do not have full faith in our leadership up the chain of command, all the way to Washington.

Additionally, by letting questions fester regarding the death of Corporal Tillman, you are placing an undue burden on our recruiters, at a time when our Army and Marine Corps can ill-afford more of a drop off in recruiting. Our military depends on being able to visit homes and gaining the trust of mothers and fathers to allow their 18-year old son or daughter to wear the uniform. What mother would allow her son or daughter to serve a nation she feels will not honor her child’s service?

Finally, as Commander in Chief, you owe the complete and total truth to Corporal Tillman’s mother, Mary Tillman. Those of us who served know that it is the duty of any officer to write to the families of those under us who were killed, and tell them the entire truth regarding their love one’s death. To lie about any details or withhold any information would not just cause unjust pain to the survivors, but is to dishonor the fallen. As our nation’s top commander, it is your duty to Pat Tillman and his family to release all materials related to his death.

For the good of our military, our troops, the Tillmans, and our nation, we respectfully call on you to comply with all past and future requests of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on the matter of the death of Corporal Tillman.

Respectfully,

Jon Soltz
Chairman, VoteVets.org
Iraq War Veteran, US Army
New York, NY

Michael Breen
Former US Army Ranger
Iraq and Afghanistan War Veteran
Seattle, WA

Brandon Friedman
Iraq and Afghanistan War Veteran, US Army
Dallas, TX

Elliot Anderson
Afghanistan War Veteran, US Marine Corps
Las Vegas, NV

Lt. Col. Andrew Horne (ret.)
Iraq War Veteran, US Marine Corps
Louisville, KY

Peter Granato
Iraq War Veteran, US Army
Washington, DC

John Bruhns
Iraq War Veteran, US Army
Philadelphia, PA

Joseph Kramer
Iraq War Veteran, US Army
Pittsburgh, PA

Lies - Gonzales Must Go

Anonymous Liberal makes The Case Against Gonzales — and it’s a pretty powerful account that very strongly indicates he lied to Congress. Some, maybe most, of the lies technically may not be perjury as they were statements made while Gonzales was not under oath, but even so, telling a Senate committee lies is illegal, immoral, and ample reason for Gonzales to go.

Try here if cartoon doesn’t appear properly.

Patrick Tillman Was Murdered?

Firedoglake — BREAKING: A Whole New Level of Horror describes evidence that might lead one to believe Patrick Tillman was murdered.

Just writing that makes me feel like some Vint Vince Foster conspiracy nut.

But it comes from the AP:

Army medical examiners were suspicious about the close proximity of the three bullet holes in Pat Tillman’s forehead and tried without success to get authorities to investigate whether the former NFL player’s death amounted to a crime, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.

“The medical evidence did not match up with the, with the scenario as described,” a doctor who examined Tillman’s body after he was killed on the battlefield in Afghanistan in 2004 told investigators.

The doctors - whose names were blacked out - said that the bullet holes were so close together that it appeared the Army Ranger was cut down by an M-16 fired from a mere 10 yards or so away.

Are we to believe the White House covered up the fragging of a soldier because he was a well-known sports star? I suppose after war crimes, nothing is unimaginable any more.

(Except cannibalism, right? We don’t eat people, right?)

A Brief Survey of Briefings

Emptywheel (Marcy Wheeler) has done a fabulous bit of sleuthing, and posts the results at The Next Hurrah: The Briefing Dates.

The key point is that Congressional leaders were briefed about secret (and IMHO illegal) wiretap programs so long as the administration thought they were legal — but the briefings stopped when they started to have doubts:

For the first two years of the program, the Intelligence Committee leaders were briefed fairly regularly, at least every 6 months. (It was just the Intell leaders at that point, and not the party leaders, because BushCo went on a snit after Richard Shelby leaked the news that the NSA had had an intercept from Al Qaeda before 9/11, and cut back who it briefed even more than normal; finally, though, the leaders rebelled and they began to get briefed on the big secrets too.) And they seemed to be very diligent to make sure that everyone got equal briefing. For example, when Bob Graham missed the March 5, 2002 briefing, he got his own briefing not long thereafter.

The March 10 Meeting

But then, there was an unusually long gap between briefings, from July 17, 2003 to March 10, 2004, a gap of eight months rather than six. If they had followed the previous pattern, they would have done a briefing in January, 2004.

Note, this was right during the period when Jim Comey, Jack Goldsmith, and others, were recognizing that the program was illegal. So they didn’t brief Congress on the program when they discovered it was illegal, but rather let it go for two more months, until the day Comey refused to certify its legality, before they bothered to convene. Effectively, rather than warning Congress, they created a crisis, presumably creating more pressure on Congress to approve it.

Effectively, the March 10 meeting was Tom Dashcle’s only briefing on the program. Perhaps that’s why he forgets the meeting? Wouldn’t you think he’d remember it all the more?

Also note, Tom DeLay got his very own personal briefing on March 11, the day the program operated with no legal sanction. Oh to be a fly on the wall at that meeting…

Irregular Briefing

Things get a little sketchy after that. Congress did not receive a briefing after the crisis, so they presumably didn’t learn that the program operated illegally (well, maybe DeLay did, but he’s kind of fond of illegal activities). Just Pete Hoekstra got a briefing on September 24, 2004, and he presumably got that solely because he had just taken over as Chair of HPSCI after Porter Goss became DCI the day before. Harry Reid had to wait much longer—two months—before he was briefed on the program after becoming Minority Leader in the Senate in 2006. Effectively, though, the program went almost a full year (March 10, 2004 until February 3, 2005) before Congress was briefed on the program that had been found to be operating illegally.

All this has increased salience this week, because basket case Attorney General Gonzales testified that back when he was White House Counsel, he got an OK to proceed with a/the program from the Congressional leaders which led Gonzales and Card to ambush Ashcroft in intensive care.

There’s lots more in the original post. Sen. Rockefeller again emerges looking spineless on an intelligence issue. There is evidence for the proposition that Speaker Pelosi is smart as hell.

Lies, Lies, Lies

Firedoglake : Omerta

Here’s a tip for Bush Administration cronies:  if you are going to lie under oath, on the record, with a video camera in your face, don’t lie about something for which there is documentary evidence directly contradicting your statements.  It makes you look unprepared, panicked and sloppy.

Impeach Gonzales

• Daschle Calls Abu a Liar
• Depends On What The Definition Of Program Is
• Rep. Harman: White House Never Sought Approval For ‘Other Intelligence Activities’
• Contempt For Gonzales
• Alberto “Fredo” Gonzales — So What is Bush Saying?
• Impeach him, charge him with perjury, hold him in contempt … just do something
• Impeach Abu Already

It’s unanimous.

See also Andrew Cohen’s Rough Justice - The Case Against Alberto Gonzales: Part I | Part II | Part III | Part IV, plus Gonzo on the Hill: A Comedic Tragedy

More Dirt on Gonzales

Gonzales Knew About Violations, Officials Say

Two senior Justice Department officials said yesterday that they kept Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales apprised of FBI violations of civil liberties and privacy safeguards in recent years.

The two officials spoke in a telephone call arranged by press officials at the Justice Department after The Washington Post disclosed yesterday that the FBI sent reports to Gonzales of legal and procedural violations shortly before he told senators in April 2005: “There has not been one verified case of civil liberties abuse” after 2001.

It is a sign of how dysfunctional our government is that this man is still in office. ( Not to mention that the same questions must be asked about Gonzales’s boss.) The question presented is whether these are truly exceptional times, or whether the current crisis — the public’s complete loss of trust in the government, the government’s complete lack of interest in whether the public trusts it — is a sign of some deeper structural failing in our form of government.

Will Libby Escape Probation Too? Maybe Not

Meanwhile, Judge Walton asks if Libby is even eligible for probation when his sentence was commuted before he served it (the statute assumes that supervised release follows incarceration). He’s asked for briefs by Monday (Judge Walton’s order and further discussion at Scotus Blog, Sentencing Law and Policy, Big Tent Democrat and Firedoglake).

The good folks at Talkleft, however, think they have two plausible answers to this: (1) the day Scooter got booked counts as one day of incarceration for time-served credit, so that satisfies the statutory pre-requisite; (2) the statute doesn’t matter, because the commutation power is plenary, and the president can transmutate prison time into something less harsh (people can refuse pardons, so there is no risk that something harsher would be substituted). As a result, the statute prerequisite isn’t relevant here. Details at Suggestions for Judge Walton on Libby’s Supervised Release.

Daily Kos: Libby's "Pardon on the Installment Plan" == Sabotage of Investigation

Daily Kos: A Pardon on the Installment Plan

It should be noted, for future record, that the President of the United States has just used his power of clemency to sabotage an active criminal investigation into the office of his own Vice President. In some parallel universes, I have heard tell that such a thing was once itself considered corruption, or obstruction. It seems at minimum useful to put a footnote in the history books, somewhere, that such a remarkable thing could happen and still receive not merely praise, but unsheepish celebration among people who pretend nightly to be serious about such things.

I think almost everyone involved sees this as what it almost certainly is: Scooter Libby, loyal to the last, is getting his pardon on the installment plan. There is little advantage — and distinct disadvantage — for Bush to pardon the charges entirely, at the moment, but Bush indeed came through with an impeccably timed effort to ensure Libby faced no actual material consequences from his actions. Facing immediate jail time? Then kill the jail time. All of it, from day one onward. If Libby was in any actual danger of having to pay his $250,000 fine, there seems little doubt he would have seen that part of his sentence commuted as well.

But now Libby is in no imminent danger: problem solved. Bush has neatly and in one action removed any impetus for Libby — or anyone else — to cooperate with government investigators. There is no leverage a prosecutor can use against Libby, in order to gain a plea deal in exchange for information that he has so far refused to provide. Conservative backers have contributed more than five million dollars in a slush fund for Libby’s defense, and are eager to help him in his hour of need.

Still Steaming

Paris Hilton went to jail; Scooter walks (scoots?). He can thank the ‘Scooter commuter’. Or perhaps the mysterious inhabitant of the fourth branch.

Readings looking for irony may find it chez Atrios (“Inevitably, the subject of Marc Rich comes up every time presidential pardons come up. Without going into all of the issues, can we just remind the world that… Marc Rich’s lawyer was Scooter Libby.”) and also at Is That Legal?, which tells the instructive tale of Wilbert Lawrence.

Myself, I’m not looking for irony. Democratic spines would be nice.

The Framers Were Smart

Via a report written and released by the Judiciary Committee in 1974 in the aftermath of the Watergate crisis:

Comments in the state ratifying conventions also suggest that those who adopted the Constitution viewed impeachment as a remedy for usurpation or abuse of power or serious breach of trust. Thus, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina stated that the impeachment power of the House reaches “those who behave amiss, or betray their public trust.”⁶⁰ … In the same convention George Mason argued that the President might use his pardoning power to “pardon crimes which were advised by himself” or, before indictment or conviction, “to stop inquiry and prevent detection.” James Madison responded:

[I]f the President be connected, in any suspicious manner, with any person, and there be grounds to believe he will shelter him, the House of Representatives can impeach him; they can remove him if found guilty…⁶³

But will they?

When You Have No Shame, There Is No Limit On How Low You Can Go

The administration still hasn’t lost its capacity to amaze or to communicate in Newspeak.

It seems that the GW Bush “respects the jury’s decision” in the Libby case, but has decided to overturn it — by commuting Libby’s jail sentence.

So the good soldier, who took one for team by lying to the Justice Department, walks. His $250,000 fine will undoubtedly be paid by well-wishers or through speaker fees, so the net effect of the sentence is two years of probation and transfer to the talk show circuit.

I admit that when I first saw the headline, I thought it was a joke. But it’s real. Statement by the President On Executive Clemency for Lewis Libby (full text after the jump). No matter how low they go, they show they can go lower.

“Only a president clinically incapable of understanding that mistakes have consequences could take the action he did today. President Bush has just sent exactly the wrong signal to the country and the world. In George Bush’s America, it is apparently okay to misuse intelligence for political gain, mislead prosecutors and lie to the FBI. George Bush and his cronies think they are above the law and the rest of us live with the consequences. The cause of equal justice in America took a serious blow today.”

“The President’s commutation of Scooter Libby’s prison sentence does not serve justice, condones criminal conduct, and is a betrayal of trust of the American people.

“The President said he would hold accountable anyone involved in the Valerie Plame leak case. By his action today, the President shows his word is not to be believed. He has abandoned all sense of fairness when it comes to justice, he has failed to uphold the rule of law, and he has failed to hold his Administration accountable.”

“The President’s decision to commute Mr. Libby’s sentence is disgraceful. Libby’s conviction was the one faint glimmer of accountability for White House efforts to manipulate intelligence and silence critics of the Iraq War. Now, even that small bit of justice has been undone. Judge Walton correctly determined that Libby deserved to be imprisoned for lying about a matter of national security. The Constitution gives President Bush the power to commute sentences, but history will judge him harshly for using that power to benefit his own Vice President’s Chief of Staff who was convicted of such a serious violation of law.”

Note that Libby’s sentence was not excessive. It was within the (now non-binding) sentencing guidelines — and that Libby didn’t take responsibility for his crime. Which gives him a great deal in common with his bosses.

Note also that by commuting but not pardoning Bush (1) ensures that Libby won’t talk to prosecutors in the hopes of getting a lighter sentence; and (2) ensures that Libby retains the right to take the 5th is questioned by prosecutors or by Congress (modulo immunity…)

I don’t believe my role [as governor] is to replace the verdict of a jury with my own, unless there are new facts or evidence of which a jury was unaware, or evidence that the trial was somehow unfair.

[UPDATE: an astute commentator (‘The Editors’) corrects me regarding Bush’s Texas record: then-Gov. Bush did commute one death sentence but for which the execution total would have been 153. I didn’t know that and I am grateful for the correction.]

As Howard Dean said,

“Once again President Bush and the GOP have undermined a core American value: equal justice under the law for every American. By commuting this sentence, President Bush is sending a clear message that the rules don’t apply to the Bush White House or loyal Republican cronies. After promising that anyone who violated the law would be ‘taken care of,’ President Bush instead handed Scooter Libby a get out of jail free card. Though Libby was convicted by a jury of lying about a matter of national security, President Bush is sparing him the consequences ordinary Americans would face. This conviction was the first moment of justice in a Bush Administration void of accountability. It’s a sad day for America when the President once again puts protecting his friends ahead of equal justice under the law.”

Full text of Statement by the President On Executive Clemency for Lewis Libby:

I have said throughout this process that it would not be appropriate to comment or intervene in this case until Mr. Libby’s appeals have been exhausted. But with the denial of bail being upheld and incarceration imminent, I believe it is now important to react to that decision.

From the very beginning of the investigation into the leaking of Valerie Plame’s name, I made it clear to the White House staff and anyone serving in my administration that I expected full cooperation with the Justice Department. Dozens of White House staff and administration officials dutifully cooperated.

After the investigation was under way, the Justice Department appointed United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois Patrick Fitzgerald as a Special Counsel in charge of the case. Mr. Fitzgerald is a highly qualified, professional prosecutor who carried out his responsibilities as charged.

This case has generated significant commentary and debate. Critics of the investigation have argued that a special counsel should not have been appointed, nor should the investigation have been pursued after the Justice Department learned who leaked Ms. Plame’s name to columnist Robert Novak. Furthermore, the critics point out that neither Mr. Libby nor anyone else has been charged with violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act or the Espionage Act, which were the original subjects of the investigation. Finally, critics say the punishment does not fit the crime: Mr. Libby was a first-time offender with years of exceptional public service and was handed a harsh sentence based in part on allegations never presented to the jury.

Others point out that a jury of citizens weighed all the evidence and listened to all the testimony and found Mr. Libby guilty of perjury and obstructing justice. They argue, correctly, that our entire system of justice relies on people telling the truth. And if a person does not tell the truth, particularly if he serves in government and holds the public trust, he must be held accountable. They say that had Mr. Libby only told the truth, he would have never been indicted in the first place.

Both critics and defenders of this investigation have made important points. I have made my own evaluation. In preparing for the decision I am announcing today, I have carefully weighed these arguments and the circumstances surrounding this case.

Mr. Libby was sentenced to thirty months of prison, two years of probation, and a $250,000 fine. In making the sentencing decision, the district court rejected the advice of the probation office, which recommended a lesser sentence and the consideration of factors that could have led to a sentence of home confinement or probation.

I respect the jury’s verdict. But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive. Therefore, I am commuting the portion of Mr. Libby’s sentence that required him to spend thirty months in prison.

My decision to commute his prison sentence leaves in place a harsh punishment for Mr. Libby. The reputation he gained through his years of public service and professional work in the legal community is forever damaged. His wife and young children have also suffered immensely. He will remain on probation. The significant fines imposed by the judge will remain in effect. The consequences of his felony conviction on his former life as a lawyer, public servant, and private citizen will be long-lasting.

The Constitution gives the President the power of clemency to be used when he deems it to be warranted. It is my judgment that a commutation of the prison term in Mr. Libby’s case is an appropriate exercise of this power.

Truth, the Final Frontier

I haven’t been posting about the various GWB insanities regarding the Veep, Gonzales, the Prosecutors, etc. etc. because, well:

• I’m busy
• It’s all too depressing
• TPM & The Carpetbagger Report have been doing such a great job of it

Here’s part of an especially good one from Thecarpetbaggerreport, The truth is apparently out of the question:

The White House “offer” to the Senate Judiciary Committee was fairly straightforward: if members wanted to talk to WH staffers about the prosecutor purge, the discussions had to be a) private; b) not under oath; and c) without transcripts. It’s that last one that never made any sense.

Indeed, the Bush gang never even tried to rationalize it. That is, until today.

The White House organized a conference call this morning with an official who certainly appeared to be Counsel Fred Fielding, who finally shed some light on why the president would make staffers available for private interviews, but only if there was no transcript of their remarks.

“Obviously, there has been a lot of discussion back and forth in that regard. The position that the president took and conveyed to the committees and the offer of compromise did not include transcripts. The accommodation was designed to provide information, not to appear to be having testimony without having testimony. One of the concomitants of testimony, of course, is transcripts.

“As far as the debate goes, often cited is that a transcript is not wanted because otherwise there would be a perjury trap. And, candidly, as everyone has discussed, misleading Congress is misleading Congress, whether it’s under oath or not. And so a transcript may be convenient, but there’s no intention to try to avoid telling the truth.” (emphasis added)

Got that? As Fielding sees it, if there’s a written record of what Bush’s aides say, senators might have proof if they lie. It’s preferable, then, to have no record and simply assume that White House staffers are being honest. And if you disagree with any of this, you prefer “confrontation” to cooperation.

He did not appear to be kidding.

571 more long days until it’s over.

Did I Miss Nothing?

I’m back, I’m almost over jet lag, and almost caught up with the news, but not with all the things that piled up while I was away. Fortunately, Patrick has agreed to do a few more guest posts as and when the Supreme Court issues its final decisions of the regular term.

• The war continues, and the Congress continues to enable it.
• Alberto Gonzales is still Attorney General… although most of the senior people working for him are quitting either in disgust or (in the case of henchpeople) in fear.
• There are near-daily revelations about US misdeeds regarding legal or physical treatment of prisoners in Iraq, or in Guantanamo or in secret CIA prisons, or regarding the coverup of same.
• The Republican primary field appears as hapless as ever.

Gone-zales? Not yet.

Stuart Taylor Jr. isn’t pulling his punches. OPENING ARGUMENT: Another Gonzales Horror Story :

Every day that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is allowed to remain in office is corrosive to constitutional governance and an invitation to further politicization of the Justice Department.

And “X-Judge” H. Lee Sarokin asks What Do Alberto Gonzalez And A Chicago Divorce Lawyer Have In Common?, and answers as follows:

They both have demeaned the legal profession. A huge billboard in Chicago’s nightclub district proclaims: “Life’s short. Get a divorce” It features photographs of “a sexy, scantily clad woman on one side and a buff, bare-chested man on the other”. (NYTimes 5/13/07) No matter what the message or the motive of the messenger, no one can dispute the right of the lawyer to offer her wares in this fashion. It has met with considerable success. As with the Attorney General, apparently all things are to be judged by whether or not they are working, not whether they are right or wrong. Illegal wiretapping, secret prisons, torture, unlawful detentions, political firings of U.S. attorneys, suspension of habeas corpus, rejection of the Geneva Convention, and undoubtedly a host of other conduct yet to be revealed (such as a coercive hospital visit to the previous Attorney General seeking approval of an illegal wiretapping scheme) are all justified on the basis that no further attacks have occured since 9/11. Ergo, these tactics, like the billboard poster, are working, The only difference being that encouraging divorce is not illegal or unconstitutional, although in this administration it might be one day.

As to the firings of the U.S. attorneys, nothing infuriates me more than the party line that these are political appointments, and the President, as did President Clinton, can replace them all. Yes, these appointments are political as are those to the courts, but once appointed, U.S. Attorneys, Judges and Justices cease to be political agents. To do otherwise violates their oath of office. Prosecutors should not be dismissed for pursuing criminal conduct by members of the party in power or failing to pursue actions for the sole purpose of embarrassing the opposition and affecting the outcome of elections. Justice is not meant to be used as a political weapon.

So look for a billboard with that infamous picture of the hooded prisoner at Abu Ghraib on one side and a smiling picture of the Attorney General on the other saying: “Stop Terror. Torture Works”, because there is little that the current Attorney General does not have in common with the sleazy divorce lawyer.

But, GWB “stands by” Gonzales. And you can see why Bush stands by his man: it will be hard to find anyone to take the job, and the confirmation hearing for any but a top-drawer replacement will be … searching.

Cheap Laughs

This is sort of a cheap laugh, but the last line is really funny. YouTube - Godfather IV

ImpeachGonzales.org

See the video by ImpeachGonzales.org.

Another Horrible Story about Alberto Gonzales

I’m in Nashville for a couple of days of intensive meetings, so I don’t have the energy to blog about this important development in the Gonzales scandal: thanks to James Comey’s testimony before Congress, it seems that top officials in the White House, including then-counsel Gonzales were so anxious to keep on with a secret, illegal wiretapping program (whose details remain unknown) that the entire Justice Dept. opposed they tried to get Ashcroft to sign off on it while he was in intensive care. To his credit, Ashcroft, like Comey, refused.

The Comey video is at Talking Points Memo and some good discussions are in my brother’s column, and at Hullabaloo, Glenn Greenwald and FireDogLake.

It is now is impossible to dismiss the suspicion is that for more than two years — before the Justice Dept got around to complaining about it — there were illegal domestic wiretaps aimed at the Bush regime’s domestic opponents.

Previous post about James Comey: An Honest Man.

Waldmann's Rules

Robert’s Stochastic thoughts:

He who knows and knows that he knows is a Teacher. Learn from him.
He who knows not and knows that he knows not is a student. Teach him.
He who knows not and knows not that he knows not is a menace. Avoid him.
He who knows and knows not that he knows is our Attorney General. Impeach him.

Impeach Gonzales

This sort of complete incompetence — or dissembling under oath — ought surely to be impeachable.

Think Progress » Gonzales: “I Haven’t Really Thought About” Habeas Corpus:

At today’s House Judiciary Committee hearing, Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) asked Attorney General Alberto Gonzales whether any U.S. citizens are “being held today, for over a month, who have been denied habeas corpus or access to an attorney.” Instead of giving an answer, Gonzales replied, “[Y]ou’re asking me a question I hadn’t really thought about.”

Sherman then followed up and asked whether there any “U.S. citizens being held now by foreign governments or foreign organizations, without access to attorneys, as a result of rendition.” Gonzales again said, “It’s just — quite frankly, I hadn’t thought about this.”

Watch the clip.

Too True

This ‘Goofus & Gallant: A DOJ Human Resources Primer’ by Jesus’ General is much too true.

It seems there’s lots more rot to root out of DoJ. Don’t miss the newscast that Ann Bartow linked to in a comment yesterday: DoJ’s civil rights division isn’t hiring (m)any minorities for its criminal division. Only two black lawyers out of 50. A number lower than any time since 1978. Although the broadcast doesn’t say so in so many words, one gathers the overall number for the civil rights division including the civil side is better — or at least, the best in DOJ (whatever that means). But it’s hard to escape the suspicion that there’s a connection between the whiteness of the criminal division and this:

One Justice Department chart revealed that over a six-year period the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had referred 3,200 individual complaints of discrimination to the civil rights division for action. They have resulted in only six lawsuits for race discrimination.

It never ends…

"Gonzales" Is Now a Trope

NO QUARTER: Letter to George Tenet from “a group of former intelligence officers” including Ray McGovern and Larry Johnson.

It now turns out that you were the Alberto Gonzales of the intelligence community—a grotesque mixture of incompetence and sycophancy shielded by a genial personality.

What does it mean when your name has become a way to invoke “a grotesque mixture of incompetence and sycophancy” — and why is Gonzales still the Attorney General?

I know, I know, for the same reason the US Army is still in Iraq.

Perverting the Course of Justice

I have no idea who “looseheadprop” is, but he or she writes one heck of a great essay over at Firedoglake on The Federal Prosecutor. You should read the whole thing, but in case you’re lazy, here’s the conclusion:

In short, [then-Attorney General and later Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson saw] the Hatch [Act] as a good excuse for USAs and AUSAs to be able to fend off attempts by politicos to co-opt the awesome power of their office to achieve political ends.

For over a generation, it was these principals that were inculcated into DOJ lawyers serving in the USAOs. Young lawyers like Jim Comey cut their teeth on these ideals. And for my entire professional life, I have seen no other standard, nor ever guessed that any other standard might ever be applied.

Contrary to the gobbletygook, clapptrap, distortions and apparently outright lies being slung around these days; this is not a question of a change in style from a previous administration to the current one.

This is a wholesale departure from long established traditions and well settled fully functioning and successful policies that have served this nation well under both Republican and Democratic administrations since at least our grandparent’s day.

I don’t know what Jim Comey is going to say today. But I know that he was “brought up” as a lawyer in the same traditions that all federal prosecutors of my generation learned. I also know that I have long admired his integrity and courage and have long feared his wrath (not that it has ever been directed at me, but it is terrifying to witness).

As a side note, I was at the Law Day dinner at the Waldorf on May 1st. All the talk that night was on two topics: 1)The USA firing scandal/raping and pillaging of DOJ, and 2) an online petition that was circulated that day calling for the restoration of habeas corpus.

I am happy to report that lawyers, judges, and other public servants known to me to be registered republicans where amoung the most outraged with respect to the former, and amoung the ardent supporters of the latter.

This is not about political party any more. This is about the rule of law. It is also about whether we are a civilized country striving to reach our best aspirations or whether we have sunk into barbarism where might makes right and where the term “serves at the pleasure of the president” is twisted from a courtly expression used by one who would resign in protest if he could not in good conscience carry out a directive from the President which the appointee felt to be wrong, into an excuse, a coverup for nefarious meddling into the charging decisions made at the District level.

As Lord Moulton once famously observed

“The measure of a civilization is the degree of its obedience to the unenforceable.”

As opposed to the current administrations view “if is it is not a clear violation of an often used criminal statute, then it’s perfect;ly OK.” And even then they have some carve out exceptions for “quaint” crimes involving violations of the Geneva conventions.

I will leave you with one last, chilling thought form the eloquent Lord Moulton

“Tyranny is yielding to the lust of the governing.”

If you are a law professor, lawyer, or law student, please consider signing the online petition to Congress requesting that it restore habeas corpus.

Daily Show Genius

In light of the previous post, we have to say that the folks at the Daily Show are the best political scientists around.

Gonzales & the 8: Much Worse Than We Think?

If this latest Murray Waas story, NATIONAL JOURNAL: Secret Order By Gonzales Delegated Extraordinary Powers To Aides, has any truth, then the perversion of the course of justice at the DOJ was not just a quiet conspiracy but an open and notorious hijacking of the legal order.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales signed a highly confidential order in March 2006 delegating to two of his top aides — who have since resigned because of their central roles in the firings of eight U.S. attorneys — extraordinary authority over the hiring and firing of most non-civil-service employees of the Justice Department. A copy of the order and other Justice Department records related to the conception and implementation of the order were provided to National Journal.

In the order, Gonzales delegated to his then-chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson, and his White House liaison “the authority, with the approval of the Attorney General, to take final action in matters pertaining to the appointment, employment, pay, separation, and general administration” of virtually all non-civil-service employees of the Justice Department, including all of the department’s political appointees who do not require Senate confirmation. Monica Goodling became White House liaison in April 2006, the month after Gonzales signed the order.

The existence of the order suggests that a broad effort was under way by the White House to place politically and ideologically loyal appointees throughout the Justice Department, not just at the U.S.-attorney level. Department records show that the personnel authority was delegated to the two aides at about the same time they were working with the White House in planning the firings of a dozen U.S. attorneys, eight of whom were, in fact, later dismissed.

And, of course, this:

The senior administration official who had firsthand knowledge of the plan said that Gonzales and other Justice officials had a “clear obligation” to disclose the plan’s existence to the House and Senate Judiciary committees — but the official said that, as far as he knew, they had not done so.

I ought to be inured, but both parts of this — the order, and the cover-up, are so raw that I actually find it hard to believe.

Although it sure ties up a lot of loose ends…

Read the whole thing. Weep. Then get even.

What's Doing (Reptiles Dept.)

I just want to thank all the people who have kept the comments lively at The Buck Doesn’t Even Stop By For Visits while I’ve been somewhat distracted by work.

If I know what’s good for me, blogging will be light for the next few days — I have to write an exam and do major surgery to a paper.

The world certainly is doing its best, however, to be very distracting.

For one thing, there’s a good-sized scaly toothed reptile back in the campus lake. I saw about seven eights of it, but not the snout which it had lodged under something at the bank of the lake, so I don’t know if it’s a gator or a croc, but I’d guess gator. The whatever-it-was had beached the front of its face, nose first, only 100 feet or so from the Rathskeller where students were happily boozing it up on a Friday afternoon, but there was a campus cop keeping the passing students from getting too close. He didn’t seem to be enjoying the job, and gave a rather grim smile when I observed that the gator had a police escort.

Previous posts on our toothy friends include Crocodile Reminder, Crocodile Coincidence, What? A Croc?, Croc II !, Cold Front Flushes Out UM Croc, Fair Warning (Alligator Dept.), Who Gets Custody of the Alligator ? and of course Exam Question: Is an Alligator a Deadly Weapon?. It’s not an obsession, really, just a fact of life.

Speaking of reptiles, the DoJ has done another Friday evening document dump.

Speaking of sinking your teeth into things, or maybe it’s man-bites-dog, don’t miss Army Officer Accuses Generals of ‘Intellectual and Moral Failures’ an amazing article about a Lt. Col. attacking his superiors (generically, not by name) in a prestigious army journal for incompetence and dishonesty in their prosecution of the Iraq war and for misleading Congress about it.

“After going into Iraq with too few troops and no coherent plan for postwar stabilization, America’s general officer corps did not accurately portray the intensity of the insurgency to the American public,” he writes. “For reasons that are not yet clear, America’s general officer corps underestimated the strength of the enemy, overestimated the capabilities of Iraq’s government and security forces and failed to provide Congress with an accurate assessment of security conditions in Iraq.”

Yingling said he decided to write the article after attending Purple Heart and deployment ceremonies for Army soldiers. “I find it hard to look them in the eye,” he said in an interview. “Our generals are not worthy of their soldiers.”

Next to last, but not least, the Bush administration war on the rule of law continues apace with its latest attempt to make it impossible for lawyers to provide meaningful or effective representation for Guantanamo detainees. I would write about this but words fail me to describe the petty viciousness of this idea and the manifest hostility to the very due process that I would have thought was one of the great achievements of our civilization. The NYT has an editorial which says part of what needs saying; some more of it is found in this Conversation with Gitmo Lawyer on Proposed DOJ Rules. Don’t look to the Supreme Court to do anything fast — in tangentially related cases, it’s not rushing the process, which is Shakespearian in its delay:

“For who would bear the whips and scorns of time, The oppressor’s wrong, the proud man’s contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law’s delay,
The insolence of office and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,”

Meanwhile, only the willful blindness of one or two men (Bush, Chaney, take your pick), ensures that the US Army will continue to bleed itself dry in Iraq, to no visible benefit to anyone outside the White House. I understand that our departure could lead to horrors — and think we have a duty to mitigate them, especially be admitting a very large number of refugees here in order to protect all the people who have helped us. If there were a plausible scenario by which staying on would allow us to enact the ‘Pottery Barn rule’ (you broke it, you pay for it), I could support that. But the occupation is as big a failure as the initial military campaign was a success. No one arguing for staying on has a winning strategy that they can articulate other than “retreat is not an option”.

I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever.

The Buck Doesn't Even Stop By For Visits

I know that GW Bush says all kinds of strange stuff, but is this the strangest (I don’t mean most mendacious, that’s different) remark of his current term in office?

Bush said sympathetic to Tillman family. President Bush hopes someone is held responsible for the U.S. military’s mishandling of information about the death of former football star Pat Tillman in Afghanistan, the White House said Wednesday.

That sound you hear is brains leaking out all over America. See, the Tillman case involves many high-ranking people in the Army — Colonels and Generals and perhaps even high-ranking civilian officials — engaged in a knowing and willful conspiracy to cover up and then lie to the public about the circumstances of Pat Tillman’s death. There is a chain of command here, and someone is a the top of it, either someone in a uniform or someone in a Pentagon. And either way, they report to one GW Bush.

So if this GW Bush who so vaguely and generally “hopes” that “someone” is held responsible also hopes that the “someone” held responsible is the person who is in fact responsible, all that GW Bush would have to do is pick up the phone and make one — one! — phone call to the current Secretary of Defense, asking for the appropriate head on a plate.

• GW Bush doesn’t understand that he can give the Pentagon orders
• GW Bush thinks we don’t understand he is the titular and (should he choose to exercise the role) actual head of government in this country as well as the Commander-in-Chief
• GW Bush hopes very much that someone is scapegoated for the ongoing Tillman PR disaster, but doesn’t want to pick up the phone and order that the actual ringleader who ordered up this unnecessary and destructive piece of propaganda be unmasked because the truth (Rumsfeld? Cheney?) is too embarrassing.
• The words “someone” and “responsible” should not be used in the same paragraph as “GW Bush”.

DOJ: Democrats Need Not Apply

We knew that Justice Dept. higher-ups, yes under Ashcroft too, were giving ridiculous preferences to right-wingers for the Honors Program (the entry-level way into great jobs at the Justice Dept.). That was pretty bad.

But I at least had no idea as to just how bad things were at DoJ until I read this account of the overt, systematic, and successful effort to blackball all Democrats from the top entry-level civil service jobs at DoJ. (Text of the whistle-blowing letter to Congress, via the Politico of all places.)

Rots From the Head?

Talking Points Memo has an important point about the US Attorney firing scandal (“the Gonzales 8”): the White House has never denied that G.W. Bush participated in the decision.

And there’s mounting evidence that he did.

Isn’t it amazing that the press took a non-denial denial about Bush’s direct involvement in the firing decision (“Anything’s possible … but I don’t think so.” — Tony Snow) and just let the matter drop? Shouldn’t they be asking about this at every gaggle and press conference until they get a straight answer?

Lapdogs.

Fred Fielding Tries to Save His Reputation?

Heard an interesting snippet on NPR yesterday, and I found the transcriplt at NPR : Documents Show Justice Ranking U.S. Attorneys. Here’s the key quote:

In a letter Thursday, White House Counsel Fred Fielding told Congress he won’t budge from his original offer — to let Congress interview White House staffers privately, with no oath or transcript.

Sources tell NPR that Fielding actually wants to negotiate with Congress about how the interviews will take place. But Fielding has not been able to persuade President Bush to go along.

Assuming this is accurate, the most likely back story to this leak is that Fred Fielding is trying to save his reputation. And that means there’s some really bad stuff lurking behind the stonewall. It also fits the public image of Bush as stonewaller-in-chief. (Shorter GW Bush: ‘Congress, read my lips, no Iraq withdrawal. But come on by for a chat and I’ll be happy to harangue you as long as you listen quietly.’)

An alternate explanation for this story is that someone, perhaps Fielding perhaps someone else, is trying to put pressure on Gonzales or the White House to see reason. But I think that’s less likely here. In previous administrations, leaks like this used to be salvos fired in internecine wars among the palace guard. That’s been remarkably not the case in this administration due to a combination of exemplary message discipline and know-nothing disinterest in both reportage and reality. Then again, Fielding earned his chops in two of those earlier administrations…

Rove, the Plame Case & the Missing Emails

One stop shopppig for your informed Rove-Plame-email speculation: Firedoglake - The Case of Patrick Fitzgerald and the Missing Emails:

Did Fitzgerald know about the emails? I think he did, having learned about the emails from Adam Levine, though I think the 250 missing email pages came from the deleted WH emails. So does the discussion of the missing emails impact Fitzgerald’s case in any way? I don’t know. It seems that, at the very least, this confusion offers Waxman (or Conyers) an opportunity to renew his request to talk to Fitzgerald, at least about the limited scope of the email evidence turned over. And possibly, if Fitzgerald didn’t get to do the full forensic analysis of the GWB43 servers he might have liked to do in December 2005, this would offer a great opportunity to do so. After all, Fred Fielding can’t very well claim executive privilege prevents Fitzgerald from investigating the RNC servers, since BushCo has already turned over the crown jewels, the morning Vice Presidential Daily Briefings, so as to appear to be cooperating with Fitzgerald’s investigation. So by having Fitzgerald seize the RNC servers, rather than Waxman do it, you do it under the aegis of an ongoing criminal investigation.

Rove Knows How to Cover His Tracks

Kevin Drum points to a fascinating update on the email trail at The Washington Monthly,

MISSING EMAILS UPDATE….Remember all those missing emails the White House told us about yesterday? Turns out the RNC does have copies on its servers. Whew. Apparently, back in 2004, as part of the Valerie Plame investigation, Patrick Fitzgerald told them to stop deleting emails.

So they did. Except, it turns out, for Karl Rove’s emails, many of which are still missing. Now that’s just plain peculiar, isn’t it?

Fuller story at TMP Muckraker. It’s really worth reading.

I can say that I am very confident, very confident that … orders from Pat Fitzgerald were the reason for the change in White House policy in 2004. So the change in policy was tied to yet another criminal investigation of the White House. And the White House and the key employees in question — namely Karl Rove and people working for him at the White House political office — were specifically on notice not to destroy the emails they sent through the RNC servers. And yet they took affirmative steps to continuing destroying them, even after all of this had happened.

CREW Says White House "Lost" 5 Million Emails

CREW says,

Through two confidential sources, CREW learned that the Executive Office of the President (EOP) has lost over FIVE MILLION emails generated between March 2003 and October 2005. The White House counsel’s office was advised of these problems in 2005 and CREW has been told that the White House was given a plan of action to recover these emails, but to date nothing has been done to rectify this significant loss of records.

Full report on the legal background online too.

5,000,000 in 30 months. That’s 166,666/month. Or about 5,500 per day. How many people is that?

Update: Some relevant data on that question.

History Repeats Itself

SO, those RNC emails that Karl Rove et all were sending each other about official business while staying off the radar of the official archives…. It seems that a bunch of them were accidentally deleted.

The White House said Wednesday it had mishandled Republican Party-sponsored e-mail accounts used by nearly two dozen presidential aides, resulting in the loss of an undetermined number of e-mails concerning official White House business.

…

[WH spokesman Scott] Stanzel said he could not speak to whether anyone was intentionally trying to avoid White House archiving because he had not spoken to all those involved.

Stanzel said some e-mails have been lost because the White House lacked clear policies on complying with Presidential Records Act requirements.

Before 2004, for instance, e-mails to and from the accounts were typically automatically deleted every 30 days along with all other RNC e-mails. Even though that was changed in 2004, so that the White House staffers with those accounts were excluded from the RNC’s automatic deletion policy, some of their e-mails were lost anyway when individual aides deleted their own files, Stanzel said.

He could not say what had been lost, and said the White House is working to recover as many as they can. The White House has now shut off employees’ ability to delete e-mails on the separate accounts, and is briefing staffers on how to better make determinations about when — and when not — to use them, Stanzel said.

Watergate anyone?

History repeats itself, the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.

I take it this is the first time?

More Fallout From Gonzales 8 Scandal

The Gonzales 8 scandal has two sides: the improper firings and the improper hirings. So far, most of the heat and light has been on the firings. That may change in light of what we are learning about the people parachuted in to US Attorney jobs without Senate confirmation — and about the people retained.

There have been reports that Little Rock’s interim U.S. Attorney J. Timothy Griffin may have seriously exaggerated his prosecutorial experience,

The 38-year-old Griffin claims on his official Web site that he prosecuted 40 criminal cases while at Ft. Campbell, where he was stationed from September 2005 to May 2006. But Army authorities say Ft. Campbell’s records show Griffin only serving as assistant trial counsel on three cases, none of which went to trial.

Griffin didn’t agree to be interviewed about his claim of 40 criminal prosecutions versus the Army’s confirmation of three cases, all of which were settled as plea bargains. But Cherith Beck, a Griffin spokeswoman, suggested that Griffin’s higher number might refer to all cases he worked on in any capacity.

“Just wanted to clarify, make sure you had an understanding that prosecuted means it’s a case he handled while he was there; it doesn’t mean that it went to trial necessarily,” Beck said. “Prosecuted means he handled those cases in one form or another.”

Sorry, but few if any lawyers would equate touching the case file with the claim that someone “prosecuted” a case.

[updated] And now we learn this about the interim recently-confirmed, leading to a controversial swearing-in US Attorney in Minneapolis, via Firedoglake (collecting sources from around the net),

four top assistants to U.S. Attorney Rachel Paulose have stepped down from their [administrative] positions.

…. First Assistant Attorney John Marti, Criminal Division Chief Jim Lakner, Civil Division Chief Erika Monzangue, and Administrative Officer Tim Anderson all left their posts Thursday.

Political insiders have criticized Paulose’s rise to the U.S. Attorney’s position as a political favor to the Bush Administration. She is just 34-years old and has worked directly for the same justice department officials who are currently under fire as part of the national U.S. Attorney’s office scandal.

…

Paulose was a special assistant to Alberto Gonzales and apparently big buds with none other than 5th amendment invoker Monica Goodling.

Meanwhile, Gonzales is stonewalling on the release of the less sanitized documents.

This week also saw the very rare, even stunning, action by the 7th circuit ruling from the bench to free a defendant from what many claim was fallout from a political prosecution against a prominent Democrat based on very scant evidence. Rather than try to quote you all the details, read about it at Figure in Travelgate ordered released by end of business today: Fed Appeals Court Unimpressed by Biskupic’s Politically Motivated Prosecution. Note that the US Attorney in this case, Steven M. Biskupic, was not. as far as we know, on the DOJ/Rove short list for removal — a “loyal Bushie” perhaps?

Poetic Justice

This piece of poetic justice regarding the Justice Department’s difficulties caused by attempts to come up with something to justify the firing of a US Attorney deserves to appear on Google as a definition of the phrase Hoist by their own petard.

Yet Another DoJ Document Dump

A third batch of documents dumped by DoJ in the Gonzales 8 scandal.

On review, it appears that certain statements in the February 23 letter are contradicted by Department documents included in our production in connection with the Committees’ review of the resignations of U.S. Attorneys. We sincerely regret any inaccuracy.

Update: Here’s why the new documents matter.

Still waiting for the White House documents…

Update: It seems the really good documents may be hiding at gwb43.com.

Gonzales Tries the 'Pure Heart Empty Head' Defense

The law as a rule frowns on the ‘pure heart, empty head’ defense, which is how we lawyers refer to claims that “I meant well; I didn’t know it was wrong to borrow from the pension fund.”

Yet, amazingly, our Attorney General is now asserting a defense for the firings which is no more than that.

Gonzales: Firings were not improper Gonzales: What I can say is this: I know the reasons why I asked you — these United States attorneys to leave. And it — it was not for improper reasons. It was not to interfere with the public corruption case. It was not for partisan reasons.

…

[NBC’s Brian Pete] Williams: To put this question another way — if you didn’t review their performance during this process, then how can you be certain that they were fired for performance reasons?

Gonzales: I — I’ve given — I’ve given the answer to the question, Pete. I know — I know the reasons why I made the decision. Again, there’s nothing in the documents to support the allegation that there was anything improper here. And there is an internal — department review to answer that question, to reassure the — the American people that there was nothing improper that happened here.

Got that? I had no role in the decision, I just signed off on it. I don’t know how they came up with that list, but since I could never possibly have meant anything bad or partisan, and because I never had the brains to make any connection between the names on that list and high-profile Republican prosecutions, the public should give me credit for my pure heart regardless of whether there was anything in my brain.

Come on America. Leaving aside the rather dubious credibility of the claim that Gonzales is this clueless and dumb, can we afford an AG whose defense against charges of unethical and probably criminal activity is … blithering ignorance?

The Brits have a name for what Gonzales is claiming — “Nelsonian Knowledge,” based on the famous incident in which Admiral Nelson put a telescope to his blind eye so that he could say, “I see no ships signals”:

It is dishonest for a man deliberately to shut his eyes to facts which he would prefer not to know. If he does so, he is taken to have actual knowledge of the facts to which he shut his eyes. Such knowledge has been described as “Nelsonian knowledge”, meaning knowledge which is attributed to a person as a consequence of his “wilful blindness” or (as American lawyers describe it) “contrived ignorance”.
—Twinsectra Limited v Yardley and Others, [2002] UKHL 12, at para. 112.

All this aside, given Gonzales’s personal history as GWB’s legal valet, it’s hard to believe he lacked genuine, rather than merely Nelsonian, knowledge of what he was signing and why. Either way he doesn’t deserve to stay in office; I suppose, though, the difference might matter to a grand jury.

Another WH Document Dump

Late Friday? After the networks and the newspapers’ deadlines? Must be time for another White House document dump.

McClatchy kindly puts some pdf’s online:

• PDF | Documents released 3-23-07 (1)
• PDF | Documents released 3-23-07 (2)
• PDF | Documents released 3-23-07 (3)
• PDF | Documents released 3-23-07 (4)
• PDF | Documents released 3-23-07 (5)
• PDF | Documents released 3-23-07 (6)
• PDF | Documents released 3-23-07 (7)
• PDF | Documents released 3-23-07 (8)
• PDF | Documents released 3-23-07 (9)
• PDF | Documents released 3-23-07 (10)
• PDF | Documents released 3-23-07 (11)

McClatchy also has a first take on their significance, Documents highlight Gonzales’ role in the firings. Among them,

The latest documents also raise new questions about how involved White House political operatives were in the decision to fire the prosecutors.

In a Dec. 3, 2006, e-mail released Friday night, Scott Jennings, one of presidential adviser Karl Rove’s aides, asked Sampson if he had a list of “all vacant, or about-to-be vacant, US Attorney slots.” Jennings’ request came on a Sunday, so Sampson offered to send it to him the next day.

Jennings, a political operative, had earlier passed along complaints from Republican Party activists about U.S. Attorney David Iglesias, who was fired from his job in New Mexico. Some Republicans were angry that Iglesias hadn’t been more aggressive in investigating Democrats.

The e-mails also show that administration officials struggled to find a way to justify the firings and considered citing immigration enforcement simply because three of the fired prosecutors were stationed near the border with Mexico. While the e-mails don’t provide evidence of partisan motives for the firings, they seem to undercut the administration’s explanation that the prosecutors were dismissed for poor performance.

Gonzales Red-Handed

On March 13. I rashly predicted Gonzales wouldn’t last two weeks. Then Bush had his petulant press conference, made his crazy proposal for the Senate to invite Rove and Miers to lie to them, and gave Gonzales a new lease on life.

But leases on life may have a short half-life. Although I’m starting to suspect I was a little optimistic, you have to wonder how Gonzales can survive revalations that contrary to his earlier statements Gonzales was in fact much more involved in discussions about firing the US Attorneys than he admitted:

Documents Show Attorney General Alberto Gonzales Approved Firings of Several U.S. Attorneys

WASHINGTON - Attorney General Alberto Gonzales approved plans to fire several U.S. attorneys in a November meeting, according to documents released Friday that contradict earlier claims that he was not closely involved in the dismissals.

The Nov. 27 meeting, in which the attorney general and at least five top Justice Department officials participated, focused on a five-step plan for carrying out the firings of the prosecutors, Justice Department officials said late Friday.

There, Gonzales signed off on the plan, which was crafted by his chief of staff, Kyle Sampson. Sampson resigned last week amid a political firestorm surrounding the firings.

The documents indicated that the hour-long morning discussion, held in the attorney general’s conference room, was the only time Gonzales met with top aides who decided which prosecutors to fire and how to do it.

Justice spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos said it was not immediately clear whether Gonzales gave his final approval to begin the firings at that meeting. Scolinos also said Gonzales was not involved in the process of selecting which prosecutors would be asked to resign.

On March 13, in explaining the firings, Gonzales told reporters he was aware that some of the dismissals were being discussed but was not involved in them.

Even if the Attorney General lacked the requisite intent to in fact be guilty of a criminal act when he approved the results of a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, he has by his series of prevarications achieved negative credibility with Congress, with the press, and now with the nation.

Alberto Gonzales must go. Swiftly.

Ron Zeigler Was Nothing

I think this response by Tony Snow during yesterday’s TV interview with Harry Smith on CBS deserves to be considered a classic bit of obfuscation and non-denial denial.

Smith: “Karl Rove wasn’t involved? Harriet Miers wasn’t involved? C’mon!”

Snow: “This is where what you’re trying to do is create a narrative that I’m not so sure the facts are going to justify. This is why what we’re trying to do is get everybody to figure out what’s the deal.”

Snow here is all but bragging that he doesn’t know the facts. And guessing about them. But he’s not saying he’s going to find them out either. The White House Press Secretary surely has some way of finding out the answer to this rather obvious question. Couldn’t he ask Rove and Miers and then tell us? You would think.

Then again, maybe couldn’t. After all, Rove and Miers would not be under oath when they speak to Snow.

Meanwhile, CREW asks, New e-mails prompt the question: Did Bush make the decision to fire the U.S. Attorneys?

And, one account of what Tony Snow has in common with a pet albino hedgehog.

More On Scandal One-Liners

“Even in Guantanamo, when they have secret hearings they keep a transcript.”

Update: Robert Waldman writes, “If only the rule of law were respected in the USA the way it is respected here in Italy. And no I never expected to write that ever.”

One-liners About Latest Scandal

“What is it about ‘So Help Me God’ that Rove and Bush find so offensive?”

And, from TPM: “Bush: We were concerned about the lack of prosecutions of bogus voter fraud claims.”

The Cocktail Party Strategy

The White House’s offer to the Senate that it would make Rove and Miers available only for a secret off-the-record no-oath “chat” — something with the legal value of cocktail party chatter — is risible. And even if the Crawford gang hasn’t figured out that others are wise to their game, surely Fred Fielding understands that. So they can’t seriously believe that the Senate will take such an insulting offer.

Which raises the question of why the White House is proffering such a silly idea. What have they been drinking? I can only think of three possible justifications for this strange move:

1. This could be a pure, cynical PR ploy to attempt to look reasonable. Given how CNN swallowed it hook line and sinker (“unprecedented access to Justice Department documents” — missing the point that the offer, which is far from unprecedented, doesn’t include access to the key White House documents) this has to count as the most generous explanation.

2. The staff gets it, but the boy in the bubble doesn’t get it, and he overruled the staff.

3. The truth is so awful, that Rove can’t be allowed near a Bible. If nothing else, he’d be taking the Fifth over and over again.

I’ve heard a fourth explanation, but it’s so crazy, that only someone who thought that the administration was hell-bent on creating disasters would believe it:

4. The administration wants to create a Constitutional crisis. It thinks it will win any votes in the Senate as it only needs a third plus one, and also win the in court of public opinion just like Clinton did (see “bubble” at (2) above). And the hardliners (Cheney) think that the precedents set by previous administrations of recognizing that senior appointees can be required to testify was mistaken; what’s more they think that their hand is strong enough to allow them to rectify this. In short, they see Congress much as they saw Iraq.

Say it ain’t so.

White House Offers to Have Rove, Miers Lie to Congress in Secret Session

Congress is getting ready to subpoena Rove and Miers, which likely will trigger a claim of executive privilege and at least a messy court action if not a political showdown. So the White House comes out with its counter-offer: they’ll testify in secret session, so long as there is no transcript and they’re not under oath.

Translation: we want to be able to lie to Congress in a way that creates neither liability nor evidence — so we can lie about our lying after the fact and no one can prove us wrong.

This is beyond chutzpah!

Document Dump - First Impressions

Haven’t read them all yet, but so far this White House document dump is mostly multiple copies of dull things. You have to wonder why they couldn’t have dumped these on Friday as originally planned … were they busy arguing over which of the good ones to take out?

Anyway, the Left Coaster has a nice summary of the only interesting items I’ve noticed so far, an extended correspondence with and about Margaret Chiara from the Western District of Michigan. Basically, main Justice was willing to trash her reputation behind her back, but not to her face. And indeed, they were willing to appoint her as a trainer of other prosecutors, so either they didn’t think she was that bad or they were happy to pay hush money as long as she avoided the press. See US Attorney Purgegate - Margaret Chiara for the details. No one comes out looking particularly good.

Get Your Data Dump Here

The House Judiciary Committee is putting .pdf files of the latest White House documents online at the committee’s homepage.

Here’s what they’ve got so far; I assume there’s lots more coming:

3-19-2007 DOJ-Released Documents 1-1

3-19-2007 DOJ-Released Documents 1-2

3-19-2007 DOJ-Released Documents 1-3

3-19-2007 DOJ-Released Documents 1-4

3-19-2007 DOJ-Released Documents 1-5

3-19-2007 DOJ-Released Documents 1-6

Gonzales Countdown In Progress

Gonzales (political) death watch now underway.

Meanwhile, the White House has emitted a mega document dump (several days behind schedule — it had been planned for the Friday after 5pm news graveyard). Letting it all hang out in an attempt to cauterize the wounds or more selective disclosure?

Not that anything short of Rove quitting is going to stop Senators from serving subpoenas. Which, if they reach Rove will be resisted and will create some interesting lawsuits.

With Gonzales all but gone, it’s open season on speculation for replacements. Former Solicitor General Olson (the most confirmable)? DHS Sec Chertoff (that could be a fun hearing)?

Gonzales Flops

Alberto Gonzales solidified his reputation as an incompetent with a breathtakingly unsuccessful press conference this afternoon, but it remains to be seen if he ends up looking more like a terminal naif, a shifty crook or, most likely, a political tool.

The great folks at