Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Probe of DOJ Political Firings Enters Dangerous Phase

Posted by David Iglesias, Huffington Post at 12:58 PM on October 14, 2008.


A U.S. Attorney fired for not prosecuting voter fraud says a new special counsel could bring indictments of top Bush administration officials.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Election 2008 in your
mailbox!

 

Recent developments brought a dangerous new turn to the on-going United States Attorney and Justice Department disaster. Based on the evidence, career, non-partisan investigators recommended the appointing of a special prosecutor to determine whether criminal laws were violated in my ouster and that of my colleagues. No longer just a civil matter to blithely ignore, this ominous development could result in current and high level officials being indicted for crimes. I suspect the special counsel will "follow the emails" in the way that "follow the money" brought down Nixon's men during Watergate.

The Justice Department's independent watchdog offices, the Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility, finished the definitive investigation about the firings, stating that U.S. Attorneys may not be removed for an "illegal or improper reason." I was not disappointed or surprised by the findings contained in its blistering report which I cooperated with fully. Every reason given for my ouster was examined and rejected as "disingenuous after-the-fact rationalizations" by former Justice Department personnel, thus sounding the death knell to my alleged "performance-related" problems. More importantly, the firings of my colleagues and me "severely damaged the credibility of the Department and raised doubts about the integrity of Department prosecutive decisions" according to the investigation. Several Republican officials took key roles damaging America's premier crime fighting organization.

The 392-page report described a "fundamentally flawed" process of termination, one in which politics were allowed to overrule the historic independence of U.S. Attorneys. Pat Rogers, the New Mexico Republican committeeman, despite his incessant drone of criticism, curiously refused to cooperate with the Justice Department investigators, as did Senator Pete Domenici, his chief of staff Steve Bell, former White House Advisor Karl Rove, former White House Counsel Harriet Miers, and former DoJ official Monica Goodling. The Attorney General, Michael Mukasey called it straight, the removals were "haphazard, arbitrary and unprofessional". He further stated the reputations of the terminated US Attorneys were "unfairly tainted by the removals and their aftermath."

The local New Mexico GOP power brokers, on the other hand, did not care about the evidence, all they cared about was partisan wins, by any and all means. Rogers, former Republican Committeeman Mickey Barnett and New Mexico Republican Chairman Allen Weh among others,will never get it. Once in office, United States Attorneys, like federal judges, are required to stay out of politics. We were not like other political appointees since we are the only presidential appointees that have the power to take away a citizen's life, liberty, property and reputation. This is an awesome responsibility and must be administered fairly and without consideration of partisan gain.

Independence is not just a town in Missouri, it is the lifeblood of a prosecutor who must base his or her decisions solely on the law and evidence. Yet, Rogers, Weh, and Barnett with zero experience as prosecutors thought they knew best. Based on rumor and innuendo, they and others tried to improperly influence me to file cases that were non-provable or not ready to indict. This type of reprehensible practice may be acceptable in corrupt third world countries but it has no place in the United States where we venerate the rule of law and the Constitution.

The DoJ investigation was unsparing in its harsh criticism of our removals. The report summarized the issue succinctly, "If a U.S. Attorney must maintain the confidence of home-state political officials to avoid removal, regardless of the merits of the U.S. Attorney's prosecutorial decisions, respect for the Department of Justice's independence and integrity will be severely damaged and every U.S. Attorneys' prosecutorial decisions will be suspect. The longstanding tradition of integrity and independent judgments by Department prosecutors will be undermined, and confidence that the Department of Justice decides who to prosecute based solely on the evidence and the law, without regard to political factors, will disappear." This is the touchstone of our criminal justice system, without which we are slouching towards institutional corruption.

I pledge my full cooperation with Special Counsel Nora Dannehey, a career federal prosecutor. One thing is for certain; I will not second guess, criticize or attempt to improperly influence her in the way that Republican officials attempted to do to me. I've learned many lessons these past eighteen months -- prosecutorial independence is not a talking point and seeking justice can never be viewed as a political "wedge" issue.

Digg!

Tagged as: voter fraud, department of justice, us attorney firings, david iglesisas, special counsel, inspector general

David C. Iglesias was the United States Attorney for the District of New Mexico between 2001 and 2007. His is the author of the book, "In Justice: Inside the Scandal that Rocked the Bush Administration."


Democratic Senators: Franken Won't Be Seated with New Class
Fallout from the surreal political scandal in Illinois has now wafted into Minnesota.
Post by Sam Stein and Ryan Grim. January 6, 2009.
Update: Al Franken Declared Winner; Coleman's Options Dwindle
"Today, the Supreme Court once again affirmed the validity of the rules under which this recount was conducted."
Post by Steve Benen. January 5, 2009.
Franken Winning Vast Majority of Wrongly Rejected Absentee Ballots
Norm Coleman's lawyers tried to stop the counting of hundreds of wrongly rejected absentee ballots and now we know they had good reason.
Post by tremayne. January 3, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
DOJ is toxic
Posted by: weathered on Oct 14, 2008 2:15 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mukasey is dirty and he was inserted to keep it that way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Missing Words
Posted by: Xynyx on Oct 14, 2008 3:24 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"This type of reprehensible practice may be acceptable in corrupt third world countries but it has no place in the United States where we venerate the rule of law and the Constitution."

I think this statement is missing the words "used to".

It should read, "This type of reprehensible practice may be acceptable in corrupt third world countries but it has no place in the United States where we used to venerate the rule of law and the Constitution."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And another thing...
Posted by: Xynyx on Oct 14, 2008 3:37 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"prosecutorial independence is not a talking point and seeking justice can never be viewed as a political "wedge" issue"

OK. Perhaps. This is sort of in the same place as the Stephen Branchflower Troopergate Report. Sarah Palin violated ethics rules (and therefore, as I read it, Alaska statute) in the manner in which she exercised her proper authority. She didn't break the law by firing Monegan. She broke the law (or the ethics code) by doing so for personal reasons. It's a very fine, subtle differentiation, but it's clear enough to me.

The same thing can happen here. It's clear that going after the people responsible for such abuses of power should be done for the purpose of seeking justice alone, and not for political gain. Ethical considerations require that such pursuit should be completely non-partisan.

HOWEVER, there is no harm in publicizing the very clear fact that this entire mess was instigated by Republicans for the purpose of gaining political power. THIS should be used not just as a wedge issue... it should be used as a Holy Fucking Cudgel, and any Republicans unwilling to show adequate remorse over the issue should be severely beaten with it, just like the Catholic Church needed to be beaten for not being able to come out and unequivocally state that the molesting of altar boys was not OK.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Cape Fear, Damnit!
Posted by: johnjmccarthy on Oct 15, 2008 5:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All attorneys should see the movie Cape Fear, the newer one with Nick Nolte and Robert Dinero.

That will keep the cheezy bastards looking over their shoulders for a few years, at least.

The leagle beagles who live on the edge of Constitutional and Criminal Law need to take a deep breath and wonder where 'justice' will find them.

All those 'serving at the pleasure' of a given president should have the moral courage to say NO to the political/criminal administration of 'justice'.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

sickofsleaze
Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com on Oct 15, 2008 5:54 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In this case the operative word is COULD.Not WILL.
I will not hold my breath or bet my hard-earned money that I will see happen in my lifetime

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Maybe...
Posted by: VickyinSD on Oct 15, 2008 8:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We'll get the opportunity to watch as the guilty officials at the top of the list are prosecuted on criminal charges instead of receive govt. pensions!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nice article, wrong tense.
Posted by: redroadtraveler on Oct 15, 2008 8:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well, David, welcome to your awakening to what REALLY goes on in the "Just Us" department.

I spent four years in federal prison, plus three years on "supervised release" (something I didn't even know existed until it was pronounced on me) for a crime I didn't commit. My prosecuter committed purjury and obstruction of justice. When I confronted him with this, he simply sneered, laughed in my face, and said "WE don't have to FOLLOW the law, we ARE the law!"

This was fifteen years ago, and the system has only gotten worse.

Welcome to the real world, David. Keep up the fight, though. I hope it brings down some of the top dogs who aid and abet that line of thinking and action.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Amazing.
Posted by: Quannah on Oct 15, 2008 11:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look what is happening "under the radar" while the media focuses on "Race in Politics," and "William Ayers and Rev. Wright," and "ACORN," and on and on and on...

It is things like this that should be the focus of our media. The fact that senior officials of the Executive Branch could be indicted for criminal wrongdoing should be FRONT-PAGE NEWS!

Forshame.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Amazing. Posted by: willymack
» RE: Amazing. Posted by: Quannah
I''l say it again... all our problems started with the Nixon administration...
Posted by: Bearzerker on Oct 15, 2008 3:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...as the powers behind the US Imperial throne, poured the foundation which we are living today!

Nixon's two-faced political decisions started the DEA as a boondoggle to pay off and entrench rethugnican ideological within the once non-political civil service...

the once noble ideals of republicans were sold off to the highest bidders thus starting the lobby wars which then changed the course of politics through out the EMPIRE!

Nixon killed off NASA and the dream of Kennedy's manned space exploration... the moon base and a manned landing on mars, all because NASA was the real life creation of then Vice President Johnson... what a vindictive scumbag!

he then went and did an end run on pot prohibition by burying the senate report on Hemp prohibition and then creating the DEA which was manned by republican purists.

read your history people and connect the dots...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

StarGzrMan
Posted by: StirMan on Oct 15, 2008 8:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You bet'cha SickOfSleaze . . . I'm still waiting for Wexler's impeachment movement to survive the election. I live on one-third the poverty level in part due to suffering Post Polio Syndrome—which is so defined that approval of disability benefits (Unless maybe the judge is either a Republican saint or a middling Democrat) is "rather" unlikely—BUT, nonetheless, I have donated $100 (and will try to squeeze out more) to Wexler's campaign. Pitch in if you care. He and Dennis seem to be the only straight up guys left in the foulbrood infected congressional malignancy. I never thot to live to attend the wake for America . . . but with PPS, heart disease, GHERD, skin cancer . . . and being as old as McBeth, it's gonna be close.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: StarGzrMan Posted by: Quannah