Atty General Gonzales Should Resign

[QueEx]

<font size="5"><center>
Mukasey Refuses to Prosecute Bush Aides</font size></center>

Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey
cited a 1984 opinion. (Chip Somodevilla
- Getty Images)


Washington Post
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, March 1, 2008; Page A02

Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey refused yesterday to refer two new House contempt citations to a federal grand jury, saying the White House aides involved in the case cannot be prosecuted because they were following legal advice from the Justice Department.

In a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Mukasey said the refusal by White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten and former presidential counsel Harriet E. Miers to comply with congressional subpoenas "did not constitute a crime."

The department "will not bring the congressional contempt citations before a grand jury or take any other action to prosecute Mr. Bolten or Ms. Miers," Mukasey wrote.

Mukasey's refusal further escalates a dispute between the administration and Congress over the firings of nine U.S. attorneys in 2006.

Bolten and Miers had refused to cooperate with a House probe because President Bush had declared that information about the firings was protected by executive privilege, which shields internal White House deliberations. The House approved contempt citations against Bolten and Miers on Feb. 14, marking the first time such complaints were ever brought against West Wing aides.

Democrats said they plan to file a lawsuit seeking the enforcement of the contempt citations.

"Today's decision to shelve the contempt process, in violation of a federal statute, shows that the White House will go to any lengths to keep its role in the US Attorney firings hidden," Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said in a statement.

The law provides for such cases to be sent to the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia for possible referral to a grand jury. But Mukasey cited a 1984 Justice Department legal opinion, which said that "the contempt of Congress statute was not intended to apply and could not constitutionally be applied to an Executive Branch official who asserts the President's claim of executive privilege."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../02/29/AR2008022903349.html?wpisrc=newsletter

 

[QueEx]

<font size="5"><center>Rove subpoenaed to testify in Congress probe</font size></center>

Karl Rove is pictured at the end of a roundtable
meeting on financial literacy chaired by U.S.
President George W. Bush (not pictured) in the
Roosevelt Room of the White House in Washington
April 25, 2007. Rove, who had been one of
President George W. Bush's top aides, was
subpoenaed on Thursday to testify before a
congressional panel investigating the
administration's firing of nine federal
prosecutors. REUTERS/Jason Reed


Thu May 22, 2008 3:13pm EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Karl Rove, who had been one of President George W. Bush's top aides, was subpoenaed on Thursday to testify before a congressional panel investigating the administration's firing of nine federal prosecutors.

House of Representatives Judiciary Committee chairman John Conyers issued the subpoena after months of failed efforts to get Rove to voluntarily testify under oath.

The Judiciary Committee, like its Senate counterpart, has been investigating for more than a year the administration's dismissal of nine of the nation's 93 U.S. attorneys in 2006.

Despite White House claims to the contrary, critics charge the firings were politically motivated, perhaps in retaliation for the targeted prosecutors being too soft on Democratic lawmakers or too tough on Republican ones.

A Judiciary subcommittee authorized a subpoena of Rove in March. The one issued to Rove requires him to appear before the panel on July 10.

(Editing by Patricia Zengerle)

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN2250668820080522

 

[QueEx]

<font size="5"><center>Prosecutor to probe role of politics
in attorney firings</font size></center>


McClatchy Newspapers
By Marisa Taylor and Greg Gordon
Monday, September 29, 2008

WASHINGTON — Attorney General Michael Mukasey agreed Monday to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate whether former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and other officials involved in the firings of nine U.S. attorneys broke the law.

The move comes at the request of Justice Department's Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility, who in a report released Monday detailed "substantial evidence" that partisan politics played a role in several of the ousters.

Gonzales "abdicated his responsibility to safeguard the integrity and independence of the department," said a statement from Inspector General Glenn Fine's office.

Mukasey appointed acting veteran federal prosecutor and acting Connecticut U.S. attorney Nora Dannehy to oversee the inquiry, virtually guaranteeing that the 18-month investigation will continue into the next administration.

Several of the prosecutors who were fired said they were pleased that the investigation would continue despite resistance from some administration officials.

"This report corroborates what my colleagues and I have been saying for the last 18 months: that the basis for our removal was improper, wrongful and now possibly criminal," said David Iglesias, the ousted U.S. attorney in New Mexico.

Fine and H. Marshall Jarrett, the head of the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility found the removal of Iglesias to be the most "troubling" example of the Department inappropriately weighing political considerations.

In their 358-page report, Fine and Jarrett concluded that White House officials were more involved in the firings than the administration initially admitted. However, their report said that investigators were impeded from resolving questions about the White House's actions because several former and current Bush aides, including former presidential political adviser Karl Rove, refused to cooperate with his investigation.

Their report recommended that Mukasey appoint a prosecutor who'd have the authority to demand more evidence from officials and determine whether lawmakers or former or current administration officials lied to Congress or obstructed justice.

George J. Terwilliger III, the lawyer representing Gonzales, asserted that the report "makes clear" that Gonzales did nothing wrong.

"It seems rather odd, then, that rather than bring the investigation to a close, the Department would escalate the matter to the attention of a prosecutor," he said.

However, Mukasey, who took the helm of the Justice Department after Gonzales resigned a year ago amid the controversy, acknowledged that key questions remain unanswered.

"The report makes plain that, at a minimum, the process by which nine U.S. attorneys were removed in 2006 was haphazard, arbitrary and unprofessional, and the way in which the Justice Department handled those removals and the resulting public controversy was profoundly lacking," Mukasey said.

The controversy was sparked by the 2006 firings of nine U.S. attorneys and a little-noticed change in the Patriot Act that allowed the Justice Department to install replacements without seeking congressional approval.

Congressional Democrats launched an investigation into the firings after they grew suspicious that the prosecutors had been ousted because several had either investigated voter fraud allegations or politicians on corruption charges.

Monday, Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called the report's findings "disturbing" and assailed the White House for "stonewalling" the inspector general, as it has defied congressional subpoenas.

Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter, the ranking Republican on the Senate committee, praised Mukasey for appointing a prosecutor to investigate. "Wherever the facts lead," he said, "it warrants further investigation."

Initially, the Justice Department denied that any of the firings was politically motivated. Then-Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty testified before Congress that all of the prosecutors were fired for "performance reasons," except for Arkansas U.S. Attorney Bud Cummins, whom he said was ousted to make way for Rove protege Tim Griffin. McClatchy, however, later revealed that most of the prosecutors had received positive performance reviews.

But Iglesias contended he'd been pressured by New Mexico Republicans Sen. Pete Domenici and Rep. Heather Wilson to speed up an indictment against local Democrats before the 2006 congressional election. While both lawmakers acknowledged calling Iglesias to ask about the case, they've denied pressuring him improperly.

Justice Department investigators found evidence to conclude that Iglesias was fired because Domenici and other Republican Party activists complained to the White House about his handling of the corruption case and separate voter fraud allegations.

In a statement Monday, Domenici's lawyer, K. Lee Blalack, said the report provided "no credible basis" to conclude that the senator interfered with or obstructed Iglesias' investigations.

Former Gonzales aide Kyle Sampson had drafted a letter saying that the department had no knowledge of Rove's role in the firings, but after a report by McClatchy, the White House acknowledged that Rove served as a conduit for complaints to the Justice Department about federal prosecutors not being aggressive enough in pursuing allegations of Democratic election fraud.

Monday's report reveals that Rove was aware that Iglesias was going to be fired even before the Justice Department sent its final firing list to the White House.

The investigators also pointed to the firing of Todd Graves, the former U.S. Attorney in Kansas City, Mo., as potentially motivated by partisan politics. The report concludes that Graves was likely singled out because of pressure from the office of Republican Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond, who was feuding with Graves' brother, a Republican congressman in Missouri.

"It also appears that no one considered whether Graves was an effective U.S. attorney before seeking his removal," the report said.

While John McKay, the former U.S. attorney in Washington state, probably was singled out for his disagreement with Justice Department officials over a law enforcement program, investigators couldn't rule out that he also was targeted for declining to prosecute allegations of Democratic voting fraud.

Fine and Jarrett, however, said they didn't find any reason to believe that U.S Attorneys Carol Lam of San Diego and Paul Charlton of Arizona were forced out because they investigated Republican politicians.

Their report pins much of the blame on Gonzales, who the report said was "remarkably unengaged" and failed to take action on behalf of Iglesias even "when he had notice that partisan politics might be involved."

The report also takes Gonzales to task for "inaccurate and misleading" statements and said he'd determined that Sampson was the "person most responsible" for the firing plan.

Bradford Berenson, Sampson's attorney, said he found it "mystifying and disappointing that the Inspector General chose to impugn" Sampson when his client had cooperated.

Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, a former U.S. attorney, said Mukasey "has an important decision to make about the extent to which he is going to back his department and force the production of this information or allow the department to be rolled by the White House."

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/53255.html