The Fall of Pete Domenici: Just the Beginning? (by Mark Kleinman at HuffPost)

[marmar]

Mark Kleiman


03.09.2007
The Fall of Pete Domenici: Just the Beginning? (10 comments )

It looks as if the U.S. Attorney probe scandal has claimed its first major victim: Sen. Pete Domenici of New Mexico. He's got some serious 'splainin' to do, and so far he's not doing it very well.

Matthew Miller of the DSCC puts it clearly:

GOP Senator Pete Domenici just can't get his story straight.When news first broke that he called U.S. Attorney David Iglesias to pressure him about ongoing investigations, Domenici said he had no idea what Iglesias was talking about. Then when it became clear that Iglesias would testify before Congressional committees, Domenici reversed course and admitted to the conversation. And now ... Domenici says he simply cannot "recall my mentioning the November election to him."

"It's getting harder and harder to keep track of Pete Domenici's denials, since he comes up with a different version every day," said DSCC spokesman Matthew Miller. "By tomorrow Pete Domenici won't remember having ever met David Iglesias or even knowing what the U.S. Attorney does. But Domenici's denials have now been contradicted in sworn testimony by a respected former U.S. Attorney who was fired just weeks after he refused to bow to Domenici's inappropriate and possibly illegal pressure. Pete Domenici is facing a Senate ethics investigation and a possible obstruction of justice review - he needs to start coming clean about his exact role in this growing scandal."

With the Senate Ethics Committee breathing down his neck, Domenici has hired a top-gun criminal defense lawyer, Lee Blalack of & Myers. The fate of Blalack's previous congressional client, Duke Cunningham (now enjoying an eight-year all-expenses vacation in the U.S. Bureau of Prisons) is hardly a good omen for Domenici, and his choice of Blalack suggests that Domenici is aware how deep a hole he's dug for himself.

Domenici's phone call to David Iglesias, in what Iglesias thought was an attempt to apply pressure for pre-election indictments in a local corruption case involving New Mexico Democrats, pretty clearly ran afoul of Senate ethics rules, if we believe Iglesias's version of the phone call rather than one of the three versions Domenici has offered so far. It might, if the statute were read literally, even expose Domenici to charges of obstruction of justice, though no one so far seems to have come up with a precedent in which obstruction charges were brought for trying to speed an investigation up rather than trying to shut one down. .....(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-kleiman/the-fall-of-pete-domenici_b_43006.html

[peacetalksforall]

1. There is troublesome wording in this 'blog'.

This writer wrote:

"Domenici's phone call to David Iglesias, in what Iglesias thought was an attempt to apply pressure for pre-election indictments in a local corruption case involving New Mexico Democrats..."

The words "...thought was an attempt to apply pressure for pre=election indictments..."

According to what I heard - Iglesias said - apply pressure to bring it to the court before elections - timing rather than outcome.

Should have said - apply pressure to schedule....?

[robinlynne]

6. Both mean exactly the same thing. He wanted the indictments in before the

election. simple. He asked will the indictments be handed down before november? the prosecutor said no. he said I'm very disappointed and hung up. where do you see a problem?

[SusanaMontana41]

2. Line 'em up like dominoes

and watch 'em all fall.

When will our national nightmare end?

[marmar]

3. "When will our national nightmare end?"

It can't end soon enough!!!

[tanyev]

4. RCRSD strikes again.

Republican Can't Remember Shit Disease. Don't go to Washington without it.

[marmar]

5. LOL....

:)

[confuddled]

7. Domenici's campaign for 2008 re-election...

is going nicely. Hope it continues this way for him. He indicated a few weeks back that he plans to run again. It's all I can do to refrain from congratulating him on his fine showing thus far. Run "St. Pete", run - as fast and as far as you can, preferably out of office and into disgrace.

[Alexander]

8. This is why I think Richardson should run against him...

and not for President.

This could be a pickup in 2008 for the Democrats, along with a few other Senate seats.