I've been covering the "December U.S. Attorney Massacre" because I have a morbid interest in the Justice Department forcing out qualified attorneys for political reasons and then lying about it.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/18/173111/605 Last week, one of the ousted U.S. Attorneys, David C. Iglesias, said two members of Congress tried to pressure him to accelerate a probe--stemming from allegations involving construction contracts and a prominent Democratic former state senator--just before the November elections. When Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M) was first asked about Iglesias' allegations, he said, "I have no idea what he's talking about." Now Domenici acknowledges that he contacted Iglesias to ask about an ongoing corruption probe of Democrats. But Domenici swears he "never pressured him nor threatened him in any way." Should we believe him now when you tacitly admitted in the same breath lying about this last week?
The "big picture" to this story is that the Bush Administration is basically circumventing the requirement that U.S. Attorneys be confirmed by the Senate. In summarily firing eight U.S. attorneys since December, under the (un)"Patriot Act," Attorney General Gonzales has the authority to name replacements who can serve indefinitely without confirmation. Previously, unconfirmed replacements could serve for only 120 days, after which the district couts would name a successor. But now the Patriot Act lets them do an end-run around Senate confirmation.
Not only are the firings dispicable, but the tissue of lies told by the Executive Branch and Legislative branch have added insult to injury. I would like to know why these institutions and their spokespeople are never disciplined for lying. They don't even bother to "massage" their earlier answers anymore. When caught with their pants down, they just do an about-face without having to explain their earlier orchestrated and deliberate misleading of the country.
In January, Attorney General Gonzales said he "would never, ever make a change in a United States attorney for political reasons." Justice Department spokesperson Brian Roehrkasse said of the mass firings, "The administration has never removed a U.S. attorney in an effort to retaliate." But when confronted with the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, White House and Justice Department officials now acknowledge that they sacked the prosecutors primarily because they were not doing enough to carry out President Bush's policy objectives on immigration, firearms, the death penalty, and other issues.
One of the sacked U.S. Attorneys, David C. Iglesias, said two members of Congress tried to pressure him to accelerate (prior to the November elections) a criminal probe of courthouse construction contracts involving a prominent Democratic former state senator. Those two congresspeople were Sen, Pete V. Domenci (R-N.M.) and Rep. Heather Wilson (R-N.M.) When Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M) was first asked about Iglesias' allegations, he said, "I have no idea what he's talking about." Now Domenici acknowledges that he contacted Iglesias to ask about the ongoing corruption probe of Democrats. Domenici even breathlessly and belatedly apologizes.
I would like to ask him the popular prosecutor's cross-examination question, "So, were you lying then or are you lying now?"
In his own lame defense, Domenici wants to make sure everyone know that he "never pressured him nor threatened him in any way." Should we believe him now when he tacitly admitted in the same breath lying about this very subject last week?
This is of cold comfort to David Iglesias, Kevin Ryan, Bud Cummins, Margaret Chiara, Paul Charlton, Carol Lam, Daniel Bogden and John McKay. I'm sure Congress will ferret out even more in tomorrow's hearings in which six of the sacked will testify. The House Judiciary subcommittee has issued subpoens for Iglesias, Cummins, Lam and McKay. The Senate Judiciary Committee has subpoenaed Bogden and Charlton. Stay tuned.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/3/5/629/47779