Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Anthony717 (talk | contribs) at 15:14, 14 March 2007 (→‎USA Patriot Act revisions: feinstein.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Eight United States Attorneys were dismissed by the United States Department of Justice in December 2006 and January 2007, after the George W. Bush administration made the determination to seek their resignations.[1] Critics have claimed the dismissals were either motivated by desire to install attorneys more loyal to the Republican party or as retribution for actions or inactions damaging to the Republican party. At least six of the eight had positive internal Justice Department performance reports.[2] In March a House of Representatives subcommittee approved subpoenas to compel testimony from four of the U.S. attorneys.[3] Hearings in the House of Representatives and Senate started on March 6, 2007.[4][5][6]

The attorneys dismissed included:


US Attorneys fired

As early as February 2005 White House counsel Harriet E. Miers to George W. Bush suggested to Kyle Sampson, Alberto Gonzales's chief of staff, that all 93 US attorneys should be dismissed and replaced.[10] Gonzales rejected this idea as impractical and disruptive to the Department of Justice, and instead had more limited dismissals of attorneys over the next 22 months. Sampson wrote in January 2006 to Miers that he recommended that the Department of Justice and the Office of the Counsel to the President work together to seek the replacement of a limited number of U.S. Attorneys," and that by limiting the number of attorneys "targeted for removal and replacement" it would "mitigat[e] the shock to the system that would result from an across-the-board firing."[10]

On March 13, 2007 the Congress received emails that showed "Sampson, chief of staff to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, came up with a checklist. He rated each of the U.S. attorneys with criteria that appeared to value political allegiance as much as job performance. He recommended retaining 'strong U.S. Attorneys who have ... exhibited loyalty to the President and Attorney General.' He suggested 'removing weak U.S. Attorneys who have ... chafed against Administration initiatives'".[11] Even more telling "The documents show that in one case, officials were eager to free up the prosecutor’s slot in Little Rock, Ark., so it could be filled by Timothy Griffin, a GOP operative close to White House political guru Karl Rove — at all costs."[11]

Then in October of 2006, George Bush told Gonzales that he had recieved complaints that some of the US Attorneys had not pursued certain voter-fraud investigations.[10]

According to Newsweek, "Kyle Sampson, Gonzales's chief of staff, developed the list of eight prosecutors to be fired last October—with input from the White House."[12]

The Justice Department did not receive White House approval for the firings until early December. As late as December 2, Sampson had written to Michael Elston that the Justice department was "[s]till waiting for green light from White House" with regards to the firing. Deputy White House counsel William K. Kelley responded on December 4, 2006 stating that "We're a go for the US Atty plan...[the White House office of legislative affairs], political, communications have signed off and acknowledged that we have to be committed to following through once the pressure comes."[13]

In December 2006, the Bush Administration notified seven United States Attorneys that they were to resign for "job performance reasons", and nominated seven replacements. The seven were "notified by phone on December 7 that they were being fired without explanation. In addition, a prosecutor in Little Rock was removed in December to make room for a former aide to presidential adviser Karl Rove."[14]

Continued press coverage ultimately led to Congressional involvement. Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty was called onto the hill. He underscored that the seven were fired for job performance issues, and not political considerations.

The next day, McNulty admitted that at least six of the seven had recently received outstanding job performance ratings, and that the United States Attorney in Arkansas (Cummins) was removed for no reason except to install a former aide to Karl Rove: 37-year-old Timothy Griffin, a former Republican National Committee opposition research director.[15] Cummins, apparently, "was ousted after Harriet E. Miers, the former White House counsel, intervened on behalf of Griffin."[16] Less than two weeks after McNulty's admission, Griffin announced that he would not seek the nomination to be chief federal prosecutor in Little Rock.[17]

In January, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that "A GOP source [had indicated] that the decision to remove U.S. attorneys, primarily in the West, was part of a plan to 'give somebody else that experience' to build up the back bench of Republicans by giving them high-profile jobs."[18] McClatchey Newspapers noted that, "The newly appointed U.S. attorneys all have impressive legal credentials, but most of them have few, if any, ties to the communities they've been appointed to serve, and some have had little experience as prosecutors. The nine recent appointees identified [as replacements] held high-level White House or Justice Department jobs, and most of them were handpicked by Gonzales…Being named a U.S. attorney 'has become a prize for doing the bidding of the White House or administration,' said Laurie Levenson, a former federal prosecutor who's now a professor at the Loyola Law School in Los Angeles."[19] Salon reported: "at least three of the eight fired attorneys were told by a superior they were being forced to resign to make jobs available for other Bush appointees, according to a former senior Justice Department official knowledgeable about their cases."[20]

On March 6, 2007, Gonzales responded to the controversy in an editorial in USA Today in which he said "To be clear, [the firing] was for reasons related to policy, priorities and management — what have been referred to broadly as "performance-related" reasons — that seven U.S. attorneys were asked to resign last December...We have never asked a U.S. attorney to resign in an effort to retaliate against him or her or to inappropriately interfere with a public corruption case (or any other type of case, for that matter). Like me, U.S. attorneys are political appointees, and we all serve at the pleasure of the president. If U.S. attorneys are not executing their responsibilities in a manner that furthers the management and policy goals of departmental leadership, it is appropriate that they be replaced...While I am grateful for the public service of these seven U.S. attorneys, they simply lost my confidence. I hope that this episode ultimately will be recognized for what it is: an overblown personnel matter."[21]

On March 12, 2007 Samson resigned from the Department of Justice.[22]

On March 13, 2007 Gonzales stated in a news conference that he accepted responsibility for mistakes made in the dismissal and rejected calls for his resignation that Democratic members of Congress had been making. He also stood by he decision to dismiss the attorneys "I stand by the decision and I think it was the right decision," Gonzales said.[23]

But Gonzales also admitted that Justice Department officials had misled Congress. According to the Attorney General, "incomplete information was communicated or may have been communicated to Congress."[2]

Threats for coming forward

After the firings became national news, Cummins, a Republican, stated that he received a phone call from Michael Estlon, a top Justice official, after defending his fellow attorneys in the press. Cummins stated that Elston told him that talking to the press might not be a good idea and that officials at the Department of Justice may feel compelled to "somehow pull their gloves off" and respond by tarnishing the attorney's image. "I was tempted to challenge him," Cummins e-mailed colleagues later that day, "and say something movie-like such as 'are you threatening ME???'". Elston acknowledges he told Cummins that he said "it's really a shame that all this has to come out in the newspaper." Elston says that this was not intended as a threat.[24]

McKay also reported getting a similar call from Elston. McKay stated that after he was fired in December he received a call from a "clearly nervous" Elston. McKay charged that "(Elston) was offering me a deal: you stay silent and the attorney general won't say anything bad about you." Elston responded to this accusation by stating that he "can't imagine" how McKay got that impression and that the call was meant to reassure McKay that the details of his termination would not be discussed.[25]

Carol Lam firing

The most well known was Carol Lam who successfully prosecuted then Congressman Duke Cunningham for corruption. She was still working during these events and ordered her staff to finish with the indictments they were working on before her last day in office. In February 2007, two days before her last day, her office indicted Dusty Foggo, the former Executive Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and a major campaign contributor Brent Wilkes (who was previously named on Cunningham's guilty plea).

North County Times has quoted Republican Congressman Darrell Issa stating that he takes "maybe one-twentieth" of the responsibility for Lam's firing.[26] On March 6, 2007, Issa made a statement at the United States House Committee on the Judiciary hearing.[27]

David Iglesias firing

Allen Weh, chairman of the New Mexico Republican Party, said he complained in 2005 about then-U.S. Attorney David Iglesias to a White House aide for Karl Rove, asking that Iglesias be removed. Then in 2006 Rove personally told Weh “He’s gone,” Rove said. Weh was dissatisfied with Iglesias due in part to his failure to indict Democrats in a voter fraud investigation. Weh followed up with, "There’s nothing we’ve done that’s wrong." In March 2007, the White House spokeswoman, Dana Perino, said Rove "wasn’t involved in who was going to be fired or hired."[28]

In late February came the allegation by David Iglesias that "two lawmakers called him about a well-known criminal investigation involving a Democratic legislator" and that "the lawmakers who called him seemed focused on whether charges would be filed before the November elections. He said the calls made him feel 'pressured to hurry the subsequent cases and prosecutions.'"[14] Further, US Attorneys in Arizona, Nevada and California were conducting corruption probes involving Republicans at the time of their dismissals.[14]

Prior to the 2006 midterm election, Pete Domenici called and "pressured New Mexico U.S. Attorney David Iglesias to speed up indictments in a federal corruption investigation that involved at least one former Democratic state senator. When Iglesias said an indictment wouldn't be handed down until at least December, "the line went dead," Iglesias was fired one week later by the Bush Administration. "A communication by a senator or House member with a federal prosecutor regarding an ongoing criminal investigation is a violation of ethics rules." In a March 2007 statement, Domenici admitted making such a call.[29] House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., has issued subpoenas to require Iglesias, among other recently ousted U.S. attorneys, to testify before Congress about their firings.[30]

Domenici admitted calling Iglesias despite the initial denial, but Domenici said he never used the word "November" when he called Iglesias about an ongoing Albuquerque courthouse corruption case.[31] Domenici has denied trying influence Iglesias, and has hired lawyer K. Lee Blalack II to represent him.[32]

According to the Justice Department, Domenici called the Department and demanded Iglesias be replaced on four occasions.[33]

On the day that Iglesias was fired, Harriet Mier's deputy William Kelley wrote that Domenici's chief of staff "is happy as a clam" about Iglesias and a week later Sampson wrote that "Domenici is going to send over names tomorrow (not even waiting for Iglesias's body to cool)."[10]

Rep. Heather Wilson also called and "pressured New Mexico U.S. attorney David Iglesias to speed up indictments in a federal corruption investigation that involved at least one former Democratic state senator. Wilson was curt after Iglesias was non-responsive to her questions about whether an indictment would be unsealed." Iglesias was fired one week afterward by the Bush Administration. House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., has issued subpoenas to require Iglesias, among other recently ousted U.S. attorneys, to testify before Congress about their firings.[34][35]

Ex-Governor David Cargo (R-NM) accused Wilson of "essentially taking the Fifth [Amendment]" defense thus far.[36]

John McKay firing

As for John McKay, in February the Seattle Times noted that "One of the most persistent rumors in Seattle legal circles is that the Justice Department forced McKay, a Republican, to resign to appease Washington state Republicans angry over the 2004 governor's race. Some believe McKay's dismissal was retribution for his failure to convene a federal grand jury to investigate allegations of voter fraud in the race."[37]

Other controversial demotions and firings of US Attorneys under Bush presidency

DiBaiagio firing

After the revelations of the other firings, Thomas M. DiBiagio, the Maryland U.S. Attorney, stated in March 2007 that he was ousted because of political pressure over public corruption investigations into the administration of then-Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.[38]

Black demotion

On August 8, 2005 the Los Angeles Times reported that the day after a grand jury subpoena of records connected to Jack Abramoff "US Attorney Frederick A. Black, who had launched the investigation, was demoted. A White House news release announced that Bush was replacing Black." His replacement, Leonardo Rapadas, recommended for the job by the Guam Republican Party, was confirmed without any debate. The investigation of Ambramoff in Guam ended when "Rapadas recused himself from the public corruption case involving [Carl] Gutierrez" because "the new US attorney was a cousin of 'one of the main targets'," according to a confidential memo to Justice Department officials."[39]

Presidential authority to hire and fire US Attorneys

The President of the United States has the authority to nominate and fire US Attorneys at his discretion. Before the Patriot Act, vacancies for United States Attorney were filled by presidential nomination. Such nominees would serve for up to 120 days, until the Senate could approve or reject the Presidential nomination. Vacancies that persisted beyond 120 days were filled on an interim basis by the court.[40]

USA Patriot Act revisions

On March 9, 2006, The USA Patriot Act Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 was signed into law. Included in it is a change to the way interim appointments of U.S. Attorneys are made. The change was written into the bill by Republican Senator Arlen Specter.[41] The change is worded as follows:

SEC. 502. INTERIM APPOINTMENT OF UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS.

Section 546 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking subsections (c) and (d) and inserting the following new subsection:

`(c) A person appointed as United States attorney under this section may serve until the qualification of a United States Attorney for such district appointed by the President under section 541 of this title. '.

The previous statute authorized the attorney general to make interim appointments for 120 days, and if no nomination of a full-time replacement was made by then, a district court judge would make another interim appointment. Both the 120-day limit and the control by judges has been stricken.

Kyle Sampson, Alberto Gonzales's chief of staff, strongly urged using this law to bypass Congressional confirmation. Sampson wrote in a Sept. 17 memo to Harriet Miers. "I am only in favor of executing on a plan to push some USAs out if we really are ready and willing to put in the time necessary to select candidates and get them appointed...It will be counterproductive to DOJ operations if we push USAs out and then don't have replacements ready to roll immediately...I strongly recommend that as a matter of administration, we utilize the new statutory provisions that authorize the AG to make USA appointments...[By avoiding Senate confirmation] we can give far less deference to home state senators and thereby get 1.) our preferred person appointed and 2.) do it far faster and more efficiently at less political costs to the White House." [42].

Senator Diane Feinstein is sponsoring a bill to overturn the above amendment and return to Senators the power to confirm U.S. Attorneys.

Terminations under previous White House administrations

At the beginning of each presidential term, it is traditional for anyone occupying a "political office" to turn in a signed letter of resignation. A political office is generally thought of as one where a person "serves at the pleasure of the President."

If there is a new President from a different party, it is expected that all of the resignations would be accepted. The attorneys are then replaced by political appointees from the new President's party.

Shortly after President Bush took office in 2001, he received the resignations from 91 of 93 sitting U.S. attorneys[43]

In contrast to the 2006 dismissal event, prior administrations typically "cleaned house" at the outset of the presidential term; they very rarely terminate attorneys, whom they had previously appointed, for political reasons.[44]

Since 1981, three attorneys have been "forced out" in the middle of a President's term.[44]

Kyle Sampson noted in a January 09, 2006 email to Harriet Miers: "In recent memory, during the Reagan and Clinton Administrations, Presidents Reagan and Clinton did not seek to remove and replace U.S. Attorneys to serve indefinitely under the holdover provision.” (underlining original)[45]

References

  1. ^ Plan for Replacing Certain United States Attorneys. Attached to email from Kyle Sampson to William W. Mercer, December 5, 2006.
  2. ^ Johnston, David (February 25, 2007). "Reviews of 6 fired attorneys positive". Washington Post. Retrieved 2006-03-07.
  3. ^ Dan Eggen and Paul Kane. Subcommittee Votes to Compel Testimony on Firings. Washington Post, March 1, 2007.
  4. ^ Hearings to air attorney firings
  5. ^ Part II–Preserving Prosecutorial Independence: Is the Department of Justice Politicizing the Hiring and Firing of U.S. Attorneys?. Senate Judiciary Committee hearing March 6, 2007.
  6. ^ Hearing: H.R. 580, Restoring Checks and Balances in the Confirmation Process of U.S. Attorneys. Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law. March 6, 2007.
  7. ^ Dan Eggen (February 24, 2007). "Justice Department Fires 8th U.S. Attorney". Washington Post. p. A02.
  8. ^ "Justice Department Fires 8th U.S. Attorney". Free Internet Press. February 24, 2007.
  9. ^ "Press Release". United States Attorney's Office. February 23, 2007.
  10. ^ a b c d Dan Eggen (March 13, 2007). "Firings Had Genesis in White House: Ex-Counsel Miers First Suggested Dismissing Prosecutors 2 Years Ago, Documents Show". Washington Post. p. A01. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  11. ^ a b Serrano, Richard A. (March 14, 2007). "E-mails detail White House plans to oust U.S. attorneys". LA Times. Retrieved 2007-03-15.
  12. ^ Isikoff, Michael (March 19, 2007). "Fuel to the Firings". Newsweek. Retrieved 2007-03-12.
  13. ^ Lara Jakes Jordan, Associated Press Writer, Gonzales: Prosecutors firings mishandled, March 13, 2007
  14. ^ a b c Dan Eggen (March 1, 2007). "Fired U.S. Attorney Says Lawmakers Pressured Him". Washington Post. p. A10.
  15. ^ Kevin Johnson (February 6, 2007). "Prosecutor fired so ex-Rove aide could get his job". USA Today.
  16. ^ David Johnston (February 16, 2007). "White House Is Reported to Be Linked to a Dismissal". New York Times.
  17. ^ Dan Eggen (February 17, 2007). "Interim Ark. U.S. Attorney Won't Seek Job: Former Rove Aide Says Senate Democrats Would Block Permanent Nomination". Washington Post. p. A10.
  18. ^ Jane Ann Morrison (January 18, 2007). "Bush administration's ouster of U.S. attorneys an insulting injustice". Las Vegas Review-Journal.
  19. ^ Marisa Taylor (January 26, 2007). "Gonzales appoints political loyalists into vacant U.S. attorneys slots". McClatchy Newspapers. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |Author2= ignored (|author2= suggested) (help)
  20. ^ Mark Follman (February 28, 2007). "Inside Bush's prosecutor purge".
  21. ^ Alberto Gonzales They lost my confidence USA Today, March 6, 2007
  22. ^ Lara Jakes Jordan, Associated Press Writer, Gonzales: Prosecutors firings mishandled, March 13, 2007
  23. ^ Lara Jakes Jordan, Associated Press Writer, Gonzales: Prosecutors firings mishandled, March 13, 2007
  24. ^ Newsweek article on firing
  25. ^ Michael Isikoff, Newsweek, Fuel to the Firings, March 19, 2007 issue. Retrieved March 12, 2007.
  26. ^ Bennett, William (March 5, 2007). "Issa to testify on Lam firing". North County Times. Retrieved 2006-03-16.
  27. ^ [1]
  28. ^ "Report: Rove was urged to oust U.S. attorney". MSNBC. March 11, 2007. Retrieved 2007-03-12.
  29. ^ Eggen, Dan (March 5, 2007). "Senator Admits Calling U.S. Attorney". Washington Post. Retrieved 2006-03-16.
  30. ^ Taylor, Marisa (March 1, 2007). "Sources: GOP lawmakers tried to influence federal investigation". McClatchy Newspapers. Retrieved 2006-03-16.
  31. ^ Brosnan, James (March 7, 2007). "Domenici denies mentioning `November' in Iglesias call". Albuquerque Tribune. Retrieved 2006-03-16.
  32. ^ Johnston, David (March 8, 2007). "Inquiry Into Ouster of U.S. Attorneys Moves Toward Subpoenas at Justice Department". New York Times. Retrieved 2006-03-16.
  33. ^ Pfeiffer, Eric (March 6, 2007). "Justice stymieing probe of 6 firings, Democrats say". Washington Times. Retrieved 2006-03-16.
  34. ^ Marisa Taylor, McClatchy Newspapers, Sources: GOP lawmakers tried to influence federal investigation, Mar. 01, 2007. Retrieved Mar. 13, 2007.
  35. ^ The Dallas Morning News, Fired U.S. attorney alleges political pressure, February 28, 2007. Retrieved Mar. 13, 2007.
  36. ^ Michael Gisick, The Albuquerque Tribune, GOP VIPs ponder David Iglesias fallout, March 3, 2007. Retrieved Mar. 13, 2007.
  37. ^ David Bowermaster (February 16, 2007). "Was McKay ousted over 2004 election?". Seattle Times.
  38. ^ Rich, Eric (March 7, 2007). "Justice Admits U.S. Attorney Was Forced Out". Washington Post. Retrieved 2006-03-07.
  39. ^ Roche, Walter (August 8, 2005). "Bush removal ended Guam investigation: US attorney's demotion halted probe of lobbyist". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 2007-03-12.
  40. ^ http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode28/usc_sec_28_00000546----000-.html 28 USC Section 541
  41. ^ http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/nation/16555903.htm
  42. ^ Dan Eggen and John Solomon Firings Had Genesis in White House Ex-Counsel Miers First Suggested Dismissing Prosecutors 2 Years Ago, Documents Show Washington Post, March 13, 2007
  43. ^ Press release from Department of Justice under George W. Bush
  44. ^ a b Cohen, Adam (February 26, 2007). "Why Have So Many U.S. Attorneys Been Fired? It Looks a Lot Like Politics". New York Times. Retrieved 2007-03-12.
  45. ^ "Gonzales Chief Of Staff Rebuts Rove Claim That Clinton Purged Prosecutors Too". Think Progress. March 13, 2007. Retrieved 2007-03-13.

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dismissal_of_U.S._attorneys_controversy&oldid=115070312"