DoJ expands probe into attorney sackings

autorank

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu May-31-07 12:37 AM
Original message

DoJ expands probe into attorney sackings

Source: FT.Com (Financial Times London)

By Brooke Masters in New York

Published: May 31 2007 01:48 | Last updated: May 31 2007 01:48

The inspector-general of the Justice department has expanded his investigation of last year’s mass sackings of US attorneys to examine allegations that political considerations have improperly affected the department’s hiring policies as well.

Glenn Fine, inspector-general, and Marshall Jarrett, who heads the department’s office of professional responsibility, informed Congress of the widening probe in a letter sent on Wednesday to the chairman and ranking Republican of the Senate and House judiciary committees.

The expansion of the investigation comes in the wake of testimony last week by Monica Goodling, a former aide to Alberto Gonzales, the attorney-general, that she had “crossed the line” in allowing politics to affect the department’s hiring.

“I may have gone too far in asking political questions of applicants for career positions and I may have taken inappropriate political considerations into account...I regret those mistakes,” she said.
(c) Financial Times Limited 2007

Read more: http://tinyurl.com/2xbq8j

"I may have gone to far..." Ms. Goolding says. I wonder what she may mean? Selecting US attorneys on the basis of politics comes to mind. That totally subverts the entire justice system. It makes it a means to an end for one political party. It causes the public to lose faith in the process ofjustice. It comes on the heels, a book end so to speak, of the dreadful Gore v. Bush decision. Here are portions of the dissents of Justices Breyer and Stevens:

"Breyer compared the Court’s intervention in the 2000 election with the membership of five U.S. Supreme Court Justices in the congressionally-created Electoral Commission that in 1877 settled the disputed election of 1876. Breyer contended that the participation of the five Justices “did not lend that process legitimacy,” but “ather, it simply embroiled Members of the Court in partisan conflict, thereby undermining respect for the judicial process.”" http://tinyurl.com/2gr7th

"Stevens charged that the Court had endorsed Bush’s tacit “lack of confidence in the impartiality and capacity of the state judges who would make the critical decisions if the vote count were to proceed.” He expressed fear that “he endorsement of that position by the majority of this Court can only lend credence to the most cynical appraisal of the work of judges throughout the land.” Declaring that “the true background of the rule of law” is “confidence in the men and women who administer the judicial system,” Stevens declared that while “we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year’s Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation’s confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.”" http://tinyurl.com/2gr7th

And then there's this from yours truly:

High Crimes

The New Mexico affair is critical to determining if and how election fraud was committed in the White House. We have a lot of people talking, some getting lawyers, and a critical conversation reported in the Albuquerque Journal, 15 April 2007:

In the spring of 2006, Domenici told Gonzales he wanted Iglesias out.

Gonzales refused. He told Domenici he would fire Iglesias only on orders from the president.

That’s the smoking gun. It’s the vital link to Bush committing election fraud. He’s a politician, the senior politician, corrupting the election process by replacing an honest prosecutor with someone who will cooperate the next time the Senator and the Congresswoman call with their requests that some prominent Democrat be indicted to give a hand to a campaign. http://tinyurl.com/3xzon8

Maybe they should look at these sources for some really serious crimes against the people starting with the theft of the presidency by the US Supreme Court and then carried forth by the corruption of the justice department.

It's more than Ms. Goolding's bad judgment. She's young and naive. The majority on the court are not in that category nor are Gonzales and Bush. Go investigate them.