Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why did Ashcroft recuse himself and allow Fitzgerald take over this case?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:26 PM
Original message
Why did Ashcroft recuse himself and allow Fitzgerald take over this case?
I remember the day he made the announcement clearly. I know Ashcroft always looks like he is eating lemons but his face looked extra sour that day. There was no joy in mudville the day I seen Ashcroft recuse himself. He didn't want to do it. He was told to do it by someone.

So my question is just who could have told him that he was going to recuse himself? That wasn't his own decision. I don't believe it was Bush's or any of his minions idea either. So who's idea was it?

Is there a group of people who make these kinds of decisions? Decisions that even Bush, Cheney, and Ashcroft abide by without question?

:tinfoilhat:

Don

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Fitzgerald has no known political affiliation
Bush would have been better off with a life long Democrat.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
shockingelk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Deputy AG James B. Comey apopointed Fitzgerald n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
2. You bet there is. I've said before, you don't get to really play RISK on
a global level without the support and acquiescence of some very powerful people. Does ANYBODY really believe that dumbya is the lead dog? Seriously? He can't fart and chew gum at the same time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
4. Because Rove
had been a consultant to Ashcroft during one of his campaigns. When Rove became an issue, he had to recuse himself. He put Jim Comey in charge; Comey, a decent man, picked Fitzgerald.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlyvi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. Yep. But he fought it like hell.
Kept putting out the line that he could be impartial. ***cough****liar****cough.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:46 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. He believed it
had been buried. Wilson notes, "As late as December 5, 2003, 'a senior White House official' was quoted in the Financial Times gloating, 'We have rolled the earthmovers in over this one'." (page 360)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. I BELIEVE I REMEMBER THE CIA DEMANDING THAT
ASHCROFT RECUSE HIMSELF... i will see if i have in my files...

but rove worked on ashrofts run for missouri governor ..after he had been fired by papa bush for leaking ...he has a habit of this...

fly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
5. Ashcroft Didn't choose Fitz
The Deputy Attorney General Comey did when he was ACTING AG.

Here is the memo, Right off FITZ's website: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/documents/ag_memo_august_12_2005.pdf

Also, FITZ has the POWER AND AUTHORITY of the ATTORNEY GENERAL and CAN NOT BE FIRED.

Comey was forced OUT once it was known that FITZ was going HARD AFTER THE ADMIN and wouldn't back down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shockingelk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Can't be fired?
Certainly there is a process for removing any government official. At least I hope there is!

(I am under the impression Bush can can him at will)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. It's likely
somewhere between the two. Bush can't fire him "at will"; however, he can for "good cause." Still, even Nixon found out that can be an error. But Comey did grant Fitzgerald the same status he had in that case, which was equal to the Attorney General's. Still, Fitzgerald has agreed to run things by the current Attorney General, it has been reported.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lucca Donating Member (159 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. This is what I am worried about:
"Fitzgerald has agreed to run things by the current Attorney General"

I don't trust Gonzales.
I hope that he doesn't find some way to stop Fitzgerald from going forward with the indictments.

I want justice done, and I surely hope that we get to see it happen next week!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. It's good not to trust him.
However, the judge holds a significant amount of power. Gonzales can't stop this. If he could, the administration would not have its tail between its legs.

Next week we will see a large step forward. But there is a huge fight ahead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. The way Fitzgerald stops being Special Counsel in this case
is for him to finish the case completely, for him to allow the Grand Jury to expire with no indictments, or if he should pass away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:35 PM
Response to Original message
7. Tom Daschle
of course, Daschle couldn't order Ashcroft to do anything, but the fact is that there was months of pressure from dem senators before Ashcroft took the step, and Daschle sent this letter a week before Ashcroft recused himself:

Daschle Letter to Ashcroft: Classified Leaks Continue

Monday 22 December 2003

The Honorable John Ashcroft
Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20530

Dear Mr. Attorney General:

On September 29, 2003, we wrote to you and to the President requesting the appointment of a special counsel to investigate the unauthorized disclosure of the identity of an undercover CIA officer. You rejected this request, stating that the Department of Justice would initiate a criminal investigation of this matter instead. However, based on what we have seen to date, it is far from clear that the Administration and your department are truly committed to taking the steps necessary to apprehend the person or persons responsible for this grave national security breach.

More than five months have passed since the first press report disclosed the name of the CIA officer and more than two months since your investigation was initiated. The press reports that you are receiving detailed briefings on the status of this case from the Justice Department employees conducting the investigation. Given your refusal to name a special prosecutor and the fact that you are a political appointee of the President, receiving briefings on an investigation of officials of this Administration creates, at a minimum, the appearance of a conflict of interest.

We believe it is essential that you give our intelligence community personnel, the Congress, and the American people confidence that the Justice Department is thoroughly and aggressively pursuing all leads in this case without concern for its political ramifications. Recognizing that this is an ongoing criminal investigation, we request that you provide us with an overall status of the investigation, including the number of people the Justice Department has interviewed, the number of briefings you have received, the general types of information you are briefed on, what conditions you have placed on the scope of these briefings to ensure the independence of this investigation, and whether you have discussed this case with senior Administration officials outside the Justice Department.

more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thereismore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. Good Ole Daschle. Man, they didn't get rid of him fast enough! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. they sure tried
Limbaugh bashed Daschle on a daily basis for years. Daschle actually got death threats due to the hatred the GOP whipped up against him.

And some of the anti-Daschle propaganda, especially a picture of him in a tutu, made it onto DU, incredibly.

And the very same day that Daschle sent this letter, the following highly dishonest post appeared on DU, furthering a despicable meme that Daschle somehow subverted the 9/11 Commission, when in fact he was a prime motivator for it...

"Tom Daschle, traitor to the truth"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=952216
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #7
21. I like Tom and all but that is boilerplate stuff
He could have written letters like that one until he was blue in the face and I don't think they would have had much effect. That ain't what did it.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. that's too pat a response
I would say that obviously Schumer, Levin, Daschle and the other senators that kept the pressure on didn't think they were wasting their time by doing so. Maybe they're naive?

I would say that of course the dem pressure was a necessary but not sufficient condition for Ashcroft's recusing himself. It didn't bring the result about by itself, but in its absence the result wouldn't have happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
speedoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
18. I believe the CIA forced the bushites to put a legit Special Prosecutor...
on this.

I am sure Tenet or some career guys at CIA had some info that, if leaked, would have done great damage to the bushites.

And, to achieve justice and punishment for outing Plame and effectively destroying the special unit she worked with, they gave the bushites a choice: a) take your chances with a guy like Fitzgerald, or b) face certain damage from our disclosures of you-know-what.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zen Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
20. Because Rove was already a top suspect --- and Rove ran his campaigns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
22. I have read all the posts so far in this thread. I have a different idea
about what happened. If you remember after the investigation was started by Ashcroft's Justice Department, Asshcroft got caught asking questions and receiving private briefings on the case. Remember during this time the fed's were watching Franklin's comings and goings and who knows who else. In fact I have a theory that Judith was being watched as well, but that's a subject for a different thread. I think it is possible Ashcroft got caught relaying information (ie: investigators were under the impression that they were being lied to) back the WH and was confronted. At that point he had no choice but to recuse himself. That is what I think happened. I have no doubt that Ashcroft was forced out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. there were some big, public flaws in the Ashcroft investigation
notably the "12 hour gap" between the time DOJ notified Gonzalez (then WH counsel) of the probe, and the time that the WH was told to preserve documents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #22
27. But when you say feds who do you mean?
CIA reports to Bush. FBI reports to Ashcroft. Ashcroft reports to Bush. And Bush has his own flunkies running both agencies. Sounds like a pretty cozy operation.

So I don't get who these Feds could be you are talking about? I also have no doubt Ashcroft was forced out but I have yet heard a convincing argument for who would have had the power to force him out.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. McNulty and crew, or whoever the patriots are that are left in the FBI.
They were investigating the spies in the pentagon at the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. This McNulty guy who I have no idea who he is and some ex-FBI agents...
...forced Ashcroft to recuse himself? Is that what you are saying?

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. McNulty is in charge of the Franklin investigation.
I do understand what your OP is getting at. I am not sure who the real bosses are. Whoever they are they want ** gone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bklyncowgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
25. Naming an honest prosecutor kept it from being used as an issue by Dems
I believe that it was in Bushco's interest to just give in and name a prosecutor that even the Democrats couldn't object to.

If the issue came up, they could say that they had appointed one of the toughest prosecutors in the country to investigate the leak. Fitzgerald gave them an out that they wouldn't have had with a partisan hack.

Remember, this was pretty early in the game as far as the war went. They probably thought that by the time Fitzgerald was done the war would be long over and even if someone from the administration actually got indicted, no one would care and a few months later they could issue pardons all around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-05 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. Nope. Bush doesn't care what the Dem's say or do
Edited on Fri Oct-21-05 08:55 PM by NNN0LHI
It was something else. I have seen that same expression Ashcroft had that day on faces of managers at Ford Motor Co. where I worked. We called that expression the "word just came down" look at the plants I worked at. When "word came down" and got some of the higher ups awfully concerned about losing their jobs that word came from world headquarters in Dearborn Michigan.

I don't know where the word comes down from for these guys but it is not the Dem's. I know that much.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
31. Hang a left is correct. Ashcroft fucked up by trying to cover up Rove's
involvement, he got caught, which meant that Ashcroft lost his ability to choose a Special Prosecutor who would slow code the investigation. Ashcroft should have recused himself from day one and appointed some partisan hack WITH NO TIES TO THE WHITE HOUSE to cover the whole thing up. However, Ashcroft was never a good jurist, he was always a politician first, so he did not see the legal trap he set for himself until it was too late.

When he was caught, all he could do was step aside and let his career second in command pick the Special Prosecutor. I want to say that it is Ashcroft's fault, but it was really Bush/Cheney/Rove's fault for selecting a politician like Ashcroft to be AG in order to placate the Right wing for the choice of Colin Powell for SOS whom they chose to placate the Dems after Bush v. Gore.

Too much politics, not enough attention to actual governing. Moral of the story, the AG should be someone with impecible LEGAL credentials.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
journalist3072 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
32. Because of his relationship with Karl Rove
From what I've heard, Aschcroft recused himself because of his cozy relationship with Karl Rove.

Rove ran Aschcroft's 2000 campaign for Senate (which of course Johnny boy lost to a dead man).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulthompson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-22-05 03:10 PM
Response to Original message
33. What about pressure from the CIA?
The CIA was hopping mad about the outing of Plame and everyone connected to Brewster Jennings. They didn't want to see some whitewash. I suspect there was a power play between the CIA and other agencies on this, and the appointment of Fitzgerald was part of the deal made.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 07:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC