Schlozman: What I Really Meant Was...

[babylonsister]

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003413.php

Schlozman: What I Really Meant Was...
By Paul Kiel - June 12, 2007, 11:39 AM

In a letter to Senate Judiciary Chairman Pat Leahy (D-VT) last night, Bradley Schlozman wrote to "clarify" his testimony before the committee last night.

Grilled by a number of senators over his decision as U.S. attorney for Kansas City to bring four voter fraud indictments just days before last year's election, Schlozman repeatedly testifed that he'd brought the indictments "at the direction" (he used the phrase ten times) of the director of the Election Crimes Branch in the Public Integrity Section. That raised more than a few eyebrows on the panel since that director, Craig Donsanto, is the man who wrote the DoJ manual discouraging such investigations close to an election.

Schlozman's story had the effect of distancing himself from the controversial decision and pinning it on a Department veteran.

Now Schlozman is changing his story:

As required by Section 9-85.210 of the U.S. Attorney's Manual, at my direction, the Assistant United States Attorney assigned to the case consulted with the Election Crimes Branch prior to the filing of the indictments. I want to be clear that, while I relied on the consultation with, and suggestions of, the Election Crimes Branch in bringing the indictments when I did, I take full responsibility for the decision to move forward with the prosecutions related to ACORN while I was the interim U.S. Attorney.

In other words, somehow, some way, Schlozman was able to get a green light for the indictments.

Sen. Leahy, reacting to Schlozman's letter, thinks it's more than a "clarification" -- and points out that it's far from the first time a Justice Department official has misled Congress over the past few months:

“It is deeply troubling that after weeks of preparation Mr. Schlozman appears to have misled the Committee and the public about his decision to file an election eve lawsuit in direct conflict with longstanding Justice Department policy.

I asked him repeatedly about this case at the hearing because of concerns that it was done to use law enforcement power improperly to affect the outcome of the election, which is the reason the Department instituted the policy as a safeguard against such manipulation.

“This Justice Department and this Administration already suffer from a severe credibility crisis, and learning that yet another senior official was less than forthcoming during his testimony before Congress does little to restore any of the lost trust or eroding confidence in their leadership. It is difficult to get to the facts when Administration officials fail to come clean, but the Committee will continue to pursue the truth behind this matter.”

[EFerrari]

1. Sleaze. After I watched him, I wanted to take a shower.

[Norquist Nemesis]

2. Hmmm...Donsanto's name came up a few times during that hearing

It (almost) sounds like Donsanto was not too happy and made it clear that he's not going to be blamed for something he didn't do. Can we suspect he knows where some of the Vote Fraud case bodies are buried???

[notadmblnd]

3. big surprise, he lied...

what would really be a big surprise is if congress grew a set of nads and actually prosecuted someone from this administration for it.

[Beelzebud]

4. When the punishment is NOTHING, why not lie to them?

[BootinUp]

5. The odor coming from the DOJ these days

is like a huge landfill in the middle of August, I need a gas mask.

[malaise]

6. What is the charge for lying to Congress? n/t

[mod mom]

7. ACORN'S June 5 2007 Press Release regarding Schlozman Testimony:

ACORN's June 5 Press Release regarding Schlozman Testimony

-snip

As U.S. Attorney, Schlozman took the unusual step of issuing indictments and making statements to the press about the case shortly before Election Day, contrary to written Justice Department policy. It remains unclear how or why Schlozman took jurisdiction over the case. When the indictments were handed down Mr. Schlozman issued a statement that read, in part: “Those who commit fraud in the electoral process dilute the votes of their fellow citizens and undermine the integrity of our democratic system. The Department of Justice will not allow such fraud to go unpunished.”

The statement neglected to mention that ACORN itself brought forward the evidence against these four workers who had defrauded the organization; that civic organizations are required by Missouri law to turn in all signed voter registration applications; or that the organization had assisted in the investigation.

Schlozman’s assertion that these crimes "dilute the votes of their fellow citizens" was inaccurate-- because no votes or voters were involved in the case.

The statement came at the heels of an intense campaign by partisan officials and activists to disparage ACORN’s voter registration drive, which was focused on low income and minority communities.

-snip


http://www.acorn.org/index.php?id=8540&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=19125&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=8359&cHash=cba7ac48aa

BUZZBLOG IS REPORTING THERE WAS NO PRESS CONFERENCE AFTER THE ACORN INDICTMENTS WERE HANDED DOWN:

There was no press conference involving Brad Schlozman after the ACORN indictments were handed up Nov. 1, 2006.

Here's what we posted on the Buzz Blog (KC Star's political blog) that afternoon:

The U.S. Attorney's office says a federal grand jury handed up indictments this afternoon against four people who, the indictments claim, worked for the community group ACORN to register voters.

The four face two felony counts each: of providing false information to the KC Election board, and of filing a false voter application with the board. Each carries a 5 year/$250,000 fine penalty.

ACORN says it's happy the indictments were handed up -- they say they provided the names of three of the four indicted individuals, who, they say, no longer work for ACORN.

Said U.S. attorney Bradley Schlozman, in a statement: "Those who commit fraud in the electoral process dilute the votes of their fellow citizens."

-snip


http://buzzblog.kcstar.com/?q=taxonomy/term/2

BUZZBLOG ALSO REPEATS THE KC STAR ARTICLE FROM NOV 2 2006 (THE FOLLOWING DAY) AT THE LINK ABOVE

IT APPEARS TO ME THAT SCHLOZMAN WAS INTENT ON DISTORTING THE STORY BEFORE THE ELECTION FOR POLITICAL GAIN. WHY ELSE WOULD HE RELEASE THE INDICTMENTS BEFORE THE ELECTION AFTER IT WAS ACORN ITSELF THAT BROUGHT FORWARD THE EVIDENCE?

[mod mom]

8. Schlozman "neglected to mention that ACORN itself brought forward the evidence"

I had to repeat this statement as it points to Schlozman use of the indictments for political gain. He didn't need to worry about "diluting votes". It wasn't urgent that these indictments be brought forward to the public to prevent voter fraud. He was attempting to portray an organization that focuses on voter registration in minority communites in a bad light in hopes of effecting the election. PERIOD.

Oh...and recall he claimed that he wasn't sure what type of voters ACORN focused on? BS.

[mod mom]

9. kicking for the evening folks.