CONYERS Did NOT Cave on Whistleblowers Website = ONE WORD Was Changed

[L. Coyote]

Conyers calls Republican whining "a sideshow and a distraction from these serious matters..." MORE from Rawstory:

=======================
Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) altered the content of a website launched Wednesday to securely elicit reports of politicization of prosecutions from Justice Department staff. The move came in response to complaints issued by his Republican counterparts on the House Judiciary Committee that the whistleblowers website was set up in violation of Congressional rules.

"In an ongoing effort to create a sideshow and a distraction from these serious matters, some have raised allegations about a webpage that was designed to give Department whistleblowers a mechanism to securely communicate with the Committee," Conyers, the Judiciary Committee's Chairman, said in a statement late on Thursday. "The webpage was launched prematurely, but the content of it represented a good faith interpretation of House rules. Within three hours of learning about a different interpretation of the Rules and to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, the website was edited - removing one word - and is now, under any interpretation, in full compliance with the rules."

Rep. Conyers ordered the replacement from the website of a statement that "Communications will be received and reviewed by a select group of members of the majority staff of the Judiciary Committee." Now, the webpage states that the committee staff generally will receive the information, implying that both Democratic and Republican staff will be privy to the whistleblowers' complaints.

Michael Roston - June 22, 2007 - http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Conyers_admits_Justice_Dept._whistleblower_website_0622.html

[Jackpine Radical]

1. The only think I can think of to say is

K'n'R

[L. Coyote]

2. Chairman Conyers Launches "Write Congress to Right Justice"

Chairman Conyers Launches "Write Congress to Right Justice"
Web Page for Current and Former DoJ Employees to Share Information with the House Judiciary Committee Investigators
June 20, 2007 - For Immediate Release - http://judiciary.house.gov/newscenter.aspx?A=821

(Washington) - Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) today announced the launch of a new Web page, http://judiciary.house.gov/WriteCongressToRightJustice.aspx, to respond to the growing number of current and former Justice Department career lawyers and other employees raising concerns about politicization in the Department.

This page provides a secure method for DOJ employees to communicate what they know to Committee investigators. The Committee will protect the confidentiality of those who come forward.

"We have heard through intermediaries that current and former Justice Department whistleblowers needed a means to securely and confidentially communicate with the Committee," Conyers said. "This page is designed to allows those whistleblowers to get the truth about the Department to the American people."

=======================
Text in the Web Page at this hour = http://judiciary.house.gov/WriteCongressToRightJustice.aspx:

This Web site is designed to receive on a completely confidential basis any information concerning the possible politicization of the United States Department of Justice. The incoming communications should be limited to those who represent that they are or were employed by the Department of Justice. The communications will be received and reviewed by a select group of members of the staff of the Judiciary Committee of the United States House of Representatives. The staff will verify through official directories that the sender is or was an employee of the Department of Justice. The names, titles and identities of the senders will be maintained in strictest confidence, but once the identities are confirmed, the substantive information provided will be utilized for official Committee business, to the extent that it can be verified and confirmed.

This Web site has been created in response to numerous requests by current or former career attorneys of the Department of Justice who have advised Members and staff of the House Judiciary Committee that they are concerned that the Department has become unduly politicized in pursuing its important law enforcement functions. These concerns were underscored by, but predated the firings of at least nine United States Attorneys in the second half of 2006. The concerns are voiced by lawyers in various divisions of Main Justice, including but not limited to, the Criminal Division and the Civil Rights Division and by assistant United States attorneys throughout the country. At the same time, many individuals have expressed concerns that their identities be kept confidential from political appointees within the Department out of a concern for retribution, which could include termination, demotions or other adverse employment actions.

In order to prevent such unfortunate retaliatory actions, we recommend that Departmental e-mail not be used for this purpose. We recommend that current or former employees use personal e-mail to this Web site or call or write the staff of the Committee at the following address or telephone number: 2138 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515. [phone]. While anonymous messages will not be considered, similar confidentiality will apply to anyone identifying him or herself and requesting such confidentiality.

The Committee is looking for concrete and specific actions taken or statements made by management-level officials of the Department that have led career employees to be concerned that law enforcement actions will not be handled on a completely non-partisan, impartial manner but will be unduly influenced by partisan political or other inappropriate considerations. The information supplied and verified will be included in matters that are investigated by the Committee and will be incorporated in the Committee’s reports and in legislative and oversight activities of the Committee. We appreciate your cooperation and assistance and look forward to any valid information that current or former DOJ employees can provide.

[Matariki]

3. thanks for posting this. n/t

[EFerrari]

4. Of course he didn't.

Geeze.

Thanks, L. Coyote.

[L. Coyote]

5. C-SPAN VIDEO of the Hearing = Paul McNulty

House Judiciary Subcmte. Hearing on Firing of U.S. Attorneys
http://c-span.org/VideoArchives.asp?CatCodePairs=,&ArchiveDays=100&Page=2

Paul McNulty, Deputy Attorney General, testifies in the ongoing investigation of the firing of U.S. Attorneys. He appears before the House Judiciary Subcmte. on Commercial & Adminstrative Law. ... Mr. McNulty has announced that he will resign in June.
6/21/2007: WASHINGTON, DC: 2 hr. 15 min.

[L. Coyote]

6. Elston and McNulty Exec. Session Interviews = redacted PDFs RELEASED

This is the sort of real information many an R would love to detract from with whining and more whining.

===============
6-21-07 Release.

McNulty Hearing Interview Transcript Excerpts

Elston Interview - http://judiciary.house.gov/Media/PDFS/Elston070621.pdf
McNulty Interview p. 12-16 - http://judiciary.house.gov/Media/PDFS/McNultyp12-16.pdf
McNulty Interview p. 19-24
.....
McNulty Interview p. 263-265

MORE LINKS: http://judiciary.house.gov/Printshop.aspx?Section=594

[G_Leo_Criley]

7. K&R n/t

[L. Coyote]

8. ConyersBlog: the House and Senate Judiciary Committees subpoenaed the White House and Harriett Mier

A little news
Submitted by JC on June 14, 2007 - 10:29pm.
http://johnconyers.com/node/135

You may have heard that the House and Senate Judiciary Committees subpoenaed the White House and Harriett Miers yesterday. I thought you might be interested in the stories about it today.

Washington Post - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/13/AR2007061300733.html

New York Times - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/13/AR2007061300733.html

========================
On the meanings of words
Submitted by koryannder on June 15, 2007

Subpoena \Sub*poe"na\, n. punishment. See Pain.] (Law)
A writ commanding the attendance in court, as a witness, of the person on whom it is served, under a penalty; the process by which a defendant in equity is commanded to appear and answer the plaintiff's bill.
<1913 Webster>

Subpoena ad testificandum. A writ used to procure the attendance of a witness for the purpose of testifying.

Subpoena duces tecum. A writ which requires a witness to attend and bring certain documents......

[Ms. Clio]

9. k&r n/t

[L. Coyote]

10. " a House rule that grants all members equal access to committee information."

Conyers launches site for DoJ whistleblowers
By Klaus Marre - June 21, 2007
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/conyers-launches-site-for-doj-whistleblowers-2007-06-21.html


“We have heard through intermediaries that current and former Justice Department whistleblowers needed a means to securely and confidentially communicate with the Committee,” Conyers said ...

However, a top Republican on the panel, blasted the new website, saying it could violate a House rule that grants all members equal access to committee information.

“Political influence neither began nor will it end with the Bush Administration,” said Rep. Chris Cannon (R-Utah) ... “The creation of a secret website to collect gossip and rumors only accessible by the majority party, and only about the Bush Administration, is blatant partisanship ... "

“The names, titles and identities of the senders will be maintained in strictest confidence, but once the identities are confirmed, the substantive information provided will be utilized for official Committee business, to the extent that it can be verified and confirmed,” Conyers said in an introduction on the website.

[CK_John]

11. But that one word means the whistleblowers id and info will be turned over to Bushco. n/t

[L. Coyote]

12. NO. It means the House Judiciary Committee Republican ranking member

may or may not reveal confidential information. And, to reveal the ID of a confidential whitleblower has its own consequences.

Additionally, any would-be whistleblower can just approach Conyers as a Congres person, or his senior staff. The message is out there now, and it cannot be put back in the box. Also, it is likely this was done because there was a line forming!!

[Joe Chi Minh]

13. Defies belief, doesn't it?

[L. Coyote]

14. Did you watch the hearing? It was no great High IQ moment for Republicans.

My choicest moment was when Conyers asked, "So, is that what you know?"
regarding voter caging when the Rs reverted to that mass mailing talking point.

It was a real, "So, you have a what, 65 or so, IQ?" moment. :rofl:

Sometimes the fish should just admit there are fish in the pond.
They're so out of place when they pretend they are not in the pond.

[Joe Chi Minh]

19. No. I wish I had! It's really "infra dig" that Conyers should have to treat

with any of those Republican troglodytes in government. What are they doing in government? Relative to his IQ, if his IQ were the norm, i.e. calibrated at 100, they would have an IQ of 65 or so. Perhaps less.

[L. Coyote]

21. VIDEO on C-SPAN: House Judiciary Subcmte. Hearing on Firing of U.S. Attorneys

This JavaScript link will work for a while, then the programs move down the queue to page 3, then 4, etc.

RECENT PROGRAMS >> : http://c-span.org/VideoArchives.asp?CatCodePairs=,&ArchiveDays=100&Page=2

6/21/2007: WASHINGTON, DC: 2 hr. 15 min.

Paul McNulty, Deputy Attorney General, testifies in the ongoing investigation of the firing of U.S. Attorneys. He appears before the House Judiciary Subcmte. on Commercial & Adminstrative Law. He is expected to discuss the actions of his Chief of Staff, Michael Elston. Mr. McNulty has announced that he will resign in June.

[Joe Chi Minh]

22. Brilliant. Thanks, Coyote.

[L. Coyote]

23. Do post back on your impression of the "is that what you know" exchange.

I dare say, I'd not skate on such thin ice, but I have an over 65 IQ :rofl:

[Joe Chi Minh]

24. Sometimes where Republicans are concerned, words fail me. Imagine that dolt wanting to

ramble on about the mechanisms of caging!

McNulty is obviously not the worst, but it was difficult to retain respect for him. Almost every answer he gave was couched in terms which included the words, "memory" or "recall".

I did identify one, I think, in which he avoided both, but the effect was rather spoilt by other transparent equivocations, including the phrase, "... I may have had a vague awareness..."

He tried to evoke a Hamlet-like persona, but came across as a bibulous Yorrick, waking up after a particularly heavy night on the amber nectar.

One thing, though. I was disgusted when he said to Congressman Conyers, "the caging, which concerns you...". I just wish that Conyers had said, "Stop just there, Mr McNulty. Caging concerns the people of this country, it concerns democracy. It ill behoves you to characterize concern for it as merely some kind of personal foible on my part."

[L. Coyote]

27. Right on on the caging issue. McNulty should have said "We are going to prosecute."

Are you aware of the McNulty memo? He centralized corporate fraud charging authority to himself, removing from the USAs that discretion within a week of the firings. Not only did corporate fraud dissappear magically before the 2004 election, but now USAs can't bring it back to our attention without permission from the Deputy AG in DC. This was a tectonic shift, especially given the inquiries into Medicare fraud in TX, CA, MO and elsewhere, 30 USAs all together, and he should have been grilled about this.

[Joe Chi Minh]

28. Gee, it gets more an more nightmarish. And the simpleton's smile

they always wear under interrogation just adds to it.

He can't be the amnesiac half-wit he poses as. You don't hear witnesses in court rooms effectively pleading amnesia, when answering virtually EVERY question. I don't think it happens much at all. But what you've just revealed about him, makes me wonder how Congressman Conyers could have made those laudatory references to his integrity. I felt uneasy about it at the time, fearing the worst. Seemingly with good reason.

It occurred to me that, as well as encouraging cooperation, the way they constantly bullshit each other may actually be a function of their milieu, the more aggressive and violent the context, the Senate, Congress, Westminster, etc, the more elaborate the courtesy rituals. Post WWII, at least until fairly recently, I believe Japan has been a relatively law-abiding and peaceful country, at least by Western standards, but the elaborate bowing rituals presumably would have orignated in the shogun era, where a shogun would top any prol he took a scunner to, on the slenderest of pretexts.

Indeed, why WASN'T McNutty grilled on it? Maybe the grilling will be done in private, via the follow-up letters. But public would have been better.

[L. Coyote]

29. Check out the amount of redaction in the Executive session transcript. Behind the scenes

there is far more going on than we are told. That may be what some of the "trusted" is about, or that may be a rub it in your face type of warning shot, connoting that you can still decide to be on our side of the line if you talk.

See: http://judiciary.house.gov/Printshop.aspx?Section=594

[Joe Chi Minh]

30. Thanks, Coyote. It's gets more and more intriguing.

[L. Coyote]

31. With 36 investigation, how can we keep up on all the details and nuances??

Even here on DU, it is obvious most people don't have a clue as to how much, all together, is actually going on in Congress.

I read a lot of one-liner rants, and very low substance seems the norm.
Meanwhile, the biggest episode of American political history is unfolding.

[Joe Chi Minh]

32. It sure looks like it on all 3 counts.

[Tigress DEM]

15. The difference between reTHUGS and DEMS....

When a DEM is found to be breaking the law his party does NOT rush to provide a "get out of jail quick" card or pay for his lawyer.

DEMS let those among them who break the law suffer the consequences of breaking the law.

When an honest law-abiding, due process respecting DEM (like Conyers) has something pointed out to him where it SEEMS things could APPEAR improper, there are immediate steps taken to come into full compliance with the law EVEN IF NOT ONE IMPROPER THING WAS EVER DONE.

[L. Coyote]

17. The difference is Avoiding Prosecution vs. Pursuit of Ethics

Some people need lawyers to advise them on how much they can get away with w/o going to jail (hopefuly).
Some people don't need lawyers, but use them for advice on the most ethical and legal way to proceed.

[Tigress DEM]

25. True, but it's also about simply "walking the walk."

People who actually walk the walk may make mistakes and need to change things as they go along. If someone is just talking about the "good that they do" without ever following through, they don't have any actual experience with having to make adjustments to the real world application.

If *ush actually did the ethical things he said he was going to do in many of his speeches, instead of just *ushitting and then backtracking, he'd actually be a half-way decent president.

It's just that he never has any intention of keeping his promises to regular people. He had no problem telling Katrina victims, we will help you, getting the photo op and just abandoning them before, during and after.

Problem is also about the "appearance" of wrong doing vs actually understanding that if you do wrong you're still doing wrong whether caught or not. So I really agree with your comment as well.

[Tigress DEM]

16. Kick Shakalaka!

[L. Coyote]

18. Federal Whistleblower Laws and Regulations, available as a free download.

http://www.whistleblowers.org/

In honor of “Whistleblower Week in Washington,” the National Whistleblower Center is making its publication, Federal Whistleblower Laws and Regulations, available as a free download. This is the only legal treatise compiling the text of all federal whistleblower protection laws and regulations, and will be available as a free download throughout Whistleblower Week in Washington (May 14-18, 2007). Federal Whistleblower Laws and Regulations contains the text of over 100 federal statutes and regulations, including the Sarbanes-Oxley corporate whistleblower law, the False Claims Act and the Whistleblower Protection Act.

This publication is available immediately as a PDF download from the National Whistleblower Center website. To download, please click this link: Federal Whistleblower Laws and Regulations. = http://www.whistleblowers.org/html/publications.html#binder

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

20. Thank you, L. Coyote!

:hi:

[EFerrari]

26. kick for Mr. Conyers