Revenge Against Rove

I don't necessarily want to see a bunch of Republicans chosen for positions in a Democratic Administration, but I think there's value to choosing a select amount. Particularly in the case of US Attorneys who have shown their willingness to buck partisanship and follow the evidence. This is a great move by the President.

Today, President Obama nominated four individuals to serve as U.S. attorneys — most notably Daniel Bogden in Nevada [...] Bogden has actually already served as a U.S. attorney, but he was ousted in the Bush administration’s political purge. Even Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) said that the case had been “completely mishandled” by then-attorney general Alberto Gonzales.

Apparently Harry Reid played a big role in this.

David Iglesias would be a nice choice for US Attorney in New Mexico, too.

Blog Outsourcing

Just go to TPM Muckraker today, there's a host of good stuff on the US Attorney scandal. Apparently Michael Elston, DoJ official, told Carol Lam she had to leave in weeks and not months, REGARDLESS OF THE IMPACT on existing cases. And fired prosecutor Bud Cummins heard from a DoJ official that Tim Griffin would stay as his replacement no matter what and that the plan was to circumvent the Senate. And another fired prosecutor, Paul Charlton, was asked to keep quiet about his circumstance in return for the Attorney General's silence. Oh, and Paul McNulty said USA Daniel Bogden's performance had nothing to do with his firing, in variance to his earlier statements to Congress. AND, the Senate Judiciary Committee has granted subpoenas for Karl Rove's emails.

And this is ONE DAY of reporting. TPM Muckraker is amazing.

I have another long US Attorney post that I'm readying, but as an example of how damaging this entire scandal has been, take a look at this:

Lawyers for former Poway defense contractor Brent Wilkes yesterday asked a judge to dismiss indictments stemming from the Randy “Duke” Cunningham scandal because the government deliberately and illegally disclosed grand jury secrets to the media.

Wilkes' attorney, Mark Geragos, also alleged in documents filed in federal court that the leaks were part of a campaign by former U.S. Attorney Carol Lam to use Wilkes and other defendants as “pawns” in a “political squabble” with bosses at the Justice Department who wanted her fired.

Geragos contended that Lam wanted the indictments to happen before the Bush administration forced her from office. The indictments were issued Feb. 13; Lam left two days later.

“The United States Attorney used the leaks to create a public atmosphere that compelled the grand jury to return indictments and present (the Justice Department) with a fait accompli, a gesture of defiance by Carol Lam as she was forced out of office,” Geragos wrote.

Because there was such a sloppy process to fire these attorneys, because it did impact ongoing investigations, the perception that Lam rushed her indictments through may be seen as legitimate, even though it's clear from the evidence that Brent Wilkes is a complete scumbag who was bribing legislators, government officials, everyone in sight. This is the damage done when you mess with the administration of justice.

Another Domino Falls in Purgegate

Via (who else?) TPM Muckraker, we have YET ANOTHER example of a federal prosecutor being fired for attempting to investigate a Republican. From The Arizona Republic:

Two weeks after Arizona U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton was ordered to give up his post, he sent an e-mail to a top Justice Department official asking how to handle questions that his ouster was connected to his investigation of Rep. Rick Renzi, R-Ariz.

Charlton, one of eight federal prosecutors forced to resign last year, never received a written response.

It seems like Charlton was beginning his investigation into Renzi, and the Justice Department had some knowledge of it.

And this is curious.

In October, Justice Department officials confirmed that Renzi was the subject of an inquiry into a land swap that would benefit a friend and business associate. Renzi has denied any wrongdoing. He could not be reached Tuesday.

Renzi is a Bush loyalist. When Renzi was locked in a battle for his congressional seat last year, the president came to Arizona to campaign for him.

When the first list of U.S. attorneys targeted for ouster was drafted, Charlton's name was not on it. But his name was on a subsequent list, drafted in September. Although the Renzi inquiry was not yet public, it is likely the Justice Department was aware of the investigation, said a former U.S. attorney who is familiar with the protocol when a sitting lawmaker is involved.

"If we had anything of a major investigative nature, I would notify the Justice Department," said Melvin McDonald, who was Arizona's U.S. attorney in the Reagan administration. "Typically, that's what happens."

So DoJ confirmed an investigation in October. Charlton's name hit the target list in September. And surely, he began the investigation well before DoJ confirmed it.

So let's recap:

• David Iglesias, US Attorney for New Mexico, gets phone calls from Pete Domenici and Heather Wilson pressuring him to indict local Democrats, and we he resists their pressure, he's fired.

• Carol Lam, US Attorney in San Diego, emails the Justice Department about obtaining warrants to search the house of Dusty Foggo, #3 at the CIA, and the next day Kyle Sampson is writing people about "the real problem we have right now with Carol Lam.

• John McKay, US Attorney in Washington State, resists calls to investigate non-existent and baseless accusations of voter fraud, and winds up on a target list, eventually getting fired.

• Daniel Bogden, US Attorney in Nevada, was in the midst of investigations targeting current or former Republican members of Congress (Jim Gibbons?) when he was fired.

• And let's not forget Debra Wong Yang, US Attorney for Los Angeles, who, months after opening an investigation into Rep. Jerry Lewis, was hired away for $1.5 million dollars by the same law firm representing Lewis, which Josh Marshall says is part of "an odd pattern of pivotal investigators and prosecutors getting fortuitous promotions or offers of employment in the private sector at key moments."

Yeah, I think I see a pattern here.

Democrats in Arizona are being pretty aggressive about the Charlton case.

"Obviously, there needs to be an investigation," said Rep. Harry Mitchell, D-Ariz. "You need to find out the facts. It shouldn't be partisan at all."

On Tuesday, the Arizona Democratic Party wrote to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, asking that it look into a connection between Charlton's removal and the Renzi investigation. The letter, signed by state party Chairman David Waid, said the investigation appears to have stalled since Charlton was forced out.

The newest e-mails, memos and other records raise fresh questions about whether there were political motivations for Charlton's ouster, as the documents indicate that Justice Department officials were still - after the fact - trying to settle on a complete explanation for why Charlton was called on Dec. 7 and told to resign.

DoJ is so busted.

UPDATE: Carpetbagger points me to this Max Blumenthal article that adds some context to the Charlton firing. He was put on the list for targeting at pretty much the same time that he opened the Renzi investigation. Prior to that, he was winning awards for running a model office. And the DoJ alibi for firing him is a... doozy:

The Justice Department and the White House offered a scattershot of alibis for firing Charlton. The Bush Administration's case against Charlton rested ultimately on the account of a little-known Justice Department official named Brent Ward, who claimed in a September 20, 2006 e-mail that Charlton was "unwilling to take good cases."

What accounts for this bizarre e-mail? And who is Brent Ward?

Ward first came to prominence in Utah, where as US Attorney during the Reagan era he cast himself as a crusader against pornography. His battles made him one of the most fervent and earnest witnesses before Attorney General Edwin Meese's Commission on Pornography; he urged "testing the endurance" of pornographers by relentless prosecutions. Meese was so impressed that he named Ward a leader of a group of US Attorneys engaged in a federal anti-pornography campaign, which soon disappeared into the back rooms of adult bookshops to ferret out evildoers. Ward returned to government last year as the chief of the Justice Department's newly created Obscenity Prosecution Task Force, where his main achievement has been the prosecution of the producer of the Girls Gone Wild film series [...]

According to the source, Ward's accusation against Charlton stems from a case he filed in June 2006. That month, Ward ordered Charlton to prosecute Five Star Video, an adult video store that registered on Ward's radar when it mailed copies of the DVD's Gag Factor 18, Filthy Things 6, Gag Factor 15, and American Bukkake 13 to customers across state lines. Charlton agreed to take the case, but as the source told me, Ward implored him to attach an additional US Attorney to it. Concerned about wasting the already limited resources at his disposal on a case of dubious value, Charlton hesitated. Despite his misgivings, he assigned the additional prosecutor--a key fact missing from the White House e-mails.

So, you have a maniac in the DoJ forcing frivolous porno investigations that Charlton FOLLOWS THROUGH ON because it's his job - and then when he's fired, the same maniac is used to claim that he doesn't take "good cases." Like the "American Bukkake 13" ring that has ripped this country asunder.

I'm at a loss...