follow the link for more pdf files on the emails

http://judiciary.house.gov/Printshop.aspx?Section=345

if you have a hard time go to the main page and then go to printshop you will find them there.

10:1

email from Sampson to Miers and William Kelly:

Please note (1) the plan, by its terms, would
commence this week; (2) I have consulted with the DAG, but not yet informed others who
would need to be brought into the loop, including Acting Associate AG Bill Mercer, EOUSA
Director Mike Battle, and AGAC Chair Johnny Sutton (nor have I informed anyone in Karl's
shop, another pre-execution necessity I would recommend); and (3) I am concerned that to
execute this plan properly we must all be on the same page and be steeled to withstand any
political upheaval that might result (see Step 3); if we start caving to complaining U.S.
Attorneys or Senators then we shouldn't do it -- it'll be more trouble than it is worth.

PDF's from Mclatchly are not opening properly in MAC preview, they show up in drawer, but not in window. Is there another source for new PDF's?

Doc:9 (page 3?) It looks like a page of a Daily Planner. Didn't Monica just take a leave of absence?

Goodling, Monica

Subject: PREP: Phone Call with Senator Domenici
Start:
End: Thu 41612006 350 PM Thu 4/6/2006 4:00 PM
Recurrence: (none)
Meeting Status: Accepted
When: Thursday, April 06, 2006 3:50 PM-4:00 PM (GMT-05:OO) Eastern Time (US & Canada).
*_*,*,*,*,*_*,*,*,*
AG's Office
AO: Kyle Sampson DOJ: Will Moschella, Monica Goodling

Well, it's official. The far left hates President Bush and his Administration. Who else would want to read through 3000 pages of useless emails? Oops, I already know the answer. Never mind. Read on.

11-1

This PDF is only one page. It's a letter, dated March 23, 2007 from Richard A. Hertling to Chuck Schumer.

In addition to noting that it is 283 pages, he says:

"We have redacted or not made available for review documents for the reasons previously described in our letter of March 19, 2007, and have also redacted information the public disclosure of which would present law enforcement concerns."

8:5-8, outline of an agenda for a White House Judicial Selection Committee meeting, except it's almost entirely redacted. Dated June 21, 2006. Main bullet points are New Business, Old Business and Confirmation Update. There is Griffin's resume attached at the end.

Who was on the committee in the White House?

3:32

"Why me? The administration is grateful for your service, but wants to give someone else the chance to serve in your district."

This contradicts claims from DOJ and WH that it was due to performance. They had people in mind to replace them already. (This isn't really news, but another confirmation.)

OK if MAC preveiw does not work, then the Acrobat 7 will display PDF's properly. FYI

11:5

This one is kind of interesting, DOJ spokesperson Scolinos emails W.H. spokesperson Martin with names of 6 to be fired USAs.

In her comment she states: "The one common link is that three are along the southern border so you could make a connection that DOJ is unhappy with immigration prosecution numbers."

i.e. Here's a public explanation that you could use.

Of course the "one common link" may also be incidental to the privately understood explanation.

10:3 Check out the last bullet point ie;" More trouble then it's worth". Yea.

From: Kyle.Sampson@usdoj.gov [mailto:Kyle.Sampson@usdoj.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 11:02 AM
To: Miers, Harriet; Kelley, William K.
Cc: Paul.J.McNulty@usdoj.gov
Subject: USA replacement plan
Importance: High

Harriet/Bill, please see the attached. Please note (1) the plan, by its terms, would
commence this week; (2) I have consulted with the DAG, but not yet informed others who
would need to be brought into the loop, including Acting Associate AG Bill Mercer, EOUSA
Director Mike Battle, and AGAC Chair Johnny Sutton (nor have I informed anyone in Karl's
shop, another pre-execution necessity I would recommend); and (3) I am concerned that to
execute this plan properly we must all be on the same page and be steeled to withstand any
political upheaval that might result (see Step 3); if we start caving to complaining U.S.
Attorneys or Senators then we shouldn't do it -- it'll be more trouble than it is worth.

2:1 - 2:2

Letter from Richard A. Hertling to John Conyers dated March 23, 2007.

Nearly identical letter to document 11:1.

From set 2-6, consisting of DAG000000251 through 300.

The doc on p. 253 is interesting. It seems to be an argument in favor of Tim Griffin. It's not clear who wrote it. Anyway, relevant quotes:

* The Attorney General appointed Tim Griffin as the interim U.S. Attorney following the resignation fo Bud Cummins, who resigned on Dec. 20, 2006. Since early 2006, Mr. Cummins has been talking about leaving the Department to go into private practice for family reasons.

* The Attorney General has assured Senator Pryor that we are not circumventing the process by making an interim appointment and that the Administration would like to nominate Mr. Griffin. However, because the input of home-state Senators is important to the Administration, the Attorney General has asked Senator Pryor whether he would support Mr. Griffin if he was nominated. While the Administration consults with the home-state Senators on a potential nomination, however, the Department must have someone lead the office -- and we believe Mr. Griffin is well-qualified to serve in this interim role until such time as a new U.S. Attorney is nominated and confirmed.

The next page begins a Jan 31, 2007 letter to Mark Pryor containing this paragraph:

As the Attorney General has stated to you, the Administration is committed to having a Senate-confirmed United States Attorney for all 94 federal districts. At no time has the Administration sought to avoid the Senate confirmation process by appointing an interim United States Attorney and then refusing to move forward, in consultation with home-State Senators, on the selection, nomination and confirmation of a new United States Attorney.

The "committed" language certainly seems familiar, but I wasn't able to find an exact match.

There follows a "fact sheet" arguing that the specific cases of appointments are all on the up-and-up.

Then (p. 261-262) there's a letter from Mark Pryor to AGAG, expressing displeasure and concern about the appointment of Griffin.

p. 266 is an email from Griffin to Monica Goodling giving his version of the story about Palast's "caging" article. In it, he argues that he was doing legitimate work to counteract voter fraud.

pp 271-277 are a draft of the statement of Paul McNulty before the Judiciary Committee, with handwritten annotations including the "knife in my heart" line. pp 278-285 the actual statement.

The remainder of the text is about S.214, and then public testimony by AGAG. I didn't find much of interest there. It's no secret the WH opposes it.

8:14

"recordkeeping for porn producers"

It's in there, I'm not kidding.

3:1

Email exchange between Paul McNulty, William Moschella, and Margaret Chiara from Oct. 17, 2006 to Oct. 19, 2006.

Most relevant: McNulty tells Chiara regarding her request that David or Scott Schools be present regarding a meeting with her, "I would not have selected Will as my principal associate or Mike as my Chief-of-Staff if they were not exemplary in their integrity, discretion and respect for United States Attorneys."

LOL

3:3: Email included in 3:1.

3:4: Email from Monica Goodling to Michael Elston from February 12, 2007: "In all fairness, you probably should make her aware of the fact that the DAG will brief her resignation on Wednesday and that it is possible that while we will not disclose outside of the Hill -- that the Hill may "out" her this week."

Interesting at 3:6

Email from Dan Collins to William Moschella from July 09, 2003:

"Will-

You had asked at the meeting a few weeks ago for ideas on DOJ Reauth. One that sprang to mind was eliminating the district courts' role in selecting USAs. The relevant section is 28 USC 546. Section 546(c)(2) states that the AG may appoint an interim USA who may server for only 120 days. Upon expiration of the 120 days, section 546(d) states that the district court appoints the interim until a USA is appointed as PAS.

-Dan"

3:9

Dan Collins email to William Moschella dated June 16, 2004. Here, he lays out amending 28 USC 546(d).

Starting at mid-paragraph: "There could be a question whether the AG could continue to appoint the same person to a new 120-day term, i.e., is the 120-day limit of (c)(2) meant to be a total cap on interim service by way of AG appointment. I don't think that is the right reading of 546(c)(2), but if you wanted to eliminate this risk, you could amend 546(c) by striking 'A person appointed as United States attorney under this section may serve until" and inserting "The term of an appointment under this section shall expire upon". Alternatively, you could add language repealing the 120-day limit on AG interim appointments altogether."

He adds alternatives to this proposal.

3:10
"From William.Moschella ..."
Sent: ... June 16, 2004 ...
To Dan Collins"

"Dan ... You once indicated to me (a pet peeve of yours I think) that federal judges have the ability to appoint acting USA's. What is the code section? There is a potential vehicle for an amendment to fix that constitutional anomaly."

Gonzales never appears in any list of meeting attendees. So how can you tell if he's there? If the meeting takes place in AG's office, then he's there.

9:24

"AG to call Sen. Domenici." Gonzales is not listed as an attendee, but you can infer he's there.

This seems to be an effort to disguise the reason for the firings even before they happened, and to prevent the disclosure of who might have made such decisions.

Doc 3:31, labeled DAG0002025

http://www.realcities.com/multimedia/nationalchannel/archive/mcw/pdf/usattorneys/032307_3.pdf

PLAN FOR REPLACING CERTAIN
UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS

STEP 3

Prepare to Withstand Political Upheaval:
U.S. Attorneys desiring to save their
jobs (aided by their allies in the
politicaI arena as well as the Justice
Department community), likely will make
efforts to preserve themselves in office.
...
[Potential questions for USAs]
Who decided?
The Administration made the
determination to seek the resignations.
(not any specific person at the White
House or the Department of Justice).

Why me?
The Administration is gratful for
your service, but wants to give someone
else the chance to serve in your district.

~~Why did the DOJ officials feel the
need to lie to the USAs about
replacements? Why claim to be giving
someone else a chance when you don't
yet know who that someone is?

@J Marcus Campbell

"Which ones are they?" email was sent before the list of 6 was sent.

Which ones are they?
Posted by: J Marcus Campbell

You need to read from the bottom up... Looks more like Martin was asking which USA's, then the response is above. Bottom up helps the longer emails make sense.

Batch 10, page 1:

From: Kelley, William K.
To: Fiddelke, Debbie S.; Jennings, Jeffery S.; Martin, Catherine
Sent: Fri Nov 17 12:32:06 2006
Subject: FW: USA replacement plan

>
The email below, and the attached document, reflect a plan by DOJ to replace several USA Attorneys. By statute, US Attorneys serve four year terms, which are commonly (but not always) extended by inaction -- in practice, they serve until replaced. They serve at the pleasure of the President, but often have very strong home-state political juice, including with their Senators.

Before executing this plan, we wannted to give your offices a heads up and seek input on changes that might reduce the profile or political fallout. Thanks.

-----Original Message------
From: Kyle.Sampson@usdoj.gov [mailto:Kyle.Sampson@usdoj.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 11:02 AM
To: Miers, Harriet; Kelley, William K.
Cc: Paul.J.McNulty@usdoj.gov
Subject: USA replacement plan
Importance: High

Harriet/Bill, please see the attached. Please note (1) the plan, by its terms, would commence this week; (2) I have consulted with the DAG, but not yet informed others who would need to be brought into the loop, including Acting Associate AG Bill Mercer, EOUSA Director Mike Battle, and AGAC Chair Johnny Sutton (nor have I informed anyone in Karl's shop, another pre-execution necesssity I would recommend); and (3) I am concerned that to execute this plan properly we must all be on the same page and be steeled to withstand any political upheaval that might result (see Step 3); if we start caving to complaining U.S. Attorneys or Senators then we shouldn't do it - it'll be more trouble than it is worth.

We'll stand by for a green light from you. Upon the green light, we'll (1) circulate the below plan to the list of folks in Step 3 (and ask that you circulate it to Karl's shop), (2) confirm that Kelley is making the Senator/Bush political lead calls, and (3) get Battle making the calls to the USAs. Let us know.

>

Kyle Sampson
Chief of Staff
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530 [...]

1-1 Meeting Reminder of William Mercer stating that McKay wants to meet to discuss LInX. (12/07/05)

1-2 William Mercer's Outlook Calender Showing that meeting (Other meetings appear to be redacted but could be mistaken)

1-3 Meeting Reminder of William Mercer mentioning a call with McKay on 01/27/2006. Of Note is subject line is "Call with USA McKay/Fast Track" EDITORIAL***Unless DOJ is an extremely ironic institution, this gives the impression that McKay was on Fast Track***Editorial

1-4 William Mercer's Outlook Calender showing that meeting. (Other meetings redacted)

1-5 Meeting Reminder of William Mercer mentioning a call with McKay and Chiara on 01/26/07

1-6 William Mercer's Outlook Calender showing that meeting (Other Meetings Redacted)

1-7 Meeting Reminder of William Mercer for meeting with top DOJ brass on 03/05/2007 to prepare for House Judiciary Committee
EDITORIAL***they sure did a great job coordinating their stories, eh?***Editorial

1-8 William Mercer's Outlook Calender showing that meeting (Other Meetings Redacted)

1-9 Meeting Reminder of William Mercer for meeting with Top DOJ brass on 03/06/2007 to have "Updated US Attorney Discussion"
Editorial***Is in AG's Conference room which may indicate Albert Gonzales attended. Don't know for certain but it is only e-mail in here that is in this room.***Editorial

1-10 William Mercer's Outlook Calender showing that meeting (Other Meetings Redacted)

J. Marcus, "Catherine Martin" as in former assistant to Dick Cheney, former witness in the Irving Lewis Libby trial, and wife of FCC Chair Kevin Martin? Isn't she now an assistant to Mr. Bush?

3:8 Letter from Issa to Lam (Feb 2, 2004) wanting to know why her office arrested and then released Antonio Amparo-Lopez (suspected alien smuggler) from custody after Lam's office decided not to prosecute. He wants info about what happened on 11/20/03 (date of arrest?) and the rationale behind Lopez' release.

Talk about the wrong prognostication:

Batch 10, page 3

From: Scolinos, Tasia
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 5:40 PM
To: 'Catherine_Martin@who.eop.gov'
Subject: RE: USA replacement plan

Its only six US attorneys (there are 94) and I think most of them will resign quietly - they don't get anything out of making it public they were asked to leave in terms of future job prospects. I don't see it as being a national story - especially if it phases in over a few months. Any concerns on your end?

J. Marcus, I believe Martin's address refers to the "White House, Executive Office of the President" (who.eop.gov). She would be coordinating communications for someone in the EOP. If correct, that puts Mr. Bush or someone in his personal office/staff in the know.

"From: Scolinos, Tasia
To: Catherine-Martin@who.eop.gov"

"OK this Catherine Martin seems like a pretty dim bulb. She is sent the list below with locations of USA's and has to ask which ones are on the southern border."

Can this be the same Catherine Martin who testifed at the Libby trial? The current Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy Communications Director for Policy and Planning?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask/20050429.html has a photo of her.

Wow. The Deputy Asst to the President doesn't know what states are on the border. Just, wow.

more panic about Fienstien letter to Lam This exchange is very damaging, considering when it happened, after 11-21 excuse idea, and prior to hearings, and after firings, looks real bad... Film at 11pm

pdf 32307_8 pg 22

Goodling, Monica . ,
Fmm:Scott-Finan, Nancy
Sent:Thursday, January 18,2007 12:42 PM
To: Goodling, Monica; Cabral, Catalina; Traccl, Robert N; Green, Saralene E; Callier, Saundra M
Subject:RE: I hear there is a letter from Feinstein on Carol Lam a year or two ago

SardSaundra
Can you pull the ~einsteinle tter on Carol Lam from 2006,2005, 20b4 up and email it to us'? Thanks.

From: . Goodling, Monica
Sent: Thursday, January 18,2007 12:39 PM
To: Smtt-Finan, Nancy; Cabral, Qtalina; Tracd, Robert N
Subject. I hear there Ls a letter from Feinsteln on Carol Lam a year or two ago
I need it ASAP. Can you pull from your system ASAP and email to me?

8 pg 28 -29 letter to AG complaining about USA Lam signed by several Congressmen involved with brent Wilkes, ie, Cunningham and John Doolittle

The approved Sampson/Miers firing plan, attached to the Dec. 4th memo, must have been drafted no later than early November 2006, then not updated when approval was delayed until December. It refers to starting the search for replacement USA's no later than early November.

It also makes clear Gonzales had to be in the loop. His chief of staff coordinated a complex firing and defensive PR strategy with the President's lawyer. She would have been talking to Rove and Bush. According to Sampson's plan, all possible contacts whom the fired USA's might call were told to give identical responses. That included Gonzales.

If Sampson had really left Gonzales out of the loop, he could have been blindsided by Bush, Rove, Miers or any of the fired USA's. Sampson was considered a Contender for interim replacement for Rove, should he have been sidelined by an indictment. Sampson's future depended on making this firing plan succeed.

He would not have left Gonzales out of the loop unless ordered to by Gonzales himself (meaning he'd approved the plan, but wanted plausible deniability about its details), or someone higher up than he was. That could only mean the President, or one of his direct reports.

Hey, check this out, re: the missing Rove e-mails and the GWB43.org e-mails:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/3/24/01039/6772

Dear "please_get_lives",

Let us know when it dawns on you.

Catherine Martin

Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy Communications Director for Policy and Planning

Prior to her appointment, Ms. Martin served as Special Assistant to the President for Economic Policy. From 2001 to 2004, she worked for Vice President Dick Cheney as Deputy Assistant and then Assistant to the Vice President for Public Affairs. Prior to joining the White House, Ms. Martin worked for Secretary of Commerce Don Evans as Deputy Chief of Staff and White House Liaison. From 2000 to 2001, Martin served as Policy Director to former Texas Attorney General John Cornyn, who was later elected to the United States Senate. From 1994 to 2000, Ms. Martin practiced law at the Washington, D.C. law firm of Steptoe & Johnson, LLP.

Ms. Martin received her J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1993 and her B.A. from the University of Texas at Austin in 1990. Ms. Martin is married to Kevin Martin, Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, and they reside in Washington, D.C.

Partial description of items in pdf file 9.

Only items that seem to have any significance (as far as I can tell) are listings for a meeting on November 27, 2006 on "U.S. Attorney Appointments" with multiple attendees and a meeting on January 17, 2007 with many attendees in preparation for the Senate hearing the next day.

All content information has been redacted other than a resume for Griffin.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:2
Sours, Raquel

Subject: U.S. Attorney Appointments

Start: Mon 11/27/2006 9:00AM
End: Mon 11/27/2006 10:00AM

Recurrence: (none)

Meeting Status: Meeting organizer

Required Attendees: Sampson,Kyle; Goodling, Monica; McNulty, Paul J; Moschella, William; Elston, Michael (ODAG); Battle, Michael (USAEO)

AG's Conference Room

AO:Kyle Sampson DOJ; Paul McNulty, Monica Gooding, Will Moschella, Mike Battle

----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:3
Sampson, Kyle calendar page scan for above meeting with listing at 9:00AM (November 27, 2006)

Listing at 9:00AM
U.S. Attorney Appointments (AG's Conference Room)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:4
Goodling, Monica

Subject: PREP: Phone Call with Senator Domenici

Start: Thu 4/6/2006 3:50PM
End: Thu 4/6/2006 4:00PM

Recurrence: (none)

Meeting Status: Accepted

When: Thursday, April 06, 2006 3:50PM-4:00PM (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

AG's Office

AO:Kyle Sampson DOJ; Will Moschella, Monica Gooding

----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:5
Goodling, Monica

Subject: Phone Call with Senator Domenici

Start: Thu 4/6/2006 4:00M
End: Thu 4/6/2006 4:15PM

Recurrence: (none)

Meeting Status: Accepted

Required Attendees: Sampson,Kyle; Moschella, William; Goodling, Monica

AG's Office
AO:Kyle Sampson DOJ; Will Moschella, Monica Gooding
POC: Jennifer 224 7093

----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:6
Goodling, Monica calendar page scan for above meeting day (April 6, 2006)

Listing at 8:30AM seems to be redacted

Listing at 3:30PM
3:50PM-4:00PM PREP: Phone Call with Senator Domenici

Listing at 4:00PM
4:00PM-4:15PM Phone Call with Senator Domenici

Listing info from 4:30PM to 6:30PM seems to be redacted

----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:7
Goodling, Monica

Subject: U.S. Attorney Appointments

Start: Mon 11/27/2006 9:00AM
End: Mon 11/27/2006 10:00AM

Recurrence: (none)

Meeting Status: Accepted

Required Attendees: Sampson,Kyle; Goodling, Monica; McNulty, Paul J; Moschella, William; Elston, Michael
(ODAG); Battle, Michael (USAEO)

When: Monday, November 27, 2006 9:00AM-10:00AM (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

AG's Conference Room
AO:Kyle Sampson DOJ; Paul McNulty, Monica Gooding, Will Moschella, Mike Elston, Mike Battle

----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:8
Goodling, Monica calendar page scan for above meeting day (November 27, 2006)

Listing info from 7:00AM to 9:00AM redacted

Listing for 9:00AM
U.S. Attorney Appointments
Info redacted

Listing info from 9:30AM to 12:00PM redacted

Listing info from 2:00PM to 3:00PM redacted

Left side footer: Goodling, Monica

----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:9
Goodling, Monica calendar page scan for above meeting day (December 08, 2006)

Listing for 8:00AM redacted

Listing for 10:00AM
10:00AM-10:45AM VTC Interview - Tim Griffin AR/E (2245 MAIN)

Redacted info in 11:30AM-1:30PM area

Redacted info in 4:30PM-5:30PM area

Left side footer: Goodling, Monica

----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:10
Goodling, Monica

Subject: VTC Interview - Tim Griffin AR/E

Start: Fri 12/08/2006 10:00AM
End: Fri 12/08/2006 10:45AM

Recurrence: (none)

Meeting Status: Accepted

(attachment icons for MSWord docs) "Resume updated.doc (72KB)" "bio2006.doc (27KB)

Resume and Bio are attached:
>>

----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:11
Scan of Tim Griffin resume (first page)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:12
Scan of Tim Griffin resume (second page)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:13
Scan of Tim Griffin biographical document (first and only page)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
.
.
.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:35
Day book page scan.

January 16, 2007

Can't read the particulars of who's calendar it is though with some lightening I might be able to.

Listing for meeting at 11:30AM
Heading:
PREP: 1/18 Senate Judiciary Hearing

Listing info redacted.

Listing for meeting at 1:15PM
Heading:
PREP: 1/18 Senate Judiciary Hearing:

Listing info redacted.

On this calendar page listings from 7AM to 11:30AM are redacted as well as 1:15PM to 4:45PM.

Footer at bottom left of page: "Otus2007, AG"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:36

Beach, Andrew

Subject: PREP: 1/18 Senate Judiciary Hearing:

Start: Wed 1/17/2007 1:45PM
End: Wed 1/17/2007 2:45PM

Recurrence: (none)

Meeting Status: Meeting organizer

Required Attendees: Otus2007, AG; Sampson,Kyle; Moschella, William; Seidel, Rebecca; Tracci, Robert N;
Friedrich, Matthew (OAG); Scolinos, Tasia; Elwood, Courtney; Mercer, William W; Hertling,
Richard; Brand, Rachel; Elston, Michael (ODAG); Burton, Faith; Colborn, Paul P; Bradbury,
Steve; Bucholtz, Jeffrey (CIV); Eisenberg, John; Elwood, John

AG Conference Room
Attending: Brent McIntosh, Associate Counsel to the President

Core Participants
AO:Kyle Sampson DOJ; Richard Hertling, Will Moschella, Courtney Elwood, Rebecca Seidel, Rob Tracci, Matt Friedrich,
Tasia Scolinos, Bill Mercer, Rachel Brand

Additional Attendees
Paul Colborn, Faith Burton, Steve Bradbury, Jeff Bucholtz, Mike Elston, John Eisenberg, John Elwood

----------------------------------------------------------------------
9:37
Day book page scan.

January 17, 2007

Redacted information from 7:15AM to 1:45PM

Listing for meeting at 1:45PM
Heading:
PREP: 1/18 Senate Judiciary Hearing

Listing info redacted.

Listing for meeting at 3:45PM
Heading:
PREP: 1/18 Senate Judiciary Hearing

Listing info redacted.

No info from 4:15PM to bottom of page

Footer at bottom left of page: "Otus2007, AG"
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Josh et al -

Not sure if you've seen this:
http://politics.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/us-attorneys-bush-holds-the-smoki
ng-gun/

- BD in SF

P.S. You might want to check your email service. I tried emailing this to you using talk@talkingpointsmemo.com, but this bounced back to me:

:
209.86.93.227 does not like recipient.
Remote host said: 550 joshtpm@earthlink.net...Due to extended inactivity new mail is not currently being accepted for this mailbox.
Giving up on 209.86.93.227.

All of section 7 documents are Outlook printouts of John Nowacki's schedule. Below is a catalog of the documents with meeting times, topic and attendees (when available).

7-1: 6/20/06 from 2:00-3:00pm
Michael Battle scheduled a face-to-face meeting with Margaret Chiara

7-2: 10/10/06 from 11:30am - 12:00 pm Regina Barret scheduled meeting with Investigator Warren Hamilton re: USA Dan Bogden.

Who is Hamilton? Why is he investigating Bogden? Any emails from Barret following this meeting?

7-3: 12/20/06 All of John Nowacki's meeting for day are redacted.

7-4: 1/9/06 from 12:00pm - 1:00pm
John Nowacki has meeting re: Tim Griffin

7-5: 1/9/060
All of John Nowacki's meeting for day are redacted. Previous page shows meeting re: Tim Griffin. Is this a failed effort to try to hide a meeting?

7-6: 1/26/07
All of John Nowacki's meeting for day are redacted.

7-7: 1/30/07
All of John Nowacki's meeting for day are redacted.

7-8: 2/5/07 2:00pm - 3:30pm
John Nowacki scheduled major pow-wow to prep for 2/6/07 DAG hearing. Attendees are: Will Moschella, Kyle Sampson, Monica Goodling, Richard Hertling, Rebecca Seidel, Nancy Scott-Finan, John Nowacki, Tom Kirsch, Michael Battle

7-9: 2/5/07
John Nowacki's schedule redacts all meetings except one noted in 7-8

7-10: 2/6/07
Afternoon meetings following DAG hearing and scheduled tasks are redacted from Nowacki's schedule

7-11: 2/15/07 1:30-3:00 pm
Scheduled meeting on Nowacki's schedule is redacted.

What happened immediately prior or after 2/15/07 that could relate to a meeting Nowacki wouldn't want disclosed?

7-12: 2/15/07 10:00am-10:30am meeting, 2:00-3:00 pm meeting
Scheduled meetings on Nowacki's schedule are redacted.

7-13: 3/2/07 11:30am - 1:00 pm
Nowacki accepted 1.5 hour meeting to prep for House Judiciary Hearing.
Attendees are: William Moschella, Monica Goodling, Richard Hertling, Nancy Scott-Finan, Brian Roehrkasse

7-14: 3/2/07 1:00pm-2:30 pm meeting immediately following prep for House Judiciary hearingn redacted from Nowacki's schedule

7-15: 3/5/06 11:00am-12:30pm
Nowacki accepted meeting to prep for House Judiciary hearing
Attendees are: William Moschella, William Mercer, Kyle Sampson, Michael Elston, Monica Goodling, Richard Hertling, Nancy Scott-Finan, John Nowacki, Tasia Scolinos, Brian Roehrkasse

7-16: 3/5/06 3:00pm-4:30pm
Nowacki accepted meeting to continue prep for House Judiciary hearing
Attendees are: William Moschella, William Mercer, Kyle Sampson, Michael Elston, Monica Goodling, Richard Hertling, Nancy Scott-Finan, John Nowacki, Tasia Scolinos, Brian Roehrkasse

7-17: 3/5/06 Meeting from 1:00pm-3:00pm redacted from Nowacki's schedule.

Who was Nowacki meeting with between morning and afternoon sessions to prep from House Judiciary hearing?

Monica Goodling was the liaison between the WH and the AG's office. And she's curiously on leave.

Seems like she would be a good be a good person to focus upon, as she probably knows where the bodies are buried.

These documents confirm it for me, the republicans were clearly concerned most about Carol Lam.

From what I have seen thus far based on the documents and the comments, they are clearly trying to put into question Carol Lam's credentials.

Things to keep of note:
-The republicans only have statistical information concerning Ms. Lam's enforcement of criminals (which on glance appears to mirror the rest of the department-especially with immigration).they don't appear to mention this as a reason to fire her before the purge.
-There is not a document that I have found (and please correct me if I am wrong) providing any rationale for firing of Carol Lam before the purge. She has been on lists, but there is still no why

It is interesting that there is yet to be a document on Iglesias. Is it simply a matter of them not having anything bad on the guy? Same with Charlton and Bogden. What gives?

3:9-10

Detailed email dated June 16, 2004, laying out options to "fix" the "constitutional anomoly" in 28 USC 546 (d), that allows Federal judges to appoint Acting USA's.

What caught my eye was the non-gov email domain, mto.com. He's a former DOJ employee, who . He appears to be a scholarly type (when not repping Big Tobacco), who Moschella tapped when a potential legislative "vehicle" was identified. (FWIW, the Patriot Act Reauthorization was signed into law on March 9, 2006.) Not necessarily anything sinister that he was consulted, but notable since he responded with several word by word options for amending 28 USC 546 (d).

Daniel P. Collins Bio
http://mto.com/lawyers/bio.cfm?attorneyID=250

*********************
From: CollinsDP@MTO.com
Sent: .Wednesday, June 16,2Q04 1239 PM
To: Moschella, William
Subject: RE:
Attachments: tmp.htm

From BD from Bang the Drum : http://politics.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/us-attorneys-bush-holds-the-smoking-gun

Quick Quotes:
"W wants him in"
"WH is intent on nominating"

Full e-mail:
From: Goodling, Monica
Sent: Friday, August 18,2006 12:09 PM
To: Sampson. Kyle
Subject: Re: Conf Call, re: Tim Griffin

Fyi - to catch you up on the latest here (unless something else has happened this week), scott and I spoke last thurs or fri and this is what’s going on… We have a senator prob, so while wh is intent on nominating, scott thinks we may have a confirmation issue. Also, WH has a personnel issue as tim returns to the states this week and is still on WH payroll. The possible solution I suggested to scott was that we (DOJ) pick him up as a political, examine the BI completed in May pursuant to his WH post, and then install him as an interim. That resolves both the WH personnel issue and gets him into the office he and the W want him in. I asked Elston to feel out the DAG on bringing Tim into one of the vacant ADAG spots there, just for a short time until we install him in Arkansas. The DAG wanted to look at his resume, and I sent it him before I left. Was going to run this plan by you once I knew the DAG was onboard. If not, I suppose we can look at CRIM, but knowing Tim, my guess is he’d prefer something else given that he was in CRIM in 2001. (Tim knows nothing about my idea for a solution at this point - wanted your signoff, and a home for him, before I called him.)

June 2004 was a very interesting month. A few quick highlights from Wiki:

June 1 Stephanie Herseth defeats Larry Diedrich in South Dakota
June 3 Tenet announces he is resigning
June 4 Pavitt anounces resignation
June 5 Reagan dies
June 6 the torture memo goes public

6-pg.11
Meeting
2/6/2007 9:30am-11:30am
Senate Office Bldg Rm. 226
Shayne Williams, Michael Elson (ODAG),
William Moschella

Topic: Is the DOJ Politicizing the Hiring and Firing of USAs? Chairman Leahy

"White House OPA calls California, Michigan, and Washington 'leads'"

This is a quote from the email listed above, posted by rwojciak at 03:41am. The email is sent by Kyle Sampson to William Kelley with a copy to Harriet Myers, and lists tasks to be performed on "Pearl Harbor Day" persuant to the Massacre, including one for the AG to do (calling Senator Kyl).

Here's my question: in the quote I cited here, does "OPA" perhaps refer to the "Office of the Political Assistant"? In other words, is this a reference to Karl Rove?

Or does the acronym, "OPA" mean something else entirely?

p.s. Thanks to every one of you for all the great work you're doing -- it's been riveting to read your entries.

6

61 pages of meeting scheduling in sets of two; first page is from desk of McNulty or Moschella or Elston, second of each set is a copy of the page from the appointment calendar. Earliest is scheduled phone conference with Domenici (9/23/05), up through scheduled in-house meetings prepping for and after the Senate hearings in February 2007.

Nothing noteworthy that I could see, though the redactions on the appointment calendars seem a little off to me at times, like the appointment notation itself was not part of the original document. Don't know what that would signify, if true, it's just that the lines don't always match up (e.g., p. 6, 14, 22).

BushCo should be fried for all this -- and I mean boiled in oil -- an electric chair would be a waste of energy.

[Yes, pun intended -- and maybe we can burn bushies to heat the oil.]

gwb43.com info:

MX Record shows mail exchangers as:

mailscan1.smartechcorp.net and mailscan2.smartechcorp.net

Nameservers for the domain are:

ns1.cha.smartechcorp.net and a.ns.trespassers-w.net

Smartech is your standard hosting company as far as I can tell, based in Chattanooga, TN. They actually make a point of stating in their news page that they host GOP sites:

http://www.smartechcorp.net/index.php?page=news&sub=story&id=68

Could be an interesting lead to follow.

hello, i am looking at PDF number 4

4:1-40 USA criminal caseload statistics for 2001-2006

4:41 email 6/6/06 from Daniel Fridman to Bill Mercer with attachment, "final memo incorporating the EARS report and U.S. sentencing commision data"

4:42 beginning of report

"The USAO for Southern District of California has come under criticism for ostensibly weak enforcement of federal immigration criminal offenses. Most recently, . . . Issa has released to the AP an internal 41-page report written last August by the Border Patrol of San Diego claiming that the lack of federal immigration prosecutions in San Diego is hurting morale within the Border Patrol . . . . The purpose of this white paper is to analyze the situation in SDCA by using staffing and prosecution . . . "

4:43 second page of white paper and end of PDF

PDF number 5 is full of email from assistants to Carol Lam, it appears, about the great and irrational "venom" coming from Issa. They are dated early July 2006 and begin on page 16.

Issa was "fixated" on the "coyote" problem and wanted to meet with Lam; eventually they speak on the phone.

5:17 Dave L. Smith email to Rebecca Seidel and Nancy Scott-Finan cc:d to Daniel Fridman, Lee Otis, John Crews, and Natalie Otis, regarding Issa's request for a meeting: "Presumably he would ask her what resources she needs to achieve 'zero tolerance' on immigration and she would be limited to urging him to support the President's budget. Still, with appropriate talking points, I see this as an opportunity to ratchet down the venom coming from Issa."

5:18 copy of letter from Brenda Porter, Lam's assistant, which includes, "I believe you are familiar with the history between Congressman Issa and our office."

5:25 email from Lam to William Moschella and Rebecca Seidel, copied from Moschella to Michael Elston and Bill Mercer, to Daniel Fridman, here Lam describes her phone call with Issa, in pretty calm language, but Issa comes across poorly

5:27-29 a long chain of forwarded and copied emails in which the Lam people in the above react with surprise and anger at some ridiculous statements made by a border patrol witness at the congressional hearing on 7/6/06 - they want to know why he is speaking out of turn and who prepped him to say such things (the immigrants are not being so prosecuted now)

5:34 last page of a long email requesting information from Lam's office to write a story about Issa's concerns - reporter is Sharon NcNary

5:54 bunch of email "of the highest possible priority" from june 16

gotta run hope every little bit helps

my notes so far:

1:4 Jan 27,2006 Bill Mercer Meeting with McKay/Fast Track

1:5 Jan 26,2006 Meeting with McKay and Charlton

1:9 3/6/06 USA Meeting - Mercer, Sampson, oschella, Elston, Hertling, Scolins, Roehrkasse

3:1 10/19/2006 meeting - Margolis, McNulty, Chiara, Moschella, Elston. "Scott Schools and David [Margolis]

know the situation and me."

3:2 8/2/2006 - CHarlton, McNulty, Meyer, Elston - AZ death penalty case

3:4 2/12/2006 (8:23 pm) Goodling tells Elston that "Hill may 'out' Chiara"

3:5 2/12/2006 (8:24 pm) Elston e-mails Chiara - "need to discuss a related issue"

3:5 2/12/2006 (3:45) Elston tells Chiara new USA's don't succeed predecessors on AGAC. Normally, interims

are not made members of AGAC

3:6 7/9/2003 Dan Collins to Will Moschella and Dan Bryant - confirmation that Dan Collins came up with idea

for "Section 502", removing district court role

3:8 Darrell Issa contacts Carol Lam about catch and release

3:9-3:10 6/16/2003 Collins lays out the details for "502"
Also notes: "P.S. I notice things are still quiet on the Sentencing Commission frot. Is there any hint

that the earlier anticipated hearing wil go forward?"

6/16 Will Moschella started discussion, asking about Collins' "peeve" regarding judicial appointment

3:11 memo dated 7/30/2004 Shows that it was Ashcroft DOJ policy not to prosecute "certain alien smugglers".

USA's wanted "zero tolerance"

3:13-3:14 USA's ask the President for additional prosecutorial funding

3:16 11/9/2005 - Moschella passes "Section 502" plan to Tolman, and Tolman agrees to "get the comprehensive

fix done."

3:17 11/11/2005 Natalie Voris confirms that Sheldon Sperling got 3 consecutive interim appointments

3:18 11/11/2005 - Moschella being a bit deceptive about PATRIOT amendment

3:19 11/11/2005 - courts have made their own appointments

3:20 Moschella discusses appointments with Collins

3:22 Iraq war impact on staffing for Lam

3:25 explains prosecutorial guidleines

3:26 suggest changing Lams guidelines

3:29 12/4/2006 - sampson, McNulty, Battle in on "plan"

3:35 e-mail regarding NM/CA immigration. Who is it from? Name is redacted or deleted

3:38 5/21/2006 email from USA-EO, report of Darrel Issa on CNN, critical of SDCA

3:40 cases "resolved by charge bargains"

3:50 5/26/2006 Dan Fridman provided Immigration pProsecution White paper to Bill Mercer, suggest changing

guidelines and adding staffing

4:42 6/6/2006 "Final Version" of report provided

5:5 6/19/2006 - memo from John Crews to Daniel Fridman - "How fast do you want the [immigration

prosecution] increase to occur, and by how much?"

5:7 explains increase question

5:8 "water balloon" analogy (just a thought..might it have been allowed to swell in SDCA to prevent

problems in TX and cause them in CA)

5:9 - 5:10 ICE shifts focus away from investigatory support of criminal cases

5:11 Fridman suggests putting conditions on DHS/DOJ grants to bring local law enforcement in line

5:15 6/23/2006 discussion about possible Issa-Lam meeting. Issa might ask what it would take to achieve

"zero tolerance" - Lam would be encouraged only to recommend support of Preisdent's budget.

RE Rove / GWB43.com email..

Does his use of this email server (and tech support ) mean the 'GOP' oganisation has same 'security clearances' as Rove. Illegal?

"Interesting about the blackberry emails routed through gwb43.com. *Very* interesting.

That server needs to be subpoenaed."

I agree. This is getting VERY interesting. I hope the Dems are up to the challenge.

There are no emails that originate from a gwb43.com address in the dump. Only ones quoted in replies.

Subpoena that server: it looks increasingly likely that "Karl's shop" uses email resources outside the eop.gov domain.

10-1, 10-3, etc.

Looking at the Outlook calendars from Kyle Sampson's computer. The date stamp on the pages is 3/15/2007 and these are pages from the gap/lull. So...these pages were printed in time for the document dump LAST Friday but they were held back. Why? Did OAG really think that bloggers and news organizations would miss this? Wishful thinking on their part?

10:3 (McClatchy dump). Apparently, there was a Word document entitled "USA replacement plan.doc." It would be interesting if that document could be examined, part. for any "track changes," comments, etc. Most people, I think, fail to consider that all changes must be accepted in order to get rid of previous drafts/changes.

Mara, 17 was a Friday, so 20 was soonest work day.

cminmd, smuggling ops, large or small, only cross at the border; they may operate or be managed from anywhere.

The three districts in CA are centered in CA's top three cities, but incorporate agricultural districts. Both are sources of employment for immigrants, and, therefore, for immigration enforcement. Just as the construction and lawn care trades in Dallas, Ft. Worth or Austin may have heavy concentrations of immigrants. Or, for that matter, 15th and P in Washinton, DC, near Whole Foods, which has a morning shape-up that appears to be largely immigrant painting and construction trades labor.

Monica Goodling may be on leave; this puts her out of the daily loop and makes it harder for the press to find her. But, Congress can request her testimony or issue a subpoena.

RE Document 8:14

and comments above by DK (reading "porn producers"), corrected by Disputo (at 3:28) as "pom producers"

This may not even fit the facts of the document here - BUT that set me to thinking about the whole business of these emails from other servers. And thus to the way this totalitarian regime has issued directives related to its criminal behavior - so for turture and for surveillance.

Thus:

1. We now know they've been keeping two (or more) sets of books for memos, emails, etc.

2. So, if these folks were intending to set up alternate ways of communicating, which would subvert the law requiring the maintenance of presidential records, wouldn't we expect to find DOJ producing a directive (for the president to sign) which allows for or provides for this double set of books?

I may be off base about:

3. Could the reference to statistics on "pom" record keeping be a reference to 1 and 2? I say that only because they must have had an internal way to refer to the "project" or "program" on memos - to refer to the double set of books - and perhaps statistics related to such?

4. Even if #3 is incorrect, we should still be on the lookout for what I've suggested here - a directive from DOJ authorizing the subversion of the law on maintaining presidential records.

SO WHERE IS THIS SILENCER TO THE SMOKING GUN?

Bears repeating. Within the past few months, Bush has replaced all three of California's USA's: two fired, one sent to a Republican firm that does white collar defense work. These eight represent seven states; that's fourteen Senators. Rove considers these seven key states in 2008. [FDL has a good comment on this.] Add in states like Utah, which also has a new USA - Brett Tolman (a former Specter staffer) who inserted the change into the Patriot [sic] Act II, deleting the Senate's role in confirming interim USA's, who beat out Kyle Sampson for that slot.

Bush takes seriously his role as top predator in the patronage food chain, though others, like Rove, actually think and eat for him.

Discounting California, whose two Senators are Democrats, what President would willfully piss off more than twenty percent of the Senate - by removing their patronage over USA appointments - without being "in" on the political moves that underlie those changes? What top political adviser would advocate these systemic changes without informing his President and coordinating its possibilities with other agencies?

The smoke is as thick as a pea souper. The fire is close by.

Giant Teapot,

The email addresses are probably in the form of

Lastname,First

so Otus2007,AG

would be

AG Otus2007

FWIW, every email on the eop.gov servers used to be cc'd to the WH "Office of the Archivist" or some such title. Before you hit "send" you were warned each and every time that *everything* is archived as a WH record.

Any possibility these people "inadvertantly" bypassed eop.gov by "accidentally" using gwb43.com, rnchq.com, etc.? None whatsoever.

In section 6 pages 24, 48 the email address of "Otus2007, AG" shows up.

In section 8 page 2 an email address of "Otus2005, Ag" appears.

In section 9 page 36 the email address of "Otus2007, AG" shows up again.

Who is this "Otus2005, AG" or "Otus2007, Ag?" Is this the same person changing names or 2 different people. Almost all of the other email address are formated with lastname, firstname using the real name of the person sending or receiving the email. Why this alias?

Posted by: bb
Date: March 24, 2007 11:36 AM

The above is my original post...thanks for catching up...Now explain the 2005 vs. 2007 versions and why no 2006, etc...then I'll be impressed with your sleuthing abilities...

Mara, 17 was a Friday, so 20 was soonest work day.

Posted by: HotFlash

The reponse was on Tuesday, Nov 21st at 1:20pm. So there was more than one day of work, which is why I am suspicious that there was more correspondence in between.

Another ?? please...

Why does the email in section 8 page 1 have a print out heading of "OIP" and a "To:" field to "Beach, Andrew?" These emails are MS Outlook emails which usually print out the name of the receiver in the header...Who is "OIP?" Why do I not see Andrew Beach in the header?? WTF??

Thank you...

The strings that Karl Rove pulls -- manifest by the words that emanate from the president -- are designed to protect Rove by prolonging Gonzales' stay . I believe Nixon's henchmen called it "twisting, twisting slowly in the wind." Judge thinks he has the president's unstinting support, but really what is going on is that Karl has told Bush that it's beneficial to the White House for Al to remain as long as possible as a symbol of ineptitude and a fall guy for the conspiracy to pervert DOJ. After Sampson testifies, the White House will reluctantly pull the trigger (on a Friday night to minimize media coverage). Al will finally realize he has been used as a human sacrifice and the president's fervent "support" was a mirage. What seems to Gonzales at this moment like the president's stirring loyalty is really nothing more than Rove's convenience.

@ Mrs. Panstreppon:
The 3/19 dump included details of budget cuts during Bush43 first term that left Assistant U.S. Attorneys (the staff level Federal prosecutors) with inadequate staffing. I think it was Lam that repurposed funds to contract out staff support, but then HQ DOJ cracked down on THAT, leaving AUSA's to essentially do their own clerical work. DOJ HQ was starving the field offices, leaving them open to criticisms such as Issa's.

They starve the programs they want to die, and they appoint pols who want to abolish the offices/statutes, to run them. Bolten said this plain as day to Jon Stewart on the Daily Show just this week.

In the case of the USA's they wanted to have it both ways: keep a stranglehold on the field budgets while demanding that whatever funds they did receive were used for bogus "voter fraud investigations."

@ bb:

OIP=Office of Information and Privacy!

As in, FOIA, Privacy Act, electronic records, etc. Possibly included in email distributions for archiving purposes?

http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/oip.html

Thank you Giant Teapot! Info rules!!!

Re Josh's observation of: "The one common link here is that three of them are along the southern border so you could make the connection that DOJ is unhappy with the immigration prosecution numbers in those districts,"

AND

The MN USA that everyone is pushing

All of the people, except Lam, where members of the Native American Issues Subcommittee (NAIS). Chiara was the Chiar. A year earlier Heffelfinger was the Chair...but he left his USA MN position in Feb. 2006.

Wanted to post this indepth analysis at talkingpoints but having trouble. (NAIS 1/3 down in the dairy).

www.dailykos.com/story/2007/3/22/5326/71374