« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
The Daily Muck
How 41 Pages Helped Unseat Lam
"When an anonymously authored 41-page Border Patrol report was released by U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), it became a vital cog in Republican efforts to focus attention on Lam's prosecutorial record -- an assault that ultimately brought down the prosecutor. However, the report is oddly written, with editorial comments and aphoristic tangents interspersed among graphs and statistics." (Voice of San Diego)
New Emails Prompt the Question: Did Bush Make the Decision to Fire US Attorneys?
"An article from McClatchy Newspapers discusses the potentially overlooked role of President Bush in the decision to fire the U.S. Attorneys: 'Internal administration e-mails show that the Justice Department postponed the firings for nearly three weeks late last year while awaiting White House approval.' Combined with a White House email asking whether the upcoming firings 'will be determined to require the boss's attention', this 18-day gap raises new concerns about the level of involvement of President Bush." (CREW)
Inspector General Details Failures of Iraq Reconstruction
"The U.S. government was unprepared for the extensive nation-building required after it invaded Iraq, and at each juncture where it could have adjusted its efforts, it failed even to understand the problems it faced, according to the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction. In a stinging, wide-ranging assessment of U.S. reconstruction efforts, Stuart W. Bowen Jr. said that in the days after the invasion, the Defense Department had no strategy for restoring either government institutions or infrastructure." (Washington Post)
Josh
Zachary
The appointment of US Attorneys is delegated to the President. Now I know that he doesn't type up personnel orders himself, but at some point there has to be input and approval from the Chief Executive.
In what form does this approval arrive? Is it a sheet of paper that arrives from the Staff Secretary's Office that he signs off on (remember that both Harriet Myers and Brett Kavanaugh were Staff Secretary at one time)? Or is it an authority delegated to someone in the White House - or the justice department (kinda like the delegated authority to combattant commanders to shoot down civilian aircraft in the USA).
The President had to approve the new appointments somewhere. If he didn't then his staff was running amuck, much like the whole Specter staff putting in the Patriot II provision fiasco.
Is this whole administration full of independent operators as they would like us to believe?
I doubt it
March 23, 2007 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yet more evidence that America is the land of opportunity . . .
Only here could a car thief and insurance fraud grow up to be a Congress person known for beating the drum for several racist movements . . . and using PIOYA information to forward his rampant stupidity.
Here is to hoping that Issa's name is found in the eighteen day gap. Here's to hoping that the Lam termination is the crowning jewel in this f**k's career and now he will just go away in the next election. Here's to hoping that folk in the OC (and the rest of the red voting sections of Kal-lee-for-n-yah) will vote in a more enlightened manner in 2008.
March 23, 2007 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Voice of San Diego story about the Border Patrol "report" that Darrell Issa used to go after Lam in May 2006 deserves its own post.
"Issa had the report several months before taking it public. He received it and several other related documents in the fall of 2005 from "a senior source in the Department of Homeland Security," Issa spokesman Frederick Hill said. He declined to identify the source, but said Issa didn't release the report until May because he hadn't had time to sort through it and verify the information."
We know from the first DOJ doc dump that Issa could not have "verified" the report. On 5/19/06, the Chief of the U.S. Border Patrol said the report was an altered and unauthorized version of an actual intelligence report issued by the El Cajon substation.
Rep. Issa, a Republican, issued a report that is very embarrassing to the DOJ without ever discussing the report with anyone at the DOJ despite having been given the report several monthe before he went public with it.
A senior official in the Dept. of Homeland Security provides a forged document to a member of Congress but the DOJ never investigated who forged the report.
No one at the DOJ comments about the a possible link between Lam prosecuting Border Patrol agents for corruption and the Border Patrol report. (Two Border Patrol agents were convicted in July 2006 for smuggling illegal aliens.)
Issa, Lou Dobbs and everyone else is silent on the issue of corruption in the Border Patrol despite the fact that such corruption has been a problem for years. Interim USA-AZ, Daniel Knauss, had been quoted in the Dallas Morning News several years earlier about the same issue.
Sounds fishy to me.
March 23, 2007 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
No-one is mentioning that two border patrol agents were being prosecuted by Carol Lam for smuggling illegal immigrants just as the 41 page document was being released. Is that because it isn't true? If it is true it seems to be extremely important. Would someone please investigate whether or not it is true?
March 23, 2007 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
This reeks. Sen Feinstein also sent a letter inquiring about Lam's performance, in which Border Patrol complaints were mentioned.
Has anyone asked Sen Feinstein what prompted her letter?
Is the Border Patrol involved in trumping up complaints against Lam?
March 23, 2007 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
More from above link "New Emails Prompt the Question: Did Bush Make the Decision to Fire US Attorneys?"
...Miers' response prompted Kyle Sampson to ask: Who will determine if this requires the President's attention?
Interestingly, as Miers forewarned, the decision was delayed, coincidentally, for the amount of time Bush was away for Thanksgiving and a foreign trip:
The e-mail exchange came the day after Bush left Washington for a weeklong trip to Russia and Asia. He returned for a long Thanksgiving weekend at Camp David, then took off to Latvia and Jordan before returning to Washington on Nov. 30, a Thursday.
Four days later, on Dec. 4, the White House signed off on the firing plan.
"We're a go for the US Atty plan," Kelley told the Justice Department. "WH leg, political and communications have signed off and acknowledged that we have to be committed to following through once the pressure comes."
"WH leg" apparently refers to the White House legislative affairs office, the president's liaison to Congress. Rove heads the political office. "Communications" is under the purview of presidential counselor Dan Bartlett.
....
Think Progress and Talking Points Memo both took note of the 18-day gap from Mid-November through early December during which there were almost no e-mails in the documents provided to Congress. That gap coincides with the time that Bush was away.
March 23, 2007 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Speaking of Tim Griffin, I keep seeing references to the fact that he "studied at Oxford," presumably support for the notion that he's a smart, qualified guy. (Today's Washington Post story mentions it, for instance: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/22/AR2007032202266.html )
A run through some of the DOJ documents turns up similar references. (Look at the talkers on DAG...249 and 253.) In fact, one thing that supposedly distinguishes Griffin from Bud Cummins is that Cummins, "unlike Mr Griffin, ... did not attend top-rated universities." Ouch.
Here's what I find curious: all the DOJ references to this say "Graduate school, Pembroke College, Oxford University, 1991." His other educational background lists degrees awarded, so it sure looks like he didn't earn a degree.
A little digging turned up this gem from 1 year ago: http://www.pmb.ox.ac.uk/pdf/pembrokianapril06.pdf (pp. 12-13; note bonus photo of Griffin & spouse) Griffin writes,
"I did not receive a Rhodes Scholarship but shortly after the interview I did have the pleasure of meeting Winthrop P. Rockefeller, Pembroke alumnus, philanthropist and son of former Arkansas Governor, Winthrop Rockefeller. The conversation with Win, as Arkansans call him, quickly turned to Oxford and specifically Pembroke College. His love for the college was apparent and infectious. Win asked if I was interested in meeting Sir Roger Bannister, the Master of Pembroke ....
"With encouragement from Win I applied to Pembroke and in the autumn of 1990, I began graduate studies at Pembroke in Modern British and European History. I made my home at the top of Staircase 8. The view of Chapel Quad from my window was magnificent and unforgettable. I met many new friends, rekindled old friendships and once again immersed myself in University life, continuing my shooting with the OUCPSC [Oxford University Clay Pigeon Shooting Club]. After my year at Pembroke, I headed to New Orleans ...
"My time at Pembroke College was special and nothing short of life changing: I made enduring friendships and learned much about the world and myself."
There's other entertaining discussion that follows (name-dropping Bo Derek, among others), but the bottom line seems to be that Griffin got in using the old boy network; that he spent a carefree year hanging out and shooting skeet; and that serious academics--let alone earning a graduate degree--was never an issue.
March 23, 2007 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sampson asks Miers for a greenlight. Miers says if we have to ask the president it will take some time. Then the plan is carried out after a prolonged lull, then doesn't suggest that they did wait for the President to sign off.
Snow says the President doesn't remember. Has anyone asked Snow again? Has someone asked if the president has been able to refresh his memory by examining the relevant documents (the ones they won't turn over) and asking Miers and Rove to remind him? Or is the white house claiming that there are no relevant documents and nobody remembers?
The gap in time between miers telling sampson s that they were waiting for the green light and mier
March 23, 2007 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Barbara@March 23, 2007 10:49 AM
3/9/06 DOJ press release about Lam's indictment of two US Border Patrol agents:
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/cas/press/cas60309-1.pdf
7/7/06 DOJ press release about the conviction of the two US Border Patrol agents:
http://sandiego.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel06/sd070706.htm
United States Attorney Lam said, “These are Border Patrol agents who smuggled illegal aliens. It doesn’t get much worse than that.”
I bet the Border Patrol was thrilled.
March 23, 2007 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Another article from the Voice of San Diego regarding Lam's investigations of Border Patrol agents
http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/articles/2006/10/09/news/01corruption.txt
March 23, 2007 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Issa's my congressman...I didn't vote for him, of course, but everyone should remember that he was one of the driving forces behind the recall of Gov. Davis, which allowed allowed the election of the terminator..say what you will about Arnold's governing style, the fact is that he has a lot of Republican operatives handeling the levers of state power.
March 23, 2007 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Rita@March 23, 2007 11:17 AM
The Voice of San Diego article about corruption in the Border Patrol is a must read. I linked to it below.
"...Of the 172 corruption cases that are currently being pursued against border officials nationwide, 72 -- or roughly 40 percent -- target local officers, according to statistics provided by the Department of Homeland Security.
"That 40 percent of corruption cases are for this 200-mile section of border between San Diego and Imperial counties and Mexico is pretty significant and pretty compelling," said Jack Hook, an investigator with the Department of Homeland Security's local Office of the Inspector General. "It indicates that border corruption is a major issue and Southern California has more than its share of cases."
Rep. Darrell Issa has a big mouth. Why didn't he praise for Lam for successfully pursuing a major problem enforcing border control laws?
Lam didn't exactly pick on guys who made one-time mistakes.
"When federal agents raided Elizalda's home, the veteran customs officer was arrested on charges of smuggling both immigrants and drugs. His BMW and Lexus were parked nearby and more than $50,000 worth of cash and jewelry were confiscated."
Calling Lou Dobbs.
March 23, 2007 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
(regarding the "Voice of San Diego" report)
I put the blame directly on the DOJ for this. I've been trying to get this point across, but people don't seem to get it. Throughout his leadership at DOJ, AG John Ashcroft, with the help of several others at DOJ and in Congress, the executive branch was strong-arming the judicial and legislative branches, sneaking/forcing legislatation through Congress, imposing strict sentencing guidelines, and even imposing strict prosecutorial guidelines on its USA's. The practice seems to have continued under Gonzales.
The 3/19 document dump mentions, on several occasions, an "Ashcroft Memo", without going into much detail about it. In context, it seems that the "memo" instructed USA's to pursue only cases where there was a high degree of conviction and long sentencing. (Precisely what Lam seemed to be doing.)
The DOJ leadership seems to have been disappointed with Supreme Court decisions that reversed many of the guidelines they had pushed through. The "Feeney Amendment" was shot down, and the noted "Booker" and "Blakely" decisions added more concerns. (Following "Feeney" up with the "Section 502" changes shows incredible audacity, since they had already had their hands slapped once for unconstitutionality, even if the courts wrongly attributed the legislation to the Congress instead of the DOJ.)
Feinstein and Issa had every reason to question the "catch and release" program, since Ashcroft's guidelines weren't (and still haven't) been made public.
I find it ironic that Republicans complain loudest about immigration and border control issues, when they are really the source of the problems. They tightly controlled the DOJ, and they controlled the budget, so any of these issues could have been addressed, but they weren't.
It seems to me that Lam was just "following orders" with regards to immigration prosecution. Her only problem was that she made the administration look bad, and they value PR and loyalty above all else.
When will people realize that this is an authoritarian/fascist regime that is not really representative of Conservative values? They're bad for the Republican party, and they're bad for the country. Has protecting and defending the Constitution become "quaint" too?
March 23, 2007 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't it ironic that an Administration that whines about the "criminilzation of politics" has actually propagated a system where GOP politicians are really, truly criminals, at least when faced with present US laws?
March 23, 2007 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Golly . . . Whore-for-Hay is O.O.T. for two weeks then returns to White House for four days of black-out drinking . . . Only to find his staff 'found' his signature on secret orders to carry off eight U.S. Attorneys behind the woodshed for doing justice in the Department of Justice . . . OR . . . did it take four days for Rove(r) and Harriest to explain the situation to the Chimp-in-Charge so he could then grunt out hid approval? It doesn't look good for the human-animal hybrid that Meirs noted as "The Best President Ever."
March 23, 2007 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just yesterday Alberto Gonzales once again told us he is working tirelessly to be sure he has every American's back covered...especially our children. Should the alleged firing of six top performing U.S. Attorneys make us feel better?
I don’t know about anyone else but I’ve always been suspicious of the guy that seems to go out of his way to tell you he’s "got your back covered".
See a sarcastic visual that demonstrates how many Americans feel when the Attorney General reassures us that he's got our backs covered...here:
www.thoughttheater.com
March 23, 2007 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Doesn't Darrel Issa have close ties to Duke Cunningham, the Republican Congressman who's now in prison? (I wish I had a link, but I know I read that somewhere, on a like-minded blog.)
Right. All this illegal immigration stuff is garbage. Issa got Lam fired either out of revenge for her prosecuting Cunnigham, or because he was afraid she was coming after him.
March 23, 2007 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Issa was the designated hitter in the game of outing Lam and the further politicizing of the DOJ for partisan gain. The voters of California should not renew Mr. Issa's short term employment contract as a government employee.
March 23, 2007 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why is Arlen Spector undermining the committee's subpoena process by holding separate negotiations with Fielding? Why hasn't Spector recused himself from these proceedings since it was his office that inserted this new authority for the AG into the Patriot Act?
Is there any way that the committee can keep Spector in line?
March 23, 2007 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
hello
April 30, 2007 8:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
hello
April 30, 2007 8:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
hello
May 1, 2007 9:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
hello
May 5, 2007 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
hello
May 6, 2007 9:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 29, 2007 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 29, 2007 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 29, 2007 7:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 29, 2007 9:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 30, 2007 12:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 30, 2007 3:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 30, 2007 5:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 30, 2007 7:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 30, 2007 9:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 30, 2007 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 30, 2007 12:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 30, 2007 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 30, 2007 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 30, 2007 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 30, 2007 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 30, 2007 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
May 30, 2007 8:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 30, 2007 10:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 30, 2007 11:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 31, 2007 12:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 31, 2007 12:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 31, 2007 2:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 31, 2007 2:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 31, 2007 4:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 31, 2007 4:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 31, 2007 6:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 31, 2007 9:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 31, 2007 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 31, 2007 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 31, 2007 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 31, 2007 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 31, 2007 6:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 31, 2007 9:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
May 31, 2007 11:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
June 1, 2007 12:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
June 1, 2007 2:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
June 1, 2007 4:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
June 1, 2007 6:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
June 1, 2007 8:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
June 1, 2007 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
June 1, 2007 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
June 1, 2007 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@durgs.com
June 1, 2007 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 1, 2007 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 1, 2007 6:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 1, 2007 9:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 1, 2007 10:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 2, 2007 12:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 2, 2007 1:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 2, 2007 3:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 2, 2007 4:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 2, 2007 6:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 2, 2007 8:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 2, 2007 9:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 2, 2007 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 2, 2007 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 2, 2007 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 2, 2007 7:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 2, 2007 9:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 3, 2007 12:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 3, 2007 2:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 3, 2007 3:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 3, 2007 5:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 3, 2007 7:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 3, 2007 7:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 3, 2007 9:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 3, 2007 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 3, 2007 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 3, 2007 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 3, 2007 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 3, 2007 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 3, 2007 9:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 3, 2007 11:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 4, 2007 4:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 4, 2007 5:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 4, 2007 7:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 4, 2007 8:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 4, 2007 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 4, 2007 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 4, 2007 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 4, 2007 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 4, 2007 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 4, 2007 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 4, 2007 9:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 4, 2007 10:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 5, 2007 1:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 5, 2007 4:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 5, 2007 6:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 5, 2007 8:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 5, 2007 9:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 5, 2007 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 5, 2007 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 5, 2007 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 5, 2007 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 5, 2007 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 5, 2007 9:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 5, 2007 11:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 6, 2007 1:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 6, 2007 3:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 6, 2007 5:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 6, 2007 6:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 6, 2007 8:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 6, 2007 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 6, 2007 11:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 6, 2007 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 6, 2007 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 6, 2007 4:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
herbals@drugs.com
June 6, 2007 6:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi, there!..167aef5e4a563335a7071f95c9e6b215
October 7, 2007 10:40 PM | Reply | Permalink