com·mis·sar /ˈkɒməˌsɑr, ˌkɒməˈsɑr/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kom-uh-sahr, kom-uh-sahr] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. the head of any of the major governmental divisions of the U.S.S.R.: called minister since 1946.
2. an official in any communist government whose duties include political indoctrination, detection of political deviation, etc.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1915–20; < Russ komissár < G Kommissar < ML commissārius commissary]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

commissar [(kom-uh-sahr)]

In various communist systems of government, an official assigned to a group to ensure the group's conformity to Communist party doctrine. The heads of government departments in the former Soviet Union were called commissars.

[Chapter:] World Politics

The American Heritage® New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition
Copyright © 2005 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

So what? The administration will first use the investigation as an excuse to refuse infomration and witnesses due to the on-going DOJ IG and OPR investigations.

Do we really trust anyone associated with thid administration to do an impartial and adequate investigation? We need a series of independent counsels to investigate and right the wrongs done be this lawless administration.

Even finding the malefactors will not be sufficient. The Republicans of this administration are a cancer within the country. The career civil servants serving the EMPIRE have already been put in place. The Storm Troopers serving in the legislature will insist upon the use or career civil servant committees for all new hires under a Democtratic administration. Just as they have turned the court system to the dark side, they now seek to turn the career civil service into their fifth column in the event of losing the 2008 elections.

The use of an independent counsel and the finding that career civil service positions were improperly and illegally handed out would permit action to remove such improperly appointed persons. To fail to do so will merely perpetuate a one party rule within this country.

This makes sense. One needs to investigate one's files prior to knowing which files to shred.

Glenn Fine and Marshall Jarrett were both appointed to their respective positions during the Clinton Administration. Beyond that, they are both strong, tough-minded, independent former prosecutors who are not going to be swayed by improper considerations. I know both of these guys and trust them implicitly.

In fact, Glenn Fine has been a thorn in the side of the Republican leadership of the Department for the last six and a half years -- appropriately so. Go back and check on the news stories that have come out about various reports his office has issued on a number of topics related to the management of the Department and the FBI. He is much like Pat Fitzgerald: a stand-up guy who could investigate anyone or any issue in a fair, just, and evenhanded manner.

"Honor and Dignity" will be along as soon as they are afforded legal representation and allowed to argue for their release from the unnamed black-site prison where they have been held since late 2001.

Rumor has it that they may be released just prior to the 2008 elections, assuming an agreement can be reached that will prohibit their speaking about their incarceration for six months, or until those responsible for their disappearance have off-shored their cash and fled to countries with no extradition treaty.

.
I have the same questions raised by Steve5117, and thanks, DC, for your input about these investigators.

In the future, I'd like to see the reporting on this include some background info on the individuals doing the investigating. A fancy title like "the Justice Department's Inspector General and head counsel for the Office of Professional Responsibility" doesn't tell me anything nowadays -- this person could be qualified for the job, or they may have been hand-picked and installed by Karl Rove.

Sounds like these individuals may be credible. Good. But if this investigation does not lead to a call for a special prosecutor, and relatively soon (how hard could it be to find probable cause of illegal activity, when public testimony already indicates it?), then there's something wrong.

-- ARG

For those of us who have been keeping up with the news (which these days cannot be done by watching the networks or reading the papers), there seems to be an overabundance of evidence that this may be the most corrupt and damaging administration in our lifetimes – and you’re right that the majority of people have no clue. I think they are not opposed to the war as much because of how we got there and how we were lied to, as they are because of the rising tide of death, and the well-publicized stories about how veterans are being treated. Several of the networks never even covered the DOJ Debacle, so how would people who only watch the news even know about it?

The 2006 vote was about the war – people want us out – and about the economy – people’s lives have not improved, good jobs are hard to find, and they are sick of watching the fat cats get fatter on oil profits. I think people have a general sense that things are not headed in the right direction, even if they don’t know all the details.

While it has been almost 7 months since the Democrats scored electoral majorities in both houses of Congress, it has been only just under 5 months since they took the reins of power. And, the Senate majority is one that is in name only, with Tim Johnson still out recuperating from brain surgery, and Joe Lieberman breaking every campaign promise he ever made.

The hearings we have seen are only a part of what is going on in these committees, and I have every reason to believe that even if we are not seeing hearings every day, the work of those committees is moving forward. As each round of questioning seems to reveal a glimpse at yet another layer of corruption and deceit, that work expands. At some point, I do think there will be a call for and a need for a special prosecutor, and it may even get to the point where you will see calls to revive the independent counsel statute. Congress allowed the previous statute to lapse in Bush’s first term; any revival of it should be done with an eye to legislating out of it some of the problems that allowed Ken Starr to turn it into a three-ring circus.

I have a hard time being patient, especially when it seems like Bush and the GOP keep winning at things we were supposed to be empowered to change. But change is coming, as the pressure mounts, the quagmire of Iraq deepens, more information leaks out. Right now, the administration is buying time, keeping Gonzales in place because he is the firewall that is shielding the inner circle of the WH. My feeling is that when Gonzales resigns, the house of cards is coming down.

Ask Jessica Radack if she thinks Glenn Fine and OIG are nonpartisan, independent, and willing to go after Republicans.

I think not.

Security code: soap, as in what I feel I need a good scrubbing with after reading these stories of filth in our government.

"Excellent. Now, Congress needs to get on the stick and hold hearings into the hiring practices, especially in the Civil Rights Division. Hearings are also necessary on the politicization of the Voting Section, especially as regards its decisionmaking in overruling the decisions of career professionals in preclearing the Texas redistricting and the Georgia and Arizona photo ID laws. There's been a lot of smoke coming out of these, and I guarantee there is fire there."

The Democrats are still investigating, gathering information and evidence, looking at connections in those. It is too soon to go after only one or a few of many issues; there are others than those being investigated by DOJ, one being fraudulent "vote fraud" accusations as excuse to investigate political opponents. If not the NSA program, then what was the program, unidentified by both Gonzalez and Comey, about which there was disagreement?

Posted by:
Date: May 30, 2007 01:30 PM

"In various communist systems of government, an official assigned to a group to ensure the group's conformity to Communist party doctrine. The heads of government departments in the former Soviet Union were called commissars.

"[Chapter:] World Politics

"The American Heritage® New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition
Copyright © 2005 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

"Posted by: jonathan
Date: May 30, 2007 01:31 PM"

There are arses in all political movements. "Communists" are _left_ wing. Bushit, et al., are _extreme right_ wing -- what is traditionally known as "lunatic fringe".

The torture obfuscations and methods authorized and imposed by Bushit, et al., were refined by WW II Nazis. Nazis are _extreme right_ wing.

"Whatever happened to all that "honor and dignity" stuff I remember hearing would be returned to Washington?? It hasn't happened yet, right?

"Posted by: Hank Essay
Date: May 30, 2007 02:58 PM"

It's taken ahile, yes, but it's beginning. It was the Democrats who got the ball rolling. The investigations within DOJ are the career professionals in rebellion. They know the meaning of blind -- neutral -- justice. The politics of the defendant is irrelevant, except in very rare instances as evidence of insanity.

There are several more public hearings coming up, including Elston and Schlozman.

That is by the Democrats in spite of the Republicans.

SC = jump. As in, by September, Republicans will begin jumping to our side of the abyss between We the people, and Bushit, et a.

"All right; let's say further evidence of the politicization of the DoJ is brought forward. And, there will be a no-confidence vote in the Senate... a nice, safe, non-binding vote.

"So what?"

It's a solid interim grounding to call out the Republicns: shit or get off the pot. Are you pro-corruption, and anti-Americanism? Or are you against it? Keep in mind that there are elections coming up.

"The questions are: Who's going to care?"

I am. About you I can't be sure.

". . . . What effect will it have on how the country is being run (note that I don't say 'managed', and I don't say 'governed')?"

It will change it for the better.

"It's only my opinion, but most people in the United States simply aren't connecting the dots . . . ."

You have the advantage of me there: I don't know most people, nor have I met most people, so I have no idea what most people do or don't think or do.

How did you manage to interview most people with so little time?

". . . . Do revelations of potentially criminal incompetence on the part of Gonzales force him to resign?"

Gonzalez and his friends are not incompetent. They are skilled criminals with a plan.

"Perhaps I've just gotten close to the bottom of my personal rope -- but I don't see much changing."

You want six years of ruthless corruption and abuses of power completely rolled back after only six months? It's no wonder you're perpetually pissed: you don't bother with the possible.

"What needs to happen in order to get rid of these creatures?"

For those among "We the people," such as you, to know what's actually going on. One way of demonstrating that is to stop bashing the Democrats for not doing the possible, and start bashing the Republicans from attempting to prevent the Democrats from making the impossible possible.

"Posted by: Austin Cooper
Date: May 30, 2007 03:55 PM"

SC = bell. As in, Ding! Ding!

"I wish I could believe the internal investigation was legitimate but until I see otherwise I perceive it as just being another tactic to block congressional investigation."

"[W]as" is past tense. The investigation has not ended yet, therefore exists in the present.

"That is because the corruption is so rampant and widespread throughout the DoJ and the executive branch that they lie about lying and investigate the same way."

Really? Substantiate. The only corruption I've so far seen is in the public testimonies of subpoeaned witnesses. I've not yet been able to see beyond the stonewall to what's going on within the DOJ, and in the not-so-White House.

"They care not about law, integrity, or corruption but merely being unaccountable. Prove me wrong, please."

Not in this instance.

Prove you wrong? How about seeking and waiting for the facts instead of beating us over the head with an untethered negative fantasy of how everything is all so corrupt, and blah, blah, blah. The internal DOJ investigation is subject to public review for competence and corruption. It will not be corrupt. It is a rebellion by the career professionals who have all along opposed the subversions.

Fitzgerald has imprisoned without regard for the politics of those he invstigated, indicted, tried, and convicted. One of those was the Republican governor of Illinois. That means politically neutral justice can occur.

James Comey's testimony to Congress showed the same.

Iglasias' integrity testifies to that fact.

Last but not least: most/all the Hispanic organizations who supported Gonzales now know he was involveed with preventing them voting.

"Posted by: bjobotts
Date: May 30, 2007 05:46 PM"

Surely you don't believe that DOJ will be critical of their own?

"Surely you don't believe that DOJ will be critical of their own?"

The politicos that have been kicking our asses for six years simply because we have some integrity are not "our own." They can (and often did) give us illegal and improper orders, and retaliate against us if we insist on staying within the law. They can (and often did) take away our decision-making authority after years of its appropriate exercise, and hand it to unqualfied, inexperienced political hacks. They can (and often did) intervene in our performance review process to sabotage our careers with politically motivated criticism. They can (and often did) transfer us, demote us, and fire us because we questioned their unabashedly political interference in cases and internal processes.

They had the raw power to do a lot of improper things. And they did!

But there is one thing they cannot do.

They cannot claim to be "our own."

Expect a decent investigation if the career people are allowed to handle it. And expect results...

BECAUSE THE POLITICAL INTERFERENCE BY SCHLOZMAN ET AL WAS FAR FROM HIDDEN. IT WAS A MATTER OF VERY PUBLIC, DISDAINFUL BRAGGING BY SUCH INDIVIDUALS.

Anne knows what she is talking about. Heed her advice!

Also, any investigation of hiring at Civil Rights Division has to include facetime with now-Iowa USA Matt Dummermuth who as a "special counsel" at Civil Rights Division, reportedly opened the floodgates for the imbalanced hiring of Federalist Society and Christian Legal Society members to the exclusion of others who actually had experience and expressed an interest in civil rights.

Question: has anyone traced the behind-the-scenes of Alex Acosta, former Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Rights Division, who ascended to the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida? How did the vacancy that he filled come about? Another "voluntary resignation"? Acosta, Schlozman, Dummermuth.... mmmm.... not a prosecutor among 'em and yet these Civil Rights Divisionites all ended up being United States Attorneys .....How come?

Please encourage DOJ OPR/IG and Members of Congress to forward relevant evidence to State AG's for prosecution of VP and President:
http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/28590#comment-5969